($) Jim Delaney on Realignment History and more
($) link
Since it's behind a paywall i'll err on the side of not oversharing, but two things stood out:
-Delaney believes that had Penn State joined the Big East, quite a lot of the realignment we'd seen wouldn't have happened
-In the 1984 anti-trust case that broke the NCAA's power to regulate, Justice Byron White seemed awfully prescient about how the NCAA's control is what allowed it to remain...amateur. Since that time we've seen haves and have-nots, the conferences have become media entities, the schools are not equals, the players should be treated as professionals. Before then, the money was less and the schools were more equal, and the amateurism was more justifiable.
I thought both of those were worth sharing
i'm an idiot
obligatory
He only masturbated in Northwestern's locker room.
Before, after, or during the rub?
Perhaps “D” is the correct answer, all of the above.
For me, this is Jim Delaney's true legacy.
Hmm...do I want to pay $23.88 to read Jim Delaney's opinion...
I agreed with you, but it turned out to be an interesting look back at history from Delaney. Plus, “Reader Mode” is your friend.
Since that time we've seen haves and have-nots, the conferences have become media entities, the schools are not equals,
But we saw these things before that time, too. Indiana and Northwestern weren't racking up Big Ten titles before 1984, either.
yea that's a fair point. I wasn't around then, so I can't say for sure. My general understanding of CFB history is - in the 1970s, it was dominated by like 10 teams, 1-2 per each major conference. In the 1980s, scholarship limits made conferences more competitive and the national title race more open, hence the U taking the sport by storm. The sport still saw lots of parity into the '00s (around when I became obsessed) and became more of a closed shop in the late BCS/CFP era, that's been dominated by the SEC with a few schools from other leagues being competitive too (including OSU and of late, Michigan).
But that's from a national championship perspective, which tracks but is not identical to a financial perspective. And while TV definitely changed the game, there were always have and have-nots. Conferences weren't media entities in the 1980s tho, were they? But I guess who cares what their purpose was if the results were still just a few dominant teams.
People seem to have this thought that there used to be balance and/or parity in college football. There hasn't. It's been a wildly uneven sport.
Something like 13 schools have won over 80% of AP national championships.
Further, money and corruption have been pretty regular in college football since the 1800s. Things have changed over time, but not nearly as much or the ways most think.
yea you're not wrong, 14 schools have won 80% of the AP titles. But that list includes Minnesota and not Michigan or Penn State. It includes Notre Dame, who hasn't won a title in 35 years. Georgia won their first AP title in 1980, and is now a part of that 14. Likewise, LSU was a non-factor in the sport in the '70s '80s and '90s (two top ten finishes and SEC titles from 1971-2000), but is now a part of that 14.
Further, from 1980 to 1998,(the first year of the BCS), there were 19 AP titles, won by 14 different schools. Even in the next decade, USC, Texas, OSU and LSU won their first AP titles since, respectively, 1972, 1969, 1968 and 1957. And then Nick Saban got to Tuscaloosa.
The point being - things have not been static. Who's been on top has changed, and there was a period in recent history where the national title was relatively up for grabs.
as an aside - the CFP does feel like a somewhat more closed shop to me - 5 schools winning 9 titles doesnt sound so bad, 7 schools winning a semifinal game. But 3 of those schools come from one league, and before the pandemic every other league had one contender who'd win the championship and battle for a slot, other than the Pac12. TCU and Cincinnati have made it feel a bit more wide open, as have the relative decline of Clemson and Oklahoma. But the natty matters - Michigan winning a natty would add a non-SEC champion, but I think the wide open nature of the 1980s and 1990s would require someone like TCU, Iowa, Oregon or UVA to win it. A school that's respected but not a traditional power and not building a powerhouse dynasty.
Interesting thoughts. Thanks for the brief info.
Justice Byron White was an All American college football player, so zero surprise that he was prescient about what was to come.
Heisman runner up, NFL all pro, Rhodes Scholar, and played for the Lions while attending Yale Law School
Don't forget a Lieutenant Commander in the US Navy as well.
His resume really makes me re-think what all I've done with my life!
Penn State in the Big East would have been better for college football overall, most likely we'd still have a Big East with them, Pitt, Miami, WVU, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, and Boston College. Literally all of those schools except Pitt recently struggle now compared to the 90s and 2000s when they were all pretty good.
Landing Penn State was key to the BigTen but I also felt that not adding ND in the early 2000's was a mistake. I believe Texas also wanted to join when Penn St was added as well which the politics of texas is ridiculous but how that would have changed as they were instrumental in forming the big12, which they later imploded themselves with their own ridiculousness... So looking back, not landing texas was a good thing. 2 conferences down, 1 to go.. sec, sec, sec imploding would be glorious..
I agree with you--and if the Big East had survived then it presumably would have survived in the same form for basketball. Those two sports in that conference had a true regional identity and fans in the north/east would maintain strong allegiance to their schools today. Even if Delaney had gone on to add Rutgers for the supposed NYC eyeballs it wouldn't have diluted the interest in the Big East.
In hindsight it's been good for the B1G to have Penn State, I suppose, but it's far less a natural fit than ND. Having gone to grad school in Pittsburgh in the '80s I would have preferred to see the PSU vs. Pitt rivalry maintained. This whole realignment mess may be 'good' for many in a financial sense but for many fans it's just, well, an ongoing mess.
Nobody here ever liked Dilbert's boss, but he was the only Big Ten/B1G Commish that actually commanded the room when he walked in amongst his peers from the other conferences, especially the SEC. Kevin Warren did not, and wasn't going to. Warren got exceedingly lucky with USC and UCLA because they wanted what the PAC12 was never able to give. And as we've since learned, he botched that deal financially, anyway - something Delaney would not have done. Time will tell if the new guy, whatshisname, will have any sway in a room with peers...
Did he retire to Pepperidge Farm?