Phil and Clint discuss changes ahead for Big Ten Football. Topics include Big Ten expansion, division re-alignment, rule changes, changes we’d make if we were football czars, and the current wild west state of NIL.
Support the Podcast, Get Gear
Subscribe:
Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | Spotify | Pandora | Stitcher | Email | RSS |
Podcast Archive
Podcast Transcript
Phil Callihan 0:00
Today we’re going to talk about some of the big changes that will be impacting college Football this season. And next season. So Clint, first thing is up. The NCAA has changed rules to impact when the clock runs, you know, after first downs, so how do you feel about that as a fan, and as somebody who spends a lot of time thinking about strategy and the nature of the game?
Clint Derringer 0:47
Yeah, there’s two pieces, I would say to this one, both of which I don’t particularly like, the first, the first thing is that, I think it makes it less likely that you get, you know, exciting comeback drives, at the end of games, I think, just plain and simple, because the clock will continue running, it’ll be harder to do, which means it’ll happen less frequently. And I think that that’s bad. As you know, it’s just a fan watching two random teams that I don’t have any emotional investment in that last opportunity for something exciting at the end of the game. So that’s one particular bad thing, that the kind of the, below the surface, part that I don’t like is that, at least superficially, this is to shorten the length of the game, right, the games are starting to really stretch, you know, three, three and a half, four hours long. Especially for fans in the seats, or other, you know, trying to compete with shorter attention spans in this the attention economy, there’s a movement to kind of shorten the length of these sporting events, we’ve seen, you know, big changes, obviously, with, with baseball with Major League Baseball, instituting a pitch clock, either to positive results. So to do that, on the surface, I think is is fine to try to shorten the length of the event, the length of the broadcast, or the length of the event for the people in the stands. But to do it by changing the game. Rather than taking away the ridiculous amount of commercial breaks, or the number of commercial breaks. During a game, I know you and I for sitting, sitting there watching a Michigan game. And there’s a touchdown Extra Point, they go to a commercial guy with the red hat comes out on the field, they come back kickoff happens, guy with the red hat comes out after the kickoff, it drives, it drives me crazy when they sandwich their you know, the kickoff between commercial breaks. And that’s obviously what’s stretching these events in real time. The amount of play from whistle, the whistle has been the same for decades, right? The reason that it’s stretching is because of all of the other, you know, advertising and other content that’s being stuffed into, into the game. So that’s really the problem. And removing that, obviously, wood wood threatened some revenue for TV interests. So that’s really what they’re covering up. So to say that you want to shorten the length of the event, you should attack the part that is not not part of the actual gameplay, in my opinion. So I’m not a big fan. For those two reasons.
Phil Callihan 3:38
Clint, you make a great point. We have been going to games for a long time. And the in stadium experience is incredibly negatively impacted by those stoppages in play. And I remember, you know, I was sitting in the seats years ago, when the Red Hat thing started. And, you know, one of the people sitting with me brought like their kid, and they’re like, Who’s the person in the Red Hat? Why does everybody boom, and I’m like, well, you’re gonna learn, you’re gonna learn, right? And, you know, my problem with it is, okay, they’re dressing this up as well. We need to shorten these games because we’re adding more games and we need to take gameplay away or game time away from athletes and hopefully this will lower injuries and lower the wear and tear on them. And listen, like you said, this is all about impacting the length of the broadcast, not the you know, the appeal to higher angels, right. So, the issue that I have is, like you said, okay, and yes, you know, the clock will stop The final two minutes of each half, but you’re going to be sprinting toward that two minutes now, right? The game is going to fly. And I think what you’re going to see, you know, another impact of this is, since the clock is not going to stop, I think you’re going to see teams, calling plays quicker. Okay? And that’s great, right? More action is good. But again, like you said, nobody’s going to complain about more Football, everyone complains about when you’re sitting in the stadium, and you have the stoppages for, for these ads to run. And, you know, Clint, you mentioned the changes in baseball. You know, I love baseball, you know, big fan, I was seriously concerned how it was going to impact games, right, with these new rules on the baseball side, and gotta say, sitting in the stadium, it actually made the game a lot more enjoyable, because they limited the time between innings. So the game actually just pops, right, it’s a lot more like watching, you know, a lower level baseball game where you didn’t have time for all these ads, and all this, all this nonsense. So it’ll be interesting to see how this impacts the product and the field, but I don’t like it. Okay. And, you know, the other thing that’s weird is, okay, so the rule change was approved. And it’ll be this year, you know, this isn’t something for 24, this is for the 23 season, will allow the clock to run after first downs and all division except Division three. So that’s just bizarre, okay. Because, you know, some of the lower divisions have the extended playoffs where you have all the extra games played. So I think it’s a bizarre thing. And again, I think that it’s going to impact the game. You know, I wonder how it’s going to impact the amount of running place that teams call and not not because the passing play is going to, you know, not because it’s not going to stop o’clock, but it’s just, I wonder if you’re going to see multiple plays called at once so that, you know, you’re not losing that time of having the play run in and guys running around. So it’s gonna be interesting to see. And again, I’m not, I’m not a fan. You know, you know, another rule that they’re bringing in is that they’re not going to allow teams to call multiple timeouts. So, you know, I think primarily, that’s going to impact, you know, the icing, the kicker thing. And then also, they’re changing the way penalties are called on the last play of a quarter where, instead of getting on untimed, down, it will just be rolled over to to the next one. So in the first and third quarter, it’ll just roll over to the second or the fourth quarter. So again, it’s, you know, they’re saying this is going to shorten the game, 70 minutes, it’s going to take eight plays away. But you know, and they’ll say, it’s not about shortening the game time, it’s more about keeping the game moving, while reducing the number of plays. And, again, it’s like, you know, that’s a contradiction, right? We, you know, we want more plays, we, you know, so it’s just, it’s just bizarre. I also wonder what extra ads we’re gonna see on screen while this is happening.
Clint Derringer 8:29
Yeah, I agree that that’s been finding ways to increase revenue on screen, while the while the game is still going has been has been a movement for the last, you know, 10 years or so. Once the technology existed to kind of superimpose all the images onto the field, it’s only going to increase but it’s a small thing. They said seven or eight minutes real time minutes, and seven or eight plays per game is what the benefit of that, you know, to have seven or eight minutes kind of shortened. Is is miniscule, I think, except that you’re taking it away from from some of the more high leverage situations. At the end of the game, like I said, so. We know we’ve seen obviously, many, many Football games boiled down to a handful of plays and high leverage situations. So now that’s where you’re reducing the number of plays. So I think just as a as a fan, again, when I’m when I’m watching a game that is not that I’m not emotionally invested in one of the teams. I don’t think it makes a lot of sense to take away those high leverage plays when you know, especially when you have a close game, I think trying to come from behind and getting the benefit of those. So it’s, it’s fine. It’s not a it’s not the end of the world, but I think it’s misapplied. And really for If they wanted to make an impact that was really tangible, I think reducing the real time of the the overall event, you could really make some gains and improve the sport and improve the product on the field and improve the experience for people at home. And for people in the stadium at the same time, if they could find a way to reduce the overall event time as somebody who’s got three younger kids, you know, my oldest is only nine, you know, and we haven’t been to a game together at the stadium. Because my youngest just turned six. And there’s, there’s no way that I can keep that I can keep all three of them engaged for for four hours, you know, crammed in, like, like sardines at the big house. Right? My oldest would certainly be capable, but my youngest wouldn’t. So either start splitting them up and bringing them one at a time or whatever. But you’re we’re reducing the opportunities for families like mine and other people right to to be able to try to actually enjoy the experience. And we’ve come down Arbor and enjoy the game day atmosphere, and, you know, just pass on buying tickets. So this is something that is impacting people when they’re deciding how to consume the games. So I think it’ll get addressed at some point. But hopefully, it’s it’s a more positive and impactful decision than than what we’re talking about. Not.
Phil Callihan 11:32
We bemoan how the in stadium experience has changed. And despite, you know, big scoreboards, and rock music, and all kinds of things, and I know, I sound like a cranky old man yelling at kids to get off my lawn. But the point is that, how are you going to replenish your next generation of fans, if you don’t make the in stadium experience better? And I realized that a lot of those things that I just said, I don’t really care about, like the DJ, and the big screens and everything is a opportunity or is a shot at appealing to to the next generation. But primarily, it’s gotta be about the game. Okay, you can add all the bells and whistles. And, you know, I, you know, speaking of baseball, again, you know, if I think about Comerica Park down in Detroit, and it’s like, Oh, they got a Ferris wheel? That’s great. Great, not really great, right? I mean, it’s, it’s great that, you know, and, you know, they have the merry go round. But ideally, it’s a, it’s a plus, it’s not the attractor, right? And the game has to be the thing that that attracts people. And I think specially in college Football, you know, you have limited touchpoints, right, you have limited home games. And if they’re going to continue to fill that large stadium, at some point, as, as later generate, or the previous generation start to decide not to go to games or not be able to go to games. It’s how you’re going to attract and engage younger, younger people, even, you know, even the students, like, when I was a student at Michigan, one of the big things I was excited about graduating was having opportunity to get season tickets, right. And you just wonder if that in stadium experience as creating the same kind of lifelong ties, that people are going to continue to want to fill that stadium. And you know, Clint, you mentioned your kids, right. So, you know, I’m fairly certain they have been raised around Michigan Football, you know, you talk about how you watch games with your kids and discuss it. So on one hand, you know, they have to be kind of chomping at the bit to go to a game. But on the other hand, you also know you don’t want it to be a negative experience. So how do you balance that out? And I think more Football is the answer, not less Football. And I don’t I see this as kind of just chewing at the edges of that of that problem.
Clint Derringer 14:12
The amount of downtime previously in previous generations of Football was more than adequately filled with, you know, with the marching band and a couple other, you know, introductions, people on the field now that there’s so much downtime between stoppages in play. That’s why they’ve had to increase the different channels of content that they’re shoving into this and now, it’s right now it’s growing instead of shrinking. It’s some point. The innovation is going to be targeted how to reduce the overall time of the event rather than right now. They’re, they’re coming up with ideas, to put on the video boards and to try to keep people engaged During the downtime, but at some point, they’re going to try to shift the creative thinking to eliminate that downtime altogether. That’s, that will, we’ll be able to tell, I think when, when that shift in thinking has happened, and it might, it might come at the expense of the TV, or you know, the consumer at home, whether it’s streaming, or television or whatever, right, because a lot of that advertising revenue probably does get shoved onto the screen, like we’ve seen in browsers and pop ups, and click ads, and all that stuff. So other sports are finding ways to do it, for sure. I think professional golf does the split screen where you can still see what’s happening on the left side of the screen, and there’s an ad on the right side of the screen. These are the types of things that are going to start to happen when when the people in power really want to reduce the event time, and it’s going to happen, because there’s going to be like you said, an entire generation of people who just choose not to go to the stadiums, you know, these the 100,000 seat stadiums, are really a sad affair, when you know, they’re half empty, or even more than half empty. You know, we’ve seen that that impact was felt, you know, all over the country in 2020. So, this, this is going to happen at some point. And we’ll see what type of solutions come out of it.
Phil Callihan 16:26
Speaking of the new stadium boards are nearing completion, they’re going to be in for the next season at Michigan Stadium. I drive by every couple of days, and they’re definitely they’re definitely in. So again, looking forward to that. But again, you know, when you know, so Clint, you and I have gone to Football games long enough to remember when there was just a old school scoreboard that had the score and pretty much the down, right. And we talked about this, I always say that there’s there’s basically three different games happening at the same time, or three different takes, right? There’s the game you see on television, or listen to on the radio, right? Kind of the media perspective, the media presentation, there’s the game you see as a fan from wherever you’re sitting in the stadium. And then there’s, the game is called on the field, right? What the players and coaches see. And what I really loved about when they first put the video scoreboards in is, as somebody who was sitting in the stands, it was great to be able to see a replay of something that happened away from you, or where somebody stood up, or, you know, you just didn’t have a good view of right. And, you know, I loved you know, one of the first thing is they’d run stats all the time. And I’m like, Oh, this is great, right. So, you know, I always tell the story. When I was in college, there was the mugging of Desmond Howard, in the endzone against Michigan State. I was in that endzone. And everybody stood up, and, you know, started, you know, cheering and everything. And then there was a great tumult. And I didn’t know what happened. Okay, till we left the game and saw it on television. You know, all I remember is the ball in the air, it hits his hands looks like he catches it, and then, you know, hands in the air blocking your view. Now, obviously, you know, Michigan lost, but again, it really was baffling to not, you know, be able to know everything that happened. So I you know, even as somebody who really watches the game and cares about the game, I was really excited for the for the scoreboards, but there’s a certain point where again, it’s just kind of an add on, it’s not a an attractor. So it’ll be interesting to see how they leverage these new video boards that are that are even bigger and better.
Clint Derringer 18:58
Yeah, it’s, it was a giant leap going from the old analog, you know, light, you know, light bulb scoreboard. That was there even when I was in college, to to the video boards because of exactly what you said, just being able to see the replays for everybody. And then that immediately became pretty, pretty political because you show you show a replay, right that the fans are disappointed with the call on the field, right? They’re even more likely than to kind of rain down on the officials and kind of impact to the process with the officiating. So you know, the scoreboard operator in which replays to show and how to show you know, is kind of interesting to watch sometimes when there’s a close call you know, if the home team is impacted or not impacted, or helped or hurt, right, it’s it’s interesting to see what which angles you see on the replay because you know, they have cameras all over the place, but that that scoreboard update right now is something that is is interesting to me in a small sense because it had to be done just because technology evolves so quickly with with with these digital screen technology is to the point to where it seems like the university operations. You know, we’re having a hard time maintaining the old scoreboards just because you know the parts and they’re fighting obsolescence. So you have a bunch of obsolete items that you can no longer get your hands on, and you can’t maintain, you know, what’s going on. And now the things going to start breaking down and really impacting everybody. So wow, I think the upgrade makes a lot of sense. I think it’s been, it’s about 10 years or so I think, which is pretty standard for how long it takes for this technology evolve. And all of a sudden, you need to start moving on to the next to the next version of these, these screens. So it then get gets mixed a little bit with the the arms race to have the biggest right, the fanciest the show us the most bells and whistles and you know, a lot of monkey see monkey do with what other teams have done both college and pro and other stadiums. So all of that kind of wraps into this thing. You had to you had to make an upgrade. So they take the opportunity for the construction and in probably tact a little bit more into it to try to get to closer to the state of the art or to compete with with other stadiums around around the area.
Phil Callihan 21:44
Well, for sure, and it’ll be interesting, because like I said, we talked about that, there are some good things that come with it. And you know, I will have to see how it gets leveraged. And, and moving forward. So
Clint Derringer 22:00
One of the big things that changed, you mentioned the stats, right? And that’s one thing, creating that extra space where the team stats are there, right? So they show Michigan’s passing, rushing, right, first downs, all of those type of what you get on the team overview on the stat page in the box score, that was a big deal, I think it’d be interesting to see if they start to look more into any of the analytics and provide a deeper detail. Not right away. But you know, if they create the capacity to, to kind of look at that stuff, some efficiency numbers, or anything that is more, a little bit more advanced in terms of statistics, and not just raw yards and first downs and whatever else. So it’s one particular thing that maybe you and I would certainly notice immediately if they go into some of the more advanced metrics.
Phil Callihan 22:54
And I would love to see that. Again, we’ll have to see. You know, it seems to me that there’s not a, there’s not a lot of forward leaning to do things that are a typical. So I’m hoping that they do look at the scoreboard as a way to do those kinds of things, right. Like you said, I’d love to see, you know, projections, I’d love to see percentages, I’d love to see all kinds of really cool things that, you know, when I’m watching a game in the press box, I have stats, okay, and, you know, some of the resources we use that if I was sitting, if I was a person who cared about that, oh, I wouldn’t be losing that when I’m in the stadium. And I wouldn’t have to be on my phone to get it, that I could just look up and go, oh, like more of a heads up display for the game. Right? Here’s what’s happening. And I wouldn’t even see I wouldn’t even mind seeing more running. Both see not commentary, but, you know, opportunity of watching other games, you know, seeing results of important games being piped in alongside, right, especially as we get later in the season and, and things start to matter more. So, again, I think there’s lots of opportunities for innovation. I’m hoping that’s what this is used for. And not just bigger, right? Because, you know, there is the oh, well now we’re just gonna make it bigger. Well, that’s more high, you know, more high definition. Well, listen, I love high definition. But you have all this real estate and you know, again, to mention the Tigers again, right. When you go to Comerica Park, when they built that, you know, the built the stadium. They’re like all the Tigers are going to have one of the biggest scoreboards in the major leagues. And really, a lot of it is pretty static and a lot of it is used for ads, right? It’s not, you know, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s great. It’s good, but it’s not, you know, 100 represent for the fan experience. There’s a lot of a lot of other masters who are being served there. So it’ll be interesting to see. You know, I think, you know, one of the cool things I like on the scoreboard that they do before games is they have, you know, you can tweet pictures with a hashtag, and they’ll put pictures of fans. I like that, you know, that’s, that’s a way to engage people. Right. So there there are there are opportunities for innovation, and hopefully they will move toward that.
Clint Derringer 25:31
Yeah, I agree.
Phil Callihan 25:32
So, talked about changes coming up for this season. For 2024 and 2025. We have some big changes coming. You know, we have some new members joining the big 10, which is going to going to impact things quite a bit. We have USC and UCLA joining the mix. And one of the things that was announced is that the big 10 will be collapsing the divisions. So we will have one big monster conference. And as part of that, there will be protected matchups so that there are certain games that teams will be guaranteed to play. For Michigan, that’ll be Michigan and Michigan State and Michigan, Ohio State.
Clint Derringer 26:28
I think the conference did well, to first of all, not continue with geographic divisions, just because that’s the way that we had done it, right. So trying to shoehorn USC and UCLA into the West and East Division. It pretty could have been done pretty simply, right. And I think that it would have caused enough problems. But that kind of merged with another movement around all of college Football, where many of the conferences are are trying to get away from division winners playing for the championship game. Instead, they want to see the two best teams play a championship game, as determined by the standings. So there’s still, we knew there was never they were never going to eliminate the championship game, because one more high level Football game in December is such a revenue maker. So the division is going away was never going to eliminate the championship game. Other conferences have already done this. You know, I’m thinking of the big 12, in particular, but it’s going it’s coming everywhere. So I think that it was smart, to kind of take that momentum, for removing divisions and to rethink exactly what this should look like with 16 teams and adding to West Coast teams. So it made a lot of sense. I’m glad that they got out of the old way of thinking the way that we were currently doing it. And at least rethought about it in a fresh sense. And then I thought that they were also pretty creative. That they didn’t just take every team and say, okay, each team has, you know, one protected rivalry or two protected rivals, some of the models that have been kicked around or that were used in the past, where we kind of forced rivalries that didn’t make a lot of sense. And I think they did well, to avoid that trap. You know, it was it was really interesting to me that, you know, Penn State doesn’t have a protected rivalry, which is, you know, something to kind of think about or, you know, I wonder, we don’t know exactly how that happens, or what the impact of that is. But the benefit of all of that creative thinking, and being able to kind of get outside the box with the way that they scheduled and made these protected rivalries is that you will play, you know, hypothetically, a player that’s at a school for four years will get to visit every venue in the big 10. Right. And, again, they’re kind of spinning it from the player experience. But I think a lot of that comes from the fan experience or from other revenue drivers. But regardless, it’s a huge improvement that every team will see the rest of the conference in a short time span, which has been probably the biggest problem since the big 10 has expanded in my lifetime, is that there was such long downtime between seeing another team that’s within your conference, you know. I remember it. I remember causing problems in the 90s and early 2000s when you’d have two teams that were undefeated that never ended They’re playing each other. And that was okay, let’s get a conference game and put that on top so that those two teams would play each other. You know, but you never know which the divisions never made sense. And now, I think it’s, it’s a big improvement to say, no matter what you’re gonna have a home in a way with every team within a four year cycle. And that is, that’s the biggest thing that I would applaud from, from the whole exercise that they did a lot of creative things to end up at that particular outcome. And that was the right way to do it.
Phil Callihan 30:34
So when I first looked at it, I noticed the same thing you did. I’m like, where’s Penn State in this? Like, I kept thinking there was another screen of protected matchups. So I do think that’s interesting. I also think that this acknowledges that Michigan is the cream of the crop of the big 10. Because, of course, we’re the only school that has two protected matchups. A little bit of snark there. As you said, the divisions in the big 10 have been mishandled from day one, right. And you were always trying to jam teams to make a get a competitive balance. And let’s be honest, the West has been kind of an also ran. So when we first started hearing about UCLA and USC joining, I just assumed they were gonna get thrown in the West, because you know, they’re in the West. And that would have, you know, I think, balanced power wise, but I can imagine that the schools in the West division would not have been a big fan of all that extra travel going back and forth there. So. So I really liked what you said about everybody having to travel to all the schools. I think I Okay, I think this is a temporary measure. Okay. I think this is what we’re going to do for 24 and 25. We’re going to see how it plays out. I I can’t see this being the long term solution. Okay. And I think back and again, I’m gonna use a baseball analogy. So before baseball had divisions, okay, you had the American League in the National League. And if you were one of the top two or three teams, great, if you were one of the also anybody else, you really, you had to watch the game because you loved it, but there really wasn’t any, you didn’t have any stake in the games, because your team was so far out, right. And they split up the divisions to give you something to play for. So I feel as if that, again, this is a temporary solution, because I don’t think the big 10 is done expanding, that’s another, you know, put a pin in that. Okay. And, you know, I’m gonna stake my claim here. When we get done adding teams, I want to see a traditional big 10 division and a new big 10 division, I would love to see that. Okay, if I had my, you know, I’m the emperor of sports. That’s what I would love to see. And, and I think we’re going to end up in some kind of division mix again, at some point, just because you can have, you know, Michigan, Penn State and Ohio State fighting for everything, and possibly, you know, one of the one of the new school from California. I just, I think you got to, you got to create a little artificial sizzle there. So I think, again, we’re this is a, this is a rough draft of what we’re gonna see, you know, I’m interesting, interested in what 26 is going to look like.
Clint Derringer 33:46
Yeah, I think a lot of that is outside of the control even of the big 10 institutions, right. So I think the big 10 Now is the first the first conference that truly touches, you know, coast to coast. So from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. So
Phil Callihan 34:01
Can I have the marketing tag from sea to shining sea?
Clint Derringer 34:05
Exactly. So the that is now again, just like when the big 10 created the big 10 network, and the rest of the conferences followed suit. That’s been, I think, the goal of many of the conferences through all of the realignment, you know, the, the SEC really kind of shattered or really kicked off this new wave of realignment when Texas and Oklahoma moved from the big 12 into the into the SEC. So that drove a lot of this conversation. But really what’s driving this now is less about certainly less about geography than it is about creating big time matchups. So there were in the last 10 years, there were movements to try to create these off site or neutral site games that brought big power teams from different conferences together. And there was, you know, moderate success, there’s but but the the opportunity for those non conference games, you know only three or four on the schedule, depending on where you play, you know, of course, the SEC still only plays eight conference games somehow. But that’s a different a whole different topic. But that’s a limited amount of opportunity when you’re trying to create these Titanic matchups between big programs, right? Again, that is what’s driving this is to try to get larger conferences, and then create schedules that rotate so that you are getting some regular diet of the best teams playing the best teams. So I agree with you that this is temporary. I don’t know. I don’t know how, you know, whether it’s divisions or some other type of realignment. But the next big shift is the continued conference realignment, I think with seeing what the big 12 Does, they’ve added new schools after they lost Texas and Oklahoma. Certainly not, they’re not the same. They’re not the same conference that they were with, with Texas and Oklahoma. So adding, you know, Cincinnati, and some of the other Mid American, or, you know, middle of the country teams, to the big 12 Geographically, is is okay, just to make sure that you have the right number to fill out your schedule. But in terms of adding power, in terms of content creation, and creating these large games, there are still some pretty big dominoes to fall in the next couple of years with the other conferences, and I think many people still are assuming, or kind of have their eye on the big 10. And the SEC right now continuing to kind of eat up these other conferences, so all of the all of the most powerful Football programs, looking to join one of those two and trying to stay out of the you know, that second tier, and I think we’ve we’ve now moved out of the power five, and group of five era, right. And it’s, it’s, we’re now moving rapidly towards the power to, and the group of, you know, the rest of the group of eight conferences, just in terms of historical power and revenue sharing, that’s going to happen in these other conferences. So the big 10 made their big move here with the West Coast teams, I would think that some of the other conferences will be the next to act. And then there’ll be some type of, of kind of counter move from both the big 10 and the SEC, but it does feel like we’re moving towards two really large super conferences.
Phil Callihan 37:49
Absolutely. And want to put in my plug here. One of the things I am genuinely excited about with UCLA joining the big 10 is an opportunity to go to a Michigan game at the Rose Bowl. And with the way that the bowl games have been moved around, you know, it used to be the end of the year carrot that hopefully Michigan would make the Rose Bowl, so you could go and go to California and see a game. And while the game may not matter as much as a playoff game or a national championship game, the experience of seeing a game at the Rose Bowl is one that should not be missed. And definitely one of the things that I am looking forward to as as the schedules come out and the projections because it is it is the way Football was intended. It is definitely an experience to be had. So I’m definitely looking forward to that.
Clint Derringer 38:54
Yeah, I think that it is a major benefit now increased opportunity. I mean, anybody you know, could have gone to see a game at the Rose Bowl, but to see, you know, to be able to go and visit and see Michigan there to play in that venue, which hasn’t happened for at least was a 2005. Rose Bowl, maybe the two, six was bowl.
Phil Callihan 39:15
I was at the game Michigan in Texas. Yeah. And last time that we were there, you know, and back then, you know, we were going to the Rose Bowl fairly regularly. And I remember casually going to that game not thinking that it would be 18 years. So excited about that. So Clint, there was some other you know, we’ve talked a lot about what’s happening in the big 10. You know, we kind of have a low in the season before things start gearing up. If there were changes you could make, you know, I talked about you know, I have a goal someday of there being traditional big 10 kind conference or division and a new new school big 10 conference? What kind of changes? You know, if you were emperor of sports? What kind of things would you like to see change to, you know, either improve your experience or you think things you have a preference for or that could improve the game overall?
Clint Derringer 40:22
Well, the really the huge seismic change that I would look at is driven by kind of what I mentioned earlier today, in that if I’m watching a game, regardless of who’s involved, I hope that there’s something that makes it interesting. Now, this is kind of the challenge of the old bowl system is trying to find two teams to play against each other to have some kind of something that’s going to make it interesting to watch most of the people I think that watch all of the 30 or so, you know, 30 Something bowl games in December in January, they’re gonna watch it no matter what, because they’re Football junkies. But from from just an interest standpoint, I think playoff expansion helps with making interest. Okay, so I think most of the critics have playoff expansion. Or that it’s, it gives the best teams, the historical powerhouse teams, kind of a mulligan, so whereas, you know, if Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Michigan, you know, with the team Georgia now, right, the powerhouse teams that have been there multiple times. If they slip up, then you’ve lowered the stakes of the regular season games, you’ve taken importance away from regular season games. And I don’t discount that, right. That’s true, I think inaccurate. However, once you don’t, it doesn’t just disappear into thin air, right? You’ve taken that regular season importance from that one high stakes game like the Michigan Ohio State game, for example. And you’ve now spread it over a bunch of other games where teams that have two or three losses are really playing each other and trying to get into the playoffs. So I think making games more interesting across the board is what would drive anything that I changed. So I think I believe that there’s going to be continued playoff expansion, I don’t think it’s done at 12, I think it’ll probably get to 16. Once there’s a natural alignment with conferences, I think conference realignment happens first, and then the playoff expands to 16. So that’s just kind of a prediction, where I would really, if I were the emperor of sport, I would create a relegation system like soccer, that keeps the games interesting, where you have the one and two win teams playing against each other. So if Rutgers wants to stay in the big 10, then they’ve got to beat you know, Michigan State in the last week of the season. And that that’s a game that I’m going to watch for sure. All right, I’m going to watch for the rivalry tie ends, and I’m going to watch for teams that are playing, not to get relegated up or down. So again, this would require some some type of conference realignment. In my mind, it was always kind of like, if we just took the Midwest as an example, geographically, you had the big 10 tier of teams, and then you had like the Mac tier of teams, and that Rutgers would be playing to stay out of the Mac, and then your Mac champion gets to move into the big 10. And there’s a financial and revenue sharing reward there for the teams that have really made it work at the Mid American level. So again, there’s a lot of a lot of what ifs and things that would have to happen. But just like playoff expansion kind of spreads out the value of games and matchups at the top tier, I would try to find ways to increase interest and, and put eyeballs on some of the games where lesser teams are playing, because I think that that would really enhance Football set Saturdays, regardless of who your favorite team is, you’re going to watch that you’re going to watch some of the marquee games. But I think it’s still interesting to then go watch some of the some of the teams that are struggling to win or really watch some of the best smaller conference schools, some of the whatever right now the group of five teams continue to try to play their way up into the, into the big leagues, so to speak, like what we’ve seen with Cincinnati and Boise recently kind of moving, moving up to the top tier of the G five and then eventually getting plucked by these by these conferences. So that relegation would be what I would explore if I if I could wave a magic wand.
Phil Callihan 44:55
It’s interesting. I was thinking about that when I was talking about like old big 10 new big 10 I was thinking, you know, there used to be, again, using the, the baseball analogy, there used to be upper division and lower division, right, like, and so I liked that, I think that that makes a lot of sense. You know, where you get teams that have something to fight for, right? So. So you know, and I’ve said this before, you know, at the beginning of every season, I want every Football team to know what they need to do, they need to do to make the playoffs, okay? I don’t want a team to have to rely on, you know, how the voters feel about them, or how the media covers them. So what I like about the expansion of the playoffs is, you know, we talked about how the diminishing value of, of the power five, right? But for now, hey, if you’re in a power five conference, when your conference when your championship game, and you’re in, okay, I don’t care what your record is, you know, you should be able to, there should be something you check the box, and you know, you’re in. And I think that’s where I don’t think the media is going to give up having the ability to vote and argue about who is really the best two teams, right. So my thing is, when, you know, their coaches should be able, every coach should be able to tell his team, you went out and you’re in, okay, or, you know, you make the conference championship game, you know, it shouldn’t be well, if you win the Champions game ship game, and everybody likes you enough. And you’re on TV enough, okay. The The other change, I would love to see, because, you know, I beat the drum on on every team should know what they need to do for years now. But what I’d like to see as flex scheduling, okay, I would love to see if we’re going to, you know, add games, as we have, you know, the, you know, the first game of the season, be a matchup of all the top Tanner or 14 teams from last season. Right? Force, a very difficult game on everybody right at the beginning, right. So yeah, I’d like to see some manner of flex scheduling where, you know, right now we have schedules set up, you know, sometimes 1015 20 years in the future. And what looks like a good game on paper now may not be just from a, you know, again, imagine if Michigan was playing TCU. Again, first game of the season, right? And And now, again, I’m not sure you would, you probably have one versus, you know, one versus three, two versus four. But that would be awesome. That would be great to see, Michigan get a chance to kind of wipe that stain off of the record. So again, I would like to see some manner of flex scheduling, and logistics wise, they’ll tell us that it can happen. And I just roll my eyes because somehow, you know, the NFL can can do playoff games with a with a week notice. But college Football needs 18 years to move on boss. Right. So
Clint Derringer 48:13
yeah, I think that’s right. And it’s, it’s something that they try to tackle again, with the bowl season. Again, these are, these are questions that have been answered in the past. It’s just a matter of figuring out a way to do it systematically.
Phil Callihan 48:27
You know, the big 10 will tell us that the big 10 Championship always needs to be in the Indianapolis because they need they need time to plan. And listen nothing against the good people of Indianapolis, but I would love to see the big 10 championship game get moved around a little bit, too, you know. So another thing while we’re talking about college Football playoffs is as the playoffs expand, I love the idea of on campus games for for the top teams. And and with the caveat that I’ve heard rumors about the big 10 Wanting to rotate that around, instead of having an on campus. I don’t want that at all. I want him to be on campus. I don’t care what the weather is, I don’t care what it looks like. So, you know, pass the big 10 championship game around however you want. But, you know, when the college Football playoffs, you know, with the expansion of hopefully the top teams being able to have a buy in or possibly a home game, depending how the schedule breaks out. I would really like on campus games.
Clint Derringer 49:39
Yeah, I agree. That’s it’s one of the kind of field leveling opportunities that comes with this change, you know, with the the dominance of the SEC. You know, now if one of those teams that we mentioned before slips up, and now has to get in as a lower seat. At least they now have to travel north and be out of there be out of their comfort. zone and play, you know, perhaps a cold weather game in December in a big 10 Stadium, and certainly certainly at least provides for some more interest. And, you know, if they continue to dominate by winning those road games after slipping up, then, you know, there’s not much to say, but, you know, show me first let me see it happen is you can compare bowl records, right as, as the big 10 teams travel to the west coast into the southeast part of the country and play these teams. Because at least they’re you know, quote, unquote, neutral fields, but you’re reversing the traffic flow. And having these teams come play in the cold weather late in the season, at least, would provide a an interesting data point that I’d like to see how successful they’re
Phil Callihan 50:46
We talked about earlier in the podcast, you want to have you want to improve the in stadium experience. You want to improve it have a game that matters, a huge game that matters, a historic game, that may only happened, you know, every X couple of years. And, you know, I think about, you know, we kind of we were in the wilderness wandering in the hope era and the Rodriguez era. And I wonder how many Michigan young Michigan fans just didn’t have that experience of seeing a huge win. That makes them want to be a fan forever. Right now. And I think that if there’s been anything great about the last couple of seasons is you could see, as Michigan, you know, has risen up against Ohio State and had some huge wins, you could definitely I could definitely look back and say yeah, these are the things that that young fans remember, these are the stories they’ll be telling 1020 years from now on why you go back and why you return. So if you want to improve in field or in stadium, have one of these epic matchups where the SEC has to travel up somewhere. So I think that would be the kind of thing that you could really excite your fan base with. And again, epic TV as well.
Phil Callihan 52:15
So Clint, do you have any other things that you would change or you’d like to see modified?
Clint Derringer 52:21
I think that’s the real that real large one with with relegation would drive most of it for me. And there’s a lot of smaller changes, that would probably have to happen to make that to make that work. But that’s, that’s where I would start, I’d love to see teams playing against each other that don’t normally get to play against each other. And I’d like to see more interest in the teams that the records are not necessarily great. But I’d like to see them really competing not only against each other on the field, but kind of keeping an eye on the mid tier conferences to see what’s happening, to see whether, you know, like I said, Rutgers is going to have to switch with Toledo or Central Michigan or something that would be that’s, that’s where I would start. I find that hugely entertaining to think about.
Phil Callihan 53:06
So I think that’s great from the fan perspective. And that’s something definitely I’d love to see. Right. I think from the player perspective, I would like to see a ton more transparency with NFL, like a, like a dashboard. Like for example. You know, schools will tout their academics, schools will tout their records, schools will tout how many players got drafted. I get the impression that NHL is now the Wild West. And a lot of promises being made a lot of things happening in the shadows. And, you know, you and I’ve talked about this, I think it’s great that players are being able to participate in the profits of their labors. Okay. I feel that in some ways, there’s a lot of snake oil being slathered about. And I think from a you know, if you’re, if you’re thinking about this as a marketplace, right, it would be really nice to know, you know, because you hear stories, right? You hear stories, and I have air quotes, right? of, well, this player is making a million dollars there and this player is making a half a million there. And you just wonder, right, you wonder if, if that is gossip to kind of encourage the next round of players and how much there is there. Okay. You know, we’ve heard a lot in the last couple of years about how Michigan was lagging behind in NHL. And you know, there was a recent announcement that Coach Harbaugh is now I think you can say endorsing a He’s a new collective here at Michigan. And, you know, it’s it’s going to be great. And it’s going to be wonderful. And there are a number of collectives all doing things a little bit differently. But not that we’re ever going to see anything from the NCAA because they’re useless. But I’m wondering if because there are no and follow me here. Because there’s financial finances involved, okay. And you have tax implications, if there’s going to be some mandatory reporting, that schools are going to have to do players are going to have to do that can be rounded up, collected, and there’ll be some kind of a dashboard of, you know, here is the average and I’ll take in this sport at this school. First of all, I’m just interested in it as a as from a fan’s perspective. Right, I would love to know, now that the SEC can’t just drop bags of money on people’s porches. You know, how big are those bags of money? How, how equally is it distributed? Right? And it would be interesting to see, and I think, you know, again, from a player’s perspective, you want to make sure they’re getting paid. Okay? You want to make sure there aren’t just stories going around that, you know, that the players who are performing and, you know, generating a lot of interest and a lot of value for their schools are being taken care of in such a way. And that there’s, again, some kind of oversight, that that the money’s really going where it needs to go.
Clint Derringer 56:43
Yeah, and I think there are lots of problems with NIL because it is the Wild West it is, you know, not quite brand new, but certainly a new phase of the game. But it’s still allowing players allowing college athletes to to monetize their name, image and likeness is the right thing, just because they play a sport or represent their institutions. I don’t believe that they should have that. That opportunity taken away from where the problems come from, in my opinion, are that the NIHL framework is being it’s a scapegoat or a shield from the NCAA institutions having to just pay the players directly as employees. Right. And this is the argument that is happening in the court system. And eventually we’ll get all the way to the top, I’m sure. And again, we’ve seen it, whether it’s the legislature or whether it’s the courts, the NCAA loses this argument 99 times out of 100, the the institutions and the governing organization, the NCAA are making huge amounts of revenue without having to share it at all, in terms of direct plant payment for the players. So name image and likeness was sort of a fig leaf concept that the the NCAA was kind of forced to accept in the courts, you know, in the last five years, and now they’re pointing at these problems. But in reality, the problems in terms of align with the fact that not everybody’s name, image and likeness has the same value, of course, right? So that having, you know, we’re seeing these collectives being put together to try to dump a bunch of money into from donors and other institutions, and then distribute to the players for playing, right. Well, that’s a problem. Yeah, because they’re trying to use this, this framework, that should be helping individual players monetize their name, image likeness. It’s being used as a collective to pay, you know, for salary, or to try to make sure that everybody who’s making the sacrifices for a team kind of is compensated across the board. And that’s not what it was meant for. But it’s trying to fill the gap that the institutions are leaving. So it is, in my opinion, it’s good that the opportunity for players of all sports, not just the big revenue, sports, but for all sports, to be able to use their standing in their sport and to monetize that is good and should stay to huge questions and problems, I think are still because this is being put in place rather than the institutions just recognizing that they are employing these players and making money off the backs of all those games and the content and the rest. So figuring that out, and deciding how We’re going to treat that in the courts and with the laws, hopefully at the federal level is really what’s going to happen to make sure that it’s it’s universal and standard. Otherwise it’s going to be, it’s always going to be the Wild West, because people are are trying to take care of a problem that NIHL wasn’t designed to solve.
Phil Callihan 1:00:21
So, Clint, I just want to be clear. I think it’s great. The players are getting paid. I’m I’m not, you know, in no way. I want no one to think that I am not completely 100% for the players being paid. When I say I want the visibility is I want them to know exactly where they should go to get paid to make sure that the money that they’re making the best choice possible. Okay. And my issue with the Collective’s, and I would say universally, okay. Whichever one, okay. Is we used to look at the NCAA and say, Okay, how much do you bring in how much goes back to the players? How much goes to overhead? Right? And we look at how much the NCAA pays, you know, their, their president, right. And there is no way on God’s green earth. Okay, that you can justify that. Right? I mean, that the NCAA can justify that. Okay. There’s no way that, you know, Mark emirate makes, you know, before he left $3 million here, there is no way he’s bet worth that. Okay, I can guarantee that you are I could do that job for a fraction of that, and do what the NCAA does, okay. So the point that I’m making with the collectives is, when I see the overhead and percentages they’re taking, okay, you should be able to have a dashboard that says, okay, collective, a collective bliss, collective, see, here’s the percentage that goes to the players, here’s the value, they each do things a little differently. So you can make that choice, okay. And when I say make a choice, you can make a choice between whether you’re gonna go to Texas or Michigan, or you’re going to go to Texas, or Alabama, or Michigan or Michigan State. So that’s why again, because you know, there’s going to be a collective part where you’re getting so much everybody’s getting something from the collective, and they’re going to be individual deals, right. And at some point, you got to pay taxes on that. And that’s why I’m wondering, why No, I’m not wondering, I’m thinking, this is going to have to happen at at the federal level. So you don’t get Florida or Alabama cutting their teams a break on state laws, right? You know, you know, death and taxes are coming, right. So if, at the federal level, there’ll be some kind of dashboard on last year, this is how much the average player made, right? And, and so that you don’t get recruited by somewhere, well, hey, you’re gonna get $5 million? Well, then you show up and you don’t, right. So that’s what I’m saying. Transparency is just information so that the players can make the best deal possible. Because it definitely feels to me when I read some of the organizations that are being set up, that the overhead is pretty high. So you should know that and, you know, again, they, they’re, it’s everything is so the problem I have is everything is better for the players now, right? Like, any collective can say, hey, this is a good deal, because there wasn’t anything before. And like you said, Hey, you be getting screwed for years. So anything is great, right? But I look at, you know, I think about, you know, and this is, you know, a far tangent, but like, when somebody signs a record contract, and then they hit it big, and then they look back five years later and go, Wow, that really wasn’t that good of a deal. Right? You should know what the deal is. And I think this is all going to get sorted out in the next five to 10 years. You know, I think five years from now, 10 years from now, we’ll go to a website somewhere and there will be a dashboard saying, you know, and and it will be something that players can evaluate just like the value of your degree, or the value of the network at the school you go to, but I would like to see steps made towards that sooner rather than later.
Clint Derringer 1:04:37
Yeah, anything that helps kind of clarify and protect the players, you know, this is kind of just opened the door to a whole nother population of people that are making money off the backs of what the players are doing.
Phil Callihan 1:04:50
Well, that’s what I’m saying. And that’s why you want to make sure you’re making the best deal. You know, there’s always the analogy of when there’s the gold rush the P who make money? Are the people selling pics? Right? I feel a lot of the collectives are the people selling pics. So, and again, you know, casting no aspersions. You know it costs money to set up an organization, but you should be able to evaluate. So all right. Well, Clint, we’ve tackled a lot in this podcast Do you have anything to to finish with?
Clint Derringer 1:05:22
Not looking forward to, you know, it’s the countdown is kind of started. I think it’s something like eight or maybe nine weeks until the regular season so we’ll have some specific season Football stuff to talk about here relatively soon.
Phil Callihan 1:05:37
And we’re anticipating quite a big season.
