Andy Staples puts out his hypothetical CFB Super League:
College Football Super League via @Andy_Staples🚨
A hypothetical look at what could happen if the SEC & Big Ten parted ways with the NCAA👀https://t.co/irEVODJJvt pic.twitter.com/Wtg3E8hTjC
— On3 (@On3sports) March 4, 2024
I can’t imagine that a super league would include both Mississippi and Miss State, OU and Ok State, IU and Purdue. I think it would just be one of each. Also, it wouldn’t include Northwestern and Vandy. I know that many of those teams are already in the B1G and SEC, which is why I think most likely the final endgame is the valuable schools from those leagues break off and join together to create the “premier league” of CFB.
Also, I can’t imagine they’d leave out Arizona State (Phoenix) and Colorado (Denver). Too big of markets to just be left behind.
If you read the article Staples defines his underlying assumptions for selection. He based his model on the assumption that both the B1G and SEC would be adding schools to their leagues vs what you are referring to which would be the biggest brands leaving the B1G/SEC to start an entirely new Super League. If it’s merely the B1G/SEC adding schools then Staples assumes it’s unlikely that either are going to kickout existing member schools from their league. The only way you get rid of the bottom-end schools in both conferences is if the biggest brands decide to leave and effectively dissolve both conferences to start a new Super League.
I’d love nothing more than to see Ohio St/Georgia/Notre Dame/Alabama/Michigan etc all get together and decide to leave the B1G/SEC to form their own Super League of the best CFB brands. Because in that scenario, Utah would most certainly be included. If you cut out all of the schools like Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers, Vanderbilt etc. then there’s plenty of room for Utah to make the cut even at 32 teams. But if not, things get really tight and there needs to be some tough decisions made on who gets left out.
At the end of the day, it’s really cool to see national writers include Utah over other schools. Staples’ model of 48 teams has Utah in over Colorado/ASU/Arizona/Stanford/Cal out West. That says a lot IMO of how far Utah has come as a national brand.
If it gets blown up it’s so they can get rid of the programs that can’t pull their own weight. Just like Oregon State and Wazzu. Bye Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas…
Nah, they’ll keep Maryland and Rutgers because of their markets. Same reason they’d probably include Virginia, NC, ASU, and Colorado.
But yeah, Illinois, Purdue and or Indiana, Michigan State, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Vandy, Northwestern (because ND provides Chicago), Kentucky, and maybe a couple more need to be really nervous.
Does Illinois, Kentucky, and Indiana really not have a good enough market but Utah does? Serious question.
Yes, SLC is a bigger market (#30) than Lexington KY, Champaign IL, and Bloomington IN.
However, market size isn’t as important as it was under the cable TV network model. It’s still a data point, but not the most important. Brand power is the most important in terms of being able to attract the most eyeballs. Viewers want to watch the best teams play. That’s why teams like Clemson and Oregon in small markets have become such powerful brands by winning and staying relevant over the past 20 years.And it’s also why the past 8 years have been so huge for Utah. Winning the PAC12 in back to back years, beating the biggest brands out West twice each year to do so, and then playing in consecutive Rose Bowls against blue blood schools has drawn millions of viewers to Utah’s brand (I think last years total viewership for Utah was over 33M; the Rose Bowl game against tOSU had 20M, almost as many as the CFP games). And don’t forget the lead up to all of this success which was also huge in the 2 years Utah made it to the CCG, was knocking on the door of the CFP, but lost to both Washington and Oregon.Being consistently ranked in the CFP over the course of the past 8 years has made Utah a relevant brand nationally. Utah hasn’t arrived by all means and still has to continue to climb and build up the brand. But this is the reason why we’re seeing national media including Utah in these hypothetical models. It’s why media are looking to Utah to be the flagship program of this new B12.Utah fans aren’t used to this type of attention and I think it’s even fair to say that most Utah fans aren’t comfortable thinking our Utes are a national brand now. But make no mistake about it, Whitt has put Utah on the map of CFB. If he can win the B12 this year and make some noise in the CFP, that would take the Utah brand even higher. And there’s nothing more important that could happen for Utah athletics right now than that. Go Utes!!
You are kidding yourself if you think the comparison is between SLC and Bloomington/West Lafayette/Champaign. Those are college towns that nobody stays in. The relevant market for IU is Indianapolis (my home) which easily supports an NFL team. The Illini market is Chicago. I would think that a Super League would take one of IU/Purdue, and one of Illinois/NW with the hope that the chosen team can consolidate the market. SLC is a smaller market with a smaller alumni base than each of those schools/cities. One thing that we have going for us is that SLC does not have an NFL team to compete with. This new mini-nfl may be looking for new football markets which plays in our favor. I really hope that we are included in the end. Either way its dumb and I hate it.
Ranking of Sports Media Markets
Good post and I stand corrected. Here’s a link to the media markets that shows which schools are associated with each market. SLC at #27 is comparable to Indianapolis at #25. Kentucky goes with Lexington which is small in comparison at #63. As you pointed out, Illinois shares Chicago #3 with a list of schools but the 2 B1G schools are Northwestern and Illinois. However, my point still stands. Media market size isn’t as important as it was 10 years ago. More important in determining the value a school brings to the table is measuring Brand in terms of overall TV ratings. Another thing to keep in mind is that one thing Utah has going for it is geography. Because Utah isn’t competing with Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky for a spot. There is going to be a pod of at least 6 schools in the West, maybe 8 or 10. That said, Utah’s competition is with Colorado, ASU, Arizona, Stanford, and Cal. I’ve seen some media people pair Utah/Colorado with the current 4 B1G Western schools. Utah’s success over the past decade has lifted the brand considerably. Colorado has seen a meteoric rise due to the Coach Prime effect that there are concerns around whether that will last or not, especially if Deion were to leave Colorado. But the other big thing going for Colorado is it would bring back the Nebraska/Colorado rivalry. And rivalries are part of the whole Brand equation because rivalry games draw the largest amounts of eyeballs. It’s actually one of the reasons why TSPP is brought up because of the Holy War being one of the Top 15 ranked rivalries in CFB. From what I’ve seen, I’m most concerned with Colorado, Stanford, and ASU. I believe Utah has passed up Arizona and Cal. And it appears that although the B1G Presidents would much prefer to bring in Stanford/Cal due to their elite academics, the TV Networks will end up overruling them in favor of schools that bring better TV ratings such as Utah. For that reason, I like our chances over the Bay area schools. The one reason why Stanford concerns me is their long-standing relationship with Notre Dame. Maybe Notre Dame would advocate for bringing in Stanford in order to finally give up Independence and join the B1G. The B1G will do whatever Notre Dame wants if it were to join the conference. But for Utah to be in strong contention for being one of the schools considered out West is nothing short of a miracle and we have Kyle Whittingham, the entire coaching staff, and a long list of school administrators to thank for getting Utah to this level…truly REMARKABLE!
Spot on. If this all goes down and Utah ends up on the outside that will mark the end of me caring at all about cfb. Much like the LIV drama has diminished my interest in the PGA. The question is then, if this all happens and Utah ends up in the group. What is the interest level? I’m almost morally conflicted about remaining a fan after half of the nation had their teams demoted for network profits. It will be interesting how it all plays out, I hope they don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater but it’s not looking good.
You’re a better man than me. I only care about Utah being in. If Utah makes it into the Super League and is playing against the best of the best brands week in and week out…let me die and go to heaven!!
Think about how huge it was when our schedule was upgraded from MWC teams to SC, Oregon, Washington etc coming to RES. Now cut out the stupid FCS games, G5 games, and low-level P5 games and replace those with matchups against Michigan, tOSU, Notre Dame etc…my brain almost explodes just thinking about it!!
The reality is the top tier of college football has been cut in half every 40 years basically since it started. And even from the beginning it was about how many resources they wanted to dedicate.
Football broke into College (later D2) and University (later D1) divisions. And then D2 split into D2 and D3, while D1 split into 1-A (later FBS) and 1-AA (later FCS). And then FBS functionally split into AQ (later P5) and non-AQ (aka G5). And now P5 has become P4 and is the process of splitting about half the teams (SEC+B1G) off to a higher level.
It’s frustrating for sure… But it’s nothing new. It’s just gotten to the level that we’re noticing
I get your points, and I don’t disagree. Aloha stated that both Rutgers and Maryland are safe due to market size, which he may be right on that point. Then he listed other schools that he thinks would be gone, but each one of those schools reside in states that are bigger than Utah is. For example, Kentucky won’t only draw from Lexington but the entire state. Same as Oregon. Their biggest market isn’t Eugenen but is Portland. Like you said, I don’t think market size is the sole determining factor, but if it’s the networks calling the shots, it will definitely play a role.
Agreed. But I disagree that Rutgers/Maryland are safe because of market size. They’re safe because they’re already in and I don’t think anyone sees a scenario where the conference would boot members out.
What schools like Rutgers/Maryland need to worry about is if tOSU/Michigan decide they’re no longer going to subsidize the bottom feeders and instead leave the B1G to start a new league. I agree that market size is an important data point because it factors into the ratings equation. For example when Utah is playing a large % of viewership is coming from SLC/Utah County market viewers. You pick up a million eyeballs there plus whatever you get nationally and it’s a solid rating for TV. But the flip side is also true. You could have a team like Rutgers playing and even though they’ve got 20M in their local media market, nobody cares or tunes in to watch them play. This is why Brand is the most important factor that takes everything into consideration, including media market size.
Market size indicates potential viewership, but brand + program strength + level of fan base engagement are driving actual viewership and this might be carrying more weight than market size.
Good example is Stanford and Cal. Big market, nice brands, both programs are down and both fanbases show lower engagement in good or bad times. Viewership for these two is significantly lower than what it could be, if the demographic cared about CFB and the programs were better.
Point is market size isn’t the only factor and it might not even be The factor in media and conference realignment. Similar to what was said on the podcast, will Ohio St vs Utah generate more interest and viewership than Ohio St vs Rutgers? If so, a program like Utah might get a look in next stage of realignment.
Good points. Which is why I don’t understand the argument that Rutgers and Maryland are in, but Kentucky, Illinois, and Indiana are out. As far as Kentucky, they do have good fan engagement where Rutgers does not. Your point about viewership when it’s team A vs. Team B makes perfect sense, so I’m not convinced Rutgers and Cal are in. I do think Stanford has some national appeal however, but they’re not a given. ND may help their case too.
Market size is wholly a cable tv construct. I’m sure you know this, but tv deals are paid off of subscriber fees. Utah as what? 3 million people? Where as NYC alone has almost 30 million people?
There are a lot more people subscribed to cable tv watching FOX and HGTV and other bullspit in NY than Utah, so if you are getting $1 per subscriber in NY, that’s 30 million a month vs 3 million a month for Utah.
Now with cable dying…we may see that become less relevant and the question moves to, who is willing to pay $10/month for ESPN+. If Utah has 2 million subscriber and NYC has 3 million subscribers but only 500K consistently watch Rutgers…then Utah becomes a lot more valuable than Rutgers.
Problem for them is geography. Those markets are all condensed and largely covered by Ohio State, Michigan, Tennessee, etc.
Michigan State is in danger purely because they’ll already have Michigan.
The school that gets consistently left out of the conversation is Vegas. Yes, they don’t have historical success to fall back on. But it’s in one of the fastest growing markets, has a shiny new NFL quality stadium and is probably the easiest and most popular travel destination in the country. They would be able to operate as a de facto expansion team and with the anticipated influx of cash (assume each member school starts at 100MM per annum), would be able to quickly build up their facilities and hire a top-notch staff to get up to speed.
Juxtapose that with someone like Utah who, if we take all of our bias out of the equation, is fighting two other schools for market share. And the people who follow one of those other schools, which is a very sizeable portion of the market, will never shift their allegiance to Utah no matter the stakes.,,
I don’t think a decision would come down to Utah v Vegas. But Utah has the same issue as Michigan State does. East Lansing and Ann Arbor are both suburbs of Detroit and would split that market just like Utah and the parochial school will, or Ok St/Oklahoma, IU/Purdue/ND, etc. Whereas Vegas doesn’t have a current P5 competitor within ~ 3 hours.
Good point. UNLV is the perfect investment for big money entities to dump cash for players and coaches. The location, facilities, and entertainment are all there in LV. Surprised it hasn’t happened yet, or in the works. UNLV could be the Bishop Gorman of college football. Like it or not, this is where it’s headed. In terms of fans wanting to check out of college football, Sankey, Fox, ESPN, and Pettite all know damn well they can do whatever they want and people will still tune in to the college football addiction. The booming gambling business alone has college football viewership locked in. My guess is college football is hot right now for some years to come with a generational downturn ahead. Time will tell.
True. But the younger generation in Utah is mostly Utah fans and it’s growing. If Utah gets in and TSPP doesn’t, it will only get bigger.
Yea if Utah gets in and TSPP is left out, I wonder if they’d just pull the plug on their athletics department all together. Football funds everything and their fan interest would drop off considerably if they were back to playing MWC football. LES would be lucky to be half-full for games IMO.
This is just some dude’s guess. W. Virginia is a great place to visit but has a population of 1.5m. Nebraska has about 2m, loves football but has not won in a long time. Utah has about 3m. Arizona has a population of 7m and Colorado 6m.
Would any rational decision makers take schools based on recent success despite small populations like Utah, or success in the distant past like Nebraska and W. Virginia rather than programs in larger states with good to solid support like AZ and CO? Does it really matter that W. Virginia had 3 good years back in 2005-07? Or that Nebraska was good back in ’80s and ’90s? I’m sure the Zoobs would say “yes the ’80s were extremely important” but I doubt many really care.
People outside of the SEC footprint always want to leave out Vandy- which seems like a no brainer based on football success. On the other hand, TN has nearly 10m people and Nashville is a financial powerhouse. Vanderbilt carries huge brand recognition in TN and they have a sterling academic reputation. Their campus great, they are remodeling their football stadium now, and are a solid financial member of the SEC despite not winning a lot of football games. Everyone in the SEC likes to play Vandy. I am absolutely certain that these programs would much rather play Vandy than have a home and home with Utah.
Decisions on who will be in and who will be out are not going be easy to make. Utah certainly merits inclusion but the actual decision may have little to do with merit. W. Virginia- no way!
This is all about money. When it comes down to Vandy vs Utah, the question will be “How many people will pay $10/month to subscribe to college football network app?”
If Vandy has 100 million people in the state but 99 all watch Tennessee and only 200K sign up to watch Vandy vs 1.5 million in Utah who would sign up…
Then Utah is way more attractive than Vanderbilt. This is where the lack of cable can really hurt these larger population schools who don’t have great support (like Rutgers).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Welcome to Ute Hub › Forums › Utah Utes Sports › Football › YES PLEASE!
Utah.Rate your excitement level for Utah Men's Basketball playing in the NIT
Total Voters: 125
Loading ...
© Copyright 2015-2024
Website and Mobile App by Tony Korologos
