Jump to content



UAlbany Athletics- America East-
SOCIAL MEDIA: UAlbany Facebook- UAlbany Instagram- UAlbany Twitter- UAlbany Blog-
MEDIA: Albany Student Press- America East TV- ESPN3- Schenectady Gazette- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio Archive interviews- Times Union College Sports- Times Union Sports- WCDB- WOFX 980-
FALL SPORTS LINKS: CAA Football-
WINTER SPORTS LINKS: College Insider- Pomeroy Ratings- Real TimeRPI-
SPRING SPORTS LINKS: Inside Lacrosse- Lax Power Backup Stick-
OTHER FORUMS: America East Forum- Any Given Saturday Forum- Championship Subdivision forum(1-AA Discussion) The Hen House - Siena Forum- Stony Brook Forum- Vermont Forum

Conference Realignment- With NCAA comments


Dane96
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, GreatDanes06 said:

To me it's very simple what this is leading to...

The NFL System

You will have an AFC and and NFC conference, with 3 divisions...each conference will have their own 8 team playoff and the winners of each conference play each other for the national championship.

ESPN will get one conference and Fox the other (like CBS and Fox). Amazon and CBS will sprinkle in their coverage of certain games like NFL does with Thursday Night and Sunday Night Football.

Not that what you are saying is wrong...but at least give credit where it came from and say "I agree with these sentiments."  This has been stated by a ton of posters/tweeters in the past months and was even discussed by Sports Illustrated.  

On an aside, I was up late messaging with four different people close to the situation, and I am giving particulars so all can understand the heavy hitting nature of their experience: someone close to the SEC / college athletics in general, who provides high level advisory services to both...specifically to athletics; the former head of CBS Sports Marketing when they were acquired by Westinghouse and continued in that role...he is a former Stanford football player and was responsible for the Boston College-Stanford football games (his kids played sports at BC), Notre Dame-Stanford, etc;  a current realignment "expert" media person; and the former President of MSG, MSG Networks, the Marquee Group, and current advisor to private equity groups looking to purchase franchises (he's a long-time family friend, got me my first internship at the Goodwill Games and then the Olympics in Atlanta). 

They all agree on the same thing:  we are going to either Three, 24 Team Leagues or Four, 18 Team leagues.  The bottom line is that they expect no more than 72 teams to end up in this new world.  The rest will stay at FBS, not form a new league, until the dollars demand it.  These schools will simply play in bowl games, have no shot at a national title...and in their minds this is pretty much status quo for today.  There may be a FEW schools that may have a shot in the dark chance to make a title game...but for most part, they wouldn't normally and would end up in a Bowl Game.    FCS will stay as it is but you won't see many more teams jumping up to try and get into FBS.

They believe that some schools may regret making recent investments into athletics as they won't be supported by revenues, e.g. many of the Sun Belt schools, Liberty, etc.    

They also believe that, for now, March Madness will remain as is...that most schools recognize the value of tournament however, there will be an expansion and most of those slots will go to the 72 schools that are in this new world of football.  One person strongly envisages a return to prominence of the NIT, which is what would give the 72 schools pause in keeping out the rest of Division 1.

Now, for my thoughts...I think this DOES impact Albany in the fact that if we truly want to be with the schools of the Northern half of the CAA, the time to strike is now if discussions are truly ongoing (and I have been told by numerous sources, they are).  That said, there needs to be a balance because I am not sure where the revenue comes from if we lose FBS games.  The positive though--I think we will still be playing the same FBS teams for the most part (mainly Group of Five and then a few one off big schools).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not gonna lie...haven't really read any of this on my own. Been crazy busy. Just my take I had after yesterday. If people have said this...credit is theirs. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GreatDanes06 said:

not gonna lie...haven't really read any of this on my own. Been crazy busy. Just my take I had after yesterday. If people have said this...credit is theirs. 

Fair point-- and you should play the lottery tonight.  LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

This was planned since February. I knew about it and discussed with others.  My understanding is that they still want Howard and we would be 16.  

Of course, that could change.

That being said, I see the CAA North breaking off at some point and I see us in a conference with that group, plus Fairfield and then 1-3 more teams.

I've also heard some obscene rumors about Binghamton lately that go beyond them wanting to start up hockey (a no brainer for them). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All fascinating stuff. On a similar note I wonder, if ever, Albany attempts to combine with Albany Med, Albany Law, Albany Pharmacy. I know there were rumors years ago but nothing came of it. You want to talk about a game changer for the University, that would be it. 

Probably a pipe dream but that and getting the Nano back (have heard nothing more about that either) would be bigger news then a move to the CAA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, UA1882 said:

All fascinating stuff. On a similar note I wonder, if ever, Albany attempts to combine with Albany Med, Albany Law, Albany Pharmacy. I know there were rumors years ago but nothing came of it. You want to talk about a game changer for the University, that would be it. 

Probably a pipe dream but that and getting the Nano back (have heard nothing more about that either) would be bigger news then a move to the CAA. 

Strongly suspect, alumni at Albany Law would object strongly despite financial concerns that have occurred in recent years... Albany Med .... enjoys its independence  ... Albany Pharmacy ... not sure .... but do they not have some association with Union College

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Albany Law alumni would definitely object but not so much if it kept the school afloat.  I suspect a merger will happen sooner, rather than later.  I went to a school very similar to Albany Law and if it were not part of the fabric of another university, I am not so sure it would survive even though it produces fantastic alumni.  Law schools are in huge financial trouble, generally speaking.  Albany Law would be best served to be part of UA.

Albany Med won't become part of UA unless it really wants to expand it's research offerings, then it is a no brainer.  For Albany to get AAU status, I don't think the med school is a requirement (even though almost every AAU school has a med school) but the law school, engineering, and ETC will help...and getting CNSE could put us right over the edge.

Union University is a mere affiliation of schools and labs that Med, Law, Pharmacy, Union College, and Dudley Labs are all a part of however, no entity reports, is governed by, or really has any control over the other, including Union University as a corporate entity of itself.   Getting any of Med, Law, or Pharmacy would not be something negotiated with Union College. 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 6:40 AM, UA1882 said:

and getting the Nano back (have heard nothing more about that either)

When first announced in the TU; this was pretty much a done deal. Then some loud mouths from Syracuse complained. Which of course is their prerogative and in fact their job to do so; but I never saw a rebuttal from the appropriate capital district representatives???????

Then the TU said UA would get nano back if the 52 billion whatever package was passed. Which it was last month. Now they are saying UA will get nano back if nano is selected as one of two national next generation chip research facilities {which IS very likely.}

The problem with all this IMHO, UA officials and cap district politicians seem to be sitting on their hands waiting for all the "what if"; instead of gettin out there are really getting after the re-merger. They seem to be very passive and afraid to ruffle feathers??????

Edited by dslyank
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, alum73 said:

What people in Syracuse? What is their issue or interest in Nano?

Probably not Syracuse, but the SUNY Poly campus in Utica, and the American Institute for Manufacturing Integrated Photonics in Rochester is also managed by Poly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, alum73 said:

What people in Syracuse? What is their issue or interest in Nano?

Two "western & central NY" congress persons (not exactly sure their districts--as 72 said Utica/Rochester likely) are making a big stink about SUNY Poly and a small chip factory currently under construction in Utica. It is actually pretty small potatoes in the scheme of things and they already have lost out on number of other larger/major chip hubs they have been trying to attract to their Marcy campus [which has a lot of LAND to offer but really not much else IMHO.]

It is my opinion and once stated by both Holcol and Schummer that Nano re-combined with UA gives  NEW YORK STATE the BEST chance of landing major chip factories to the STATE. IMHO these SUNY Poly people would have a better chance of landing something significant or at least peripheral with nano centered with UA where it started out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...