This season's payout amounts to the P5 for the non-Contract/Access bowls their teams are in this year (total and per school, assuming even split):

SEC .... $22.5 million...........$1.6m

B1G ... $22.25 million.........$1.5m

PAC ..... $15.6 million..........$1.3m

ACC .... $15.0 million...........$1m

Big 12 .... $13.8 million........$1.38m

Until I see a true updated list of bowl payouts, I'm skeptical of the numbers. I know some of the bowl payouts have changed. I can go to three different sites and have three different payout numbers. Where did yours come from?

(12-14-2014 08:42 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Until I see a true updated list of bowl payouts, I'm skeptical of the numbers. I know some of the bowl payouts have changed. I can go to three different sites and have three different payout numbers. Where did yours come from?

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_...edule.html

Quo,

How did you account for the Quick Lane Bowl, for the ACC, which is TBA? I would imagine that that one was just left off, correct?

(12-14-2014 11:16 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  Quo,

How did you account for the Quick Lane Bowl, for the ACC, which is TBA? I would imagine that that one was just left off, correct?

I had found a report indicating that this bowl will pay out $1.2 million for each participant, and so that figure was included in the ACC's total.

http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/detro..._bowl.html

(12-14-2014 11:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 11:16 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  Quo,

How did you account for the Quick Lane Bowl, for the ACC, which is TBA? I would imagine that that one was just left off, correct?

I had found a report indicating that this bowl will pay out $1.2 million for each participant, and so that figure was included in the ACC's total.

http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/detro..._bowl.html

OK, looks like you did your homework. Nice work.

(12-14-2014 11:45 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 11:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 11:16 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  Quo,

How did you account for the Quick Lane Bowl, for the ACC, which is TBA? I would imagine that that one was just left off, correct?

I had found a report indicating that this bowl will pay out $1.2 million for each participant, and so that figure was included in the ACC's total.

http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/detro..._bowl.html

OK, looks like you did your homework. Nice work.

If you didn't already do so, check out the reaction of Central Michigan players to their bowl selection. It boiled down to the Quick Lane Bowl, played in their home state, and the new Bahamas Bowl. It's pretty clear that they were rather pleased that their destination turned out to be the latter.

Did you include the Music City Bowl as ACC?

Edit: Did the math, looks like ya did.

(12-14-2014 01:20 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Did you include the Music City Bowl as ACC?

Edit: Did the math, looks like ya did.

Yes ... the ACC has a whopping 9 non-CFP bowl games. But the payouts just aren't that good. The biggest payout this year is $2.75m, for the Music City Bowl, and Notre Dame is playing in that.

In contrast, the Big 12 has three bowls, the Texas Bowl, the Cactus Bowl, and the Alamo Bowl that are paying out more than $3 million each, so they are generating almost as much in overall payout money as the ACC, even though they have just 5 teams in non-CFP bowls.

Likewise, the PAC is generating even more overall payouts than the ACC, despite having only 6 teams in non-CFP bowls. That's because they have three bowls - Alamo, Cactus, and Holiday, that are each paying out more than the best-paying ACC bowl.

This means the PAC and Big 12 will probably net even more of that money because their travel expenses will be lower with fewer teams out there traveling.

I really like the Big 12's array of bowls. There aren't many but they are high-paying and have good geography. Two of them are in Texas, naturally, but they also get exposure elsewhere, playing the SEC in the Liberty Bowl (Tennessee), they get into Florida versus the ACC in the Russell Athletic Bowl (Orlando), and out west versus the PAC in the Cactus Bowl (Phoenix).

In contrast, of the PAC's six bowls, five are in the far west, and only one is outside their footprint, the Alamo in San Antonio.

The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

Yes, but you guys will get to play in the Citrus at least 3 times, because the B1G is guaranteed at least 3 appearances in the Orange Bowl.

Still, there are better and worst-case scenarios for the ACC in the 8 years that the OB isn't a playoff bowl.

Best case:

B1G plays in Orange bowl 3 times, SEC 3 times, Notre Dame 2 times.

- this would mean the ACC would collect a whopping $41.25 million from the OB in the two years ND plays in the game.

Worst case:

B1G plays in Orange Bowl 3 times, SEC plays in it 5 times, Notre Dame zero times.

- not only would the ACC never cash a $41.25m check, but its appearances in the Citrus bowl would be minimized as well. Basically, any time the SEC plays in the Orange Bowl, that's bad for the ACC.

(12-14-2014 04:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

Yes, but you guys will get to play in the Citrus at least 3 times, because the B1G is guaranteed at least 3 appearances in the Orange Bowl.

Still, there are better and worst-case scenarios for the ACC in the 8 years that the OB isn't a playoff bowl.

Best case:

B1G plays in Orange bowl 3 times, SEC 3 times, Notre Dame 2 times.

- this would mean the ACC would collect a whopping $41.25 million from the OB in the two years ND plays in the game.

Worst case:

B1G plays in Orange Bowl 3 times, SEC plays in it 5 times, Notre Dame zero times.

- not only would the ACC never cash a $41.25m check, but its appearances in the Citrus bowl would be minimized as well. Basically, any time the SEC plays in the Orange Bowl, that's bad for the ACC.

Also bad for the Citrus Bowl...they would lose access to Florida State, Clemson, Miami, Louisville and the Big One Notre Dame..

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

I think that is something that got less attention than it should have because the TCU/Baylor exclusion story drowned it out.

There was absolutely no football reason that Mississippi State should have jumped Michigan State. If anything, Michigan State looked even better than the week before because the only two teams they lost to won conference championships in dominating fashion and made the playoff.

The non-football reason for the Miss St/Mich St switch is that the B1G might have been short one bowl slot if they lost the Citrus and could have "arranged" for the SEC to get the Orange this year instead of them.

(12-14-2014 05:28 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 04:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

Yes, but you guys will get to play in the Citrus at least 3 times, because the B1G is guaranteed at least 3 appearances in the Orange Bowl.

Still, there are better and worst-case scenarios for the ACC in the 8 years that the OB isn't a playoff bowl.

Best case:

B1G plays in Orange bowl 3 times, SEC 3 times, Notre Dame 2 times.

- this would mean the ACC would collect a whopping $41.25 million from the OB in the two years ND plays in the game.

Worst case:

B1G plays in Orange Bowl 3 times, SEC plays in it 5 times, Notre Dame zero times.

- not only would the ACC never cash a $41.25m check, but its appearances in the Citrus bowl would be minimized as well. Basically, any time the SEC plays in the Orange Bowl, that's bad for the ACC.

Also bad for the Citrus Bowl...they would lose access to Florida State, Clemson, Miami, Louisville and the Big One Notre Dame..

Everyone wants access to Notre Dame, sure, but if given a choice, the Citrus would surely rather have B1G teams than ACC teams. That's why it had a tie with the B1G not ACC.

The ideal tie-in for any Florida bowl is SEC/B1G. That guarantees big names and crowds from the deep south, and also the B1G's massive traveling fan base.

We can't know for sure, but I would bet a big bottom dollar that the idea that if the B1G played in the Orange, the ACC would replace them in the Citrus wasn't the Citrus Bowl's idea.

Not so sure....would the Citrus rather have Clemson vs. Missouri or Minnesota vs. Missouri...that was the choice this year...

(12-14-2014 08:16 PM)Maize Wrote:  Not so sure....would the Citrus rather have Clemson vs. Missouri or Minnesota vs. Missouri...that was the choice this year...

They would prefer Texas vs Missouri over both, but that doesn't mean they prefer a Big 12 tie over the B1G either. Over the full range of possible matchups, the B1G is the choice.

(12-14-2014 10:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 08:16 PM)Maize Wrote:  Not so sure....would the Citrus rather have Clemson vs. Missouri or Minnesota vs. Missouri...that was the choice this year...

They would prefer Texas vs Missouri over both, but that doesn't mean they prefer a Big 12 tie over the B1G either. Over the full range of possible matchups, the B1G is the choice.

Then they should have gotten a Contract with the Big XII for the Citrus Bowl...they chose the SEC and a shared arrangement with the B1G/ACC instead...But really the Citrus Bowl also controls the Russell Athletic Bowl and they already have access to the Big XII to include Texas and Oklahoma....the only P5 league that the Citrus Bowl Committee does not have is the Pac 12.

Not really much difference because in the grand scheme of things as long as the Citrus Bowl Committee which runs both the Russell Athletic and Citrus Bowl have that SEC Tie In it doesn't matter...

(12-14-2014 08:42 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Until I see a true updated list of bowl payouts, I'm skeptical of the numbers. I know some of the bowl payouts have changed. I can go to three different sites and have three different payout numbers. Where did yours come from?

His numbers likely reflect the true payout from this season. The numbers you often see reported are averages over the length of the contract. The numbers start low, and increase over time. During the final years of the contract, the payouts are actually higher than the reported average.

(12-14-2014 06:08 PM)krup Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

I think that is something that got less attention than it should have because the TCU/Baylor exclusion story drowned it out.

There was absolutely no football reason that Mississippi State should have jumped Michigan State. If anything, Michigan State looked even better than the week before because the only two teams they lost to won conference championships in dominating fashion and made the playoff.

The non-football reason for the Miss St/Mich St switch is that the B1G might have been short one bowl slot if they lost the Citrus and could have "arranged" for the SEC to get the Orange this year instead of them.

That was exactly the reason. It was sort of an open secret that the B1G asked for this. The Big Ten was going to be one bowl short anyway. But once Ohio State made the playoffs, they had an opportunity to get two teams in access bowls, and not use the Orange Bowl slot as had Baylor or TCU made the playoffs, Ohio State was heading to the Orange Bowl anyway, and Mich St likely went to the same spot they are going now. But once Ohio St made the playoffs, an opportunity arose, and the "powers that be" made it happen.

If anyone paid ANY attention to this, they would realize it completely undermined the ENTIRE playoff committee's credibility, as it shows they can manipulate matchups as easy as they want to, and it gives a team like TCU or Baylor a reason to cry foul.

(12-15-2014 11:53 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 08:42 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Until I see a true updated list of bowl payouts, I'm skeptical of the numbers. I know some of the bowl payouts have changed. I can go to three different sites and have three different payout numbers. Where did yours come from?

His numbers likely reflect the true payout from this season. The numbers you often see reported are averages over the length of the contract. The numbers start low, and increase over time. During the final years of the contract, the payouts are actually higher than the reported average.

(12-14-2014 06:08 PM)krup Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

I think that is something that got less attention than it should have because the TCU/Baylor exclusion story drowned it out.

There was absolutely no football reason that Mississippi State should have jumped Michigan State. If anything, Michigan State looked even better than the week before because the only two teams they lost to won conference championships in dominating fashion and made the playoff.

The non-football reason for the Miss St/Mich St switch is that the B1G might have been short one bowl slot if they lost the Citrus and could have "arranged" for the SEC to get the Orange this year instead of them.

That was exactly the reason. It was sort of an open secret that the B1G asked for this. The Big Ten was going to be one bowl short anyway. But once Ohio State made the playoffs, they had an opportunity to get two teams in access bowls, and not use the Orange Bowl slot as had Baylor or TCU made the playoffs, Ohio State was heading to the Orange Bowl anyway, and Mich St likely went to the same spot they are going now. But once Ohio St made the playoffs, an opportunity arose, and the "powers that be" made it happen.

If anyone paid ANY attention to this, they would realize it completely undermined the ENTIRE playoff committee's credibility, as it shows they can manipulate matchups as easy as they want to, and it gives a team like TCU or Baylor a reason to cry foul.

I am not so sure. There was a "football reason" for having Mississippi State move up past Michigan State: Mississippi State had the better body of work, and the CFP committee made it clear that they did not feel bound to follow the logic of the traditional polls, such that if team A was ahead of B one week, then if nothing happened in the following week, A would remain ahead of B. They reserved the right to re-evaluate bodies of work each week. Plus, even though Michigan State and Mississippi State didn't play the final weekend, factors like final SOS and who the final top 25 would be (so "good wins" and "bad losses" could be looked at) were still in flux.

So if we look at the whole season, we see that:

1) By almost all accounts, MissST played the tougher schedule. E.g., Sagarin has the Bulldog's schedule at #21, Sparty's is #60.

2) The Bulldogs had better wins. They beat two teams that finished in the top 25 of the final CFP standings, #19 Auburn and #23 LSU. Michigan State beat no teams ranked in the final top 25.

3) The losses are basically a wash, but arguably favor the Bulldogs as well. They lost by 5 to #1 Alabama while Sparty lost by 19 to #2 Oregon. True, Sparty did lose by "only" 12 to #4 Ohio State, while the Bulldogs lost by 14 to #9 Ole Miss, but Sparty's loss was at home while the loss to Ole Miss was on the road, making them essentially the same.

It's therefore no surprise that the computers- Sagarin, Wolfe, Colley, and Massey's composite of 100+ rankings, all have Mississippi State ranked ahead of Michigan State.

(12-14-2014 06:08 PM)krup Wrote:  

(12-14-2014 02:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  The CFP did the ACC no favor when they leap frog Mississippi State over Michigan State and cost the ACC the Citrus Bowl...

I think that is something that got less attention than it should have because the TCU/Baylor exclusion story drowned it out.

There was absolutely no football reason that Mississippi State should have jumped Michigan State. If anything, Michigan State looked even better than the week before because the only two teams they lost to won conference championships in dominating fashion and made the playoff.

The non-football reason for the Miss St/Mich St switch is that the B1G might have been short one bowl slot if they lost the Citrus and could have "arranged" for the SEC to get the Orange this year instead of them.

As i explained to Ad, there was a football reason for the switch: Mississippi State had a better overall season than Michigan State, and so the CFP was really just correcting their prior mistake in having Sparty ahead the previous week.

Also, I seriously doubt the B1G would have wanted to lose the Orange Bowl just to save a lesser bowl slot. Here's why:

While the OB contract guarantees the B1G and SEC three appearances each in the 8 years the OB isn't hosting a playoff, it also says that each could appear as many as five times. And those two extra times are worth a LOT of money, $27.5 million each, far more than the $4.25 million payout of the Citrus Bowl or any lesser bowl they might have missed out on. And, they are mutually exclusive opportunities - the B1G and SEC are competing for them, since if the SEC plays 5 times the B1G can't play more than 3, and vice-versa.

So if you are the B1G or SEC, much better to play in the Orange Bowl when you can. Get your hands on as many of those $27.5 million checks as you can, and the sooner the better. You want to play in it not just 3 times, but 4 or 5 times if possible. So I doubt the B1G would have wanted to give up that Orange Bowl bid in order to save a lesser bowl slot.