RElegation??

[ringthebells]

This article is making its rounds. What are your thoughts? The Jacks and Bison get mentioned as targets.

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-foo...l?guccounter=1

[Prairiehaas]

Creative and interesting. Many, many ifs. First of which is where will the current Pac-12 resources go? Then, will the NCAA give OSU & WSU time to develop something this complex before eliminating the PAC-12 P5 status for CFP? Then if this could work why would they choose SDSU & NDSU for expansion? Why not the Montanas, or Idaho/Montana? That would save travel $$ for olympic sports.

[ringthebells]

I agree, tons of questions, but an interesting idea none-the-less. Would the relegation set-up bring in more TV money? Would anybody outside of the conference care who gets relegated enough to watch more of the games? Is this all a set up for the PAC-2 to poach the top portion of the Mountain West without having to pay exit fees?

[JackrabbitGuy]

Interesting read and good fodder for discussion and speculation. Like the article says it would be harder to sell the merits to the schools that would be more likely to be subject to relocation.

There are great media hooks here for the modern game. As a Jackrabbit fan, not sure I would like to see our university in an arrangement such as this.

[Theee Catrabbit]

What's the buffer for someone that's relegated? There needs to be a "mechanic" to allow the "relegated" to move up. Right now it just looks like if you are in the top tier you get double the and will just suppress the "relegated" to stay in the bottom Tier. Basically the "haves" will always "have" the "have nots" will stay at the bottom unless there's some sort of boost. What if every 4 years all dollars are split equally? This gives the bottom tier a chance to level out with the top tier, briefly.

[jakejc795]

What's the buffer for someone that's relegated? There needs to be a "mechanic" to allow the "relegated" to move up. Right now it just looks like if you are in the top tier you get double the and will just suppress the "relegated" to stay in the bottom Tier. Basically the "haves" will always "have" the "have nots" will stay at the bottom unless there's some sort of boost. What if every 4 years all dollars are split equally? This gives the bottom tier a chance to level out with the top tier, briefly.

Dellenger proposes mechanisms such as:

• a relegation Game between the sixth- and seventh-placed teams in the Pac-12
  • loser is relegated to the Mountain West. The eighth-place finisher in the regular season is automatically relegated
  • promotion game between the second and third-placed teams in the Mountain West
    • winner is promoted to the Pac-12
    • regular-season champion of the Mountain West is automatically promoted to the Pac-12

My concern would be how competitive scheduling would be; for instance, would "Pac" teams be incentivized to have a 2023 Bison schedule with Pac/MW version of Racers and 'Necks. Making the host site dependent on historical and current season's strength of schedule, whereby the home teams would be the ones who had/have the "stronger" schedule, could be one way to reduce the probability of that

[Jacksfan29!]

What's the buffer for someone that's relegated? There needs to be a "mechanic" to allow the "relegated" to move up. Right now it just looks like if you are in the top tier you get double the and will just suppress the "relegated" to stay in the bottom Tier. Basically the "haves" will always "have" the "have nots" will stay at the bottom unless there's some sort of boost. What if every 4 years all dollars are split equally? This gives the bottom tier a chance to level out with the top tier, briefly.

Buffer? Here is how it works.

PAC - A league
MWC - B league

Bottom team in the A league move down to the B league. Top team from B league move up to the A league. If you get relegated, you win to move back up. Same with a team who starts in the lower league. Win, move your way up. How does money get dispersed? My guess, lower league teams would get around $2 million less in TV money. If this were to happen, I prefer a model where the top 2 move up and the bottom 2 move down. EPL in England allows 3 move ups from the Championship with 3 from the EPL going down. The goal, prove it on the field. It would definitely make G5 a lot more interesting.

[NorCalJack]

Here is another article about relegation and how the MWC could benefit from this model. It also mentions SDSU and NDSU.

https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...ball-look-like

[jakejc795]

Here is another article about relegation and how the MWC could benefit from this model. It also mentions SDSU and NDSU.

https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...ball-look-like

It also mentions a PowerPoint presentation created by Boise State's AD and shared with unspecified ADs within the MWC and outside the conference.

[JimmieTuba]

Not that either conference needs relegation like the PACxx needs relegation, but it would make more sense for NDSU and SDSU to be linked with Big12/Big10 than PACxx/MWC.

[Theee Catrabbit]

Not that either conference needs relegation like the PACxx needs relegation, but it would make more sense for NDSU and SDSU to be linked with Big12/Big10 than PACxx/MWC.

The BIG conferences aren't coming calling and they aren't going to change to this format, they have no incentive to do so.

Oregon St and Washington will end up finding conferences and this will get shelved, despite it being a pretty good idea.

[jakejc795]

Not that either conference needs relegation like the PACxx needs relegation, but it would make more sense for NDSU and SDSU to be linked with Big12/Big10 than PACxx/MWC.

How so?

One of the arguments of the article is that relegation would serve the dual purpose of providing a blend of stability (via "reconstitution" of some semblance of the PAC and reduced risk of MWC poaching) and intrigue. The "Bigs" are already stable.

Assuming the resulting "relegational" conference would have bid(s) to CFP, if you're the Jacks would you rather compete there or against "BIGs"?

[jakejc795]

The BIG conferences aren't coming calling and they aren't going to change to this format, they have no incentive to do so.

Oregon St and Washington will end up finding conferences and this will get shelved, despite it being a pretty good idea.

I see your point, but the fact that Boise State's AD is allegedly pushing this suggests some see an incentive to consider this among MW teams, and the "PAC" wouldn't have to fold/be absorbed.

[jbjack]

As intriguing as a move to FBS seems in a vacuum, the reality of G5 is this: Thursday night games; or in a mountain/pacific time zone league, games starting at 9pm (or later) on Saturdays. When we were in need of a conference, we would have taken a Big Sky invite, sure, but at the top of the list was the MVFC in large part to ensure eastern/central time zone and reasonable media availability to the fans.

[JimmieTuba]

The BIG conferences aren't coming calling and they aren't going to change to this format, they have no incentive to do so.

Thus, the disclaimer of neither conference needing it.

How so?

SDSU would have a lot more in common with Iowa State, Kansas State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin than Washington State, Oregon State, San Jose State, and San Diego State. Although the latter gives us the 'Real SDSU Battle'.

Travel with the Big12 would be slightly better (No idea how B1G/ACC teams will manage travel now).

Again, neither 'Big' conference needs this like the PAC does. It, indeed, is a pipe dream.