Raleigh News-Observer article on ACC expansion

[HailToPitt725]

Not that we haven’t already had our fair share of expansion discussion on here, but a few tidbits from a recent article published by the Raleigh News-Observer on NC State coming around to approve Cal, SMU, and Stanford:

• “Clemson had been quieter in its criticism but, like FSU, had expressed concern about its ability to compete as the ACC’s revenue disparity with the SEC and Big Ten continued to grow”
• “UNC, meanwhile, understood its place as the most desired of ACC members”
• Wake Forest was a hard push for ACC expansion, leading the point that the conference was headed for a similar fate as the Pac-12
• “If FSU goes independent (they are seriously considering it), SMU could fill the gap.”
• In the long term, Sutton envisioned a time, after the Big 12’s television rights deal expires in six years, when the ACC could target TCU and West Virginia. Do that, his message went, and it “ensures the ACC exists until such time as a ‘top down’ solution comes in college football (it surely will in the next 3-10 years) whereby the top 24-36 teams form their own alliance and everyone else scrambles to develop the next level.”
• Speculation that NC State received assurances that they’d be accepted into the AAU if they voted yes (NCSU denies this)

Full story here:

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Not that we haven’t already had our fair share of expansion discussion on here, but a few tidbits from a recent article published by the Raleigh News-Observer on NC State coming around to approve Cal, SMU, and Stanford:

• “Clemson had been quieter in its criticism but, like FSU, had expressed concern about its ability to compete as the ACC’s revenue disparity with the SEC and Big Ten continued to grow”
• “UNC, meanwhile, understood its place as the most desired of ACC members”
• Wake Forest was a hard push for ACC expansion, leading the point that the conference was headed for a similar fate as the Pac-12
• “If FSU goes independent (they are seriously considering it), SMU could fill the gap.”
• In the long term, Sutton envisioned a time, after the Big 12’s television rights deal expires in six years, when the ACC could target TCU and West Virginia. Do that, his message went, and it “ensures the ACC exists until such time as a ‘top down’ solution comes in college football (it surely will in the next 3-10 years) whereby the top 24-36 teams form their own alliance and everyone else scrambles to develop the next level.”
• Speculation that NC State received assurances that they’d be accepted into the AAU if they voted yes (NCSU denies this)

Full story here:

View embedded media

Good article but no real new info. Just behind the scenes details.

The FSU going independent thing was just a wealthy influential Wake booster saying that. Independence makes no sense for them as they still wouldn't own their TV rights. Should just go to the B10 or SEC without any TV revenue like SMU. If SMU could do it, so should they. Cut some athletic programs to save money until 2036.

I like that this Wake booster thinks like me. He envisions picking off B12 members in 6 years. Their new deal is going to suck so bad. Its basically the old Big East plus the AZ, UT, and CO schools....who themselves dont add much and Colorado will be P2 eventually and not because of Prime.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Not that we haven’t already had our fair share of expansion discussion on here, but a few tidbits from a recent article published by the Raleigh News-Observer on NC State coming around to approve Cal, SMU, and Stanford:

• “Clemson had been quieter in its criticism but, like FSU, had expressed concern about its ability to compete as the ACC’s revenue disparity with the SEC and Big Ten continued to grow”
• “UNC, meanwhile, understood its place as the most desired of ACC members”
• Wake Forest was a hard push for ACC expansion, leading the point that the conference was headed for a similar fate as the Pac-12
• “If FSU goes independent (they are seriously considering it), SMU could fill the gap.”
• In the long term, Sutton envisioned a time, after the Big 12’s television rights deal expires in six years, when the ACC could target TCU and West Virginia. Do that, his message went, and it “ensures the ACC exists until such time as a ‘top down’ solution comes in college football (it surely will in the next 3-10 years) whereby the top 24-36 teams form their own alliance and everyone else scrambles to develop the next level.”
• Speculation that NC State received assurances that they’d be accepted into the AAU if they voted yes (NCSU denies this)

Full story here:

View embedded media

Pitt needs to get that alliance up to 48 schools. Two 24 school conferences. Then Pitt would be a coin flip for inclusion.

 

[Pitt79]

... the top 24-36 teams form their own alliance and everyone else scrambles to develop the next level.

I'll make a point of never watching any of those 24-36 teams play ever, unless they play Pitt, and just watch games from whatever league Pitt plays in, no matter the level.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Pitt needs to get that alliance up to 48 schools. Two 24 school conferences. Then Pitt would be a coin flip for inclusion.

It’d be fascinating to see how they’d select that group of teams, whether it’s 24 or 48. Theoretically, it could just be the Big Ten and SEC, but I’d imagine there’s a few programs in each they’d prefer to switch out.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

It’d be fascinating to see how they’d select that group of teams, whether it’s 24 or 48. Theoretically, it could just be the Big Ten and SEC, but I’d imagine there’s a few programs in each they’d prefer to switch out.

Heard the guys on the radio talking about a Pat Forde analysis of schools from a couple of years ago that was pretty thorough. Many things were evaluated, including tv viewership, on the field success, etc. and on his list Pitt was somewhere in the mid 40’s. Ahead of schools like WVU. But behind some of the bottom feeders in power conferences.

 

[ThePanthers]

It’d be fascinating to see how they’d select that group of teams, whether it’s 24 or 48. Theoretically, it could just be the Big Ten and SEC, but I’d imagine there’s a few programs in each they’d prefer to switch out.

There won't be an orgainzed "selection" if you will. It will be tOSU, Michigan, PSU, Wiscy, Florida, LSU, etc just saying "F it, we want to do our own thing" and working with TV to bring in the most value.

I'm with Pitt79, I'm only watching Pitt and the tier they are playing against in that NWO. I don't care about watching FSU vs USC or something if it means absolutely nothing for Pitt.

And to be honest, if schools like Purdue, WVU, Minnesota, Indiana, NC State, etc are part of our tier, I'd be fine with it.

 

[HailToPitt725]

There won't be an orgainzed "selection" if you will. It will be tOSU, Michigan, PSU, Wiscy, Florida, LSU, etc just saying "F it, we want to do our own thing" and working with TV to bring in the most value.

I'm with Pitt79, I'm only watching Pitt and the tier they are playing against in that NWO. I don't care about watching FSU vs USC or something if it means absolutely nothing for Pitt.

And to be honest, if schools like Purdue, WVU, Minnesota, Indiana, NC State, etc are part of our tier, I'd be fine with it.

I wonder if that “own thing” will be a super conference that mimics its own league, or a separate entity altogether that’s outside of the NCAA. As long as we still get to play WVU, Syracuse, etc. in football and our basketball can still compete at the highest level, I’m fine with however the chips fall because it’s outside of our control.

 

[pittmeister]

It’d be fascinating to see how they’d select that group of teams, whether it’s 24 or 48. Theoretically, it could just be the Big Ten and SEC, but I’d imagine there’s a few programs in each they’d prefer to switch out.

2nd EDITED***

Here are the list of the P5 teams of anyone wants to take a stab at 48 teams:

PAC 12: USC, UCLA, Washington, WSU, Stanford, Oregon, OSU, California, Utah, AZ, ASU, Colorado.

BIG TEN: OSU, Michigan, MSU, PSU, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland,

BIG 12: Texas, Oklahoma, OKST, TT, TCU, Baylor, UCF, Cincinnati, BYU, ISU, WVU, Kansas, KSU Houston,

SEC: Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama, LSU, FLA, Georgia, Kentucky, Miss, Miss St., Missouri, Arkansas, TAM, SC.

ACC: Pitt, Clemson, FSU, North Carolina, NCST, VT, VA, GT, Miami, WF, Duke, Notre Dame, Louisville, Syracuse, BC.

A total of 69 teams (not including SMU). 21 teams must be eliminated to get to 48

 

[pittdan77]

That's the first I've read anything about FSU going independent. Either someone is full of crap or their prospects of moving to the B1G or SEC aren't as good as they would have you believe. Leaning towards "full of crap".

 

[Saboteur II]

Not that we haven’t already had our fair share of expansion discussion on here, but a few tidbits from a recent article published by the Raleigh News-Observer on NC State coming around to approve Cal, SMU, and Stanford:

• “Clemson had been quieter in its criticism but, like FSU, had expressed concern about its ability to compete as the ACC’s revenue disparity with the SEC and Big Ten continued to grow”
• “UNC, meanwhile, understood its place as the most desired of ACC members”
• Wake Forest was a hard push for ACC expansion, leading the point that the conference was headed for a similar fate as the Pac-12
• “If FSU goes independent (they are seriously considering it), SMU could fill the gap.”
• In the long term, Sutton envisioned a time, after the Big 12’s television rights deal expires in six years, when the ACC could target TCU and West Virginia. Do that, his message went, and it “ensures the ACC exists until such time as a ‘top down’ solution comes in college football (it surely will in the next 3-10 years) whereby the top 24-36 teams form their own alliance and everyone else scrambles to develop the next level.”
• Speculation that NC State received assurances that they’d be accepted into the AAU if they voted yes (NCSU denies this)

Full story here:

View embedded media

What is missed in all of the post article banter is the revelations of ostensibly private messages.
As a lawyer I take a dim view of CONFIDENTIALITY agreements because humans simply cannot keep a secret. My expression is “if two people know something it’s not a secret”.
Here we have high level executives with their texts out in the open. On purpose? Maybe, maybe not.
But now that these messages are public rest assured there are more to follow.
FYI. Robert Hanssen died in solitary confinement back in June. He shared a bunch of secrets.

 

[Dointhatrag]

Here are the list of the P5 teams of anyone wants to take a stab at 48 teams:

PAC 12: USC, UCLA, Washington, WSU, Stanford, Oregon, OSU, California, Utah, AZ, ASU, Colorado.

BIG TEN: OSU, Michigan, MSU, PSU, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland,

BIG 12: Texas, Oklahoma, OKST, TT, TCU, Baylor, UCF, Cincinnati, BYU, ISU, WVU, Kansas, KSU,

SEC: Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama, LSU, FLA, Georgia, Kentucky, Miss, Miss St., Missouri, Arkansas, TAM, SC.

ACC: Pitt, Clemson, FSU, North Carolina, NCST, VT, VA, GT, Miami, WF, Duke, Notre Dame, Louisville, Syracuse.

A total of 67 teams (not including SMU). 19 teams must be eliminated to get to 48

Unfortunately if a top 48 ever happens it will never be chosen based on performance but who has big donors, what conference you are currently in, and what senators/congressman have pull. A tier EFL format would be great with 3 teams going up and down each year from tier but will never happen because of the following:
- home game revenue
- tv contracts based on conferences
- home/home matchups
- historic rivalries.

If you can get every team to give that up then maybe but you will need some major Saudi money to get there

 

[Pitt79]

Unfortunately if a top 48 ever happens it will never be chosen based on performance but who has big donors, what conference you are currently in, and what senators/congressman have pull. A tier EFL format would be great with 3 teams going up and down each year from tier but will never happen because of the following:
- home game revenue
- tv contracts based on conferences
- home/home matchups
- historic rivalries.

If you can get every team to give that up then maybe but you will need some major Saudi money to get there

Historic rivalries? since when do they care about that?

 

[Pitt79]

There won't be an orgainzed "selection" if you will. It will be tOSU, Michigan, PSU, Wiscy, Florida, LSU, etc just saying "F it, we want to do our own thing" and working with TV to bring in the most value.

I'm with Pitt79, I'm only watching Pitt and the tier they are playing against in that NWO. I don't care about watching FSU vs USC or something if it means absolutely nothing for Pitt.

And to be honest, if schools like Purdue, WVU, Minnesota, Indiana, NC State, etc are part of our tier, I'd be fine with it.

My question is, who is the target audience of this 24-36 team super league? It's not pro football in the sense that you have ties to the team, people pick a pro team based on city, region or because they like the logo, nobody is an alumnus of the Cowboys. So if there's a 30-team super league and your SCHOOL is left out, are they expecting you to pick one of the 30 teams and root for them? I'll tell them to take a hike, I don't care who's THE BEST or what's the highest level, I want to watch Pitt.

 

[pittmeister]

Unfortunately if a top 48 ever happens it will never be chosen based on performance but who has big donors, what conference you are currently in, and what senators/congressman have pull. A tier EFL format would be great with 3 teams going up and down each year from tier but will never happen because of the following:
- home game revenue
- tv contracts based on conferences
- home/home matchups
- historic rivalries.

If you can get every team to give that up then maybe but you will need some major Saudi money to get there

You know in the end all of that won’t matter. The people in charge will have their own criteria which none of us will understand.

Of course there will be much discussion. On here, the usual fatalist and flamers will declare Pitt dead no matter how many teams are included. It could be 200 and Pitt will miss the cut.

Me? As I have said a million times. Pitt is underestimated by many who follow them. I think they will be included if there were only 36 teams….

 

[BTisinDC]

My question is, who is the target audience of this 24-36 team super league? It's not pro football in the sense that you have ties to the team, people pick a pro team based on city, region or because they like the logo, nobody is an alumnus of the Cowboys. So if there's a 30-team super league and your SCHOOL is left out, are they expecting you to pick one of the 30 teams and root for them? I'll tell them to take a hike, I don't care who's THE BEST or what's the highest level, I want to watch Pitt.

I'd watch it, why wouldn't I? I like watching the best play the best, and the games would undoubtedly have prime time slots, so unless Pitt is playing at the same time, I'd be watching. And I have little doubt that most will if it comes to be.

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

I wouldn’t watch the NFL if the Steelers weren’t in it. Similarly, when/if Pitt is left out of the Grand Poobah league that seems to be inevitable, I’ll have no interest to watch it either. I’m a Pittsburgh football fan, not necessarily a football fan.

But I get that ratings and interest overall seem to have actually risen, so it must be why these what appear to be destructive things are being pushed upon the sport (and frankly have been for some time). It’s too bad, but apparently only for my purposes. But mazel tov I guess.

 

[Pitt79]

I'd watch it, why wouldn't I? I like watching the best play the best, and the games would undoubtedly have prime time slots, so unless Pitt is playing at the same time, I'd be watching. And I have little doubt that most will if it comes to be.

I"ll do what I do now, I"d watch Pitt, if they aren't playing, I often watch some weird G5 or FCS game, or a movie, I almost never watch B1G games, I absolutely have boycotted watching the SEC, I seriously haven't watched Bama play for 30 years, I already don't watch the blue bloods and media favorites or the teams the Herbstreit and Friends pimp for... unless they play Pitt

 

[BTisinDC]

I"ll do what I do now, I"d watch Pitt, if they aren't playing, I often watch some weird G5 or FCS game, or a movie, I almost never watch B1G games, I absolutely have boycotted watching the SEC, I seriously haven't watched Bama play for 30 years, I already don't watch the blue bloods and media favorites or the teams the Herbstreit and Friends pimp for... unless they play Pitt

Sounds exciting.

 

[Pitt79]

Sounds exciting.

Your sarcasm is how I feel about watching the SEC or B1G, because I hate all of their teams so why watch? Actually, a lot of the G5 or FCS games are way more exciting.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It’d be fascinating to see how they’d select that group of teams, whether it’s 24 or 48. Theoretically, it could just be the Big Ten and SEC, but I’d imagine there’s a few programs in each they’d prefer to switch out.

The Big Ten and SEC will be here for the next 100 years. Any "24 team conference" will be under the B10 or SEC.

 

[pafootballguy]

My question is, who is the target audience of this 24-36 team super league? It's not pro football in the sense that you have ties to the team, people pick a pro team based on city, region or because they like the logo, nobody is an alumnus of the Cowboys. So if there's a 30-team super league and your SCHOOL is left out, are they expecting you to pick one of the 30 teams and root for them? I'll tell them to take a hike, I don't care who's THE BEST or what's the highest level, I want to watch Pitt.

10 million people did not watch Colorado vs TCU because they all had connections to those schools. People love to watch big stories and highly ranked teams play each other and viewership is going up even with massive upheaval in the sport.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Unfortunately if a top 48 ever happens it will never be chosen based on performance but who has big donors, what conference you are currently in, and what senators/congressman have pull. A tier EFL format would be great with 3 teams going up and down each year from tier but will never happen because of the following:
- home game revenue
- tv contracts based on conferences
- home/home matchups
- historic rivalries.

If you can get every team to give that up then maybe but you will need some major Saudi money to get there

If they are going to do promotion/relegation, then it better be there from the start, otherwise you’ll never get the toothpaste back in the tube.

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

If they are going to do promotion/relegation, then it better be there from the start, otherwise you’ll never get the toothpaste back in the tube.

Agreed. It’s kind of like Pitt not using the upper deck (whether tarp or not) at Heinz. That should have been done and established from the very first season. 22 years later it STILL should be done but now it would be too much of a mess.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

If Pitt were in the 2nd division with a chance for promotion, I’d be ok with that.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Historic rivalries? since when do they care about that?

Here’s why I think rivalries might play a factor in who makes it, to a certain extent:

Obviously they’re catering to the casual fan if/when they create this ‘super league.’ However, I think you also need to retain at least some of the longtime fans at smaller schools across the country that “fill in the regional gaps” between the bluebloods. It’d also be smart if they maintain some semblance of tradition.

If they need extra schools to reach 48, that’s where I see them bringing in Colorado for Nebraska, Minnesota for Wisconsin, Stanford for Notre Dame, etc. I think that’s how we could sneak in.

 

[Las Panteras]

Here’s why I think rivalries might play a factor in who makes it, to a certain extent:

Obviously they’re catering to the casual fan if/when they create this ‘super league.’ However, I think you also need to retain at least some of the longtime fans at smaller schools across the country that “fill in the regional gaps” between the bluebloods. It’d also be smart if they maintain some semblance of tradition.

If they need extra schools to reach 48, that’s where I see them bringing in Colorado for Nebraska, Minnesota for Wisconsin, Stanford for Notre Dame, etc. I think that’s how we could sneak in.

I might be grabbing at straws here, but the western exansion of the B1G is going to be expensive, travel wise.

Not such the case here. Perhaps Pittsburgh, with ample hotels and air access could become a sort of "hub" for multiple teams to compete.

Plus....maybe the new chancellor has some markers she can call in.....

 

[PITT 76]

Not that we haven’t already had our fair share of expansion discussion on here, but a few tidbits from a recent article published by the Raleigh News-Observer on NC State coming around to approve Cal, SMU, and Stanford:

• “Clemson had been quieter in its criticism but, like FSU, had expressed concern about its ability to compete as the ACC’s revenue disparity with the SEC and Big Ten continued to grow”
• “UNC, meanwhile, understood its place as the most desired of ACC members”
• Wake Forest was a hard push for ACC expansion, leading the point that the conference was headed for a similar fate as the Pac-12
• “If FSU goes independent (they are seriously considering it), SMU could fill the gap.”
• In the long term, Sutton envisioned a time, after the Big 12’s television rights deal expires in six years, when the ACC could target TCU and West Virginia. Do that, his message went, and it “ensures the ACC exists until such time as a ‘top down’ solution comes in college football (it surely will in the next 3-10 years) whereby the top 24-36 teams form their own alliance and everyone else scrambles to develop the next level.”
• Speculation that NC State received assurances that they’d be accepted into the AAU if they voted yes (NCSU denies this)

Full story here:

View embedded media

Thanks for the link. This is info that does interest me.

 

[Safety Blitz]

If a “super conference” is formed, I tend to think a group of the top 20-25 programs will get the ball rolling. Filling in the rest to get to, for example, 48 schools will include a lot of factors, including what schools bring to the table and who may be willing to take a smaller slice of the pie to join the club.

 

[HailToPitt725]

If a “super conference” is formed, I tend to think a group of the top 20-25 programs will get the ball rolling. Filling in the rest to get to, for example, 48 schools will include a lot of factors, including what schools bring to the table and who may be willing to take a smaller slice of the pie to join the club.

If you’re Pitt, would you take a “smaller slice” than what you’d get otherwise in the ACC or a so-called second tier to be in that ‘super league?’ Honestly, I think I would.

 

[Safety Blitz]

Tough, tough call.
Wouldn’t exactly have “Second Class Citizen” tattooed on your forehead, but it probably would be there in permanent marker for quite a while.
Benefits of swimming in the ocean with the sharks, however, could be much better than living with the guppies in a small pond.
Administrations would have to think fast, because it wouldn’t take long to fill out the roster with schools willing to immediately take that deal.

 

[mlvnsmly]

If you’re Pitt, would you take a “smaller slice” than what you’d get otherwise in the ACC or a so-called second tier to be in that ‘super league?’ Honestly, I think I would.

I would. For.comarison, it would be extremely disappointing for the Steelers, Pirates, or Penguins to suddenly be in a lesser/minor league. I also think it would have an effect on the other sports at Pitt even if they remain at the top.

Having said that, I have a hard time believing this will ever be a thing. It just seems like some twitter dopes wet dream. If it were to happen and the move is by conference, Pitt has no chance. If individual teams were to break off, I think Pitt has a good chance. Pitt is definitely in a top 40 scenario, but the problem is if the Rutgers of the world get dragged along for easy wins. Those bottom feeder teams take their spot for sure.

 

[pittdan77]

Any scenario anyone can concoct about the future of CFB that doesn't account for how TV people want to spend their money is automatically BS. Things like rivalries matter, in that regard. Highest rated regular season games are almost always rivalry games. Hell, even Army and Navy are a good TV product. There would be milion$ of reasons to revive or maintain rivalries.

 

[Pitt79]

Tough, tough call.
Wouldn’t exactly have “Second Class Citizen” tattooed on your forehead, but it probably would be there in permanent marker for quite a while.
Benefits of swimming in the ocean with the sharks, however, could be much better than living with the guppies in a small pond.
Administrations would have to think fast, because it wouldn’t take long to fill out the roster with schools willing to immediately take that deal.

As a fan it might be MORE FUN if they could be 10-2 every year and be small pond champions many times, rather than joining Rutgers and Vandy fighting to get to 5-7. On any given Saturday turning on the TV and seeing a "W" matters most to me, I don't care who they played.

 

[Pitt79]

... but the problem is if the Rutgers of the world get dragged along for easy wins. Those bottom feeder teams take their spot for sure.

It's already like wrestling, Bama, tOSU, USC are Hulk Hogan and the Nature Boy and Rutgers and Vandy are the local jobbers they bring in to get pinned in ten seconds during the early broadcasts to promote Wrestlemania on January 1st guaranteeing THE NAMES are always there.

 

[Pitt79]

Any scenario anyone can concoct about the future of CFB that doesn't account for how TV people want to spend their money is automatically BS. Things like rivalries matter, in that regard. Highest rated regular season games are almost always rivalry games. Hell, even Army and Navy are a good TV product. There would be milion$ of reasons to revive or maintain rivalries.

Using that logic, Pitt and WVU should get in, to promote the Brawl and also Pitt/Penn State.

 

[BTisinDC]

It's already like wrestling, Bama, tOSU, USC are Hulk Hogan and the Nature Boy and Rutgers and Vandy are the local jobbers they bring in to get pinned in ten seconds during the early broadcasts to promote Wrestlemania on January 1st guaranteeing THE NAMES are always there.

Is "THE NAMES" your code for the best teams?

 

[Pitt79]

Is "THE NAMES" your code for the best teams?

Not necessarily, THE NAMES could be teams that the media and the talking heads desperately want to be good all the time, but haven't necessarily been good lately, teams like Miami, Nebraska, Florida State, Texas, USC for example, most of these ''name brand" teams have barely been as good as Pitt the last decade, but the TV people desperately want them to be good and want their brands represented more than a team like Pitt, these are the teams where the TV announcers say, "College football is better when _______ is good", they never fill that blank with Pitt.

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

If you’re Pitt, would you take a “smaller slice” than what you’d get otherwise in the ACC or a so-called second tier to be in that ‘super league?’ Honestly, I think I would.

A zillion times yes. For one, the smaller slice would still be umpteen percent more than the lower level would glean for Pitt. Second, Pitt football simply wouldn’t survive not being in the top tier of the sport.

Minor league college football won’t work here. Maybe we would try it for awhile, and it may work for others, but it won’t be sustainable here. There’s only so many years I’d see the university accepting the hemorrhaging financial losses. They hate having football in the first place, let alone if it can’t pay the bills for the other sports as it does now.

 

[ThePanthers]

Any scenario anyone can concoct about the future of CFB that doesn't account for how TV people want to spend their money is automatically BS. Things like rivalries matter, in that regard. Highest rated regular season games are almost always rivalry games. Hell, even Army and Navy are a good TV product. There would be milion$ of reasons to revive or maintain rivalries.

IMO, how things have moved around in the last decade, they are more concerned about the brand name, and if there happens to be a good rivalry between those brand names, then that is an added bonus. But they'd rather see Oregon vs tOSU or Texas vs Bama, games that aren't rivalries but have names that draw a ton of eyeballs than having Oregon vs Oregon State, Washington vs Washington State, Kansas vs Mizzou, etc.