As long as your team is in one of them, no. Being in the B1G, Iowa should be just fine. The B1G and the SEC are considered to be in the top 2 conferences as measured by media rights deals in place. Belief is that the larger conferences will continue to set the rules for the College Football Playoff, such as automatic bids, etc.
When there are 9 teams in the Pac 12, who cares about an ocean or two.
I don’t really see any downside to super conferences for fans. When the dust finally settles I’m sure the divisions within the super conferences will look very similar to some of the traditional smaller conferences from before.
The only downside I can see off the top of my head is, if there are any particular matchups they prefer seeing, they may not happen as often as they do now if the teams are not in the same division.
There are some other questions that would need to be answered - off the top of my head:
- How many teams in each conference?
- Do the conferences bother having divisions? It used to be a requirement if a 12-team or larger conference wanted to have a conference championship game, but no longer.
- Do the conferences switch to 4-team conference championship tournaments?
- What happens to the other 5-6 conferences? Do they form their own tournament? (Right now, nothing prevents there from being a second 4-team FBS tournament; the only requirement is that the two semi-finals have to be established bowl games.)
I like Pacific and Atlantic 12, they can call it PANDA12.
The college football playoff has already moved to an 8 team playoff coming this season.
No. It’s next year (2024-2025 season) and 12 teams.
What @Chingon said - this season is still 4 teams; starting next season, it will be 12, but it will still be a single tournament.
What I suggested was, have a second tournament, but limited to the “non-superconferences”.
I think we’ll eventually move to a system like that where the mega SEC and mega Big 10 split off and have the championship between just those two conference. The mega Big 12 decays back into smaller pieces in this this lower division.
Here is the insanity that college football money is driving. FSU is exploring taking on investments from private equity to fund a portion of their athletic department expenses in exchange for a portion of their future media rights income. They have to be careful or FSU may lose their tax exempt status as a university.
LOL, I would love to see Bain Capital swoop in, load up the athletic program with debt, and sell the rights to Chief Osceloa to Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino.
The effect of all these conference realignments, I feel, is to make conference affiliation less and less relevant to the average fan. Relevant to ADs and commissioners and business offices, yes; but to Joe Sixpack sitting in the stands on a Saturday with a painted beer belly and a hot dog, not really relevant.
When I think of the “average fan,” I think of my brother-in-law, who gave up the Iowa season tickets he’d had for 25+ years when the Big Ten expanded to 14 teams. I remember him saying, “We used to see Michigan and Ohio State every other year. Now it’s maybe once in four years, and we get Rutgers instead. Screw it.”
I hadn’t thought of that. The schedules will certainly be different. I remember when Iowa played Wisconsin every year.
IIRC, back when the conference truly had only 10 teams, every team played 8 of the other 9 teams every year, but true rivalries were never skipped – Iowa/Wisconsin, Iowa/Minnesota, Michigan/Ohio St., Michigan/Michigan St., etc.
Personally I thought Penn St. and Nebraska were sensible regional additions, but IMO this coast-to-coast nonsense more or less destroys the whole point of a conference from the fan’s POV.
I get it. I’m not a fan of either school, but I didn’t like Texas A&M coming to the SEC, because it destroyed a classic rivalry, with Texas. That game will come back when the 'Horns join the SEC next year, but IIRC, my Georgia Dawgs will lose our yearly rivalry game with Auburn. Which is the second-longest rivalry in the South (after North Carolina-Virginia).
As a Rutgers fan, I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I’ve always been fascinated by one match-up, but I don’t think I’ll ever see a Rutgers-Princeton football game in my lifetime. I do think several historic broken rivalries are on the verge of being restored as we continue to undergo realignment.
Is there any reason not to protect a historic rivalry if you’re in the same super conference? It may not be annual but once every two years seems fairly attainable.
After a wild week the Pac-12 is down to 4 teams: Stanford, Cal, Washington State, and Oregon State.
While regionalism was already teetering on the brink, these moves fully destroy it. College football just isn’t a regional product anymore, or at least that’s not where the money is.
I do wonder how teams are going to accommodate all of this travel they’re going to have to do and still maintain a facade that “student athletes” are going to class and focusing on their studies. At least the football teams will likely get direct charters and luxury accommodations. Have a hard time seeing that benefit being extended to the women’s volleyball team.
Was just talking about that last night with a friend. It’s a pain in the ass to get from Eugene, Oregon to Champaign, Illinois using commercial air travel. A football team will charter a plane due to all the people and equipment, but that’s going to be quite a pain for the non revenue sports.