With conference realignment being all about money (and some exceptions for traditional rivalries and academic allegiences), the biggest driver is the television contract the conference can get. Schools like App and Boise St are more like novelties when compared to even the most mediocre P5 teams in terms of fan base and TV viewers.
I wish that conferences weren't the ones that negotiated TV contracts. That is what has led to bloated conferences and certainly contributes to further stratifying college football, where you only have a handful teams that can reasonably compete for a title each year.
Wrigley, that kind of thinking is what makes the world a better place. I have teachers in my family and am friends with many teachers, and I know that many of them have made decisions in their careers that hurt their income but put them in a better position with their families and increased their effectiveness in the classroom.
However, and I think everybody should understand this, I think the argument over teacher pay (at least among those I have the conversation with) isn't that teachers work harder when they are paid more, but that for some people the best decision they can make for their family is to get paid more somewhere else. It would be great if there was competition for teaching jobs instead of school systems taking whoever is willing to work in that environment for that pay. I think most of the Red for Ed folks were angling more for money being spent in support of the classroom, like more teaching assistants and textbook funds, and that is why they weren't really impressed with the pay increases.
Poor madison..feel for them..anyway the mitchell vs madsion score will only depend on when mitchell decides to let off the gas .i hear madison has like 15 freshman playing up due to no jv team..if they can get them to buy into the program 15 freshman is a good number to build around for the future .