ADVERTISEMENT

Relegation

roses04

Hall Of Fame
Oct 4, 2003
1,512
1,379
113
There have been several articles discussing setting up the new Pac 8,10,12, in partnership with the Mountain West and setting up a relegation type system. We have talked about this in the past, I guess getting in front of this is one position to take. The biggest issue with this is athletic budgets and having a huge decrease if relegated. Unfortunately, I do believe it is the direction of College Football.

USC and UCLA left because they had to share money with schools like WSU and OSU, and the perception was that USC and UCLA contributed a lot more, because they were in a large media market, so they should receive more. Well, if you look at the current situation, 8 of 12 teams from the Pac are in the top 25 in football, and all these teams earn less revenue from their TV contract than most of the teams in the top 25. If money was the sole answer, the Texas A&M should win a NC, but they haven't. Revenue sharing saved baseball and football, and other major leagues sports by creating parity, and fan interest, and keeping franchises in cities. Well you aren't moving universities, but you are losing fans interest by putting schools at a disadvantage or shutting them out of leagues.

College Football, or the networks, depending on who you see as running the show, seem to think differently. Do you actually think in 5 years that Northwestern, or Purdue, or any of the bottom teams in the Big will continue to receive as much revenue as Michigan. Look at the SEC, Alabama and Georgia won't continue to support Vandy and South Carolina. If your ratings suck, just like any other TV show, you're gone. Nick Saban has mentioned he is in favor of some form or relegation, so you know they have discussed it in the SEC.

The fact we are even talking about relegation is hard to comprehend, but who would have thought 5 years ago that a college football player could be paid millions per year to stay in school, (they say the Colorado QB Sanders is worth 10 million a year) or that one could transfer to another school because he didn't like it, or because someone came in and offered him a couple 100K to move. No Caps on NIL, almost unlimited transfer rules, and next up is relegation. There is a lot of money that goes to schools that under perform, the networks won't continue pay those schools. They won't even pay two schools that are performing right now and have performed much better than many schools in the Big, Big 12, and SEC over the past 25 years.
 
Last edited:
I think the idea is interesting, I just don't see schools like Nevada signing up for this.
 
Interesting idea but I just don't see it for numerous reasons if it's performance-based. As for a couple:

- Most significantly, WSU, and to a lesser extent Oregon State, illustrate how it is about market size and money, not performance. The TV execs would want the "not haves" to win even less than they do now and have in the past.

- Roster churn has always been a fact of college sports relative to some other leagues in which relegation is employed, just due to eligibility expiring. In recent years, it has gone on hyperdrive. This cuts against a relegation system since you can have vast changes in performance year to year. E.g., while it's in the Pac-12, look at Colorado. It would have been relegated. Then it hires Sanders and the whole roster is turned over. Think anyone would want that in the lower league without its games on TV? That's just an example but there are all kinds of lesser examples and other things cutting this way.

BUT ... if it was based on TV ratings, I could actually see something like this making sense for everyone, even if that isn't to say it wouldn't necessarily be fair to everyone. It would give the media companies more direct access to what they really want -- people to be advertised to. It would incentivize schools to invest in their programs to make their games more enticing to viewers. It would even incentivize people to tune in when they otherwise wouldn't, since they don't want their teams to get relegated.

Now, there are some issues I see with that, too (further incentivizing watching on TV instead of attending, incentivizing "exciting" football instead of winning football, and even more coaching hires and other stuff based on showmanship instead of actual coaching acumen or ability to build a program, and so on). You'd have the UWs of the world hiring bot farms in China to tune in to make sure they remained in the upper echelon. Shit like that. There would be stuff that would have to be solved for. But it's interesting, at least.

I doubt it happens and "relegation" instead happens with the TV networks just picking who they want and don't want based on market size and all the other factors they always have.
 
I doubt it happens and "relegation" instead happens with the TV networks just picking who they want and don't want based on market size and all the other factors they always have.
Its been said before but bears repeating:

Within 10 years the NCAA/ networks will have a totally unique and profitable business model where the D1/FBS teams will be whittled down to 32 total teams, with two conferences with 4 divisions each. They'll play a total of 17 games with two bye weeks and a three week preseason and conclude with a 4 round playoff with the final round being the Super College Bowl. Additionally, games will be spread throughout the week on days that don't conflict with other major sports, so say Sat, Tues, Wed, Friday?

Here's where I think they're missing out, though. Relegation happens to and from the NFL for college teams! Thats right! The best college team moves up each year and the worst NFL team has to play a college schedule! WOW WOW WOW!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BSpike76
CF is ruined. I see many people like me opting out. I’ll follow WSU like I do now with full support t but won’t be watching the schools east of Wyoming. I e enjoy west coast football & really could care less about the. Georgia’s Michigan’s and Notre Dames of the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fab5Coug
I think the idea is interesting, I just don't see schools like Nevada signing up for this.
I don't see schools like Alabama signing up for this. Why take the risk. They're in the club.

If you mean relegation within a marginal conference trying to get a seat at the CFP table, same concept applies. No reason why a school like Nevada or Hawaii takes on the downside risk.
 
agree....how can you run an athletic department knowing that your media revenue might get cut in half if you don't win the final football game of the season. What if WSU was decimated with injuries and put in this situation.
 
I really don't see relegation becoming a thing in CFB, at least as long as we still have a system of conferences. If those go away and it becomes more of a major/minor alignment....maybe.

I do agree that if this system continues, eventually the blue bloods are going to get tired of sharing with everyone else. The Big 10 will want to dump Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, etc. SEC will want to dump Vandy, Kentucky, Mississippi State, etc. Maybe that will move them to a major/minor situation. On the other hand, the blue bloods want to keep around teams that they can beat - soft scheduling is part of what helped them stay blue bloods in the first place. The networks like having Alabama-Michigan, Texas-Oklahoma, and FLorida-LSU every week, but the schools don't want to do that. They know that means they're less likely to run the table.

Between TV, TV money, and NIL, I don't think relegation and conferences can coexist. If the conferences go away, which may be plausible in another 10 years (plus or minus), then there could be a path to it. It would even clean up CFP a bit if they did that - no more consideration of G5 champs, only the top 12 get in. Maybe we'll get there.

Among the downsides in that situation - Cinderella is dead. It's already pretty unlikely there will ever be one in the CFP, but with a relegation scenario, there's really no room for Cindy. And the networks love Cinderella...because the fans do.
 
I don't see schools like Alabama signing up for this. Why take the risk. They're in the club.

If you mean relegation within a marginal conference trying to get a seat at the CFP table, same concept applies. No reason why a school like Nevada or Hawaii takes on the downside risk.
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this relegation thing. Damn dementia. Just f-ing merge with the Mtn West and take our lumps.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT