I'll start this entry first off by saying, I don't have any faith that the NCAA or the SEC has any intention of doing this obvious cash grab "right". They will do whatever represents the largest increase to revenue generation, all other considerations be damned. The NCAA under Mark Emmert's leadership has become so far removed from their core mission statement* that this version of the NCAA is unrecognizable. Ultimately, I believe Emmert's buffoonery will lead the member institutions and conference commissioners to fully comprehend the complete and utter uselessness of this version of the NCAA, subsequently leading its' dissolve.

*http://www.thecoia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/NCAA-Mission-Statement-COIA-version-with-NCAA-Current-Statements.pdf

So, with that being said and the obvious wheels in motion for a massive paradigm shift on the horizon related to conference alignment, I wanted to consider how this could be done in a way that doesn't directly contradict the proclaimed values of college athletics, place the burden squarely on the individual teams and universities to meet the obligations of their television contracts, and still maintain some semblance of what makes college football such an enjoyable, and therefore profitable, sport to watch. To begin, let's start here:

What makes college football and other athletics great?

Obviously there is no one correct answer to this question. People by-and-large have their individual reasons for why they so passionately follow their school and sport of choice, and generally I think there is some emotional complexity behind it. I do believe however there are a couple of broad concepts that drive fan engagement to college sports.

1. An affinity towards one's alma mater, local university, or institution that they identify with culturally. College sports for most it seems, conjure a different set of emotions on the fandom spectrum than the professional ranks. I believe largely this is because a fan can share a level of commonality with the athlete: you represent my school, my state, my cultural identity and therefore, you represent me. This is an element missing at the professional level, because the average fan doesn't know what it's like to play for the Detroit Tigers. But they can relate to what it's like to be a student at the University of Michigan, and that experience means a lot both to the player and the fan.

2. The rivalries of college sports represent more than just an opponent that needs vanquishing to achieve the ultimate goal of a championship. Higher education in America, our connection to higher education in America, spans far beyond the birth and rise of professional sports in America. The history of the institutions within their respective communities contribute a whole lot more than a conference championship, or a national championship like their professional counterparts. They also carry their small piece of American history, of their state's or interstate history, and the scar tissue from grievances and conflicts from the past that can play themselves out metaphorically through athletics and provide a sense of vengeance or treachery depending on the desired outcome. Universities are not a mere form of entertainment; they are in our community and contribute (mostly) positively to our lives, which makes it personal. The rivalries between institutions then, are much closer to home, they feel more personal, and they carry a deeper historical meaning with them.

This, to me, is an element of college sports that professional sports can't provide - and I love professional sports. But I love professional sports for what they are; the very best athletes on the planet of their respective sport competing at the highest level and showcasing skills that 99.9% of the remaining population could never manage. Frankly without the two aforementioned components from above binarily working with each other, college sports would devolve into a watered down, less competitive version of the professional level. No one wants or cares to see that.

The repercussions of conference realignment if done poorly

People often make callus, nonsensical decisions when their objective is fueled by greed. If the conference realignment dynamic goes to a place where it no longer considers historical relevance and context between the member institutions, and every decision is made around controlling TV markets and maximizing revenue contributions from participating athletic departments, college sports risks losing one of the major elements that attract people to college sports in the first place: People causally tune in, or are attracted to sporting events where it is common knowledge the competing teams have a history and don't like each other. Oklahoma State fans circle the Oklahoma game on their calendar every year, as Minnesota fans do with Michigan. Texas and TAMU used to be a prime time matchup (and presumably will be again) that college football fans across the country would tune in for. I don't think anyone is disillusioned that Texas vs. Mississipi State is not going to draw the same audience. Ultimately the erosion of beloved norms like this happens over time. College football isn't going to lose 10% of their viewership overnight, using an arbitrary number. Making the stuffed suits like Emmert and Sankey validate their money-grubbing decisions. But over time, as the casual or non-fanatical viewer continuously fails to capture the feeling of intrigue from a long time rivalry matchup, they will simply find something else to preoccupy their time on Saturday. 

NIL here plays a big role on exacerbating the problem. The dynamic NIL introduces into the equation is probably worthy of its' own subtitle by itself. I'm placing it here however because of how interconnected it has the potential to become with the disillusionment of college sports, along with conference realignment (not to mention it is also probably the driving force behind it). When you remove the long standing tradition of certain rivalries or competitive affiliations between universities, and then you add in a personally motivating factor like compensation, you now have an environment where fans aren't getting to see all the matchups that maintain their attention, and you have players that represent your university because it represents the best money making opportunity for them, not because they love the university just like the fans do. You've basically killed the soul of college football. For the record, I will say I do not oppose player compensation at the collegiate level. I do believe they are owed a share of the billions of dollars that they ultimately generate for their schools every season. I do think if you introduce an element like NIL into an environment where every decision is driven by maximizing revenue at all costs, you're byproduct is going to be pretty stale and underwhelming, similar to the menu of any restaurant chain across the country.

How can the realignment venture be salvaged?

In my opinion, trying to scramble and Frankenstein a bunch of leagues together without any vision towards maintaining the elements of college sports that intrigues the fan and makes it marketable, is a shortsighted money grab that will diminish it's value over time. So if mega-contracts with the networks is what is desired, and blank checks and spur of the moment transfer decisions are now permitted, you need to at least create an intriguing conference system and playoff format that delivers the familiarity off college football that attracts large swathes of the audience. Here is how I would do it:

First, identify the top 72 athletic departments that you want to contribute to your newly established revenue model

By my count, there are currently 66 Power 5 teams across the conferences. No school certainly wants to lose their place and prestige amongst the most competitive teams in college sports; and for now, no one should have to. 72 is a nice, easy, dividable number that can be split into groups of 3, 4, 6 or 8. It also allows for inclusion for some of the most competitive non-P5 schools to get a shot at the action like UCF or Houston.

Consolidate the P5 conferences, plus the non-P5 invitees into three mega-conferences

Each mega-conference would now be comprised of 24 teams. The SEC recruiting Oklahoma and Texas, and the B1G recruiting teams like USC and Washington for example, would lay the ground work for which schools affiliate with which conference. Regional location of each member institution at the end of the day shouldn't really matter if you split each of the conferences into multiple divisions. This allows each conference to exist in pretty much every major market where they would like a presence. Speaking of divisions..

Each mega-conference will have 4 divisions comprised of 6 schools

This is where you can introduce the regional footprint component and try to preserve some of the long standing tradition that makes college football fun. From a scheduling perspective, each team will play their divisional opponents every year. In addition to that, the divisions will rotate their schedules so that they play another division within their conference once every three years. Under this format, schools can also reduce their logistical costs by organizing with schools that also share the same geographical footprint; so Michigan is only sending all their varsity sports teams out to Los Angeles once every 2 years or 6 years rather than every year or every other year. There would be one remaining game on everyone's schedule that they can coordinate at their discretion; more than likely a non-72 member team.

Appeasing the broadcast networks

In theory, each conference should have some pretty high profile, compelling athletic departments that make up their membership. Let the networks bid on the broadcast rights for each of the conferences. If every conference can provide access to every major market across the country, those contracts would be pretty astronomical. CBS you would imagine would maintain their agreement to the conference formally known as the SEC. Fox would carry the former B1G Conference, and NBC/ABC could duke it out for who covers the third conference. ESPN I'm sure could strike some kind of arrangement where they can broadcast the lesser profile games from each of the conferences on a weekly basis as they see fit, then you could imagine a scenario where each conference also has it's own broadcast channels as well for the lower profile matchups.

Anointing a champion: playoff format

Under this format, I think the most sensical thing to do is expand the playoff bracket to 16 teams. This would allow the division champion from each conference to earn a spot in the playoff. You also have 4 at-large spots remaining that would be awarded using a committee that are measuring more or less the same metrics they use today for at-large bids. Teams outside of the 3 conferences are not eligible to participate in the playoff. This forces the hand of Notre Dame to get on board, and keeps any other schools from going rouge. Seeding is based on record, then SOS. This assures an 11-1 Michigan doesn't draw a lower seed than a 9-3 UCF simply because UCF won their division and Michigan did not. 

Access for the remainder of division I

Again, because this entire chain of events was spurred by revenue generation, every 5 years the new governing body of collegiate athletics (assuming the NCAA is no more) will evaluate the top 72 revenue producing athletic departments across the country. They use some kind of 5 year rolling average for each AD to rationalize who gets to compete on the big stage. If a former team of the top 72 is supplanted by another university, they lose their place in their mega-conference and a new team is introduced to take their place. This element gets a little tricky, but it provides access and incentives for all division I universities to grow their athletic departments.

Introducing an element that advances academics

One of the sticking points for institutions like UM among others to move forward under a new model such as the one we're heading towards is that it completely lacks any advancement in the field of academia. And why shouldn't that be a sticking point? We are, after all, talking about a collection of universities whose mission statement's all declare in some iteration their purpose is to advance the pursuit of knowledge, higher education, and research that advances our society. In order to get buy in (and access to their "brand") from the schools that are serious about academics, they need to see some new and compelling ways that this new conference alignment model contributes back to the core mission statement of the university. Contributing part of the profits back to the AAU might be one way. Also committing to finance the creation of new, inclusive higher educational initiatives I think would go a long way in convincing the academics that this new model can contribute positively to the university's greater sense of purpose.

So that basically says it all in way too many words. I do think there is an avenue to recreate the college game in a way that maintains most of what is so beloved about it, realizes the revenue potential of the sport, and does so in a way that the participating members can be comfortable with.

If you made it this far, would like to hear your thoughts, poke some holes, or present your own ideas for how this thing should shake out.

Thanks for reading, and Go Blue!