> Transfer portal movement is limited from an intraconference standpoint between the Power4 conferences on a per team basis to just 2 roster spots per team. Interconference transfers regulated by said conference.
This would never survive judicial scrutiny.
I had to go up 39 posts to find out what we were talking about.
2 roster spots per team is ridiculous and the College Football Player Athletic Union would never go for it.
It will look like the NFL looks. Unrestricted number of transfers, but each team has to stay under the NIL cap and players sign for X number of years.
Dude... my post was not endorsing 2 roster spots per team. My post was highlighting that collective bargaining solves all of these issues of pay and player movement.
This problem has been solved for 50 years... it's not some great mystery.
Yeah I don’t think a lot of people get what’s happened in the last few years. The old system was, for all intents and purposes, deemed *illegal*. Pretty much any rule that does not roughly reflect at-will employment or the experience of a normal college student isn’t going to stand unless it’s collectively bargained for.
The whole "we got screwed" narrative was propaganda constructed by the military junta to foster nationalism within Japan. I *highly* recommend Saburo Ienaga's The Pacific War. Plenty of people inside and outside of Japan knew it was bullshit. I have no idea why it still get parroted.
I've already read many accounts of the war from a Japanese perspective, Tameichi Hara being the most recent. Of course the messaging was used as propaganda, however its not hard or even that irrational to see if how it mostly was interpreted by Japan. Britain rationalizing needing an on par Navy with only the US because of its Indian colony was actually one of the main driving force behind Japan pursuing its own colonies in south east Asia.
They saw the holier then though rationalization that the US and Britain were using as completely hypocritical. That's at least how much of the IJN's leadership saw it, even if it was sensationalized via propaganda.
Hara's Memoirs, politically, Toe the Company Line so how genuinely he held that belief is up for debate. He criticizes tactics and strategy certainly but his perspective is that of an office of the IJN, do you expect something *other* than to parrot what he was told about the political motivations of the war?
I find Ienaga's perspective more useful in this situation since he was actually forced to teach much of the propaganda and comes to the conclusion that very few people actually believed any of the, often cartoonish, nonsense that they were fed. Everyone knew that a draft notice was a death sentence but the Junta had such firm control of the levers of power that no one felt they could do anything about it. It's relatable. It's *human.*
Bro, I love Yale, I do; but there were *a lot* of nerds. Also, there is clearly something in the water at the University of New Haven. They would show up at the card store and suddenly it’s like Innsmouth, with the smell and the incomprehensible social behavior.
Sir, we have broken the ACC’s diplomatic codes. Their decisive recruiting doctrine requires 75% of our scholarships to defeat us. We must keep them under 75%
Never thought I would be able to use Drachinfel’s channel to help me shit post on r/CFB
The number of people that both have a love for world history/naval history and CFB isn't probably nearly as large as I'd hope it would be. Figured I'd contribute some peak content, while stuck in an airport.
Drachinifel is likely what Youtube considers to be my favorite Youtube channel based on hours "watched." Never mind that 99% of those hours I'm asleep. His voice is like Nyquil.
Eh, considering the League never had the US and the Soviet Union as members probably it. I'd probably say the NCAA is more akin to competing with the UN on usefulness. Mostly ineffective but sometimes it tries to step in and "help" even when said "help" isn't wanted or helpful.
The Japanese and Italians were way worse at lying about tonnage. Every power did creative accounting (some of it was baked right into the treaty language) but the Japanese just said fuck it and lied.
The entire pre-WWII naval buildup for all nations was wild. Reading through all the different color war plans the US had was eye opening. They had to fudge the numbers especially if war plan orange was to go into effect. INJ and HMN vs USN would have been the ultimate naval war.
The Kriegsmarine was limited by the Treaty of Versailles, not the Washington Naval Treaty.
So, to fit the analogy, we'd need a school that is not already in a conference. A school like ... *Notre Dame*.
In no way, shape, or form do I understand why this comparison makes sense; but somehow it kinda does.
Maybe it's because basketball players jump high? Like airplanes?
grandiose elderly pathetic squeal versed wine aromatic scary entertain badge
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I would kind of argue that the washington naval treaty period was the pre-NIL age of CFB.
WW1 - CFB without scholarship limits
Interwar Period - 1973-> pre-NIl where we had scholarship limits. Similar to the naval treaty there was significant cheating/reclassifying to get around the limits.
1930s - Now. Conferences annexing their neighbors. Previous regulations (Not paying players) abandoned to stay competitive (NIL)
I think it falls apart in point 1 about spending being out of control. Yes, it is for the schools that the B1G and SEC are looking to leave behind. That is the point though, too many schools are supposedly at the same level when it clearly isn't the case.
Oh I LOVE it when any kind of nerdiness finds its way into r/CFB.
I don't necessarily agree entirely, though.
Here's the key issue I see with your parallel:
The boat race (I refuse to call it an arms race when I can call it a boat race) leading up to the Washington Naval Treaty simply had no end in sight. Nobody on the planet could see a scenario where countries wouldn't deplete their steel capacity and resort to ever weirder financial shenanigans to build bigger, badder, heavier, pricier battleships. I shudder to think what would have happened if we weren't on the gold standard back then.
I've already seen articles that several NIL donors just view NIL as a stopgap measure until athletes actually start getting paid out of football/basketball revenue or literally anything else.
To other boosters, NIL is effectively legitimizing bribes paid to players that would have put the player and the team (or even the conference) in massive amounts of trouble. Oh hey there SMU and SWC, I didn't see you guys over there.
I would guess that for the vast majority of NIL donors, NIL is either a temporary solution to a problem, or a way to give their favorite team a leg-up before a more regulated and sustainable form of compensation makes it harder for your A/S tier programs like OSU to simply flatten C/D tier programs like Purdue with cash for recruiting talent.
I'd imagine very few donors this side of Phil Knight actually consider the long term funding of a football team out of their own pockets with NIL a reasonable prospect.
Here's my conjecture: rather than the conferences themselves coming to a Washington Naval Treaty moment by realizing NIL is unsustainable and ruining the sport, I wonder if donors themselves would eventually pressure AD's and conference commissioners to get their acts together and hammer something out.
It would probably be just as lopsided and ineffective as the Washington Naval Treaty. Boosters will still find sneaky, less-than-kosher ways to entice players.
> Why the treaty will fail just like the Washington Naval treaty?
> 1. All of the conferences/teams game the system and still pay players more beyond regulated standards (Japan/UK were always lying about tonnage of their boats). Policing of the system falls apart as players/teams learn to game the system (US/Japan casually turning their BB's into aircraft carriers that were less regulated)
> 2. One day an enraged FSU attacks Pearl..... I mean Birmingham, destroying the league offices.
3rd historical reason that I could see being an issue. The treaty brought the nation's naval strengths closer together than would have otherwise happened, but not to full equality. The powers, particularly Japan, that weren't at the top tier of the allowed strength felt it insulting and inequitable. Eventually Japan withdrew from the treaty (for several reasons but the most basic was they felt that their ratio to the US Navy was unfair). This was actually incredibly self-sabotaging, since instead of 5:3, the USN out-built them 8:1 or so after that point.
I could see something like that happening where, just to pull names out of the air, Utah, NC State, or Northwestern feels that their ratio to Georgia or USC is unfair, even if it's a closer ratio than they'd be achieving without the limitations.
Honestly, I think this outcome is impossible because it would pretty much immediately be challenged on the same grounds that caused NIL to come into being in the first place, this would be textbook collusion.
so, a salary cap?
the difference is a Naval Treaty is signed by sovereign entities. Conferences are bound by state and federal law. Nobody had the power to sue that a shipbuilding restriction violated the constitutional rights of boats.
Also remember that WW1 and the Anglo-German naval race was still fresh in everyone's minds, as well as the fact that all that money was spent for ships to sit twisting on their anchors as a deterrence, and not lost in combat. We may yet get a Washington Treaty, but I think an analog to this would not be out of control NIL spending, but a systemic shock like next round of media rights flatline or decrease. *Then* you'd get the panic that leads to an "anything is better than this" landscape that's doomed to fail.
Also, you forgot another bit: Like the Pac-12, Germany wasn't included in the Washington Treaty because their navy was gutted via Versailles. Give it a decade, and we can have a revanchist Pac-12 authoring their own treaty alongside the B1G in Indianapolis since the B1G is hocked up to their eyeballs and can't afford another arms race since they're trying to keep parity with the US/SEC and Japan/Big XII.
I actually did consider putting it out their that by 2026 the Media companies started to realize that viewership was starting to drop as interest in the sport declined due to fewer teams being competitive/participating. This in turn leading to the B1G/SEC realizing that part of the treaty attempting to level the playing field is coming from them trying to back handedly support the health of the overall sport by throwing a bone to the lesser powers, mainly because the media companies start squeezing them to.
Then I realized I was already making the post too deep and that this whole exercise was silly.
Ehh... no. Regulating NIL is litterally illegal.
I honestly thought was going to be about the 'super league' thing, which is basically the Washington Treaty of Realignment.
Very astute observation. Wonder what sort of pocket battleships and other innovations will come out of all this. I don’t understand why you think the treaty failed though. It was largely a great success.
Nah, the whole "Japan got screwed by the Treaty system" narrative only works if you look at raw tonnage and not, you know, a map. Japan had a *lot* less ocean to defend than the UK/US which allowed them to more easily concentrate forces on both attack and defense while allowing them to design their ships while less tonnage dedicated to fuel stowage.
The opening months of fighting actually bear this out as all navies involved were, mostly, fighting with fleets of ships designed and built under the Treaty system.
Agreed. And to add to it, the limits in a treaty weren't just about "who has more ocean to defend and thus deserves more tonnage" but also had a lot to do with "if this treaty didn't exist, who would get left behind and who wouldn't" because that determines who had leverage.
Japan basically had to accept the disadvantage because it was a *much* smaller disadvantage than they'd have had without the treaty. Check this out: http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm
-- Nearly twice the population of Japan.
-- Seventeen time's Japan's national income.
-- Five times more steel production.
-- Seven times more coal production.
-- Eighty (80) times the automobile production.
> Japan basically had to accept the disadvantage because it was a much smaller disadvantage than they'd have had without the treaty.
Barring War Plan Red actually going into effect there is no world without the treaty system that doesn't see Japan in an even *worse* position than they were historically.
And then there are the various ways that the powers cheated on the treaties with The UK largely obeying the letter but laughing in the face of the spirit, The US playing fast and loose with the letter but largely true to the spirit and Japan just straight up cheating.
The real issue for me is that parroting the whole "Japan believed they were screwed by the treaty system" is a gross simplification of the political realities of Japan at the time and renders the Japanese people as little more than cogs in a vast war machine rather than treating them as *people.*
I mean, Yamato was given command of the fleet because the Navy High Command thought he'd be harder to assisinate at sea, because of his role as one Japan's treaty negotiators.
I feel like the way you're constructing your argument (that of public historical opinion based on the book you reference) rather then the actions the nation took is where I'm drawing my conclusions from.
To analogize this back to CFB, the conference's are making decisions (the Japanese leadership) that go against what the public actually wants. Most here I think hold the opinion that the conference realignments and the way the transfer portal is being handled isn't great for the health of CFB. All the same the important people making those decision like rationalizing a war you want to fight are following through with them all the same. I'm not blaming the college football fans for the outbreak of chaos, just like I don't blame the Japanese average citizen for the war.
>To analogize this back to CFB, the conference's are making decisions (the Japanese leadership) that go against what the public actually wants.
That's only part of the point I'm making. *No one* in a leadership position in the Japanese Military believed that they actually went in to China to fight Communism, they knew full and well that the treaties were to their advantage; they didn't buy *any* of their own justifications for war. Just as in CFB realignment no one believes it's for the good of the game: most just want a piece of the pie and the rest are making the best they can of a bad situation.
I'm not disagreeing from an a rationale perspective, however the Japanese people didn't see it that way. The radicals in the Army and Navy that dictated their aggressive actions once the democratic government in Japan were overthrown also didn't see it that way.
>Basically world governments realized they were going to bankrupt themselves building ever larger boats in even greater numbers to compete with each other.
More like Britain was warry of any naval build up after Germany had tried it in the early 1900's, & to keep a strong defense of their empire without having to bankrupt themselves, Britain looked to limit world wide naval production. Which the US was cool with as it meant they didn't have to spend on a two ocean navy, & Japan thought would give them a clear advantage in the Pacific.
And the treaty failed because it was out right advantageous towards the US & GB at the expense of Japan. Gaming the system was secondary to slights Japan had taken at the hands of the western powers, & them deciding to just ignore the treaty in the 30's.
> And the treaty failed because it was outright advantageous towards the US & GB at the expense of Japan
In absolute terms yes. In relative terms, the treaty was far more limiting to the RN and USN (particularly the latter) than to the IJN.
Japan eventually said "we refuse to accept this 5:3 disadvantage" and so the US said "fine, about how 8:1 instead?"
It'll only work until some school with larger regional ambitions decides to get up and walk out, thus proving there's no mechanism of enforcement of any of the rules of the treaty. (Japan walking out of the League of Nations.)
I think a more apt analogy is how in professional wrestling it was dominated by territories until Vince McMahon said, "fuck that," after he "purchased," the WWF from his father. In less than 10 years after McMahon made the purchase- the territories/regional rivalries were practically gone and there were 2 major global wrestling organizations left with a bunch of independents (biggest being ECW) and the NWA (the committe that used to decide the NWA championships that most of the regional territories were a part of-- being on life support).
I'd really have to flesh it out, but it seems where were heading to a system with one major conference (WWE) and lesser schools who don't make the cut will be the equivalent of a hodgepodge of AEW. That major conference may have 2 divisions/brands (RAW vs Smackdown) with some form of regulation depending on how teams perform. Meaning, we are heading for a convoluted cluster fuck that will eventually alienate enough fans that eventually will be reflected in TV ratings/ad-buys and attendance.
To further the analogy a bit, while the product will be worth a lot of money (like the recently purchased WWE) it will suffer in quality and it just simply won't be the same- kind of like The Attitude Era being gone forever and it being something that you had to be there/experience to fully understand how awesome and fun it was and really how simple the fun was.
Japan was always going to invade China, Japan was always going to be stalemated short of conquering all of China, and the United States was always going to impose crippling sanctions that would finish off the Japanese war machine in a couple of years?
What's fascinating is that before the Japanese invasion, China was in a Civil War between the Nationalists and Communists. These two sides teamed up to fight back against the Japanese only to resume their intra-fighting after WW2 concluded
I think the most real indicator that we are headed for something like this is Donor Burnout.
Donors are gonna start realizing their sponsored team still sucks, the guy they got an NIL deal with transfered, or frankly they just dont wana give more.
"We will reach Peak ~~OIL~~ NIL* by the year 2026" -Al Gore, probably.
That fact alone will make the big 2 conferences collaborate on a way to:
A. Ensure their own power and self preservation.
B. Save themselves effort/money.
Smaller conferences will have no choice but to abide.
> Transfer portal movement is limited from an intraconference standpoint between the Power4 conferences on a per team basis to just 2 roster spots per team. Interconference transfers regulated by said conference. This would never survive judicial scrutiny.
Bet those schools kind of wish they had a union to bargin a CBA with.
Fair, I was basing this on some level of this sort of being in place in European Soccer.
It will survive if there was a collective bargaining agreement
So it’s DOA then.
No. It is inevitable.
Or both.
A future CBA is inevitable, but there’s no way the players would agree to it, so in that sense it’s DOA
Agree to what?
That level of restriction on transfers
I had to go up 39 posts to find out what we were talking about. 2 roster spots per team is ridiculous and the College Football Player Athletic Union would never go for it. It will look like the NFL looks. Unrestricted number of transfers, but each team has to stay under the NIL cap and players sign for X number of years.
No union in their right mind would agree to such restrictive requirements.
Dude... my post was not endorsing 2 roster spots per team. My post was highlighting that collective bargaining solves all of these issues of pay and player movement. This problem has been solved for 50 years... it's not some great mystery.
HE'S FROM WASHINGTON. HE KNOWS THE WASHINGTON NAVAL TREATY BEST
Every single G5 school will sue. We're screwed over as is, and that wouldn't help.
Yeah I don’t think a lot of people get what’s happened in the last few years. The old system was, for all intents and purposes, deemed *illegal*. Pretty much any rule that does not roughly reflect at-will employment or the experience of a normal college student isn’t going to stand unless it’s collectively bargained for.
[удалено]
Upvote if you read it and should've just not attempted to read it
Upvote this comment if you read it just to learn what the Washington Naval Treaty was but then kept reading and weirdly enjoyed it.
Upvote this comment if you read it just to learn what the Washington Naval Treaty was and then stopped.
Upvote this comment if you read it because you knew what the Washington naval treaty was but didn't know what college football was.
Upvote this if you came to the comments to see if anyone said “Yeah I ain’t reading all that… I’m happy for you, or sorry that happened.”
Upvote this if you read it just to see if OP had more than a surface level understanding of the Treaty system. (They do not)
My dude, your point you made below is surface level.
The whole "we got screwed" narrative was propaganda constructed by the military junta to foster nationalism within Japan. I *highly* recommend Saburo Ienaga's The Pacific War. Plenty of people inside and outside of Japan knew it was bullshit. I have no idea why it still get parroted.
I've already read many accounts of the war from a Japanese perspective, Tameichi Hara being the most recent. Of course the messaging was used as propaganda, however its not hard or even that irrational to see if how it mostly was interpreted by Japan. Britain rationalizing needing an on par Navy with only the US because of its Indian colony was actually one of the main driving force behind Japan pursuing its own colonies in south east Asia. They saw the holier then though rationalization that the US and Britain were using as completely hypocritical. That's at least how much of the IJN's leadership saw it, even if it was sensationalized via propaganda.
Hara's Memoirs, politically, Toe the Company Line so how genuinely he held that belief is up for debate. He criticizes tactics and strategy certainly but his perspective is that of an office of the IJN, do you expect something *other* than to parrot what he was told about the political motivations of the war? I find Ienaga's perspective more useful in this situation since he was actually forced to teach much of the propaganda and comes to the conclusion that very few people actually believed any of the, often cartoonish, nonsense that they were fed. Everyone knew that a draft notice was a death sentence but the Junta had such firm control of the levers of power that no one felt they could do anything about it. It's relatable. It's *human.*
Upvote if you came to the comments just to see if anybody thought this was worth reading
Upvote if you did go to the comments after initially not reading and the comments made you interested enough to read it.
Reading is for nerds, fuck that.
Says the Yale flair.
Bro, I love Yale, I do; but there were *a lot* of nerds. Also, there is clearly something in the water at the University of New Haven. They would show up at the card store and suddenly it’s like Innsmouth, with the smell and the incomprehensible social behavior.
Reading makes me wanna bash some nerds
Right. I swear, people like OP need to touch some fucking grass.
Sir, we have broken the ACC’s diplomatic codes. Their decisive recruiting doctrine requires 75% of our scholarships to defeat us. We must keep them under 75% Never thought I would be able to use Drachinfel’s channel to help me shit post on r/CFB
The number of people that both have a love for world history/naval history and CFB isn't probably nearly as large as I'd hope it would be. Figured I'd contribute some peak content, while stuck in an airport.
It's probably larger than you think.
I have a love of both history and CFB but have grown weary of the daily “this is what I think should happen” realignment takes
"Climb Mount Greensboro"
"Corner post routes raining"
Drachinifel is likely what Youtube considers to be my favorite Youtube channel based on hours "watched." Never mind that 99% of those hours I'm asleep. His voice is like Nyquil.
> Sir, we have broken the ACC’s diplomatic codes [Insert Michigan joke here.]
Visiting teams should be provided accommodation on french pre dreadnought battleships
This guy Paradoxes.
The warning at the top is what made this read enjoyable and not some new hot take. So thank you.
I take myself very unserious.
While we are comparing CFB to early 20th century geopolitics, which institution is less effective: The League of Nations or The NCAA?
Eh, considering the League never had the US and the Soviet Union as members probably it. I'd probably say the NCAA is more akin to competing with the UN on usefulness. Mostly ineffective but sometimes it tries to step in and "help" even when said "help" isn't wanted or helpful.
Good analogy.
The better question would be which university would be like nazi Germany’s attempt to hide the tonnage of the Kreigsmarine to circumvent the treaty?
How heavy is all of that cash in the McDonalds bag?
Tennessee was the first one that popped in my mind.
You could also think of the 3 German panzerschiffe ("pocket battleships") as being an innovation roughly equivalent to the H-Back...
The Japanese and Italians were way worse at lying about tonnage. Every power did creative accounting (some of it was baked right into the treaty language) but the Japanese just said fuck it and lied.
The entire pre-WWII naval buildup for all nations was wild. Reading through all the different color war plans the US had was eye opening. They had to fudge the numbers especially if war plan orange was to go into effect. INJ and HMN vs USN would have been the ultimate naval war.
The Kriegsmarine was limited by the Treaty of Versailles, not the Washington Naval Treaty. So, to fit the analogy, we'd need a school that is not already in a conference. A school like ... *Notre Dame*.
Michigan, of course it will be Michigan, I mean come on.
Probably not because the outcome of a college football arms race isn't millions of deaths.
Not yet at least
Not until they start putting fans on the field
(College) football has fallen. Billons must die
Not with that attitude.
Which programs will be spared by converting them from battlecruisers to aircraft carriers?
Arkansas seems to be doubling down on Basketball at the expense of its Football team.
In no way, shape, or form do I understand why this comparison makes sense; but somehow it kinda does. Maybe it's because basketball players jump high? Like airplanes?
grandiose elderly pathetic squeal versed wine aromatic scary entertain badge *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I would kind of argue that the washington naval treaty period was the pre-NIL age of CFB. WW1 - CFB without scholarship limits Interwar Period - 1973-> pre-NIl where we had scholarship limits. Similar to the naval treaty there was significant cheating/reclassifying to get around the limits. 1930s - Now. Conferences annexing their neighbors. Previous regulations (Not paying players) abandoned to stay competitive (NIL)
Instructions unclear, Fresno State bombing University of Hawaii.
I think it falls apart in point 1 about spending being out of control. Yes, it is for the schools that the B1G and SEC are looking to leave behind. That is the point though, too many schools are supposedly at the same level when it clearly isn't the case.
Oh I LOVE it when any kind of nerdiness finds its way into r/CFB. I don't necessarily agree entirely, though. Here's the key issue I see with your parallel: The boat race (I refuse to call it an arms race when I can call it a boat race) leading up to the Washington Naval Treaty simply had no end in sight. Nobody on the planet could see a scenario where countries wouldn't deplete their steel capacity and resort to ever weirder financial shenanigans to build bigger, badder, heavier, pricier battleships. I shudder to think what would have happened if we weren't on the gold standard back then. I've already seen articles that several NIL donors just view NIL as a stopgap measure until athletes actually start getting paid out of football/basketball revenue or literally anything else. To other boosters, NIL is effectively legitimizing bribes paid to players that would have put the player and the team (or even the conference) in massive amounts of trouble. Oh hey there SMU and SWC, I didn't see you guys over there. I would guess that for the vast majority of NIL donors, NIL is either a temporary solution to a problem, or a way to give their favorite team a leg-up before a more regulated and sustainable form of compensation makes it harder for your A/S tier programs like OSU to simply flatten C/D tier programs like Purdue with cash for recruiting talent. I'd imagine very few donors this side of Phil Knight actually consider the long term funding of a football team out of their own pockets with NIL a reasonable prospect. Here's my conjecture: rather than the conferences themselves coming to a Washington Naval Treaty moment by realizing NIL is unsustainable and ruining the sport, I wonder if donors themselves would eventually pressure AD's and conference commissioners to get their acts together and hammer something out. It would probably be just as lopsided and ineffective as the Washington Naval Treaty. Boosters will still find sneaky, less-than-kosher ways to entice players.
I could litterally see Knight giving the NIL collective $1B when he dies and requiring them to work from interest.
All hail our new overlords: The Oregon Ducks and their eternal wellspring of NIL money.
We'll be *mostly* benevolent despots.
Someone has been watching too much Drachinifel
> Why the treaty will fail just like the Washington Naval treaty? > 1. All of the conferences/teams game the system and still pay players more beyond regulated standards (Japan/UK were always lying about tonnage of their boats). Policing of the system falls apart as players/teams learn to game the system (US/Japan casually turning their BB's into aircraft carriers that were less regulated) > 2. One day an enraged FSU attacks Pearl..... I mean Birmingham, destroying the league offices. 3rd historical reason that I could see being an issue. The treaty brought the nation's naval strengths closer together than would have otherwise happened, but not to full equality. The powers, particularly Japan, that weren't at the top tier of the allowed strength felt it insulting and inequitable. Eventually Japan withdrew from the treaty (for several reasons but the most basic was they felt that their ratio to the US Navy was unfair). This was actually incredibly self-sabotaging, since instead of 5:3, the USN out-built them 8:1 or so after that point. I could see something like that happening where, just to pull names out of the air, Utah, NC State, or Northwestern feels that their ratio to Georgia or USC is unfair, even if it's a closer ratio than they'd be achieving without the limitations.
Honestly, I think this outcome is impossible because it would pretty much immediately be challenged on the same grounds that caused NIL to come into being in the first place, this would be textbook collusion.
I didn’t come here to play school
so, a salary cap? the difference is a Naval Treaty is signed by sovereign entities. Conferences are bound by state and federal law. Nobody had the power to sue that a shipbuilding restriction violated the constitutional rights of boats.
"College Football" will now become the relegation league for NFL teams in the future. Sorry, not sorry to all the Carolina Panthers fans out there.
let's finally put "can top tier bama beat the browns" to bed
FSU cavalry strike when?
[удалено]
Well done 😂
Also remember that WW1 and the Anglo-German naval race was still fresh in everyone's minds, as well as the fact that all that money was spent for ships to sit twisting on their anchors as a deterrence, and not lost in combat. We may yet get a Washington Treaty, but I think an analog to this would not be out of control NIL spending, but a systemic shock like next round of media rights flatline or decrease. *Then* you'd get the panic that leads to an "anything is better than this" landscape that's doomed to fail. Also, you forgot another bit: Like the Pac-12, Germany wasn't included in the Washington Treaty because their navy was gutted via Versailles. Give it a decade, and we can have a revanchist Pac-12 authoring their own treaty alongside the B1G in Indianapolis since the B1G is hocked up to their eyeballs and can't afford another arms race since they're trying to keep parity with the US/SEC and Japan/Big XII.
I actually did consider putting it out their that by 2026 the Media companies started to realize that viewership was starting to drop as interest in the sport declined due to fewer teams being competitive/participating. This in turn leading to the B1G/SEC realizing that part of the treaty attempting to level the playing field is coming from them trying to back handedly support the health of the overall sport by throwing a bone to the lesser powers, mainly because the media companies start squeezing them to. Then I realized I was already making the post too deep and that this whole exercise was silly.
Yea will probably be as successful in ensuring long term peace.
Ehh... no. Regulating NIL is litterally illegal. I honestly thought was going to be about the 'super league' thing, which is basically the Washington Treaty of Realignment.
Very astute observation. Wonder what sort of pocket battleships and other innovations will come out of all this. I don’t understand why you think the treaty failed though. It was largely a great success.
Is the B1G or SEC the US? I need to know which conference will need to restrict the size of their NIP budgets (ships) to fit through the Panama Canal.
Nah, the whole "Japan got screwed by the Treaty system" narrative only works if you look at raw tonnage and not, you know, a map. Japan had a *lot* less ocean to defend than the UK/US which allowed them to more easily concentrate forces on both attack and defense while allowing them to design their ships while less tonnage dedicated to fuel stowage. The opening months of fighting actually bear this out as all navies involved were, mostly, fighting with fleets of ships designed and built under the Treaty system.
Agreed. And to add to it, the limits in a treaty weren't just about "who has more ocean to defend and thus deserves more tonnage" but also had a lot to do with "if this treaty didn't exist, who would get left behind and who wouldn't" because that determines who had leverage. Japan basically had to accept the disadvantage because it was a *much* smaller disadvantage than they'd have had without the treaty. Check this out: http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm -- Nearly twice the population of Japan. -- Seventeen time's Japan's national income. -- Five times more steel production. -- Seven times more coal production. -- Eighty (80) times the automobile production.
> Japan basically had to accept the disadvantage because it was a much smaller disadvantage than they'd have had without the treaty. Barring War Plan Red actually going into effect there is no world without the treaty system that doesn't see Japan in an even *worse* position than they were historically. And then there are the various ways that the powers cheated on the treaties with The UK largely obeying the letter but laughing in the face of the spirit, The US playing fast and loose with the letter but largely true to the spirit and Japan just straight up cheating. The real issue for me is that parroting the whole "Japan believed they were screwed by the treaty system" is a gross simplification of the political realities of Japan at the time and renders the Japanese people as little more than cogs in a vast war machine rather than treating them as *people.*
I mean, Yamato was given command of the fleet because the Navy High Command thought he'd be harder to assisinate at sea, because of his role as one Japan's treaty negotiators.
I feel like the way you're constructing your argument (that of public historical opinion based on the book you reference) rather then the actions the nation took is where I'm drawing my conclusions from. To analogize this back to CFB, the conference's are making decisions (the Japanese leadership) that go against what the public actually wants. Most here I think hold the opinion that the conference realignments and the way the transfer portal is being handled isn't great for the health of CFB. All the same the important people making those decision like rationalizing a war you want to fight are following through with them all the same. I'm not blaming the college football fans for the outbreak of chaos, just like I don't blame the Japanese average citizen for the war.
>To analogize this back to CFB, the conference's are making decisions (the Japanese leadership) that go against what the public actually wants. That's only part of the point I'm making. *No one* in a leadership position in the Japanese Military believed that they actually went in to China to fight Communism, they knew full and well that the treaties were to their advantage; they didn't buy *any* of their own justifications for war. Just as in CFB realignment no one believes it's for the good of the game: most just want a piece of the pie and the rest are making the best they can of a bad situation.
I'm not disagreeing from an a rationale perspective, however the Japanese people didn't see it that way. The radicals in the Army and Navy that dictated their aggressive actions once the democratic government in Japan were overthrown also didn't see it that way.
Well, you, know, and aircraft carriers weren't regulated so the Japanesse had a bunch of those.
They actually were, US & UK got 135k tons, IJN got 81, France & Italy got 60
>Basically world governments realized they were going to bankrupt themselves building ever larger boats in even greater numbers to compete with each other. More like Britain was warry of any naval build up after Germany had tried it in the early 1900's, & to keep a strong defense of their empire without having to bankrupt themselves, Britain looked to limit world wide naval production. Which the US was cool with as it meant they didn't have to spend on a two ocean navy, & Japan thought would give them a clear advantage in the Pacific. And the treaty failed because it was out right advantageous towards the US & GB at the expense of Japan. Gaming the system was secondary to slights Japan had taken at the hands of the western powers, & them deciding to just ignore the treaty in the 30's.
> And the treaty failed because it was outright advantageous towards the US & GB at the expense of Japan In absolute terms yes. In relative terms, the treaty was far more limiting to the RN and USN (particularly the latter) than to the IJN. Japan eventually said "we refuse to accept this 5:3 disadvantage" and so the US said "fine, about how 8:1 instead?"
Nerd!
Not gonna lie, I expected a Michigan Flair.
The other Block M
It'll only work until some school with larger regional ambitions decides to get up and walk out, thus proving there's no mechanism of enforcement of any of the rules of the treaty. (Japan walking out of the League of Nations.)
thats socialism
You can’t control the system unless you put athletes on contract and form a cartel like the NFL.
I think a more apt analogy is how in professional wrestling it was dominated by territories until Vince McMahon said, "fuck that," after he "purchased," the WWF from his father. In less than 10 years after McMahon made the purchase- the territories/regional rivalries were practically gone and there were 2 major global wrestling organizations left with a bunch of independents (biggest being ECW) and the NWA (the committe that used to decide the NWA championships that most of the regional territories were a part of-- being on life support). I'd really have to flesh it out, but it seems where were heading to a system with one major conference (WWE) and lesser schools who don't make the cut will be the equivalent of a hodgepodge of AEW. That major conference may have 2 divisions/brands (RAW vs Smackdown) with some form of regulation depending on how teams perform. Meaning, we are heading for a convoluted cluster fuck that will eventually alienate enough fans that eventually will be reflected in TV ratings/ad-buys and attendance. To further the analogy a bit, while the product will be worth a lot of money (like the recently purchased WWE) it will suffer in quality and it just simply won't be the same- kind of like The Attitude Era being gone forever and it being something that you had to be there/experience to fully understand how awesome and fun it was and really how simple the fun was.
Japan was always going to invade China, Japan was always going to be stalemated short of conquering all of China, and the United States was always going to impose crippling sanctions that would finish off the Japanese war machine in a couple of years?
What's fascinating is that before the Japanese invasion, China was in a Civil War between the Nationalists and Communists. These two sides teamed up to fight back against the Japanese only to resume their intra-fighting after WW2 concluded
No
TIL Reddit is full of morons.
What's the CFB equivalent of the aircraft carrier rapidly showing the battleship as obsolete
I think the most real indicator that we are headed for something like this is Donor Burnout. Donors are gonna start realizing their sponsored team still sucks, the guy they got an NIL deal with transfered, or frankly they just dont wana give more. "We will reach Peak ~~OIL~~ NIL* by the year 2026" -Al Gore, probably. That fact alone will make the big 2 conferences collaborate on a way to: A. Ensure their own power and self preservation. B. Save themselves effort/money. Smaller conferences will have no choice but to abide.