2025 NCAA Football Thread

[Deleterious]

Can SoFi handle a crowd of 15,000?

 

[buddha]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

something tells me this is going to get ugly.

I've watched this dynamic before, where the weaker/poorer members of an organization try to dictate to the stronger/richer because they think they have voting numbers. It almost always turns out poorly.

Think UM or USC would be welcome in the ACC or SEC? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

That is such a shady deal.  i hope michigan doesnt cave like they did with the ncaa.  their recent history is to talk loud and then back off.

those are public institutions with governance structures who are responsible - in theory - to the people of the state who provide the financing for those schools (except northwestern and usc)  to sell off future assets like that without their approval should not be legally possible.

they should file an injunction.

i'm really surprised ohio state is going along with this; although their finances are worse than michigan's, i believe.  penn state is deep into a stadium renovation.  everyone else other than usc needs cash.

[Deleterious]

That type of deal probably kills the super league talk.  Maybe OSU sees value by remaining a big fish in a small pond.  

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

i'm really surprised ohio state is going along with this; although their finances are worse than michigan's, i believe.

IDK. UM athletic dept was in the hole because of the fines but OSU is generally the conference income leader aren't they? I guess if you blow through it all it doesn't matter what your income is!

At UM, with Grasso being an interim, plus a guy with no major college sports experience anyway, I don't see him with a big personal interest in his own sports legacy - IOW, I don't think he's likely to try to push the regents one way or the if they make a decision. But who knows?  OTOH, I don't suppose any of the Regents want to go down as the 'guy that blew up the Big Ten" even if that exactly the kind of thing that all this is driving inevitably towards.

Edited 4 hours ago by gehringer_2

[buddha]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

IDK. UM athletic dept was in the hole because of the fines but OSU is generally the conference income leader aren't they? I guess if you blow through it all it doesn't matter what your income is!

osu is deep underwater.  you like to take shots at michigan - many of them warranted - but osu is like $25 million in the hole every year.  psu is deep underwater because of the stadium rebuild.  michigan's finances are better than both, i believe.

and in principle, michigan is correct: this is a short term payday loan to bail out those who cannot manage their finances.  except this time its public institutions and they play by different rules.

so......michigan, usc, and notre dame to the sec?  or to the acc?

does a big ten with only ohio state, penn state, and....oregon?  make more money than an acc with notre dame, michigan, usc, florida state, and north carolina?  

[buddha]

and if michigan bolted the big ten with usc and notre dame, would penn state leave and return to its eastern roots?

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, buddha said:

and if michigan bolted the big ten with usc and notre dame, would penn state leave and return to its eastern roots?

LOL - if you are Penn state at this point wouldn't you rather play Pitt than Indiana?

[MichiganCardinal]

5 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

something tells me this is going to get ugly.

I've watched this dynamic before, where the weaker/poorer members of an organization try to dictate to the stronger/richer because they think they have voting numbers. It almost always turns out poorly.

Think UM or USC would be welcome in the ACC or SEC? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

I agree. This could be the beginning of the end. Depending on your definitions of the beginning and the end.

Ten more years of sharing revenues with Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland, and Northwestern? Might be okay if it's on the big dogs terms. But if they're going to try to throw their non-existent weight around?

I'm curious where Ohio State sits with this. It would be really easy for a small group of powerhouses to eschew the rest.

[casimir]

8 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I agree. This could be the beginning of the end. Depending on your definitions of the beginning and the end.

Ten more years of sharing revenues with Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland, and Northwestern? Might be okay if it's on the big dogs terms. But if they're going to try to throw their non-existent weight around?

I'm curious where Ohio State sits with this. It would be really easy for a small group of powerhouses to eschew the rest.

So what is this super league supposed to look like?  Would the Purdues and Rutgers be invited to it?  The Globetrotters didn’t win all of those games without the Washington Generals.  I can’t see a league with only “blue bloods” knocking the snot out of each other every week.

[MichiganCardinal]

22 minutes ago, casimir said:

So what is this super league supposed to look like?  Would the Purdues and Rutgers be invited to it?  The Globetrotters didn’t win all of those games without the Washington Generals.  I can’t see a league with only “blue bloods” knocking the snot out of each other every week.

I think it looks at who brings money. I agree that it won't be just the top ten programs of all time. I don't think being a founding member of the Big Ten will guarantee you a seat though. 

[buddha]

26 minutes ago, casimir said:

So what is this super league supposed to look like?  Would the Purdues and Rutgers be invited to it?  The Globetrotters didn’t win all of those games without the Washington Generals.  I can’t see a league with only “blue bloods” knocking the snot out of each other every week.

like a european champions league.

the top 20 college football teams in two leagues playing every week would be very sustainable and would be very popular.

texas-ohio state does 16 million.

purdue-northwestern does 1.6 million.

[casimir]

27 minutes ago, buddha said:

like a european champions league.

the top 20 college football teams in two leagues playing every week would be very sustainable and would be very popular.

texas-ohio state does 16 million.

purdue-northwestern does 1.6 million.

So 20 teams total or 40 teams total?  Are they also suggesting the promotion/relegation foolishness?

[buddha]

44 minutes ago, casimir said:

So 20 teams total or 40 teams total?  Are they also suggesting the promotion/relegation foolishness?

america doesnt do promotion/relegation.  we do guaranteed profits.

promotion/relegation is amazing.  it actually gives you consequences for losing!   unlike american sports, which rewards you for failure with the ability to bring in the most talented players the next season.  you all complain about tanking but none of you are willing to do the one thing that would end it: relegation.  so keep whining about europe and soccer.  they got it right.

the top 40 college football programs could definitely start their own league and the ratings would be amazing.

that's why this is a great deal if youre purdue/northwestern/iowa etc.  you know that ohio state and penn state are desperate for cash right now.  what better time to lock them into a grant of rights deal than now?  what better way to make sure they dont leave by dangling a sweet $190 million in front of them now?  its brilliant timing by pettiti and company, selling out the future at the perfect time when your big brand names are struggling in the new environment.

michigan is pretending to be ethical and usc is pretending its still an elite program.  they'll both cave.  michigan ALWAYS caves.

the one real impediment would be the law.