College Football

Oh, there's a million problems with it, though of course there are problems in the current CFB system too.

One of the dirty little secrets in soccer is that Pro/Rel only REALLY works well in England and maybe Germany. Germany requires significant ownership stakes (nominally a majority) from fans, and England's supporter culture is so localized and balkanized that it's pretty slow for fan support to be wicked away to the big clubs, and the Premier League's TV money is so massive (sound familiar?) that getting in even for a year is a massive boon to the Championship teams that come up (cue Ted Lasso...), so it's a prize that stimulates interest.

As for Title IX, I'd say the PAC-MWC thought experiments (since that's really all they are for now) would probably not have major implications. They probably will have to be legally and administratively one conference, and the other sports could either not do it at all, or have their own schemes, and (critically) the amounts of money are not so ridiculous that the difference is likely to kill off sports. Hypothetically, it could be considered nothing more than a tweak on performance-based payouts, plus a different approach to scheduling. Now, if you start having the SEC and B1G looking at it, and there are department-changing amounts of money in play, then yeah, it's going to be an issue.

More generally, yeah, Title IX is just not built for a world where colleges are running the number 4 and 7 (or whatever... you get the idea) spectator sports leagues in the country. It's another case of the NCAA and Congress burying their heads in the sand. If they would stop pretending that FBS football players are exactly the same as the Tennis team, then they could properly offer a balanced and equitable extracurricular athletic program to their students with scholarship opportunities matching their student body. MBB too, but that's cheaper to run and only 13 scholarships, so while still an exercise in cognitive dissonance, it unbalances things much less.