[Husker] Two-tier conferences

[Steve Reichenbach]

As the major conferences become more spread out to bring in more
of the top teams, many of the lesser teams are being relegated to
second-class status.  This will leave behind many regional rivalries
and so may lead to less overall interest in college football.

One idea (that I haven't seen discussed) is two-tier conferences,
such as they have in European soccer.  In such a scheme, there is
a higher tier and a lower tier.  Every year, the best teams from
the lower-tier move up and the worst teams from the top tier move
down.  This would have many benefits.

1) Television.  It would keep fans of the lower-tier more engaged
in the games of the upper-tier.  Also, it would provide even more
content (from lower-tier schools) for a 24 hour network.

2) Quality.  It would motivate institutions to keep upgrading their
quality (to move up from the lower tier or to avoid moving down from
the upper tier).  The conference could offer more games between top
teams.

3) Status.  It wouldn't relegate schools such as ISU and KSU to
permanent second-class status and it wouldn't guarantee first-class
status to teams that don't perform.

4) Rivalries.  It could keep alive some more local rivalries.  For
example, the years that KSU replaced Northwestern (sorry, Mike) in
the top-tier, Nebraska would play a more local school.

Such a scheme would allow the inevitable trend to giving more money
to the top programs (which is what has driven this since the Supreme
Court decision on NCAA vs OU in 1984) while not shutting out the
lesser schools as is now the case.

It may be time for the NCAA to get more creative in trying to accomodate
the reality of big time television revenues with the need for broader
institutional participation as the basis for broader interest in the
"product".  Would the cartel of the top schools support such a plan?
Sometimes perceived self-interest prevents plans that would better
serve in the long run.