College Football: 16-Team Super Conferences Are Not the Future

Currently there are grumbles surrounding the ACC and potential defections by schools like Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, or Clemson to the most unlikely conference for stability, the Big 12. On the surface it seems to be motivated primarily by money, which is undoubtedly a major culprit, but there is another culprit that is working in conjunction with money. That culprit being the ability of a conference to keep the best interest of each member school. 

In the case of the ACC, there is a split interest of the conference, basketball and football. The conference's recent acquisition of Syracuse and Pittsburgh can be interpreted as an attempt to overtake the Big East in basketball dominance and to appease Duke and North Carolina. 

This increased interest in basketball by the ACC is coming at the cost of football, which is a primary driver in getting lucrative television contracts because more people, and myself included, don't watch the basketball regular season, we only watch March Madness. On the flip side, the ratings for college football regular season games are heavily watched and dominate every other league and sport, except for the king of sports, the NFL. 

Back to the matter of each school's individual interests. The most concrete evidence for why there is dissatisfaction in the conference amongst the football driven schools is the case of Florida State's athletic budget and its projected shortfall due to the new contract with ESPN. 

This shortfall displays why a large 14-team conference with two distinct interests cannot work. The SEC will be just fine in their new set-up because most of the schools in the conference are focused on one thing, football.

The ACC's problems were further compounded when the Big 12 and the SEC agreed on a new bowl game (to compete against the Rose Bowl) between the two champions from each conference. This new bowl alliance will probably bring an inevitable scheduling alliance between the two conferences, which means even higher regular season revenue for each conference and even more lucrative television contracts from major networks. 

Scheduling alliances bring stability because each conference can maintain their own identity while being able to maintain the interests of each member school because they are still in separate conferences. There is already a new scheduling alliance between the Pac-12 and the Big 10, and since there is an inevitable scheduling alliance between the Big 12 and the SEC, it leaves the ACC behind in the dust under the false impression that sheer size is the only answer to be competitive. 

There is already a precedent to prove why a 16-team super conference won't work: The WAC in the mid to late 1990's after gaining former Southwest Conference schools (Rice, SMU, University of Houston and TCU).

The conference was so far flung and unable to maintain the interest of each school that most of those teams eventually left for the newly formed C-USA and its counterpart, the Mountain West conference. If people are truly concerned about travel, then imagine traveling from Houston to Honolulu, Hawaii. Absolutely insane. 

Since the ACC has no chance of acquiring a decent partner conference, it would be in FSU's and another school's best interest to move to the Big 12. History shows that a 10-12 school conference is one of the most stable environments because such a conference has the size to get a good television contract, while at the same time being able to maintain each individual school's interest (for the most part).

Besides, schools like Florida State would be able to play against the best teams in college football. Schools like Texas, Oklahoma, TCU, Oklahoma State, and (if there is a scheduling alliance), Georgia, LSU, Arkansas, Florida, and Alabama on occasion.

Scheduling alliances are, as the infamous Charlie "The Tiger Blooded" Sheen once said, "Winning!"