Started By
Message
We already have a 8 team playoff so quit wishing for one
Posted on 12/10/14 at 10:46 am
Posted on 12/10/14 at 10:46 am
The post season is about who gets the money and how it gets divided and there is no way the ACC, B1G, PAC, and SEC are giving up a dime of it to Notre Dame, the B12, or any Gang of 5 school if they can avoid it and keep 100%. CCG's are the property of the conferences so the money from the games all go 100% back into the conference that hosts them. If you think this will change then tell me why the ACC, B1G, PAC, or SEC would share money they already own 100% of?
In the era of the BCS the B1G signed a deal with FOX for 24 million or more per year for a single game which the B1G controls and involves 2 B1G schools. Now we have the playoff so expect that 24 million to swell greatly when the next contract comes due. In comparison each one of the playoff games gets 6 million for the conference of the invited team. While some might be a bit slow on the uptake, simple 3rd grade math makes this easy to understand.
24 million / 14 teams = roughly 1.7 million per B1G school for CCG
6 million / 14 teams = roughly 0.4 million per B1G school for 4 team playoff spot
1.7 - 0.4 = 1.3 million extra per B1G school for B1G CCG than the playoff game
Lest you think this just applies to the B1G. I just used them because the numbers are more public and easier to decipher. The SEC should be fairly close and could easily surpass the B1G deal if CBS really does decide not to pay more. ESPN has already expressed a bidding interest if CBS holds to their bluff about not raising the stakes next go round. If the Rose Bowl is worth 80 million to ESPN every year and the B1G CCG is worth 24 million to FOX every year it seems safe to say the SEC CCG should be worth somewhere in between.
Even if the PAC and ACC squeeze out 1 million per member school for their CCG's it is still double what the playoff will pay member schools. The B12 has their collective thumb stuck up their collective arse because nobody will pay even 12 million for a regular season game between TCU and Iowa State or Kansas State and Baylor, which is what it would need to generate to even hint at expanding past 4 playoff teams.
In the era of the BCS the B1G signed a deal with FOX for 24 million or more per year for a single game which the B1G controls and involves 2 B1G schools. Now we have the playoff so expect that 24 million to swell greatly when the next contract comes due. In comparison each one of the playoff games gets 6 million for the conference of the invited team. While some might be a bit slow on the uptake, simple 3rd grade math makes this easy to understand.
24 million / 14 teams = roughly 1.7 million per B1G school for CCG
6 million / 14 teams = roughly 0.4 million per B1G school for 4 team playoff spot
1.7 - 0.4 = 1.3 million extra per B1G school for B1G CCG than the playoff game
Lest you think this just applies to the B1G. I just used them because the numbers are more public and easier to decipher. The SEC should be fairly close and could easily surpass the B1G deal if CBS really does decide not to pay more. ESPN has already expressed a bidding interest if CBS holds to their bluff about not raising the stakes next go round. If the Rose Bowl is worth 80 million to ESPN every year and the B1G CCG is worth 24 million to FOX every year it seems safe to say the SEC CCG should be worth somewhere in between.
Even if the PAC and ACC squeeze out 1 million per member school for their CCG's it is still double what the playoff will pay member schools. The B12 has their collective thumb stuck up their collective arse because nobody will pay even 12 million for a regular season game between TCU and Iowa State or Kansas State and Baylor, which is what it would need to generate to even hint at expanding past 4 playoff teams.
4
Posted on 12/10/14 at 10:56 am to Cheese Grits
The problem is the not playoff "Playoff" bowls.
The old BCS system had a national title, but they also had another set of bowls that mattered. It was an accomplishment when your team played in a "BCS Bowl."
They tried to do the same thing in this era, but NO ONE cares about the non-playoff bowls. Now that three non-exhibition games exist, instead of one, it has sucked all the air from the room away from the other bowls. Either you made the top four, or you had a so-so season. We are at the polar opposite of where college football was in 1985.
With that said, the lack of prestige for these other not playoff "Playoff" bowls hurts the bottom line directly as ESPN went from having five hyped BCS games to three playoff games anyone cares about. By having an 8 team playoff they more than double the games that matter.
In the end, the money will talk.
The old BCS system had a national title, but they also had another set of bowls that mattered. It was an accomplishment when your team played in a "BCS Bowl."
They tried to do the same thing in this era, but NO ONE cares about the non-playoff bowls. Now that three non-exhibition games exist, instead of one, it has sucked all the air from the room away from the other bowls. Either you made the top four, or you had a so-so season. We are at the polar opposite of where college football was in 1985.
With that said, the lack of prestige for these other not playoff "Playoff" bowls hurts the bottom line directly as ESPN went from having five hyped BCS games to three playoff games anyone cares about. By having an 8 team playoff they more than double the games that matter.
In the end, the money will talk.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 11:04 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
We already have a 8 team playoff
No we don't. If Mizzou had won, they still don't make the CFP. If you win in a playoff, you move on. Not team B, beats team A, but team C moves on.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 11:21 am to Tiger Live2
College football just needs to have a NCAA tournament and be done with it. If Divisions 1-AA, Division 2 and Division 3 can finish the season with a 16 team tournament then why can't Division 1? I would probably eliminate the conference championship games and go to a 32 team tournament instead. Also, eliminate the divisions and rotate the schedules so that every team plays every other league time just as often as anyone else.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 11:21 am to Cheese Grits
I like your grit, Cheese, but this scenario only applies to this football season. It could work every year if the SEC, ACC, PAC and Big X cannibalize the Big 12 and the playoff is restricted to the champions of these four super conferences. That might get boring after a while.
The bowl system as it exists would surely die. Best to expand the playoffs to at least 8, I think.
The bowl system as it exists would surely die. Best to expand the playoffs to at least 8, I think.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 11:24 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
The old BCS system had a national title, but they also had another set of bowls that mattered. It was an accomplishment when your team played in a "BCS Bowl."
They tried to do the same thing in this era, but NO ONE cares about the non-playoff bowls. Now that three non-exhibition games exist, instead of one, it has sucked all the air from the room away from the other bowls. Either you made the top four, or you had a so-so season.
Totally disagree. Before there was one truly meaningful game, now there are three.
The BCS bowls were just as big of "exhibitions" as the "NYD 6" or whatever they are calling them now.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 11:32 am to RandySavage
quote:
The BCS bowls were just as big of "exhibitions" as the "NYD 6" or whatever they are calling them now.
Sure, but they had more MEANING back then.
I mean, with over 100 football teams only two having good years wouldn't work. Not when fans were used to a system where everyone who won their conference had about the best year possible.
The BCS bowls were training wheels, a transition point for fans used to meaningless bowl games as a "reward" for a good season. Now the public has been weaned on meaningful games, yet these tag-along bowls still stick around.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 1:54 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
Sure, but they had more MEANING back then.
Fewer bowls means more meaning.
They really should raise the standards to get in a bowl and get rid of the excess bowls
Power 5 + IND schools = 8 win regular season minimum to qualify
Gang of Five schools = 9 win regular season minimum to qualify
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:30 pm to Cheese Grits
If Wisconsin, Missouri, Georgia Tech, or Arizona had won, none of them would have got into the playoffs with the possible exception being that three or all four won. The committee lucked out because none of them did win and Ohio St won so convincingly. Just leaving the dysfunctional conference to complain.
This scenario will not work out most years for the committee.
Think about if all four of the above teams had won.
FSU, Baylor, and TCU would have had one loss and then a bunch of two loss teams. Hell I think they would leave out FSU, TCU, and had three two loss teams in the four depending on scores, etc
This scenario will not work out most years for the committee.
Think about if all four of the above teams had won.
FSU, Baylor, and TCU would have had one loss and then a bunch of two loss teams. Hell I think they would leave out FSU, TCU, and had three two loss teams in the four depending on scores, etc
Posted on 12/10/14 at 2:36 pm to NotRight37
quote:
If Wisconsin, Missouri, Georgia Tech, or Arizona had won
TCU would have replaced Wisconsin
Missouri was not going to win
Georgia Tech probably replaces Free Shoes (mainly for liability sake)
Arizona probably represents the PAC
B12 gets in and the B1G gets left out and all goes along as before.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 3:26 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
No we don't. If Mizzou had won, they still don't make the CFP. If you win in a playoff, you move on. Not team B, beats team A, but team C moves on.
This is correct. Eight teams is the answer. Had Missouri won the best conference in cfb has no representative. The five champions ensures all conferences are represented. The 3 at large ensure that if a conference had a year like 2011 when the two best teams are in same conference that both make the playoffs.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 4:35 pm to Cheese Grits
I thought the 8 team playoff was simply the SEC West + SEC East champ
Posted on 12/10/14 at 4:38 pm to Tiger Live2
quote:
No we don't. If Mizzou had won, they still don't make the CFP. If you win in a playoff, you move on. Not team B, beats team A, but team C moves on.
And on the flip side, MSU didn't make the SECCG but would have made an 8-team playoff. (Not that we would have made it past the first round, but still.)
In many recent years the 2nd place SEC West team would have made an 8-team playoff ahead of the SEC East champion. THAT is why a conference championship game is not (and should not be) considered a first round of an expanded playoff.
Posted on 12/10/14 at 9:21 pm to labamafan
quote:
This is correct.
The playoff was not set up to be correct it was set up to deal the B1G back into the discussion. Secondary teams will want 8 to deal their team back in after a second loss but then you are rewarding bad play over good.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 12:02 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
They really should raise the standards to get in a bowl and get rid of the excess bowls
This will never happen.
Posted on 12/11/14 at 8:27 am to cardboardboxer
Yeah but at least now you don't have the tie-ins to bowls that will make crummy matchups. Look how many bowl games are top 15 teams against eachother. You don't have a top 5 team playing an unranked UConn or something. And the games that don't matter will be legitimate opponents squaring off
This post was edited on 12/11/14 at 8:28 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News