(02-21-2024 10:59 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 10:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  sorry but that's a big no. The tourney is going to be selected AFTER the CCG. SEC and Big Ten don't want playoff games overshadowing their CCG. That would be dumb on them financially- therefore it's DOA.

I know you hate the CCG, but whatever.

The selection would be held where it is now. Conference champ games would be gonzo for all but the P2 leagues, which actually makes perfect sense in a 14-team setup.

Their TV contracts would require those quite honestly. Can't just stop playing the game and TV be fine with it. And yes, ESPN is the TV and they wouldn't want that at all.

But yes, selection would be held the day AFTER the CCG are played.

(02-21-2024 11:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Their TV contracts would require those quite honestly. Can't just stop playing the game and TV be fine with it. And yes, ESPN is the TV and they wouldn't want that at all.

But yes, selection would be held the day AFTER the CCG are played.

The TV contracts point is valid, but those are ESPN babys after all. The conferences just need to be made whole.

And I called this yesterday as more posters continued to bash Rutgers and bumped my quote:

(02-20-2024 08:22 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  14 teams actually makes sense. P2 champs automatic byes. Runner Ups are seeded into Rd1.

The scheduling is the only thing I am purely speculating on. But I said 5+7 had no shot of being extended. It was pointless discussing 4 AQs via CCGs as a starting point beyond ‘25.

(02-21-2024 11:11 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Their TV contracts would require those quite honestly. Can't just stop playing the game and TV be fine with it. And yes, ESPN is the TV and they wouldn't want that at all.

But yes, selection would be held the day AFTER the CCG are played.

The TV contracts point is valid, but those are ESPN babys after all. The conferences just need to be made whole.

And I called this yesterday as more posters continued to bash Rutgers and bumped my quote:

(02-20-2024 08:22 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  14 teams actually makes sense. P2 champs automatic byes. Runner Ups are seeded into Rd1.

The scheduling is the only thing I am purely speculating on. But I said 5+7 had no shot of being extended. It was pointless discussing 4 AQs via CCGs as a starting point beyond ‘25.

If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

(02-21-2024 11:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

No. Two Rd1 AQs (potentially on home campus) is far more lucrative than 1 AQ in a QF. And there will be some additional play-in games optioned in once Army Navy is bumped entirely. The revenue the six Saturday games (a game on Friday as well rather) will generate on the last NFL free open Saturday would be HUUUUGE.

And this also stabilizes the ACC until the Big 12 contract is up. They can lock on two AQs for the rest of the decade and no one will be compelled to move to the Big 12 in that time.

(02-21-2024 11:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:11 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Their TV contracts would require those quite honestly. Can't just stop playing the game and TV be fine with it. And yes, ESPN is the TV and they wouldn't want that at all.

But yes, selection would be held the day AFTER the CCG are played.

The TV contracts point is valid, but those are ESPN babys after all. The conferences just need to be made whole.

And I called this yesterday as more posters continued to bash Rutgers and bumped my quote:

(02-20-2024 08:22 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  14 teams actually makes sense. P2 champs automatic byes. Runner Ups are seeded into Rd1.

The scheduling is the only thing I am purely speculating on. But I said 5+7 had no shot of being extended. It was pointless discussing 4 AQs via CCGs as a starting point beyond ‘25.

If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

Yeah - I don’t see how any of the P4 would be messing with their CCGs. The G5 might be re-thinking their CCGs because it’s nothing but downside for whoever is the highest ranked G5 team heading into the final week - if they get upset in the CCG, then their conference may be losing out on a playoff spot entirely.

The P4, though, still have (a) massive TV contracts that pay a lot of money for those CCGs (and actually worth as much or more than the playoff itself for the Big Ten and SEC), (b) the value of a bye to the quarterfinals is still perpetually underrated on this forum - it’s a huge benefit for a conference champ and there’s a lot of value in game where they’re playing for that conference championship and bye, and (c ) as noted in point a, CCGs are worth a lot of money and the last thing that any of these conferences do is give up money.

I mean, the power conference basketball tournaments are almost always meaningless for the title game participants (outside of total fluke bid stealing runs) and arguably even a disadvantage for the Big Ten that plays right before the Selection Show… but the Big Ten happily cashes that check year after year. The value of the football CCGs dwarf the basketball tournaments by comparison.

(02-21-2024 11:29 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

No. Two Rd1 AQs (potentially on home campus) is far more lucrative than 1 AQ in a QF. And there will be some additional play-in games optioned in once Army Navy is bumped entirely. The revenue the six Saturday games (a game on Friday as well rather) will generate on the last NFL free open Saturday would be HUUUUGE.

And this also stabilizes the ACC until the Big 12 contract is up. They can lock on two AQs for the rest of the decade and no one will be compelled to move to the Big 12 in that time.

I totally disagree. The ACC and Big 12 can't just tell ESPN that they aren't playing a CCG. You know what would happen- ESPN would cut their TV revenue. The CCG is absolutely baked into the TV money.

ESPN gets to have their cake(the CCG) and eat it too(the 1st rd of the playoffs).

(02-21-2024 11:37 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:11 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Their TV contracts would require those quite honestly. Can't just stop playing the game and TV be fine with it. And yes, ESPN is the TV and they wouldn't want that at all.

But yes, selection would be held the day AFTER the CCG are played.

The TV contracts point is valid, but those are ESPN babys after all. The conferences just need to be made whole.

And I called this yesterday as more posters continued to bash Rutgers and bumped my quote:

(02-20-2024 08:22 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  14 teams actually makes sense. P2 champs automatic byes. Runner Ups are seeded into Rd1.

The scheduling is the only thing I am purely speculating on. But I said 5+7 had no shot of being extended. It was pointless discussing 4 AQs via CCGs as a starting point beyond ‘25.

If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

Yeah - I don’t see how any of the P4 would be messing with their CCGs. The G5 might be re-thinking their CCGs because it’s nothing but downside for whoever is the highest ranked G5 team heading into the final week - if they get upset in the CCG, then their conference may be losing out on a playoff spot entirely.

The P4, though, still have (a) massive TV contracts that pay a lot of money for those CCGs (and actually worth as much or more than the playoff itself for the Big Ten and SEC), (b) the value of a bye to the quarterfinals is still perpetually underrated on this forum - it’s a huge benefit for a conference champ and there’s a lot of value in game where they’re playing for that conference championship and bye, and (c ) as noted in point a, CCGs are worth a lot of money and the last thing that any of these conferences do is give up money.

I mean, the power conference basketball tournaments are almost always meaningless for the title game participants (outside of total fluke bid stealing runs) and arguably even a disadvantage for the Big Ten that plays right before the Selection Show… but the Big Ten happily cashes that check year after year. The value of the football CCGs dwarf the basketball tournaments by comparison.

Just think some for some strange reason don't like the CCG and want to get rid of them. Just isn't realistic in any remote fashion.

(02-21-2024 11:29 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

No. Two Rd1 AQs (potentially on home campus) is far more lucrative than 1 AQ in a QF. And there will be some additional play-in games optioned in once Army Navy is bumped entirely. The revenue the six Saturday games (a game on Friday as well rather) will generate on the last NFL free open Saturday would be HUUUUGE.

And this also stabilizes the ACC until the Big 12 contract is up. They can lock on two AQs for the rest of the decade and no one will be compelled to move to the Big 12 in that time.

I think you’re mistaken there. Both the BCS and CFP systems paid waaaaaaaaaay more money for the power conferences’ top champ than they did for additional at-large bids. We’re talking many multiples more (nearly 10 times more in the current CFP system.) The P5 money advantage didn’t come from playoff spots, but rather the massive payments that they received from the contract bowls. So, there’s a lot of precedent for a super balloon payment being provided to the top 4 conference champs that get to the bye to the quarterfinal. In fact, that’s the competitively “neutral” way to have the P4 get paid way more than the G5 without having to say that the P4 are more valuable than the G5.

(02-21-2024 10:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:59 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:53 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

DOA. G5 is going to be lucky to get 1 spot. They sure as hell aren't getting 2 spots. No matter what G5 fanboys think.

I knew somebody wouldn't like it but with all of the teams in the G5 they are worth a second one.

not really. The easiest safest bet is that they get 1 at most. More of a shot at 0 than at 2.

Obviously the powers that be believe there is some worth of having the G5 conferences in tow otherwise they would have left them behind by now.

Why not try to make it half way fair? Shouldn't the G5 demand that it be halfway fair?

How do they let two conferences load up on autobids for themselves?

(02-22-2024 12:27 AM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 10:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:59 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:53 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

DOA. G5 is going to be lucky to get 1 spot. They sure as hell aren't getting 2 spots. No matter what G5 fanboys think.

I knew somebody wouldn't like it but with all of the teams in the G5 they are worth a second one.

not really. The easiest safest bet is that they get 1 at most. More of a shot at 0 than at 2.

Obviously the powers that be believe there is some worth of having the G5 conferences in tow otherwise they would have left them behind by now.

Why not try to make it half way fair? Shouldn't the G5 demand that it be halfway fair?

How do they let two conferences load up on autobids for themselves?

The powers that be see “fairness” as, “Are the conferences bringing the most value getting the most money?”

The G5 have no leverage here. I personally believe that providing one G5 champ slot is good for the system, but that one spot is legitimately a subsidy. The CFP system sees Notre Dame alone as worth more than the G5 combined, much less any of the P4. They’re not getting a second spot.

(02-22-2024 12:27 AM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 10:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:59 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:53 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

DOA. G5 is going to be lucky to get 1 spot. They sure as hell aren't getting 2 spots. No matter what G5 fanboys think.

I knew somebody wouldn't like it but with all of the teams in the G5 they are worth a second one.

not really. The easiest safest bet is that they get 1 at most. More of a shot at 0 than at 2.

Obviously the powers that be believe there is some worth of having the G5 conferences in tow otherwise they would have left them behind by now.

Why not try to make it half way fair? Shouldn't the G5 demand that it be halfway fair?

How do they let two conferences load up on autobids for themselves?

lol, fair. Thanks for the laugh.

(02-21-2024 10:25 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Hmm, would such a format that's AQ heavy force ND to join a conference?

Who cares?

(02-21-2024 10:56 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I also think it’s laughable people believe the Big 12 and ACC would still want to hold a CCG if they are guaranteed two bids as compensation. This is the only logical outcome for the M2.

CCGs are big $$, and the Conferences don't have to share them with everyone else. No way they're getting rid of them now.

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)otown Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:24 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

Exactly what I was saying. The Big 12 and ACC are not being hung out to dry like many on this forum fantasize about. Their institutions are too politically powerful. If there are multiple auto qualifiers per conference being discussed, all 4 power conferences will be a part of it. The G5 is being hung out to dry with 1 singular spot in all different scenarios discussed.......that is the big news here.

With these big leagues, it gets tough to separate teams as you get in the middle of the pack. There will be really complicated tie-breakers if you have 4 autobids for a conference.

This is one of the worst ideas to come out.

(02-21-2024 10:56 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I also think it’s laughable people believe the Big 12 and ACC would still want to hold a CCG if they are guaranteed two bids as compensation. This is the only logical outcome for the M2.

I guess you have never heard of the concept of the US $? CCGs pay big money in US $s. And it is money the conferences don't have to share with anyone else.

Your suggestion is not logical or rational.

(02-21-2024 11:37 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:11 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Their TV contracts would require those quite honestly. Can't just stop playing the game and TV be fine with it. And yes, ESPN is the TV and they wouldn't want that at all.

But yes, selection would be held the day AFTER the CCG are played.

The TV contracts point is valid, but those are ESPN babys after all. The conferences just need to be made whole.

And I called this yesterday as more posters continued to bash Rutgers and bumped my quote:

(02-20-2024 08:22 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  14 teams actually makes sense. P2 champs automatic byes. Runner Ups are seeded into Rd1.

The scheduling is the only thing I am purely speculating on. But I said 5+7 had no shot of being extended. It was pointless discussing 4 AQs via CCGs as a starting point beyond ‘25.

If ESPN didn't want to do it, they don't have to make them whole. The conferences can't just say we're not playing the game.

Yeah - I don’t see how any of the P4 would be messing with their CCGs. The G5 might be re-thinking their CCGs because it’s nothing but downside for whoever is the highest ranked G5 team heading into the final week - if they get upset in the CCG, then their conference may be losing out on a playoff spot entirely.

The P4, though, still have (a) massive TV contracts that pay a lot of money for those CCGs (and actually worth as much or more than the playoff itself for the Big Ten and SEC), (b) the value of a bye to the quarterfinals is still perpetually underrated on this forum - it’s a huge benefit for a conference champ and there’s a lot of value in game where they’re playing for that conference championship and bye, and (c ) as noted in point a, CCGs are worth a lot of money and the last thing that any of these conferences do is give up money.

I mean, the power conference basketball tournaments are almost always meaningless for the title game participants (outside of total fluke bid stealing runs) and arguably even a disadvantage for the Big Ten that plays right before the Selection Show… but the Big Ten happily cashes that check year after year. The value of the football CCGs dwarf the basketball tournaments by comparison.

If you have two G5 teams that go 12-0 for both teams in the same conference? They settled it on the field. And a third team goes 13-0 in another G5? You might find 2 G5 schools ranked in the top 12 as the Big 10 and SEC cause many schools to lose more than 3 games. ACC may have a 4 lose champ. If the champs of the G5 could be Memphis and Boise State. Those two G5 schools can draw enough viewers in the ratings alone. Several of the G5 schools can't help being in a conference with deadweights.

(02-21-2024 11:45 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think you’re mistaken there. Both the BCS and CFP systems paid waaaaaaaaaay more money for the power conferences’ top champ than they did for additional at-large bids. We’re talking many multiples more (nearly 10 times more in the current CFP system.) The P5 money advantage didn’t come from playoff spots, but rather the massive payments that they received from the contract bowls. So, there’s a lot of precedent for a super balloon payment being provided to the top 4 conference champs that get to the bye to the quarterfinal. In fact, that’s the competitively “neutral” way to have the P4 get paid way more than the G5 without having to say that the P4 are more valuable than the G5.

The BCS and old NY6 models have absolutely no bearing on the valuations of this new model. Silly argument. If you take a 1.3 billion dollar playoff package and look at Rd1 NCAA tourney distributions (about 30% of the viewership in total) and proportionate that, the payouts are much higher. Almost half a billion worth.

(02-21-2024 08:26 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 05:57 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

I'm having trouble digesting this one. I don't think the Big Ten brain trust has thought this through at all.

The CFP is not seeing a ton of interest in the first-round games as it is, with three on the third Saturday of December and one on the Friday night before.

A 14 team bracket means 6 first-round games. Fitting in 6 games, either you go up against Amazon Thursday Night football and play one game in the late-night window, plus the Friday and Saturday-noon SAturday-afternoon and Saturday primetime games. Or you cannibalize your audience hoping for some sort of synergy, maybe kicking off at 11:00, 1:00, 3:00, 5:00, 7:00, 9:00 Eastern. on two (or more?) different networks.

6 first round games means you split it between Army-Navy weekend and the following weekend. You are all but guaranteed to have 6 of those 14 teams to have only 12 games, so you pair the first weekend before CCGs with those teams. The second weekend will be Champs #3-#5 and 3 at larges remaining (which may include further 12-win teams). They may even split the games so 2 are on Army-Navy while 4 are the next weekend.

(02-21-2024 10:56 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I also think it’s laughable people believe the Big 12 and ACC would still want to hold a CCG if they are guaranteed two bids as compensation. This is the only logical outcome for the M2.

This is what I am looking at too. If the CCG (for the ACC and XII) has minimal effect on the playoff (and already doesn’t attract many eyeballs, especially for the ACC), are they dead?

Ya, ya, 2 more games nets “everybody” more money, but at what cost?

If what you want is more SEC/B1G playoff games in exclusive windows driving up the value of the playoff contract, do GoBuckeye’s idea. Send teams #10-#13 into a play-in round on Army Navy weekend and keep the rest of the playoff the same.

Competitively, I could see dropping to 3 byes, now that there are only 4 Power Conferences. These past 2 years would have seen 3-loss teams with byes, which is less than ideal. But don’t ice the ACC/XII from a bye opportunity by dropping to 2.

(02-22-2024 04:17 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 11:45 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think you’re mistaken there. Both the BCS and CFP systems paid waaaaaaaaaay more money for the power conferences’ top champ than they did for additional at-large bids. We’re talking many multiples more (nearly 10 times more in the current CFP system.) The P5 money advantage didn’t come from playoff spots, but rather the massive payments that they received from the contract bowls. So, there’s a lot of precedent for a super balloon payment being provided to the top 4 conference champs that get to the bye to the quarterfinal. In fact, that’s the competitively “neutral” way to have the P4 get paid way more than the G5 without having to say that the P4 are more valuable than the G5.

The BCS and old NY6 models have absolutely no bearing on the valuations of this new model. Silly argument. If you take a 1.3 billion dollar playoff package and look at Rd1 NCAA tourney distributions (about 30% of the viewership in total) and proportionate that, the payouts are much higher. Almost half a billion worth.

It's just as big and just as unsupported assumption to use the NCAA basketball tournament system and go counting credits. The NCAA tournament you talking about 131 games and about that many credits. Football playoffs you're talking around a dozen games.

Before you start making decisions for the ACC and the Big 12 and the G5 about what to do with their championship games potentially costing themselves conference TV money, you want to be a whole lot more certain what the revenue distribution model is.

The BCS revenue distribution and the existing college football playoff revenue distribution are relevant because they reflect the kind of revenue distribution that the powers that be in college football set up last time in the time before that.