Itll happen. Wonder where the gophers end up?

Donate To GopherHole
fmlizard said:
Can someone explain why MSU or Iowa would be in the circle and Minnesota would not?

These programs are not better than Minnesota historically. They aren't better presently (especially MSU)

Iowa is a much smaller state with split allegiances and no major media market. Michigan State is the 2nd team in their state, smaller media market. I guess their stadiums have a few more seats?

For a long time the Gophers have been stuck in their Wacker-era perceptions nationally, but if we were going by things like long-term historical success, recent success, media market size -- the Gophers should be in the circle.

But to be honest, I would rather be an instant League 2 title contender vs Purdue, Iowa St, Northwestern, etc. than be the last team into the Premier League and have a bunch of 1 and 2 win seasons. Remember, it's all minor league, even the top flight.
Click to expand...
This. Literally makes 0 sense to have Iowa, mich st in a different tier than MN. Mich St is barely over .500 the last 5 years. Premier league is changed every year. What you did in the past means nothing. Of note, the Gophs are also a game ahead of WI in W/L the last 5 years as well.
 



Those saying that a fully fledged, formal PL style system would kill fandom of schools placed in lower divisions/tiers: why?

Those clubs in England have no fans? Why is it different?
 

fmlizard said:
Can someone explain why MSU or Iowa would be in the circle and Minnesota would not?
Click to expand...

Most of the elite football schools are in the Confederate States (plus Oklahoma - practically the same thing) and the Far West. If they go to a Premier League, they may want adequate representation from the combined areas of the Northeast and Midwest. Right now, there are only three schools from those areas that can be considered elite in the FBS world (OSU, Michigan, and PSU) so they may have to add a couple of teams who may not be truly elite. If that were the case, Iowa and Wisconsin could claim to be closer to that status than us.
 


I'd be concerned about being left out of a league based solely on current competitiveness/relevance/fan interest. But if we're looking strictly at marketing, being in the 14th or 15th largest television market doesn't hurt. That said, Iowa or Wisconsin might be smaller market, but might get more viewership overall.

Honestly, being in a second tier league wouldn't be all that bad. I've lived now in six different decades and at no time during my life has this program been nationally relevant. Sure, there was the 2019 feel good season. And for awhile in 98 Mason had a nice club. But U of M hasn't started and ended the season as a legitimate contender in the Big 10, and hasn't been able to even win a divisional title in the Big 10 Waste. I went to an FCS school who competes for national championships, plays regional and traditional rivals and has a great game day atmosphere. The product on the field is good and honestly, if the Gophers and my alma mater are playing at the same time, I'll usually have the FCS game on instead.

I'm not suggesting that the U of M drop to FCS, but a second tier of college football, provided we would have regional peers (Iowa, Wisconsin, Iowa State, K-State (I assume Neb. would be playing top tier recent success notwithstanding) would be no less entertaining then the hopelessness we play for now.
 

I can see it going something similar to the NFL -- big league with more small divisions. Something like this would be cool:

B1G West: USC, UCLA, Wash, Ore
B1G North: Min, Wisc, Iowa, Neb
B1G Central: NW, Ill, Purd, Ind
B1G East: Mich, OSU, PSU, MSU
B1G Northeast: Rut, MD, ??, ??

Two division champs with the best record play for the CCG. That would actually be a lot of fun. You keep the traditional rivals and can play for a division title, and you also have the coast-to-coast super league.
 

If you imagined college football similar to the how the European version of football works, it makes sense. Relegation would keep things interesting and many fans would have their favorite Premier team and maybe their local favorite.

For anyone unsure what Relegation looks like:
What does relegation mean in Premier League?

How does relegation work in the Premier League? Since England's top flight was whittled down to a sleek 20-team division in 1995, the three clubs that prop up the table - sitting in 18th, 19th and 20th - by the end of the season are automatically relegated to the Championship, England's second tier.
 

MplsGopher said:
Those saying that a fully fledged, formal PL style system would kill fandom of schools placed in lower divisions/tiers: why?

Those clubs in England have no fans? Why is it different?
Click to expand...
Can the PL players signed under contract for teams that are demoted to a lower division/tier enter the Transfer Portal?
 



I read the article and it already feels outdated. The author puts Utah in who couldn't get a bid to the B1G, but is going to be in some "premier" league of 28? I also am very skeptical that Minnesota (despite our lack of success in recent decades) would be left out in favor of Iowa, a 2nd team from Oklahoma, a second team from Michigan, Utah, and Nebraska. At some point market size matters. TCU looks like a silly inclusion today too. If this list were made today, Colorado would probably be in simply because of Coach Prime. I'd think Illinois, Syracuse or Rutgers, and Virginia or Maryland would be in a similar boat to Minnesota as schools that would provide a regional benefit that others listed do not. The bottom 10 schools of something like this are never going to win it though so maybe small markets where the teams are the only game in town (ex Iowa, Nebraska) are better candidates to be this type of leagues Washington Generals?
 

MNVCGUY said:
For those wondering the Big Ten teams in this new division would be Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Iowa along with new Big Ten teams (still feels weird saying it) USC, UCLA, Oregon, and Washington.

Michigan State, Wisconsin and Iowa would be bottom feeders in this layout with little to no chance to compete with all the helmet schools.

Honestly, if something like this did happen I would be glad to see Minnesota not end up in the break off group but it would be a shame to lose our top rivals.

That said, if some sort of split does happen I don't really see a world where we don't end up in whatever division Wisconsin and Iowa end up in.
Click to expand...
Don't forget Nebraska feeding of the bottom.
 

I don't have a subscription to the Athletic so the proposed details are a mystery. Regardless, any new premier-level league wouldn't operate simply off an invite. The league would require substantial minimum thresholds that need to be met and maintained, no different than any other premier league, club or divisional structure (like the NCAA divisions).

Requirements would probably include a massive up front fee, player and recruitment standards, staffing standards, infrastructure standards (e.g., stadium and practice facility minimums), media market size, fan attendance, etc. In return for that investment, the member schools could get more exposure in the big leagues and a larger media revenue payout. Half of the "premier" teams would get their ass kicked routinely.

Schools that aren't the traditional top handful of programs would have a hard decision to make. In that scenario, it could be smarter for Midwest teams to abandon that dream and do their own thing....back to the future.
 
Last edited:

@EG#9 and others advocating that our market could get us included:

But the problem is twofold on that:

1) without strong parity enforcement on compensation for players and access to top recruits, we’ll never have a chance to compete. And without that, no one in the market will care anymore after long enough passes of 0,1,2 win seasons

2) the name of the game is ratings, at the end of the day. Nebraska, for example, still has some pretty strong ability to draw national casual fans to tune them in. And they have little market/population to speak of. So there is still a strong flavor of this type of thing that you’d have to overcome.
 



to me, there are two glaring issues with any kind of "relegation" system:

TV money and scheduling.

I think its fair to say that the Super League teams would get more TV money then the lower level. So being relegated would cost teams significant revenue.

and schedules are typically made up at least a couple of years in advance. with relegation, you would literally have to do a new schedule every season.

If there is a Super League someday - or if the B1G and SEC break away from the NCAA and do their own thing - I don't see relegation being part of the deal.
 

MplsGopher said:
Those saying that a fully fledged, formal PL style system would kill fandom of schools placed in lower divisions/tiers: why?

Those clubs in England have no fans? Why is it different?
Click to expand...
College football fandom is way different than pro leagues. I’ll watch Ohio State now because they’re in the same tier and conference that we are. If we move down, why would I care about Ohio State vs. Tennessee? I have no connection to those schools. Now multiply that by a ton of other fans/alums of lower tier teams, do you still have enough interest in the tier 1 teams that it makes financial sense? Maybe, maybe not.
 

upnorthkid said:
This. Literally makes 0 sense to have Iowa, mich st in a different tier than MN. Mich St is barely over .500 the last 5 years. Premier league is changed every year. What you did in the past means nothing. Of note, the Gophs are also a game ahead of WI in W/L the last 5 years as well.
Click to expand...
It's $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and viewership, and more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. On field doesn't matter in this discussion really.
 

Nokomis said:
I can see it going something similar to the NFL -- big league with more small divisions. Something like this would be cool:

B1G West: USC, UCLA, Wash, Ore
B1G North: Min, Wisc, Iowa, Neb
B1G Central: NW, Ill, Purd, Ind
B1G East: Mich, OSU, PSU, MSU
B1G Northeast: Rut, MD, ??, ??

Two division champs with the best record play for the CCG. That would actually be a lot of fun. You keep the traditional rivals and can play for a division title, and you also have the coast-to-coast super league.
Click to expand...
I like it.

Or, just do this next season:

Pacific: USC, UCLA, Wash, Oregon
West: Minn, Neb, Iowa, Wisc, IL
North: Mich, MSU, NW, Purd, IN
East: OH St, PA St, Rutg, MD

Then, have a conference semifinal weekend.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
It's $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and viewership, and more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. On field doesn't matter in this discussion really.
Click to expand...
And those 2 teams would generate no additional viewership or money: even worse an argument than MN and the TC market versus a split Iowa or the JV program of Michigan
 

It'll never happen. Cutting off big portions of the country makes no sense. Again.....ask yourselves why the Big Ten invited Maryland.....and more specifically.....Rutgers. You want big markets to be invested in your product. Pulling out only the top 28 programs (which is already subjective) would possibly increase interest from more casual or NFL fans......but it wouldn't make up for the loss of interest from fan bases now competing in an entirely different league.
 

The question is: would viewership of Michigan vs Ohio State in the Mpls market significantly decline if Minnesota were no longer in the Big Ten?

I'm not really convinced it would.

And the decline could result in less lost value than the cost of paying the ransom booty to Minnesota to be in the conference. That's the kind of calculus they could consider in the future.
 

Gopher_In_NYC said:
Don’t know and honestly don’t care.
If/when thst happens, I’m done for good.

I’m not nearly as diehard as I was even three years ago.

Their greed will ruin it in the end.
Click to expand...
Preach on brother, why can’t we have nice things like old school college fb. It’s so disappointing. They should call it the bush league
 

I'll watch at a least dozen D3 games this year with most of those streaming. Just a few years ago, I'd be lucky to see one or two annually and only in person. My point being, FBS needs to be careful it doesn't kill the golden good with greed. There are increasingly other options.
 

FBS wouldn't be doing it. It would be the elite programs getting together and deciding to split away and form their own association.

Would it really be the worst thing in the world if, say, the following schools from the upcoming 18 team Big Ten decided to leave for a brand new association?

Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, Nebraska

I'd still watch the Gophers play, and they would have a much better chance of being competitive with the top of the conference.
 

EG#9 said:
I read the article and it already feels outdated. The author puts Utah in who couldn't get a bid to the B1G, but is going to be in some "premier" league of 28? I also am very skeptical that Minnesota (despite our lack of success in recent decades) would be left out in favor of Iowa, a 2nd team from Oklahoma, a second team from Michigan, Utah, and Nebraska. At some point market size matters. TCU looks like a silly inclusion today too. If this list were made today, Colorado would probably be in simply because of Coach Prime. I'd think Illinois, Syracuse or Rutgers, and Virginia or Maryland would be in a similar boat to Minnesota as schools that would provide a regional benefit that others listed do not. The bottom 10 schools of something like this are never going to win it though so maybe small markets where the teams are the only game in town (ex Iowa, Nebraska) are better candidates to be this type of leagues Washington Generals?
Click to expand...
I do think MN is more valuable than the 1980-2022 winning percentage would suggest

And some schools are less valuable than that winning percentage would suggest
 

Panthadad2 said:
I'll watch at a least dozen D3 games this year with most of those streaming. Just a few years ago, I'd be lucky to see one or two annually and only in person. My point being, FBS needs to be careful it doesn't kill the golden good with greed. There are increasingly other options.
Click to expand...
These days “:…content is king…”. There are so many options available to stream/broadcast games. High school games are viewable either for free or for a minimal charge all over the state of Minnesota.

I love Big Ten football for one reason only: the U of M is a member of that conference. I casually watched tOSU vs PSU last week waiting for the Gopher/Iowa game to start. That match-up of two unbeaten, top ten teams was not only boring, but also exposed PSU for being an extremely over-ranked football team, and also brought down my impression of tOSU. The number 3 vs the number 7 teams was a real bore to watch. And, if it has very little impact on my Gopher team’s season, I really don’t care, I guess.

Having top-25 teams battle each other really doesn’t interest me much. I think it’s probably just going to tarnish the images of Notre Dame, Michigan, tOSU, Texas, USC, Georgia, FSU, and the other 21 blue bloods that would make up any “super college football conference.”

Those 28 teams when they start playing ONLY other superior recruited teams game in and game out are all going to lose a lot of their luster. In my humble opinion only.

After a couple of seasons the winners of that class/conference will be longing for the time when they only had to play a couple of teams that on paper could really challenge them. They will destroy all the hype that used make each one of them “special” after the thrill of the new & improved conference is gone and exposes a lot of the “super teams for what they are without their old conference teams to dominate.
Panthadad2 said:
I'll watch at a least dozen D3 games this year with most of those streaming. Just a few years ago, I'd be lucky to see one or two annually and only in person. My point being, FBS needs to be careful it doesn't kill the golden good with greed. There are increasingly other options.
Click to expand...
 

GoldGoldGold said:
If the NFL draft worked the way college recruiting worked, the Superbowl Champ would get the first 7 picks in the draft. The Superbowl runner-up would get the next 7, and on and on until the worst team in the league gets the last 7 picks....

In this scenario the NFL would never have succeeded and is what is going to cause college football to cease its existence as we know it..

Similar rules which level the playing field in the NFL is what is needed in college football if the sport is going to survive.
Click to expand...
I've been saying this exact same thing. Now they are paying to play, stop the illusion of "education". Treat NIL like a salary cap. Parity is what drives the NFL.
 

stocker08 said:
It'll never happen. Cutting off big portions of the country makes no sense. Again.....ask yourselves why the Big Ten invited Maryland.....and more specifically.....Rutgers.
Click to expand...
Because at that time, getting the BTN in the NYC and Baltimore/DC cable systems meant guaranteed money for the schools.
 

disco said:
Because at that time, getting the BTN in the NYC and Baltimore/DC cable systems meant guaranteed money for the schools.
Click to expand...

Right. Does that change at all now? You still want these big markets represented in a super league, no?
 

stocker08 said:
Right. Does that change at all now? You still want these big markets represented in a super league, no?
Click to expand...
No. It matters much less with cord-cutting and a la carte streaming.
We all knew nobody watched Rutgers football. It was just to get the network guaranteed on in NYC. Nobody cares about them and I highly doubt interest increased at all because they were added. Interest in college football in New York and New England isn't great anyway.

Market size in CFB isn't really important at all. When your largest stadiums are in Columbus, Ann Arbor, Baton Rouge, Happy Valley, etc. It's really kind of similar to Green Bay having an NFL team.
 

disco said:
No. It matters much less with cord-cutting and a la carte streaming.
We all knew nobody watched Rutgers football. It was just to get the network guaranteed on in NYC. Nobody cares about them and I highly doubt interest increased at all because they were added. Interest in college football in New York and New England isn't great anyway.

Market size in CFB isn't really important at all. When your largest stadiums are in Columbus, Ann Arbor, Baton Rouge, Happy Valley, etc. It's really kind of similar to Green Bay having an NFL team.
Click to expand...

Of course it still matters.....which is why the largest media markets almost always have pro teams. Having a league that alienates media markets is BAD for the league. And cord cutting doesn't make your point....it actually does the opposite. Large media markets = larger subscriber base.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom