Realignment talk not going away

['stache 22147]

What could possibly change for those 4 programs? As long as they don't lose money, it seems they should support it to ensure the conference survives if and when they leave, but that theory seems to be the opposite in practice for some reason (i.e., USC/UCLA being a no on taking Big 12 teams, from what I read).

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

[Zhorn96 1836]

21 minutes ago, 'stache said:

What could possibly change for those 4 programs? As long as they don't lose money, it seems they should support it to ensure the conference survives if and when they leave, but that theory seems to be the opposite in practice for some reason (i.e., USC/UCLA being a no on taking Big 12 teams, from what I read).

FWIW, Cal Insiders are saying it is basically done (90+%) and has been for over a week, its just paperwork and details and while you never know... blah blah.  18 sports would compete in the ACC was the last I heard.  Other sports will have to stay in their non Pac leagues or find a new one and I expect 6 or so sports to be on life support (need massive donor support immediately to "self fund") or cut in short order.  Some of the delay was Clemson and FSU causing a fuss for a higher distro but allegedly, UNC and NC State flipped more than a week ago pending final details being sorted out.  The Big 12 stuff came out of nowhere to them, everyone felt like it was a media plant story to kick things along a little but no one was aware of any discussions with the Big 12 at all.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Zhorn96

[Sbbruin 22147]

9 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

FWIW, Cal Insiders are saying it is basically done (90+%) and has been for over a week, its just paperwork and details and while you never know... blah blah.  18 sports would compete in the ACC was the last I heard.  Other sports will have to stay in their non Pac leagues or find a new one and I expect 6 or so sports to be on life support (need massive donor support immediately to "self fund") or cut in short order.  Some of the delay was Clemson and FSU causing a fuss for a higher distro but allegedly, UNC and NC State flipped more than a week ago pending final details being sorted out.  The Big 12 stuff came out of nowhere to them, everyone felt like it was a media plant story to kick things along a little but no one was aware of any discussions with the Big 12 at all.

Cal insiders are the least connected and reliable "insiders" of any school in the country.

[Zhorn96 1836]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

Cal insiders are the least connected and reliable "insiders" of any school in the country.

we'll see.  Possible vote has been scheduled for tonight apparently...

edit: Vote is in fact now scheduled for tonight.  If it proceeds, its happening gif time

I don't agree with you on the donors/insiders, at least in the last few years.  If you're saying that Cal's athletic leadership (encompassing the AD and the support from the Chancellor's office) is the dumbest pile of shit in the known universe, I am in firm agreement.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Zhorn96

[CustersDoctor 585]

35 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I think the MWC makes more sense than the AAC.  With the loss of the 3 best schools, I'm not sure the AAC is better than the MWC in it's current form.  And it's way more travel, for what will not be a significant raise.

Oregon State and Wazzu in the MWC is a fairly entertaining league that I'll probably watch at midnight when I get home from the field.

To me here's the main reason to join the MWC. Their negotiation window comes up sooner. The MWC's contract expires in 25/26 the AAC renegotiates in 31/32. Considering the fact that OSU, WSU, CAL & STANFORD are additive to either conference, they should go with the conference that gets to take advantage of the bump the PAC4 gives them the soonest. So if you join the MWC you'll certainly be able to get the new contract well above what the AAC's contract is and you only have to wait 2 years to take advantage of it. And IF the MWC sucks and you want out you're only there two years. OR IF the ACC loses Clemson & FSU in the next two years, the ACC may let in CALFORD to replace them, at a more equitable rate than they are currently offering.

[notre dame joe 205]

1 hour ago, bullet said:

to discuss and potentially take action

Do these people get paid by the meeting?

3 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

Raider Red does not take the shotguns on the road.  Those are only at home, and most of the time, it's a Saddle Tramp who shoots the blanks after a score rather than Red himself.  When I was in school we had two incidents with those shotguns.  One was the Saddle Tramp carrying them over to Red accidentally shot one while it was pointed down, leaving a burn mark in the astroturf.  The athletic facilities assistant AD, Ron Damron, completely lost his shit over that.  Then a couple of years later, he REALLY lost his shit when the dumbass who was responsible for the shotguns decided he wanted to impress his girlfriend and get a picture of him shooting the shotguns AFTER a game was over.  We all turned around when we heard them because that never happens after a game.  Damron and the campus police descended on him rather quickly.  It took a lot of pleading by the Saddle Tramp sponsor to the administration to allow them to continue the tradition and not have it banned because of the actions of one dumb kid.

Now if the big wooden pistols Red has as decoration are "banned", then that's just being stupid.  Those are just wood cutouts.

The man of Troy gets to wave his sword around.  ND forbids live mascots.  Or so we are told as the reason the school won't bring back the Irish Terrier Clashmore Mike. 

Edited August 28, 2023 by notre dame joe

[CustersDoctor 585]

This configuration makes more sense than any ACC set up. The small revenue share, huge travel expenses  AND no natural rivals.  When you can join the MWC that gets to renegotiate in 2025.

[LTbear 4219]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I think the MWC makes more sense than the AAC.  With the loss of the 3 best schools, I'm not sure the AAC is better than the MWC in it's current form.  And it's way more travel, for what will not be a significant raise.

Oregon State and Wazzu in the MWC is a fairly entertaining league that I'll probably watch at midnight when I get home from the field.

All of this. I enjoy the lesser-known late-night games, and as a longtime mountain time zone resident, I enjoy watching MWC teams play in a still regional league outside of the big-time limelight. I'd turn on a WSU vs Boise game anytime as the nightcap to a solid day.

Edited August 28, 2023 by LTbear

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[TexasEd 8269]

18 hours ago, gatormarc said:

Always fun to see the old mascots that all had the sailor hats since one cartoonist went to every school and sold them all on sailor hats.

 

5 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I always assumed that was a dutch oven on the mascot's head.  Because who doesn't want a bowl of delicious chili served out of a dutch oven that has been sitting on a steer's head for some reason?

 

5 hours ago, gatormarc said:

I forgot, not only did he do all the sailor hats, but in some cases he just resold the same mascot to different schools.

I always thought it was supposed to be some sort of beanie/fraternity hat like Flounder's

[Al_4_ISU 12665]

1 minute ago, TexasEd said:

 

 

I always thought it was supposed to be some sort of beanie/fraternity hat like Flounder's

[The Original Greaser Bob 2901]

3 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

Seems like 2 different shit sandwiches.  At least the MWC is more regional, not that that makes any difference these days.

I love you man, and I know Stanford made it's bed, but you and any USC folks need to just hush up.  Jealous as fuck.

I miss when we mattered.

May, I always wished beanies had been forced upon us as freshmen.

[gatormarc 938]

2 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

I always thought it was supposed to be some sort of beanie/fraternity hat like Flounder's

Maybe it depended on the school? Most had some sort of beanie hat that freshman were supposed to wear. I'm not sure how or when it was specifically a sailor hat unless he did it because it was easier to put the school's lettering on?

I know Albert has a beanie with a bill. He never had a sailor hat as far as I know.

[gatormarc 938]

UNC had an an active shooter situation today. Not much info out yet.

But tonight's ACC call has understandably been postponed.

[jTower 251]

1 minute ago, gatormarc said:

UNC had an an active shooter situation today. Not much info out yet.

But tonight's ACC call has understandably been postponed.

Until Tuesday no doubt

[DukDukGru 48]

1 hour ago, LTbear said:

All of this. I enjoy the lesser-known late-night games, and as a longtime mountain time zone resident, I enjoy watching MWC teams play in a still regional league outside of the big-time limelight. I'd turn on a WSU vs Boise game anytime as the nightcap to a solid day.

Agreed, with a spouse as an alum and living within short driving distance, there are some games I would consider buying tickets for as a fan of college football.

[Ghost of LL 15705]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I think the MWC makes more sense than the AAC.  With the loss of the 3 best schools, I'm not sure the AAC is better than the MWC in it's current form.  And it's way more travel, for what will not be a significant raise.

Oregon State and Wazzu in the MWC is a fairly entertaining league that I'll probably watch at midnight when I get home from the field.

I appreciate you and @LTbear expressing that sentiment.  But candidly--no, you won't.

Virtually every week, the B1G is going to have some late West Coast conference game featuring either USC or UCLA. And for those of you who still care about the Big XII, that conference is going to do the same thing with Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado.  With four schools out west, the Big XII is virtually guaranteed to have a late West Coast game every Saturday.

So are you going to watch Iowa @ USC or Kansas State @ Arizona rather than Utah State @ Oregon State?  Hell yeah you are.

[LTbear 4219]

17 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I appreciate you and @LTbear expressing that sentiment.  But candidly--no, you won't.

Horseshit. I literally do so almost every damn week of the season. I even watch local FCS games. Yes, I will watch a decent matchup between two teams in my region (Rocky Mountains) over some big-name matchup between teams a thousand miles away more often than not. If you'll always default to the bigger name, that's totally fine, but don't act like you have a clue what I'll watch for myself. 

[Laxtonto 13328]

 

 

Spoiler

CFP leaders to tackle 12-team format’s issues of access, money, more at this week’s meeting

By Nicole Auerbach and Chris Vannini

Aug 28, 2023

87

---

On Wednesday, college football’s power brokers will meet again to work through the remaining unresolved issues of the 12-team College Football Playoff before the expanded format arrives next season. The meeting was scheduled weeks ago, but the intrigue surrounding it increased tenfold this month after the latest wave of conference realignment left the Pac-12 on life support.

 

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has been vocal in recent weeks about his desire for CFP leadership to re-examine the previously agreed-upon 12-team model. He told ESPN that he still believes 12 is the right number of participants but wants to revisit the way those bids are awarded. Sankey is one of 10 FBS commissioners who, along with Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick, make up the CFP management committee.

Sankey was also part of the subgroup that created the 12-team model approved last fall, made up of the six highest-ranked conference champions and the six highest-ranked at-large teams. The “6+6” model, as administrators have informally referred to it, has been lauded for nearly guaranteeing annual access for all five Power 5 champions and at least one Group of 5 champion, while also ensuring that the best teams in the country have a chance to play for the national championship.

Does 6+6 still make the most sense with just four power conferences and nine FBS leagues? With the Pac-12 out of the picture, should there be five spots for the highest-ranked conference champions and seven for at-large bids — or should changes be more drastic? And how will the revenue get divided?

The commissioners may not have final answers for these questions by the end of the day on Wednesday, but they do expect to dive into the topics. They also must work through other logistical issues, from lodging to ticket allotments and everything in between. Despite all the poaching of conference members that’s taken place over the past three years, those in the room expect this week’s meeting to be cordial. There’s too much at stake for it not to be.

“I don’t want it to sound like it’s Pollyanna, but it’s not a Texas steel cage match, either,” one commissioner told The Athletic under the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic candidly. “We’ve got to keep plodding away the same way we were.”

 

Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff will be in attendance Wednesday, despite the future of his conference being in flux. Right now, the league has just four members for 2024, though that number could be cut in half by week’s end if Stanford and Cal are officially invited to the ACC. It is hard to imagine that Kliavkoff will play a significant role in conversations about the future of the 12-team CFP, set to begin in a season when the Pac-12 may not exist in any form. But he could be included in discussions regarding the 2023-24 season, in which his league will be an active participant.

Finalizing the format

Feelings about reexamining the expanded CFP format are somewhat mixed, including private pushback to the idea, floated by Sankey and others in the SEC, of simply taking the 12 highest-ranked teams instead of designating spots for conference champions.

“If someone wants to go down the path of, if we only have nine conferences, as opposed to 10, we should reconsider the number of automatic bids and the number of conference champions we take — I’m open to that,” another commissioner said. “I could see (five conference champions and seven at-large bids) as being a reasonable conversation and certainly one in keeping with the principles of where we’ve ended up.

“Anything beyond that is in no way consistent with our conversations over the past several years.”

Commissioners understand that a so-called “12-best” model would likely favor the SEC and Big Ten, especially with their upcoming expansion. But any changes for the 2024 and 2025 seasons will require a unanimous vote, and there are at least seven other conference commissioners involved in these decisions, plus Swarbrick.

Still, the SEC and Big Ten will soon represent 34 schools, more than half of the Power 5. Their influence continues to grow, and the relationship between the conferences has begun to warm, especially between the two commissioners. Could Sankey and the Big Ten’s Tony Petitti begin to throw their weight around?

 

“I don’t think either are going to approach it like that,” one commissioner said. “They’re certainly going to address it, but they understand we need unanimity (for 2024 and 2025).”

Still, the pressure to find additional spots for at-large teams will only increase in the coming years. This time next year, the Big Ten will have 18 teams, and the SEC will have 16. The ACC could be at 17 full-time members (if it adds Cal, Stanford and SMU), and the Big 12 will have 16 members. If only their champions make the CFP, that could mean a lot of unhappy programs and fan bases.

“We’re adding Oklahoma and Texas, and we’re not going to have fewer teams involved in the postseason with the addition of those two historic programs to our current 14,” Sankey told ESPN last week. “We could stay at four and we could stay at the four best teams, and that is just a straightforward representation of our attitude.

“But the idea of 12 creates a balance. I think all of that’s an indication of a willingness to support the game more broadly than just one conference’s interests. If it was just one conference’s interests, I could have been obstinate that we stay at four as long as we wanted and then let’s go negotiate Year 13 (2026) and beyond as opposed to try and continue to grow the game and bring people into the national championship.”

The second commissioner who spoke to The Athletic wondered why Sankey would be pushing for the reconsideration of a format he already approved. The commissioner noted that this round of realignment has mostly been a reshuffling of teams from one power conference to another. The makeup of the so-called Power 5 is essentially unchanged, except for the additions of UCF, Houston, BYU and Cincinnati and the anticipated subtractions of Oregon State and Washington State. The overall value of the teams that were grouped into five “power” leagues should theoretically be similar to that of mostly the same schools grouped into four.

Revisiting revenue

The commissioners need to figure out how to split the revenue for the first two years of the 12-team CFP and then will essentially start from scratch on a revenue distribution formula for the new CFP contract that begins in 2026. It’s a safe assumption that for 2024 and 2025, the formula will be adjusted so that the power leagues’ per-school payouts look similar regardless of the number of members each conference has.

“It is incredibly easy to overreact,” the second commissioner said. “The thing we’re quibbling about has nothing to do with the quality of the team on the field. We’re not talking about competition, we’re talking about perceived value by some suits in New York or L.A.”

 

One question that could come up in 2024 and 2025 revenue distribution discussions: Should 2024’s new Power 5 schools make the same as the other 65? It’s possible that one or more commissioners would make the argument that new Big 12 members BYU, Houston, Cincinnati and UCF did not drive the value of the initial deal the CFP struck with ESPN a decade ago because they were in the Group of 5 at the time, and therefore they should not cash in now.

That’s just one of the many potential topics that has seen a change in tone after the latest round of realignment.

“Circumstances have changed,” CFP executive director Bill Hancock said. “I suspect the management committee will spend time discussing the effects of those circumstances. It wouldn’t be appropriate for me to get into what those effects might be. We’ll have to wait and see.”

Tickets, home sites and TV deals

The group must also get closer to nailing down details about the logistics of first-round home sites and the television deal for the first two rounds, tasks that were the original focus of the meeting.

“We’ve had an agenda for this meeting for several weeks, and we’re sticking with that agenda,” Hancock said.

For first-round home sites, the home team will sell the tickets, and season-ticket holders are expected to have an opportunity to buy them. But the allotment of visiting team tickets and where they will sit has yet to be finalized. Different schools and conferences have different policies and locations for visiting fans.

Hotels will need to be booked far in advance, especially in college towns where hotels are difficult to find on game day weekends. The group is still figuring out whether schools should book hotels before the season and cancel them if they’re not needed, whether the CFP itself should book them, or whether there is some other solution.

 

“We’re getting close,” Hancock said of home site logistics. “We’ll be ready. I think it’ll take a few more (meetings).”

Meanwhile, the television deal must account for a change in its inventory. The 12-team playoff will grow the CFP’s package by four, from six New Year’s Six games and the national championship to 11 playoff games. ESPN, which has the exclusive rights to the CFP, has first dibs on the additional games before the entire CFP rights are expected to go back to market for 2026 and beyond. Fox has said it is interested in bidding for games.

“If it were to be shared, I personally feel like it couldn’t or maybe rather shouldn’t be shared beyond two,” ESPN president of content Burke Magnus told The Athletic’s Richard Deitsch earlier this month. “I don’t know how you divvy up 11 games between more than two entities and get everybody equally invested in it. Remember, unlike the NFL packages, it’s not tethered to anything in the regular season. They’re literally just 11 games. So I think to drive maximum value, the more you divide it up, the more that potentially depresses price and value. But it certainly could be two.”

The current CFP contract is worth around $470 million annually. Some estimates project that the full package could fetch more than $2 billion, but the market is also in an uncertain place — the Pac-12 fell apart because it could not secure a satisfactory media rights deal, and ESPN has to pay more than it originally planned for Big 12 expansion and potentially ACC expansion, too. The NBA and WWE are also going through rights negotiations with many of the same broadcast partners. And all this comes at a time when ESPN is making cuts and searching for a strategic partner for investment.

With the expanded CFP just one year away, the rights to games for the 2024 and 2025 postseasons will need to be determined somewhat soon.

“We’re working on that and I’m confident we’ll have it done in plenty of time,” Hancock said.

Although that may be true, the to-do list has gotten longer in recent weeks. And Wednesday will be the first chance for commissioners to check anything off.

 

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

6 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

 

 

  Hide contents

CFP leaders to tackle 12-team format’s issues of access, money, more at this week’s meeting

By Nicole Auerbach and Chris Vannini

Aug 28, 2023

 

87

 

---

On Wednesday, college football’s power brokers will meet again to work through the remaining unresolved issues of the 12-team College Football Playoff before the expanded format arrives next season. The meeting was scheduled weeks ago, but the intrigue surrounding it increased tenfold this month after the latest wave of conference realignment left the Pac-12 on life support.

 

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has been vocal in recent weeks about his desire for CFP leadership to re-examine the previously agreed-upon 12-team model. He told ESPN that he still believes 12 is the right number of participants but wants to revisit the way those bids are awarded. Sankey is one of 10 FBS commissioners who, along with Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick, make up the CFP management committee.

Sankey was also part of the subgroup that created the 12-team model approved last fall, made up of the six highest-ranked conference champions and the six highest-ranked at-large teams. The “6+6” model, as administrators have informally referred to it, has been lauded for nearly guaranteeing annual access for all five Power 5 champions and at least one Group of 5 champion, while also ensuring that the best teams in the country have a chance to play for the national championship.

Does 6+6 still make the most sense with just four power conferences and nine FBS leagues? With the Pac-12 out of the picture, should there be five spots for the highest-ranked conference champions and seven for at-large bids — or should changes be more drastic? And how will the revenue get divided?

The commissioners may not have final answers for these questions by the end of the day on Wednesday, but they do expect to dive into the topics. They also must work through other logistical issues, from lodging to ticket allotments and everything in between. Despite all the poaching of conference members that’s taken place over the past three years, those in the room expect this week’s meeting to be cordial. There’s too much at stake for it not to be.

“I don’t want it to sound like it’s Pollyanna, but it’s not a Texas steel cage match, either,” one commissioner told The Athletic under the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic candidly. “We’ve got to keep plodding away the same way we were.”

 

Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff will be in attendance Wednesday, despite the future of his conference being in flux. Right now, the league has just four members for 2024, though that number could be cut in half by week’s end if Stanford and Cal are officially invited to the ACC. It is hard to imagine that Kliavkoff will play a significant role in conversations about the future of the 12-team CFP, set to begin in a season when the Pac-12 may not exist in any form. But he could be included in discussions regarding the 2023-24 season, in which his league will be an active participant.

Finalizing the format

Feelings about reexamining the expanded CFP format are somewhat mixed, including private pushback to the idea, floated by Sankey and others in the SEC, of simply taking the 12 highest-ranked teams instead of designating spots for conference champions.

“If someone wants to go down the path of, if we only have nine conferences, as opposed to 10, we should reconsider the number of automatic bids and the number of conference champions we take — I’m open to that,” another commissioner said. “I could see (five conference champions and seven at-large bids) as being a reasonable conversation and certainly one in keeping with the principles of where we’ve ended up.

“Anything beyond that is in no way consistent with our conversations over the past several years.”

Commissioners understand that a so-called “12-best” model would likely favor the SEC and Big Ten, especially with their upcoming expansion. But any changes for the 2024 and 2025 seasons will require a unanimous vote, and there are at least seven other conference commissioners involved in these decisions, plus Swarbrick.

Still, the SEC and Big Ten will soon represent 34 schools, more than half of the Power 5. Their influence continues to grow, and the relationship between the conferences has begun to warm, especially between the two commissioners. Could Sankey and the Big Ten’s Tony Petitti begin to throw their weight around?

 

“I don’t think either are going to approach it like that,” one commissioner said. “They’re certainly going to address it, but they understand we need unanimity (for 2024 and 2025).”

Still, the pressure to find additional spots for at-large teams will only increase in the coming years. This time next year, the Big Ten will have 18 teams, and the SEC will have 16. The ACC could be at 17 full-time members (if it adds Cal, Stanford and SMU), and the Big 12 will have 16 members. If only their champions make the CFP, that could mean a lot of unhappy programs and fan bases.

“We’re adding Oklahoma and Texas, and we’re not going to have fewer teams involved in the postseason with the addition of those two historic programs to our current 14,” Sankey told ESPN last week. “We could stay at four and we could stay at the four best teams, and that is just a straightforward representation of our attitude.

“But the idea of 12 creates a balance. I think all of that’s an indication of a willingness to support the game more broadly than just one conference’s interests. If it was just one conference’s interests, I could have been obstinate that we stay at four as long as we wanted and then let’s go negotiate Year 13 (2026) and beyond as opposed to try and continue to grow the game and bring people into the national championship.”

The second commissioner who spoke to The Athletic wondered why Sankey would be pushing for the reconsideration of a format he already approved. The commissioner noted that this round of realignment has mostly been a reshuffling of teams from one power conference to another. The makeup of the so-called Power 5 is essentially unchanged, except for the additions of UCF, Houston, BYU and Cincinnati and the anticipated subtractions of Oregon State and Washington State. The overall value of the teams that were grouped into five “power” leagues should theoretically be similar to that of mostly the same schools grouped into four.

Revisiting revenue

The commissioners need to figure out how to split the revenue for the first two years of the 12-team CFP and then will essentially start from scratch on a revenue distribution formula for the new CFP contract that begins in 2026. It’s a safe assumption that for 2024 and 2025, the formula will be adjusted so that the power leagues’ per-school payouts look similar regardless of the number of members each conference has.

“It is incredibly easy to overreact,” the second commissioner said. “The thing we’re quibbling about has nothing to do with the quality of the team on the field. We’re not talking about competition, we’re talking about perceived value by some suits in New York or L.A.”

 

One question that could come up in 2024 and 2025 revenue distribution discussions: Should 2024’s new Power 5 schools make the same as the other 65? It’s possible that one or more commissioners would make the argument that new Big 12 members BYU, Houston, Cincinnati and UCF did not drive the value of the initial deal the CFP struck with ESPN a decade ago because they were in the Group of 5 at the time, and therefore they should not cash in now.

That’s just one of the many potential topics that has seen a change in tone after the latest round of realignment.

“Circumstances have changed,” CFP executive director Bill Hancock said. “I suspect the management committee will spend time discussing the effects of those circumstances. It wouldn’t be appropriate for me to get into what those effects might be. We’ll have to wait and see.”

Tickets, home sites and TV deals

The group must also get closer to nailing down details about the logistics of first-round home sites and the television deal for the first two rounds, tasks that were the original focus of the meeting.

“We’ve had an agenda for this meeting for several weeks, and we’re sticking with that agenda,” Hancock said.

For first-round home sites, the home team will sell the tickets, and season-ticket holders are expected to have an opportunity to buy them. But the allotment of visiting team tickets and where they will sit has yet to be finalized. Different schools and conferences have different policies and locations for visiting fans.

Hotels will need to be booked far in advance, especially in college towns where hotels are difficult to find on game day weekends. The group is still figuring out whether schools should book hotels before the season and cancel them if they’re not needed, whether the CFP itself should book them, or whether there is some other solution.

 

“We’re getting close,” Hancock said of home site logistics. “We’ll be ready. I think it’ll take a few more (meetings).”

Meanwhile, the television deal must account for a change in its inventory. The 12-team playoff will grow the CFP’s package by four, from six New Year’s Six games and the national championship to 11 playoff games. ESPN, which has the exclusive rights to the CFP, has first dibs on the additional games before the entire CFP rights are expected to go back to market for 2026 and beyond. Fox has said it is interested in bidding for games.

“If it were to be shared, I personally feel like it couldn’t or maybe rather shouldn’t be shared beyond two,” ESPN president of content Burke Magnus told The Athletic’s Richard Deitsch earlier this month. “I don’t know how you divvy up 11 games between more than two entities and get everybody equally invested in it. Remember, unlike the NFL packages, it’s not tethered to anything in the regular season. They’re literally just 11 games. So I think to drive maximum value, the more you divide it up, the more that potentially depresses price and value. But it certainly could be two.”

The current CFP contract is worth around $470 million annually. Some estimates project that the full package could fetch more than $2 billion, but the market is also in an uncertain place — the Pac-12 fell apart because it could not secure a satisfactory media rights deal, and ESPN has to pay more than it originally planned for Big 12 expansion and potentially ACC expansion, too. The NBA and WWE are also going through rights negotiations with many of the same broadcast partners. And all this comes at a time when ESPN is making cuts and searching for a strategic partner for investment.

With the expanded CFP just one year away, the rights to games for the 2024 and 2025 postseasons will need to be determined somewhat soon.

“We’re working on that and I’m confident we’ll have it done in plenty of time,” Hancock said.

Although that may be true, the to-do list has gotten longer in recent weeks. And Wednesday will be the first chance for commissioners to check anything off.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[BachelorTrek 3326]

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

[USC Traveler 488]

8 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

most of the time, it's a Saddle Tramp who shoots the blanks after a score

After reading about Tech coeds for 10 years plus on Shaggy and Surly, I thought "Wow- Tech really embraces it and calls their cheerleaders the Saddle Tramps!"

 

Needless to say I was incredibly disappointed to google it and find out that wasn't the case.

 

[billfromlaketravis 11870]

I hope it’s 5 conference champs, first 4 get byes, and 7 at large. I still don’t love 5 auto bids, but we’ll see how the MWC or AAC champion does for a couple seasons. I think they’ll get boat raced… but Tulane just beat USC in a NY6 bowl. 
 

They won’t say it publicly, but I’d imagine both the SEC and Big Ten will try to get 4 teams each in every CFP.

Edited August 29, 2023 by billfromlaketravis

[gatormarc 938]

4 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

Needless to say I was incredibly disappointed to google it and find out that wasn't the case.

 

Maybe you just aren't searching on the right site.

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

1 minute ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I hope it’s 5 conference champs, first 4 get byes, and 7 at large. I still don’t love 5 auto bids, but we’ll see how the MWC or AAC champion does for a couple seasons. I think they’ll get boat raced… but Tulane just beat USC in a NY6 bowl. 

4 Conference Champs(ACC, Big 10, Big 12, SEC)
4 Highest Ranked Teams
4 At Large

[LTbear 4219]

5+7. Simple fix with the PAC's death.

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

6 minutes ago, LTbear said:

5+7. Simple fix with the PAC's death.

Thinking about it I think this is correct.

 

4 conference champions from the big 4 conferences....1 conference champion from the highest ranked champion outside of that

[Al_4_ISU 12665]

3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I appreciate you and @LTbear expressing that sentiment.  But candidly--no, you won't.

Virtually every week, the B1G is going to have some late West Coast conference game featuring either USC or UCLA. And for those of you who still care about the Big XII, that conference is going to do the same thing with Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado.  With four schools out west, the Big XII is virtually guaranteed to have a late West Coast game every Saturday.

So are you going to watch Iowa @ USC or Kansas State @ Arizona rather than Utah State @ Oregon State?  Hell yeah you are.

Yeah, you make a good point that I forgot about.  I keep thinking of it as an alternative to Pac 12 After Dark, but that’s just been absorbed into the Big 10 and Big 12.

That said, I prefer a competitive game between schools in a smaller league than a bad game in a bigger one.  

Edited August 29, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[LTtxfan 50036]

5 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I miss when we mattered.

May, I always wished beanies had been forced upon us as freshmen.

 

[Sbbruin 22147]

4 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I appreciate you and @LTbear expressing that sentiment.  But candidly--no, you won't.

Virtually every week, the B1G is going to have some late West Coast conference game featuring either USC or UCLA. And for those of you who still care about the Big XII, that conference is going to do the same thing with Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado.  With four schools out west, the Big XII is virtually guaranteed to have a late West Coast game every Saturday.

So are you going to watch Iowa @ USC or Kansas State @ Arizona rather than Utah State @ Oregon State?  Hell yeah you are.

They aren’t going to make every SC and UCLA home game a night game

[TKthunder2 5060]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

They aren’t going to make every SC and UCLA home game a night game

Yeah, there’s no way they do that to USC.

[DukDukGru 48]

8 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I appreciate you and @LTbear expressing that sentiment.  But candidly--no, you won't.

Virtually every week, the B1G is going to have some late West Coast conference game featuring either USC or UCLA. And for those of you who still care about the Big XII, that conference is going to do the same thing with Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado.  With four schools out west, the Big XII is virtually guaranteed to have a late West Coast game every Saturday.

So are you going to watch Iowa @ USC or Kansas State @ Arizona rather than Utah State @ Oregon State?  Hell yeah you are.

Our side conversation was focused upon which conference (AAC/MWC) would be a better home  for OrSU/WSU now that they are outcasts.  Televised Big 10 or Big 12 games don't really factor into the choice we were discussing. 

The more realistic question I was answering in my response was that as a PAC NW resident (who is not a primary fan of OrSU or WSU) I would be more interested in watching either school regularly play regional games against Boise St. or Nevada rather than cross country conference matchups with AAC schools like Temple and South Florida. 

This is a fan level response that does not even get into the economics of choosing either the MWC or AAC.

[Ghost of LL 15705]

4 hours ago, DukDukGru said:

Our side conversation was focused upon which conference (AAC/MWC) would be a better home  for OrSU/WSU now that they are outcasts.  Televised Big 10 or Big 12 games don't really factor into the choice we were discussing. 

The more realistic question I was answering in my response was that as a PAC NW resident (who is not a primary fan of OrSU or WSU) I would be more interested in watching either school regularly play regional games against Boise St. or Nevada rather than cross country conference matchups with AAC schools like Temple and South Florida. 

This is a fan level response that does not even get into the economics of choosing either the MWC or AAC.

And I appreciate the fact that each viewer has his/her own viewing idiosyncrasies.  And though I called out @LTbear individually, I didn't mean to call him out specifically.  He has his own idiosyncrasies as someone who prioritizes regional games.  But I was talking about him more as a stand-in for the generic college-football fan nationwide.

And I think the scheduling and appeal to the generic college-football fan is what makes these moves so interesting.  The B1G and the Big XII (and presumably soon the ACC) are going to be able to offer television inventory from 11:00 AM CT when its first games start straight through to 1:30 AM CT when the West Coast games end.  More than 14 hours of football--four different time slots.

That's something the SEC can't offer.  And until last year, it's not something anyone even really considered.  

And it does kind of raise the possibility of fragmentation of the college-football audience.  This year, if I'm a fan of the Big XII, I can watch only three games.  If I want a late-night game, it's going to be a PAC 12 game.  And let's be real honest--that 11:00 game is likely to be a dog that I don't really care about.  I mean, I'm sure someone probably cares about Iowa State and UCF, but I don't.  So I'd be inclined to watch the SEC or B1G 11:00 kickoff instead.

But next year, with more teams across more time zones, I can (and maybe should) be more focused on the Big XII if I were still a Big XII fan.  The PAC 12 will be gone; and that late-night game is going to be a Big XII conference game.  And with four more schools, and consequently more inventory, there's a somewhat increased chance that the 11:00 game is one that is of interest.

Point being, I could see a scenario in which the trend toward national superconferences actually (and paradoxically) makes college-football fans more narrowly focused on their conference of choice.

6 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Yeah, there’s no way they do that to USC.

No--they're not going to make every home game a night game.  But I expect they will have USC and UCLA playing a lot more night games than they currently do.

But between USC, UCLA, Washington, and Oregon, someone is going to be playing a late-night game every Saturday.  

[DanTheHorn 5092]

I do not understand this desire to get rid of the auto bids. If you are ranked in the top 8 and are not a BIG 10 or SEC conference champion you are not going to be left out since the BIG 10 and SEC champions are probably ranked in the top 8. If you are one of the two highest ranked at large teams why wouldn't you want to play a team you can boat race and essentially get a bye week. I don't care about a good game if I am in position to be one of the ones that boat races a team. It only hurts when you are number 9 in the country and get left out.

Now I do understand why a commissioner wants less auto bids because it means more money. I just like the idea that every game in conference will still mean something since teams will want to avoid being number 9 and possibly left out. If it is just the top 12 then it becomes 6 from BIG and 6 from SEC once they go to 24 teams. It will start to feel like the NBA. Also, you may have to beat the same damn team again, see 2001. To me the 12 team was genius because the top 8 teams are in the playoffs and who cares who the other 4 teams are that get in since it was never meant to address the top 12.

Edited August 29, 2023 by DanTheHorn

[Zeus 6879]

23 hours ago, CustersDoctor said:

I was trying to look up which college venues prohibit mascots from carrying fake weapons. Pistol Pete, Raider Red and the Mountaineer aren't allowed to have their fake guns with them at some road games. All those mascots have at least two sets of guns. One set can fire blanks and another set is purely a prop. Well, the WVU Mountaineer's Musket can actually be loaded and you can kill stuff with it. The mascot got in trouble a few years ago for shooting a bear. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/west-virginia-mountaineer-mascot-reprimanded-after-he-kills-bear-with-school-issued-musket/

that bear had it coming

[Zeus 6879]

19 hours ago, CustersDoctor said:

This configuration makes more sense than any ACC set up. The small revenue share, huge travel expenses  AND no natural rivals.  When you can join the MWC that gets to renegotiate in 2025.

renaming it the Pac4 sucks lol it shows they lost the whole fucking conference. 

Just dissolve both into a new named conference if the Pac teams don't wanna be Mountain West. I think Mountain West is a cool name. Pac whatever was always lame just like BIG is lame. The big12 had 10 schools now 16 soon to be 14. The Pac12 and Big10 haven't had those amount of schools in forever. Those names all sucked. 

[Al_4_ISU 12665]

15 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

I do not understand this desire to get rid of the auto bids. If you are ranked in the top 8 and are not a BIG 10 or SEC conference champion you are not going to be left out since the BIG 10 and SEC champions are probably ranked in the top 8. If you are one of the two highest ranked at large teams why wouldn't you want to play a team you can boat race and essentially get a bye week. I don't care about a good game if I am in position to be one of the ones that boat races a team. It only hurts when you are number 9 in the country and get left out.

Now I do understand why a commissioner wants less auto bids because it means more money. I just like the idea that every game in conference will still mean something since teams will want to avoid being number 9 and possibly left out. If it is just the top 12 then it becomes 6 from BIG and 6 from SEC once they go to 24 teams. It will start to feel like the NBA. Also, you may have to beat the same damn team again, see 2001. To me the 12 team was genius because the top 8 teams are in the playoffs and who cares who the other 4 teams are that get in since it was never meant to address the top 12.

Relegation hard on.  That's what it is.

[Vertigo 20502]

15 minutes ago, Zeus said:

that bear had it coming

[DanTheHorn 5092]

Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

Relegation hard on.  That's what it is.

Yup but I do think that just like in the NFL if you are the lowest ranked wild card you go play number one then if you are the lowest ranked team going in even if you are one of the conference champions that got a bye you go get to play #1 for your first game.

[TKthunder2 5060]

13 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

I do not understand this desire to get rid of the auto bids. If you are ranked in the top 8 and are not a BIG 10 or SEC conference champion you are not going to be left out since the BIG 10 and SEC champions are probably ranked in the top 8. If you are one of the two highest ranked at large teams why wouldn't you want to play a team you can boat race and essentially get a bye week. I don't care about a good game if I am in position to be one of the ones that boat races a team. It only hurts when you are number 9 in the country and get left out.

Now I do understand why a commissioner wants less auto bids because it means more money. I just like the idea that every game in conference will still mean something since teams will want to avoid being number 9 and possibly left out. If it is just the top 12 then it becomes 6 from BIG and 6 from SEC once they go to 24 teams. It will start to feel like the NBA. Also, you may have to beat the same damn team again, see 2001. To me the 12 team was genius because the top 8 teams are in the playoffs and who cares who the other 4 teams are that get in since it was never meant to address the top 12.

Most years the Big12 and ACC will have a team in the top 12 too, but in years where they have a #15 champion they’ll be displacing a SEC/B1G. I can’t remember where I saw this but the difference between getting into the CFP versus and regular NY6 bowl is over $50mil in marketing and brand recognition which leads to future enrollment, donations, tickets, etc.

The BCS suffered through horrible autobids from the Big East for year, and they don’t want to see this again.

[Vertigo 20502]

I think the only reason Kliavkoff attends the meetings is so that he can sit in the front of the room facing the wall with a dunce hat. 

[Al_4_ISU 12665]

6 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Most years the Big12 and ACC will have a team in the top 12 too, but in years where they have a #15 champion they’ll be displacing a SEC/B1G. I can’t remember where I saw this but the difference between getting into the CFP versus and regular NY6 bowl is over $50mil in marketing and brand recognition which leads to future enrollment, donations, tickets, etc.

The BCS suffered through horrible autobids from the Big East for year, and they don’t want to see this again.

In a division-less format, the risk of the ACC or Big 12 champ being undeserving of participating in a 12 team playoff is nil.  Almost every year that team will be as good (if not better than) as the 2nd/3rd place Big 10 team.

Let's not forget that the Big 10 champ got knocked out of the playoffs by a team who didn't technically win the Big 12 last year.  I mean, TCU was really the Big 12 champion, but they don't have a trophy saying it.

Edited August 29, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

6 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Relegation hard on.  That's what it is.

The relegation crowd is so stupid 

[Mitch Cumsteen 19003]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Relegation hard on.  That's what it is.

Because god forbid we get the actual best 12 teams into the playoffs. And god forbid we actually make non-SEC and non-Big 10 teams play competitive games in their out of conference schedule to boost their playoff resume instead of having Baylor play Long fucking Island.

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

Most years the Big12 and ACC will have a team in the top 12 too, but in years where they have a #15 champion they’ll be displacing a SEC/B1G. I can’t remember where I saw this but the difference between getting into the CFP versus and regular NY6 bowl is over $50mil in marketing and brand recognition which leads to future enrollment, donations, tickets, etc.

The BCS suffered through horrible autobids from the Big East for year, and they don’t want to see this again.

And this. All of this.

[Vertigo 20502]

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

Most years the Big12 and ACC will have a team in the top 12 too, but in years where they have a #15 champion they’ll be displacing a SEC/B1G. I can’t remember where I saw this but the difference between getting into the CFP versus and regular NY6 bowl is over $50mil in marketing and brand recognition which leads to future enrollment, donations, tickets, etc.

The BCS suffered through horrible autobids from the Big East for year, and they don’t want to see this again.

If it were up to me, I would say something like:

4 auto bids to the P4 conferences

2 G5 autobids provided that the conference champs finish in the top 15 - if not, then those bids become at large bids

6 at large bids for the highest ranked non conference teams. 

 

[Al_4_ISU 12665]

Just now, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Because god forbid we get the actual best 12 teams into the playoffs. And god forbid we actually make non-SEC and non-Big 10 teams play competitive games in their out of conference schedule to boost their playoff resume instead of having Baylor play Long fucking Island.

And this. All of this.

You think eliminating auto bids does this?  Seriously?

It just allows for the committee to put the 12 brands with the largest fanbases in.  Auto bids force their to be some level of tangible accomplishment to be included in the playoff instead of putting a 9-3 Big 10 team who never played Ohio State or Michigan into the playoffs because they have more fans than the 10-2 Big 12 champ.

[TKthunder2 5060]

5 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

If it were up to me, I would say something like:

4 auto bids to the P4 conferences

2 G5 autobids provided that the conference champs finish in the top 15 - if not, then those bids become at large bids

6 at large bids for the highest ranked non conference teams. 

 

4 for P4
1 for highest G5 champ in top 15
7 at large

[Mitch Cumsteen 19003]

4 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

You think eliminating auto bids does this?  Seriously?

It just allows for the committee to put the 12 brands with the largest fanbases in.  Auto bids force their to be some level of tangible accomplishment to be included in the playoff instead of putting a 9-3 Big 10 team who never played Ohio State or Michigan into the playoffs because they have more fans than the 10-2 Big 12 champ.

If the 10-2 Big 12 champ played competitive games (or won) against Ohio State or Michigan, I don't think they're getting left out. If they schedule Incarnate Word, Long Island, and a directional Louisiana school while getting a bullshit draw in the Big 12 and win a weak conference at 10-2? Yeah.... I think that a 9-3 Big 10 or SEC team is probably better than them. 

[DanTheHorn 5092]

2 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Most years the Big12 and ACC will have a team in the top 12 too, but in years where they have a #15 champion they’ll be displacing a SEC/B1G. I can’t remember where I saw this but the difference between getting into the CFP versus and regular NY6 bowl is over $50mil in marketing and brand recognition which leads to future enrollment, donations, tickets, etc.

The BCS suffered through horrible autobids from the Big East for year, and they don’t want to see this again.

Like I said as a commissioner or a fan of a team that feels displaced yes it is bad. As a top 8 team that gets into the playoffs with an actual chance to become national champion it works great because if I am ranked in the top 2 I am probably going to play a team that I am going to boat race in the quarterfinals. If I am ranked as 2 of the highest at large bids I get to boat race a team on my way to the quarterfinals. Why would you want to play a real game if you earned those spots whos care about the displaced teams. Don't be one of those teams and we know it sucks since it happened to us in 2008 and a few times when we were #5 as far as the BCS. Still I would hate to be 2005 Texas and have to play a first real game.