The announcement that the 6-6 playoff has been agreed to me tells me a few things:

The Big 10 and SEC aren’t ready for a breakaway

Expansion among the P2 and M3 has probably cooled for the next 6 yrs or so

The Big 10 and SEC haven’t been able to agree, in principle, on a new order of things. This plan gets us through the next 6 year cycle but it’s not a dynamic departure from what we already have and it still keeps the G5 involved despite the fact that they will be woefully unprepared to compete financially with the top leagues. I think the SEC sees this as a model that they designed and they believe they will successful in so they’ll push for a performance driven revenue distribution model that benefits them.

I think that the P2 are actually largely in agreement, but the 6+6 model was the only way to achieve unanimity and get the 12 team playoff going before 2026.

When 2026 hits the SEC and B1G (and ND) are very likely to be on the same page. We won't necessarily dictate terms to the others, but there will be the threat of a P2+ND breakaway hanging over negotiations, enabling us to mostly get what we want. And there might be more than just the threat of a breakaway, it might be more "go along with what we want or you don't get to join us in our incipient breakaway".

(09-04-2022 04:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The announcement that the 6-6 playoff has been agreed to me tells me a few things:

The Big 10 and SEC aren’t ready for a breakaway

Expansion among the P2 and M3 has probably cooled for the next 6 yrs or so

The Big 10 and SEC haven’t been able to agree, in principle, on a new order of things. This plan gets us through the next 6 year cycle but it’s not a dynamic departure from what we already have and it still keeps the G5 involved despite the fact that they will be woefully unprepared to compete financially with the top leagues. I think the SEC sees this as a model that they designed and they believe they will successful in so they’ll push for a performance driven revenue distribution model that benefits them.

If the SEC does the bolded, IMO that will be a bad decision that could haunt them. Performance can vary, the SEC would be unwise to think their dominance on the field will go on and on.

But brand value is much more stable, so if I was the SEC, I would push for a tiered-guaranteed model, where the great bulk of the distribution is guaranteed, with the SEC and B1G getting equal and much larger slices than the M3, and with the G5 trailing at their usual 20%.

So maybe ...

G5 ............ 20% total

SEC/B1G ... 25% each

M3 ............ 10% each

And then have a small 10% extra set aside for performance, like in the CFP.

(09-04-2022 05:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-04-2022 04:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The announcement that the 6-6 playoff has been agreed to me tells me a few things:

The Big 10 and SEC aren’t ready for a breakaway

Expansion among the P2 and M3 has probably cooled for the next 6 yrs or so

The Big 10 and SEC haven’t been able to agree, in principle, on a new order of things. This plan gets us through the next 6 year cycle but it’s not a dynamic departure from what we already have and it still keeps the G5 involved despite the fact that they will be woefully unprepared to compete financially with the top leagues. I think the SEC sees this as a model that they designed and they believe they will successful in so they’ll push for a performance driven revenue distribution model that benefits them.

If the SEC does the bolded, IMO that will be a bad decision that could haunt them. Performance can vary, the SEC would be unwise to think their dominance on the field will go on and on.

But brand value is much more stable, so if I was the SEC, I would push for a tiered-guaranteed model, where the great bulk of the distribution is guaranteed, with the SEC and B1G getting equal and much larger slices than the M3, and with the G5 trailing at their usual 20%.

So maybe ...

G5 ............ 20% total

SEC/B1G ... 25% each

M3 ............ 10% each

And then have a small 10% extra set aside for performance, like in the CFP.

I'd be happy with that. 25% of $2-3b is a whole lotta cheddar. Even on the low end, that would be

$.25 x $2b = $500m, $500m/17 = $29.4m per P2 school
$.25 x $3b = $750m, $750m/17 = $44.1m per P2 school

One reason for the SEC to value performance somewhat more than now, however, is that the model you proposed would aggressively push ND towards the B1G. If the best ND can hope for in their stronger years is $7.5m when the P2 are getting $44.1m, that's a really strong incentive for them to go somewhere like the B1G.

Maybe something more like:

g5 - 11%
SEC - 20%
B1G - 20%
midmajors get 15% total between the 2 or 3 of them

34% remaining split amongst playoff teams, something like

qualify for first round 1 share
qualify for quarterfinals an extra share (either bye or win 1st round)
semifinalist extra share
title game extra share
win title extra share

So 12 + 8 + 4 +2 + 1 = 27 total shares

College football ratings are dropping like a rock. College football fans are tired of seeing the same teams play each other year in and year out. (Alabama vs Clemson 3 out of 4 years)

The 12 team playoff gets more teams and their fans interested.

The CFP needs to have the same buzz The NCAA Basketball Tournament Sweet 16 or Final Four. A 12 team playoff would create a tournament buzz the CFP presently lacks.