It's a serious question, I'm not looking for outliers....If conference A has a media deal that is 10x conference B, I think we all understand that difference shows up on a lot of ways that make conference A non-competetitive with conference B. If they are equal...I would expect any competetive differences to be the product of other things. What if it's just 2x? or 1.2x....is there a point at which it doesn't matter?
My question is because football program spending is incredibly correlated with succesful outcomes...we love to point to outliers and act like that means it's "possible"....unfortunately, I believe reall winning in college athletics comes with a price tag that you might be able to postpone but if you want reall sustained success, you have to pony up. If the new PAC teams have bigger budgets than the new MWC teams...I assume that will mostly be due to whatever media money they end up making. If they have more $$ for programs/NIL whatever....I don't think it needs to be double...it just needs to be a little bit more and over time, theat advantage will accrue. At least that is my prediction. I hated the unequal payout that Boise St got from the MWC.... and I hate that UNLV and AFA got something similar....it creates an uneven platform from the beginning.
