forums

"Project Rudy" New Super League concept

Advertisement
Over the last four months, athletic directors at more than 25 power conference programs have seen the presentation, many of them in person during meetings with Smash Capital representatives. Others only held phone or Zoom calls about Project Rudy, its name a nod to the famous Notre Dame walk-on, Rudy Ruettiger. Three of four power conference commissioners were shared details of the model directly from the architects as well (those from the SEC, Big 12 and ACC).
 
In a recent acquisition, the architects of Project Rudy successfully recruited to join their team one of the most respected people within the college space: former Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick. It is a stunning move for someone who just six months ago sat on the College Football Playoff governing committee as one of the most powerful decision-makers in the industry.

“Of all the ideas I’ve seen, this one makes the most sense,” said Miami athletic director Dan Radakovich, who has seen the presentation. “Conferences are kept intact, commissioners still have an important and valuable role, and there is the ability for schools to make increased money from bigger matchups and more playoff games.”
 
Project Rudy is built on two somewhat simple concepts to increase revenue from television networks and corporate sponsors.

(1) Arrange more games between power conference programs by eliminating all games against Group of Five and FCS opponents; expanding the playoffs; and pitting blue-blood powers more often against one another.

(2) Consolidate the media rights of the 70 schools under one agreement, instead of the current structure of five different packages (one for each power league and Notre Dame).


According to presentation, the proposed changes will result in an increase of media and sponsorship revenue of about $15 billion over a 12-year period.

The growth is derived from holding 1.5 times more “marquee” games (playoffs, top bowls) and three times more “quality” games (rivalries and blue-blood matchups); while eliminating games against non-power opponents (currently 18% of FBS scheduling).

An upfront infusion of $5.3 billion in private capital — borrowed from future media revenues — would provide schools immediate cash during a three-year transition period, helping them buy out non-power opponents and supplementing their annual television distribution.
 
How about at end of every season, teams draw straws - and all teams are reassigned to whatever conference they pulled from the blind draw.

That way, it's confusing as an infant in a tiddy bar - conferences change each year, new challenges for all teams as they look at their new schedule - and no one conference makes the big bucks while others suk hind tiddy.

Organized chaos - circumvents careful strategic planning for everyone!

It's like showing up at a free-for-all brawl - but you are blindly given shirts of colors to identify which fighting team you're on!

The fun! The belly-aching! The moaning!

Now THAT would be an exciting college football season!
 
Advertisement
Haven't we been discussing this in MEGA thread?? Or are there two Super Leagues plans of a concept?
 
Advertisement
bacane said:
SEC is gonna be a problem. Will need to kiss *** before giving up their golden goose.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily .... the proposal does state that the 4 P4 conferences would remain in tact .... and the goal of having ONLY CONFERENCE GAMES ... ie ... no more Group of 5 or non P4 opponents .... is projected to increase games agains blue blood programs by 1.5 times and QUALITY GAMES by 3 times = more money for everybody. The plan DOES INCLUDE some sort of relegation ... payment of top money based on program success etc. But it APPEARS to be an approach that would permit TOP PROGRAMS in each P4 conference to earn similar or identical money, with bonuses for CFP participation. Schools that finish at the bottom of their conference would receive less money. The ones at risk are not THE SCHOOLS ... but the SEC and B10 commissioners and their salaries.
 
Rickd said:
Not necessarily .... the proposal does state that the 4 P4 conferences would remain in tact .... and the goal of having ONLY CONFERENCE GAMES ... ie ... no more Group of 5 or non P4 opponents .... is projected to increase games agains blue blood programs by 1.5 times and QUALITY GAMES by 3 times = more money for everybody. The plan DOES INCLUDE some sort of relegation ... payment of top money based on program success etc. But it APPEARS to be an approach that would permit TOP PROGRAMS in each P4 conference to earn similar or identical money, with bonuses for CFP participation. Schools that finish at the bottom of their conference would receive less money. The ones at risk are not THE SCHOOLS ... but the SEC and B10 commissioners and their salaries.
Click to expand...
It's not in the best interest of SEC and Big 10 to embrace a system that brings more money to everybody. Both conferences and their commissioners would surrender their dominant position and power. So, if something like this is to come to fruition, they'll negotiate from strength and land a slew of concessions - i.e. guarantee of x number of schools in the top tier, etc.
 
We need a Champions League within the regular season ...where past champions are seeded and pitted against each other, just as a rivalry match up
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
In a truly capital investment model, you would weed out the programs that are just "eaters" and bring marginal value to the league...
 
This is a ******* terrible idea.

They want to consolidate the media rights of 70 schools under one agreement & use a tiered distribution system, all under the direction of a private equity firm.

**** THAT.

"Staggs and Mayer founded Candle Media, a premium content company that launched in 2021 with backing of private equity giant Blackstone."

"the revenues will be allotted unequally. Project Rudy separates the 70 programs into three tiers.

Tier 1: the top 16 schools earn per-school revenue projections from $130 million in Year 4, escalating to $250 million in Year 12

Tier 2: the next 22 schools earn revenue of $60-$110 million

Tier 3: the last 32 schools earn projections of $30-$60 million

The gap between:
tier 1 and tier 2 would be $20-$70 million, YEARLY
tier 1 and tier 3 would be $70-$100 million, YEARLY
tier 2 and tier 3 would be $30-$50 million, YEARLY

The model offers a variety of ways to determine how to tier schools. ... However, one proposed model suggests having eight “permanent” members of Tier 1, a move presumably to placate the biggest brands in the sport.

Letting private equity run this thing is a worst case scenario.

I know some of you might think we're a tier 1 school. But make no mistake, a private equity firm does not have the same set of standards that you do.

They do not give a **** about how many titles we've won. They do not give a **** about anything but what makes THEM the most money.

@Rellyrell what could go wrong?
 
Advertisement
70 is way too many. I even think 56 is too many, but here's what that could look like:

8x7CFBLeague.jpg

Only change I'd possibly make is move BYU to the Plains, move Missouri to the Old Southern dropping Southern Miss (and thus georgia Southern from the G4), and move Cal up to West Coast.... But anyways doing this breakdown basically is the best way I can come up with to keep the regionality AND Balance. Plus as long as you allow teams to have 2 out of division permanant rivals, keeps all the most important/historic games. Honestly the only even decent teams I don't have listed in that top 56 or the G4 teams are Miami (Ohio), Central Michigan, Western Michigan, Ball State, Western Kentucky, UAB, and like James Madison... There really isn't anyone else that has been decently successful over the last like 30-40 years.

Scheduling: This is 2 conference, 4 divisions of 7 teams each, making 56 total. The schedule will move to 13 games and eliminate the conference championship (or now it'd be referred to as division championship) as a game. The winner of the division is just whoever had the best division record, with H2H as tie breaker. Every team in the division plays each other (so 6 games there). Then you have 3 whole cross-division vs division games (that rotate yearly) in whatever place the team finished last season. 2 of them will be Intra-conference and 1 will be out-conference. That makes 9 total games so far. Then each team gets 2-3 protected permanent out of division rivalries if they choose. If those rivalries would be played as Cross-Division opponents, it would free up that spot in their schedule. The teams can fill the remainder of their 13 game schedule how they want, but can only include max 1 G5 opponent from this list and no FCS.

Playoffs: From there you Make it an 8 per conference playoff. Division champions get the top 4 seeds. The next highest 4 ranked teams in each conference *by win% and in-conference win%/h2h as tie breakers* make the CFP as the wild cards. No 1st round Byes.

Relegation: G4 teams play everyone in their division (5 games) and play 5 cross division opponents that finished in same place (3 intra-conference, and 2 outer conference). That makes 10 games. They can do what they want with the rest of their 2-3 games (also serves as placeholder if a major team got relegated and has permanant rivals). The top teams in each division and the next 4 best by win% (games against Major league teams don't count against them for seeding) in each conference play each other in a playoff. G4 champion can play the team that finished in last place of whatever division they would be in (so like if Cal won the G8 Championship, they'd play worst team in the West Coast conference).
 
Last edited:
SCarolina Ibis said:
This is a ******* terrible idea.

They want to consolidate the media rights of 70 schools under one agreement & use a tiered distribution system, all under the direction of a private equity firm.

**** THAT.

"Staggs and Mayer founded Candle Media, a premium content company that launched in 2021 with backing of private equity giant Blackstone."

"the revenues will be allotted unequally. Project Rudy separates the 70 programs into three tiers.

Tier 1: the top 16 schools earn per-school revenue projections from $130 million in Year 4, escalating to $250 million in Year 12

Tier 2: the next 22 schools earn revenue of $60-$110 million

Tier 3: the last 32 schools earn projections of $30-$60 million

The gap between:
tier 1 and tier 2 would be $20-$70 million, YEARLY
tier 1 and tier 3 would be $70-$100 million, YEARLY
tier 2 and tier 3 would be $30-$50 million, YEARLY

The model offers a variety of ways to determine how to tier schools. ... However, one proposed model suggests having eight “permanent” members of Tier 1, a move presumably to placate the biggest brands in the sport.

Letting private equity run this thing is a worst case scenario.

I know some of you might think we're a tier 1 school. But make no mistake, a private equity firm does not have the same set of standards that you do.

They do not give a **** about how many titles we've won. They do not give a **** about anything but what makes THEM the most money.

@Rellyrell what could go wrong?
Click to expand...

Two things I’ve learned from being around P.E guys, r:

1. There’s always an ulterior motive behind their ideas that benefit them

2. There’s always fine print that’s so fine, u have to read it w/ a telescope that comes back to bite those who get in bed w/ them.

I don’t like this concept, b/c this concept is going to benefit a handful of teams, drive a wider gap between the haves & have nots, while boosting their pockets. Private Equity firms r typically opportunist, & that’s no offense to anyone on the board who are apart of one.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top