I wonder what incentive for consent/participation there is for smaller schools in this model where revenue is distributed based on brand value. Will brand value be determined in an open fair and reasonable manner? Or will it be a black box of “just trust us bro pls bro setting schools up to be princes or paupers with no middle ground is the only way bro!” Do Bama & Georgia get $200m each while Indiana & OK State get $50k each? Who on earth would sign up for that if it meant being on the $50k end?
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
College Football
842 readers
1 users here now
A community to discuss college football.
| /c/CFB Poll Top 25 |  |
|---|---|
| 1. Oregon |  |
| 2. Ohio State |  |
| 3. Indiana |  |
| 4. Texas |  |
| 5. Notre Dame |  |
| T-6. Ole Miss |  |
| T-6. Tennessee |  |
| 8. Penn State |  |
| 9. Alabama |  |
| 10. BYU |  |
| 11. Miami |  |
| 12. SMU |  |
| 13. Georgia |  |
| 14. Boise State |  |
| 15. Army |  |
| 16. Texas A&M |  |
| 17. Clemson |  |
| 18. South Carolina |  |
| 19. Washington State |  |
| 20. Colorado |  |
| 21. Louisville |  |
| 22. Tulane |  |
| 23. Kansas State |  |
| T-24. Iowa State |  |
| T-24. LSU |  |
Check out our other sports communities!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Not that your point is bad, but with the current model some of those "50k" teams may not even have a conference with a revenue deal at all if things keep going the espn/fox way. So the incentive may just be the stability of a super league. Either way the more transparent the better.
Nothing about regonality with the conferences, but I assume the non pro/rel conferences would be regional. So this model probably meets my criteria of Tennessee play bama and fLorida every year. I do like that teams would be the owners of the league, and that revenue would be distributed based on brand value. As always the pro/rel model for the 8th conference MUST protect rivalries imo, and I still don't love a playoff model. But honestly as far as cfb models go this one isn't my least favorite.
I don’t hate it either, though I still maintain that if you “fix” the portal issue, pro/rel will not serve its intended purpose in a league full of players early on their developmental curves and leaving after five years.
Interesting that the structure is also intended to provide a single entity for potential unions to negotiate with for collective bargaining.