Super League proposed by schools afraid of being left out...

travis.sixpack

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2008
1,031
1,025
113

The current CST outline would create a system that would have the top 70 programs — all members of the five former major conferences, plus Notre Dame and new ACC member SMU — as permanent members and encompass all 130-plus FBS universities.

The perpetual members would be in seven 10-team divisions, joined by an eighth division of teams that would be promoted from the second tier.

The 50-plus second-division teams would have the opportunity to compete their way into the upper division, creating a promotion system similar to the structure in European football leagues. The 70 permanent teams would never be in danger of moving down, while the second division would have the incentive of promotion and relegation.

I would be okay with returning to the pre-1992 SEC expansion, but I don't see Sankey or the BigTen going for this proposal.
 

QuaoarsKing

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2008
4,719
696
113
I love it and hope they do it. Nobody in the P5 already gets left out, and there's a pathway for teams outside of it.

Maybe there should be 11-team conferences instead of 10 so that you always have the same number of home and road teams, but the framework here is very good and much better than the hacked up piecemeal expansion we've been saying. I'd argue this system preserves "tradition" better than where the current system is going.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZombieKissinger

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,312
11,948
113
Thus far, the group is struggling to gain traction with the schools that would play in their proposed “Super League.” .... However, planned dinners with administrators from the Big Ten, SEC and Big 12 all were called off. Spokespersons for the Big Ten and SEC said commissioners Petitti and Greg Sankey, respectively, have not met with Perna’s group.

No kidding. This thing is dead on arrival.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoronDawg

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,634
7,210
113
Hahahahahahahaha

This sounds like me 'reorganizing' the conferences in my free time circa 2002, back before phones. I would create the ideal perfect league.

The exact opposite of that is what played out. Which is probably why we're in the situation we are in today.
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,242
3,975
113
Hahahahahahahaha

This sounds like me 'reorganizing' the conferences in my free time circa 2002, back before phones. I would create the ideal perfect league.

The exact opposite of that is what played out. Which is probably why we're in the situation we are in today.
Give me OG Goat Holder with a pen and a napkin over what we have today
 

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,634
7,210
113
I don’t see the issue with just expanding the playoff and letting everybody have at it. We act like there are a bunch of schools thinking they can’t afford it - well that’s not what I see in the real world. Many programs are clawing their way into FBS and P5, and very few are trying to get out.

Reserve a few spots for G5 champions or something. Playoff needs to be 16+ anyway.
 

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,312
11,948
113
I don’t see the issue with just expanding the playoff and letting everybody have at it. We act like there are a bunch of schools thinking they can’t afford it - well that’s not what I see in the real world. Many programs are clawing their way into FBS and P5, and very few are trying to get out.

Reserve a few spots for G5 champions or something. Playoff needs to be 16+ anyway.
Because the SEC and the Big 10 want to continue their lucrative conference championship games and share as little playoff money with other conferences as they can get away with. You don't accomplish either of those goals by expanding the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoronDawg

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,634
7,210
113
Because the SEC and the Big 10 want to continue their lucrative conference championship games and share as little playoff money with other conferences as they can get away with. You don't accomplish either of those goals by expanding the playoffs.
Well you certainly accomplish killing college football.

Is that money even that big? Especially compared to the regular season conference deals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patdog

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,312
11,948
113
Well you certainly accomplish killing college football.

Is that money even that big? Especially compared to the regular season conference deals.
Yep. College football is dead. All in the name of greed. If the money wasn't really all that big, you wouldn't see the SEC and Big 10 so adamant about keeping the conference championship games. Each of those games is like a playoff game, but with the conference getting both halves of the revenue, so really like 2 playoff games. Plus what they'll get for the actual playoff games. It's a LOT of money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anon1697564126

Willow Grove Dawg

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2016
5,743
1,450
113
New CFP deal is $1.3 per billion per year. The SEC & Big 10 get 29% each, ACC & Big 12 16%, Notre Dame 1%, & the combined G5 schools 9% after expenses. It is a ***-wagon load of money for the SEC & Big 10 - very conservative $320 million annually for the SEC or $20 million per school.
 

greenbean.sixpack

Well-known member
Oct 6, 2012
6,108
4,678
113
The leadership of the Big 10/SEC (both in the conference offices and power brokers at the Universities) are not going to give up any power whatsoever. Something like this may work, but it would be for those teams not currently in the Big 2 and would play second fiddle to the Big 2.
 

greenbean.sixpack

Well-known member
Oct 6, 2012
6,108
4,678
113
Yep. College football is dead. All in the name of greed. If the money wasn't really all that big, you wouldn't see the SEC and Big 10 so adamant about keeping the conference championship games. Each of those games is like a playoff game, but with the conference getting both halves of the revenue, so really like 2 playoff games. Plus what they'll get for the actual playoff games. It's a LOT of money.
This is dumb, CFB is more popular than ever and will be ever bigger this season with the 12 team playoff.

Prior to this year's NCAA basketball tourney, there were folks bemoaning the state of college basketball. This year's ratings were better than the World Series or NBA finals.

No matter who many chicken littles cry and wine about the state of college sports, the sports just keep growing.
 

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,634
7,210
113
This is dumb, CFB is more popular than ever and will be ever bigger this season with the 12 team playoff.

Prior to this year's NCAA basketball tourney, there were folks bemoaning the state of college basketball. This year's ratings were better than the World Series or NBA finals.

No matter who many chicken littles cry and wine about the state of college sports, the sports just keep growing.
You’re going to hit a tipping point where the TV crowd doesn’t outweigh the in-person tribal crowd. May not happen for 20 years but it will happen if they continue down this road to professionalism.

You aren’t looking far enough in the future. You’re just seeing the current state of things, which is still semi-playing off the past. It will eventually wear off.
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,345
1,210
108
You’re going to hit a tipping point where the TV crowd doesn’t outweigh the in-person tribal crowd. May not happen for 20 years but it will happen if they continue down this road to professionalism.

You aren’t looking far enough in the future. You’re just seeing the current state of things, which is still semi-playing off the past. It will eventually wear off.
Agree, they are going to kill the golden goose if they aren’t careful. What makes college basketball special and separates it from the boring nba. college football has been the greatest sport, more exciting and interesting than the NFL. if you just make college football nfl lite or college basketball the cba, it’s going to lose its special place.
 

greenbean.sixpack

Well-known member
Oct 6, 2012
6,108
4,678
113
You’re going to hit a tipping point where the TV crowd doesn’t outweigh the in-person tribal crowd. May not happen for 20 years but it will happen if they continue down this road to professionalism.

You aren’t looking far enough in the future. You’re just seeing the current state of things, which is still semi-playing off the past. It will eventually wear off.
Don't see it. It will continue to grow and get more popular. 60ish teams in the highest division is probably the sweet spot. Things won't change much for us, when the right coach gets to together with the right talent, we'll have a shot at the playoffs, but mostly we'll stay a middling program. For some middle-lower tier teams in the Big 12/ACC, they may end up in a lower division. 2023 was one of the greatest seasons of college football I've experienced (not for the Bulldogs, but for the sport as a whole), storylines and exciting games everywhere. 2024 will be even better and it will grow from there. It may not be what we're used to, but that doesn't mean it is declining. The 12 team playoff (it will probably grow to 16 eventually) will be huge and great TV.
 

Bulldog Bruce

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2007
3,493
2,472
113
Agree, they are going to kill the golden goose if they aren’t careful. What makes college basketball special and separates it from the boring nba. college football has been the greatest sport, more exciting and interesting than the NFL. if you just make college football nfl lite or college basketball the cba, it’s going to lose its special place.
I know people on this board want to believe this, but it is just not true. NFL is king. In the population centers, a small percentage follows the college games compared to professional sports.

Other than the event of March Madness, college basketball is suffering. There are no stars in the Men's game anymore. We don't even learn names until the tournament starts. Women's college basketball has more stars than the men's game.
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,345
1,210
108
I know people on this board want to believe this, but it is just not true. NFL is king. In the population centers, a small percentage follows the college games compared to professional sports.

Other than the event of March Madness, college basketball is suffering. There are no stars in the Men's game anymore. We don't even learn names until the tournament starts. Women's college basketball has more stars than the men's game.
Are you really suggesting the nba is a better product than college basketball ? The nba is just flat out boring. Just some viewer #s I looked up show featured college games doubling nba numbers.
 
Last edited:

leeinator

Well-known member
Feb 24, 2014
712
504
93
Absolutely no reason to have a bigger than 50K fully chairbacked stadium at MSU with escalators and all the bells and whistles. Attendance is only going to drop over the next 10 years. In fact, I'm almost done with season ticket buying. I plan to pick and choose what games I want to see in person. I have not seen ONE single football game of any magnitude (proclaimed sold out or not) in MSU history where you could not find tickets. Never.
 

ronpolk

Well-known member
May 6, 2009
8,119
2,609
113
Are you really suggesting the nba is a better product than college basketball ? The nba is just flat out boring. Just some viewer #s I looked up show featured college games doubling nba numbers.
It’s 1000x better product… just like the NFL is 1000x better product than college football.
 

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,634
7,210
113
It’s 1000x better product… just like the NFL is 1000x better product than college football.
I think what @85Bears means is that college sports are special/better for a different reason.

As far as products go, I don't think anyone really thinks that the NFL and NBA aren't better than college. The level of coaching and talent confirms that easily. But it's more entertainment, and definitely more about the TV crowd. But there are more passionate fans in college, more tribalism, more of a will to win. That's why you see all these boosters willing to pay players, and friends/family getting in fights over games.

That's the way it used to be anyway. It's slowly becoming another professional league, which, as we've seen many times, only works if you have the best talent, i.e. the NFL.
 

Bulldog Bruce

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2007
3,493
2,472
113
Are you really suggesting the nba is a better product than college basketball ? The nba is just flat out boring. Just some viewer #s I looked up show featured college games doubling nba numbers.
Not even close. College Basketball is unwatchable IMO. Every time I try to watch a college game, I am sad of how bad the ability to shoot a basketball has become. I watched the battle of the MSUs and the one in Green actually wasn't terrible like the Maroon one was.

The NBA at least has people who can impress you with their ability to play and they can make shots. The Joker can play basketball. Steph Curry impresses with his ability to shoot. Is the game too long? Yes. Is there too many moving picks and walks and carries? Yes. But it seemed, at least in the MSUs game, the college game now allows that also.

There is no way you can really think the college players are more skilled than the NBA players. I watch way more college Baseball than MLB and enjoy it more, but I don't think the play is better.
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,345
1,210
108
Not even close. College Basketball is unwatchable IMO. Every time I try to watch a college game, I am sad of how bad the ability to shoot a basketball has become. I watched the battle of the MSUs and the one in Green actually wasn't terrible like the Maroon one was.

The NBA at least has people who can impress you with their ability to play and they can make shots. The Joker can play basketball. Steph Curry impresses with his ability to shoot. Is the game too long? Yes. Is there too many moving picks and walks and carries? Yes. But it seemed, at least in the MSUs game, the college game now allows that also.

There is no way you can really think the college players are more skilled than the NBA players. I watch way more college Baseball than MLB and enjoy it more, but I don't think the play is better.
The reason that college basketball shooting has suffered is because of the shot clock and the inability to run an offense, in other words the game is becoming like the NBA...Garbage. NIL and the transfer portal are also hurting the college game, in other words it’s because it’s becoming like the NBA ....Garbage. see where I’m going with this. thats the original point, they had the greatest game and they are killing the golden goose.
 

DesotoCountyDawg

Well-known member
Nov 16, 2005
22,085
9,417
113
Are you really suggesting the nba is a better product than college basketball ? The nba is just flat out boring. Just some viewer #s I looked up show featured college games doubling nba numbers.
The NBA is light years better as a product.
 

DesotoCountyDawg

Well-known member
Nov 16, 2005
22,085
9,417
113
The reason that college basketball shooting has suffered is because of the shot clock and the inability to run an offense, in other words the game is becoming like the NBA...Garbage. NIL and the transfer portal are also hurting the college game, in other words it’s because it’s becoming like the NBA ....Garbage. see where I’m going with this. thats the original point, they had the greatest game and they are killing the golden goose.
College basketball is not suffering because of the shot clock. Thats ridiculous. They can’t shoot or run an offense and a lot of that comes from AAU ruining them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IBleedMaroonDawg

Bulldog Bruce

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2007
3,493
2,472
113
The reason that college basketball shooting has suffered is because of the shot clock and the inability to run an offense, in other words the game is becoming like the NBA...Garbage. NIL and the transfer portal are also hurting the college game, in other words it’s because it’s becoming like the NBA ....Garbage. see where I’m going with this. thats the original point, they had the greatest game and they are killing the golden goose.
You can like what you like. Billions of people love soccer/football and think it is the greatest game in the world. I don't think that. I would rather watch paint dry. So I understand you have your reasons why you prefer one sport over another. I am just pointing out that that doesn't make your opinion true for everyone.
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,345
1,210
108
College basketball is not suffering because of the shot clock. Thats ridiculous. They can’t shoot or run an offense and a lot of that comes from AAU ruining them.
It’s ridiculous huh ? I listened to a college coaches discussion on why scoring is down now compared to the 1980s despite there being a shot clock , It’s obviously because they can’t run an efficient offense to get a good look on that amount of time. they end up taking a poor percentage shot as the clock winds down. so the shot clock is hurting the game and lowering scoring.
 

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,634
7,210
113
You can like what you like. Billions of people love soccer/football and think it is the greatest game in the world. I don't think that. I would rather watch paint dry. So I understand you have your reasons why you prefer one sport over another. I am just pointing out that that doesn't make your opinion true for everyone.
I watch college sports because I care (or used to care) who wins, especially Mississippi State. I could care less about the quality of play. Within reason, obviously.

If I want to watch quality of play, I watch pro sports.

Speaking of soccer, I'm trying my best to figure out what the point of it all is. I simply can't do it. Just a lot of running around and wasted energy, it seems to me.
 

HuntDawg

Well-known member
Oct 25, 2018
2,450
1,199
113
I know people on this board want to believe this, but it is just not true. NFL is king. In the population centers, a small percentage follows the college games compared to professional sports.

Other than the event of March Madness, college basketball is suffering. There are no stars in the Men's game anymore. We don't even learn names until the tournament starts. Women's college basketball has more stars than the men's game.
This is true. Go to a non college town or a state that has professional teams.
both college and pro sports have their niche, but the nfl and the nba still rule. So does the mlb as opposed to the college game for that matter.

not saying I like it, but from a big picture view, it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IBleedMaroonDawg

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,312
11,948
113
It’s ridiculous huh ? I listened to a college coaches discussion on why scoring is down now compared to the 1980s despite there being a shot clock , It’s obviously because they can’t run an efficient offense to get a good look on that amount of time. they end up taking a poor percentage shot as the clock winds down. so the shot clock is hurting the game and lowering scoring.
You're making the assumption they'd ever be able to get a good shot off with the poor fundamentals and shooting ability all over the game today. That's a very big assumption.
 

HuntDawg

Well-known member
Oct 25, 2018
2,450
1,199
113
You're making the assumption they'd ever be able to get a good shot off with the poor fundamentals and shooting ability all over the game today. That's a very big assumption.
agree. Poor,point he was trying to make. I thought I read where scores were actually going up. But I don’t care to research it all.

i will say back in the 80s, the best players still played 3 years and sometimes 4 years of college basketball. Jordan, worthy, Shaa, Olajuwon, lattener, etc. If the best college players all stayed 3-4 years probably help the scoring and shooting…

if scoring is dropping (and I’m not sure it is) it certainly isn’t the shot clocks fault
 

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,312
11,948
113
if scoring is dropping (and I’m not sure it is) it certainly isn’t the shot clocks fault
I remember the days of Bob Boy and losing games 26-20. Also remember a Duke-North Carolina game where Duke was the better team. Dean Smith ran the 4-corners offense the entire first half. Halftime score was Duke - 7, UNC - 0.
 

DesotoCountyDawg

Well-known member
Nov 16, 2005
22,085
9,417
113
It’s ridiculous huh ? I listened to a college coaches discussion on why scoring is down now compared to the 1980s despite there being a shot clock , It’s obviously because they can’t run an efficient offense to get a good look on that amount of time. they end up taking a poor percentage shot as the clock winds down. so the shot clock is hurting the game and lowering scoring.
If you can’t run an offense or shoot it doesn’t really matter how long the shot clock is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patdog

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,345
1,210
108
If you can’t run an offense or shoot it doesn’t really matter how long the shot clock is.
That isn’t true at all, you run your offense to get a high percentage shot. It may take more than 24 seconds. why do we see so many possessions get to under five seconds on the shot clock and then a desperate low % heave as the shot clock expires ? That happens with very good teams. Why is the scoring totals lower now with a shot clock, which is supposed to create more scoring ? Teams scored more points in the 80s.
 

8dog

Well-known member
Feb 23, 2008
12,267
3,219
113
That isn’t true at all, you run your offense to get a high percentage shot. It may take more than 24 seconds. why do we see so many possessions get to under five seconds on the shot clock and then a desperate low % heave as the shot clock expires ? That happens with very good teams. Why is the scoring totals lower now with a shot clock, which is supposed to create more scoring ? Teams scored more points in the 80s.
I’m gonna need to see some support for the last statement because that can’t possibly be true.
 

DesotoCountyDawg

Well-known member
Nov 16, 2005
22,085
9,417
113
That isn’t true at all, you run your offense to get a high percentage shot. It may take more than 24 seconds. why do we see so many possessions get to under five seconds on the shot clock and then a desperate low % heave as the shot clock expires ? That happens with very good teams. Why is the scoring totals lower now with a shot clock, which is supposed to create more scoring ? Teams scored more points in the 80s.
You do realize that college is a 30 second shot clock. NBA is 24.
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,345
1,210
108
I’m gonna need to see some support for the last statement because that can’t possibly be true.
Why would that be hard to believe ? The shot clock has dumbed down the game, limited defense and very low IQ offense.
 

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,312
11,948
113
I’m gonna need to see some support for the last statement because that can’t possibly be true.
Scoring is down. That is a fact. But its not because of the shot clocks. It's because teams are running the shot clocks down near zero more often. Pace of play is slow, and getting slower. If we eliminate the shot clocks it's going to be even slower.
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login