The CFP thread got me thinking about how the failure of CFP negotiations over this past year may be connected to the current realignment turmoil - both in terms of leading to it and maybe ramifications moving forward. Three points came to mind:
1) I think that had a CFP deal been reached this past year, particularly if it was a 12-team model like the Working Group's 6+6, then the B1G acquisition of USC and UCLA would have been less likely. It probably still happens anyway, but a firmly-established playoff with guaranteed massive money increases for every P-conference on the way might have caused USC and UCLA to think that life in the PAC was tolerable financially. Might.
Which leads me to idea number two ...
2) While the impetus for the PAC and ACC to push for a model with guaranteed P5 autobids always made sense to me, I was always mystified as to why the B1G was also a cheerleader for 5+1 and a rejection of the Working Group model, when all the data indicated that 6+6 would work splendidly for the B1G. It was a head-scratcher, and I chalcked it up to "solidarity" with their Alliance partners.
But, looking back, if #1 has some plausibility, then maybe the big brains at B1G HQ realized that all along, and thus maybe helped pump the breaks on the Working Group 6+6 model because they figured acceptance of a CFP model would "solidify" conferences, and, smarting from the SEC surging ahead via the TX and OU acquisition, maybe the B1G wanted to keep things unsettled so as to help them make a counter-move. Pure speculation of course with no evidence to support me, but it came to mind.
3) It wasn't just the SEC that felt irked by the rejection of the Working Group proposal, Notre Dame was involved in crafting that as well, and may have lingering bad feelings over that. If so, those bad feelings would be directed at entities that opposed the proposal - namely the B1G and ACC. In contrast, ND partnered with the SEC to make the proposal, so maybe a relationship was created that could lead to some ND - SEC cooperation going forward.
Just throwing ideas out there. I don't claim to have evidence for any of them ....
(07-09-2022 07:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]The CFP thread got me thinking about how the failure of CFP negotiations over this past year may be connected to the current realignment turmoil - both in terms of leading to it and maybe ramifications moving forward. Three points came to mind:
1) I think that had a CFP deal been reached this past year, particularly if it was a 12-team model like the Working Group's 6+6, then the B1G acquisition of USC and UCLA would have been less likely. It probably still happens anyway, but a firmly-established playoff with guaranteed massive money increases for every P-conference on the way might have caused USC and UCLA to think that life in the PAC was tolerable financially. Might.
Which leads me to idea number two ...
2) While the impetus for the PAC and ACC to push for a model with guaranteed P5 autobids always made sense to me, I was always mystified as to why the B1G was also a cheerleader for 5+1 and a rejection of the Working Group model, when all the data indicated that 6+6 would work splendidly for the B1G. It was a head-scratcher, and I chalcked it up to "solidarity" with their Alliance partners.
But, looking back, if #1 has some plausibility, then maybe the big brains at B1G HQ realized that all along, and thus maybe helped pump the breaks on the Working Group 6+6 model because they figured acceptance of a CFP model would "solidify" conferences, and, smarting from the SEC surging ahead via the TX and OU acquisition, maybe the B1G wanted to keep things unsettled so as to help them make a counter-move. Pure speculation of course with no evidence to support me, but it came to mind.
Contradictory speculation: Big Ten commissioner was disillusioned with the PAC and ACC after the playoff fiasco. Rose Bowl and revenue split did have to be worked out, but 6+6 was a perfectly viable plan.
I'm going to say No Quo, I think the networks have been wanting to cull the herd for sometime now and realignment would be happening just like it is regardless of the CFP. Just my opinion.
(07-09-2022 07:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]The CFP thread got me thinking about how the failure of CFP negotiations over this past year may be connected to the current realignment turmoil - both in terms of leading to it and maybe ramifications moving forward. Three points came to mind:
1) I think that had a CFP deal been reached this past year, particularly if it was a 12-team model like the Working Group's 6+6, then the B1G acquisition of USC and UCLA would have been less likely. It probably still happens anyway, but a firmly-established playoff with guaranteed massive money increases for every P-conference on the way might have caused USC and UCLA to think that life in the PAC was tolerable financially. Might.
Which leads me to idea number two ...
2) While the impetus for the PAC and ACC to push for a model with guaranteed P5 autobids always made sense to me, I was always mystified as to why the B1G was also a cheerleader for 5+1 and a rejection of the Working Group model, when all the data indicated that 6+6 would work splendidly for the B1G. It was a head-scratcher, and I chalcked it up to "solidarity" with their Alliance partners.
But, looking back, if #1 has some plausibility, then maybe the big brains at B1G HQ realized that all along, and thus maybe helped pump the breaks on the Working Group 6+6 model because they figured acceptance of a CFP model would "solidify" conferences, and, smarting from the SEC surging ahead via the TX and OU acquisition, maybe the B1G wanted to keep things unsettled so as to help them make a counter-move. Pure speculation of course with no evidence to support me, but it came to mind.
3) It wasn't just the SEC that felt irked by the rejection of the Working Group proposal, Notre Dame was involved in crafting that as well, and may have lingering bad feelings over that. If so, those bad feelings would be directed at entities that opposed the proposal - namely the B1G and ACC. In contrast, ND partnered with the SEC to make the proposal, so maybe a relationship was created that could lead to some ND - SEC cooperation going forward.
Just throwing ideas out there. I don't claim to have evidence for any of them ....
1. Likely it would have stabilized. I don't think the anger over the UT and OU move was so much because the two joined as much as it was over Sankey landing the pair seemingly at the very time the window for additions would likely close with a ratification of playoff expansion. So, the halting was done so the B1G could respond.
I wouldn't be shocked if ESPN somehow leaked the OU / UT news so a push for a well-heeled P2 could begin.
2. I won't lay Machiavellian planning at the Big 10's feet. I will lay it upon FOX who used media rights negotiations to fight ESPN fire with some of their own. Big 10 involvement would be in simply voting to take a pair of blue chips and a bigger payday.
3. Yes, Notre Dame and SEC relations worked well under Slive. I believe Sankey will work well with them also. You know Sankey and Warren both were groomed by Mike Slive? I'm not sure whether they are chummy or chilly, but they have the same management tree, or at least one large limb of it.
I think it did, at least in two ways.
1.) In a situation where "friends" were negotiating to try to get what they want - including the forming of an "alliance", it showed how fragmented they actually were
2.) it gave the cover of a forum for these schools to talk. Any time there is an opportunity for decision-makers at schools to get together and talk in person - in hallways between meetings, etc. Opportunities can arise.
And because of #1 highlighting where similarities and differences were/are, I think it helped along any decisions made, both in action and inaction.
I would not be surprised if we later find out that various schools from the PAC did not get a B10 invite due to stances of individual schoolsm and other stuff during the CFP discussions.
I also think, if that acc gor goes away, or even diminishes, at some point, we may see (or not see) movement there as well, for similar reasons.
(07-09-2022 07:57 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't be shocked if ESPN somehow leaked the OU / UT news so a push for a well-heeled P2 could begin.
It was not leaked by ESPN, but by an individual with ties to Texas A&M, who got the story out there to attempt to stop a move by Texas under the very unofficial custom that the SEC would not add a second team in a state without the first team's signoff.
Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
(07-09-2022 08:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
(07-09-2022 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
(07-09-2022 08:09 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 07:57 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't be shocked if ESPN somehow leaked the OU / UT news so a push for a well-heeled P2 could begin.
It was not leaked by ESPN, but by an individual with ties to Texas A&M, who got the story out there to attempt to stop a move by Texas under the very unofficial custom that the SEC would not add a second team in a state without the first team's signoff.
Yes, I know who he was. His president didn't tell him. And the "unofficial custom" is mostly hooey. His President voted to accept. Until the vote is decided She is the soul notification needed, and is sworn to absolute secrecy. Nobody at any member school would have been notified but the president and only regents and trustees of Texas and Oklahoma could have been a source besides Presidents, so a Texas board member could have leaked it. The rest is social myth in Texas. The SEC has 1 policy regarding second state schools. They must be profitable. As to the A&M source, he and a booster were stirring the pot. But they heard it from the reporter who was following up on a lead. Who gave him the lead? ESPN has many media sources which could provide such a leak. Much more to that incident than meets the eye!
(07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
(07-09-2022 08:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
It's clear to everyone who is not living in denial that the Big 10 and SEC are proxy players for FOX and Disney where one is essentially invested in the other and if a state could prove the two were second cousins, they could hit them with incest charges!
Do they want expanded playoffs? Yes. Do they want top markets and brands to stay plugged in? Yes. Is it easier to control two monolithic conferences with a lot of mutual self-interest and with a track record of being open to corporate partners' needs as well as their own, or five conferences where three remain bitter and apt to recalcitrant behavior?
Nothing changes. We are headed where at least those two networks want to go. The drama and contentiousness just provide a distraction which keeps eyes off of a collaborative effort on the corporate end.
The movement has 100% to do with the revenue disparity of the P2 which its proven to be 100% real and not just speculation.
OU/UT knew they had to get out of the XII.
UCLA/USC knew they had to get out of the PAC.
There is no other driver for it. P2 isn't scheming for a breakaway. They are looking at 1 billion or 1.25 billion deals while the NFL and NBA are looking for 100 billion. Its a big edge on the other college conferences but grand scheme its a drop in the bucket.
A P2 or consolidation to a P1 of 40-48 teams is a long term trend but not in the cards near term because of GORs, valuations and also who are you going to play? Internal playoff and bowls are no fun.
(07-09-2022 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
It's clear to everyone who is not living in denial that the Big 10 and SEC are proxy players for FOX and Disney where one is essentially invested in the other and if a state could prove the two were second cousins, they could hit them with incest charges!
Do they want expanded playoffs? Yes. Do they want top markets and brands to stay plugged in? Yes. Is it easier to control two monolithic conferences with a lot of mutual self-interest and with a track record of being open to corporate partners' needs as well as their own, or five conferences where three remain bitter and apt to recalcitrant behavior?
Nothing changes. We are headed where at least those two networks want to go. The drama and contentiousness just provide a distraction which keeps eyes off of a collaborative effort on the corporate end.
Most would also expect that a 12 or 16 team playoffs would be most SEC/B1G teams.
If that power center changes then more programs move up to the SEC/B1G.
But the trend of the PAC/XII/ACC getting squashed likely won't change and therefore we might not see much more in the way of SEC/B1G expansion.
I could be wrong in my recollection of the timing of all these moves, but it seemed to me that when the 6+6 CFP model was agreed to by the committee the Big Ten may have still believed that they had a chance to land OUT, or at least that the two might stay put in the Big XII. It's easy to see how the Big Ten might surmise that the SEC already knew at that time what OUT's decision was going to be and tried to keep it secret until getting the new CFP structure approved.
Regardless who actually leaked the OUT news (it is plausible that A&M was the source, though it is also plausible that it was ESPN) once the report was confirmed it was a game changer for CFP talks for everyone but the SEC. If the Big Ten had already come to terms with expanding to 16 schools, they now had two openings in search of whales and needed time to try and land them. The smart move for them would be to stall the process of CFP changes.
With USC and UCLA leaving the PAC, now there are three conferences with a legitimate concern that their champion might not always make the Top 6. And with rampant speculation that the two Big Dogs may not be done eating, this isn't yet a good time to finalize CFP talks.
The speculation is dead. Several sources have said the B1G is done expanding less ND and the ACC is locked up in a massive GOR. ND moving to the B1G wouldn't even affect the ACC's 14 FB playing schools.
Things will quiet down by the end of the year and early next year they'll start talking about the playoff again,
(07-09-2022 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting questions! I'll always wonder how expectations of the coming 6+6 playoff played into both the OUT move, and then how its derailment affected the Southern Cal-UCLA decision. OUT cast aside the easier playoff path they had through the Big XII when 6+6 was still expected, I wonder if 6+6 had passed would the LA schools have done the same? As things stand now the Trojans & Bruins move likely provides better access, since the B1G & SEC will be setting the rules.
I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
It's clear to everyone who is not living in denial that the Big 10 and SEC are proxy players for FOX and Disney where one is essentially invested in the other and if a state could prove the two were second cousins, they could hit them with incest charges!
Do they want expanded playoffs? Yes. Do they want top markets and brands to stay plugged in? Yes. Is it easier to control two monolithic conferences with a lot of mutual self-interest and with a track record of being open to corporate partners' needs as well as their own, or five conferences where three remain bitter and apt to recalcitrant behavior?
Nothing changes. We are headed where at least those two networks want to go. The drama and contentiousness just provide a distraction which keeps eyes off of a collaborative effort on the corporate end.
C'mon man. Don't ruin kayfabe for everyone.
(07-09-2022 09:50 PM)Porcine Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder - if they had the talks now, with TX, OK, USC, and UCLA to be in different conferences - would the outcome be the same. Does removing those schools change a conference's overall position in the discussions?
Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
It's clear to everyone who is not living in denial that the Big 10 and SEC are proxy players for FOX and Disney where one is essentially invested in the other and if a state could prove the two were second cousins, they could hit them with incest charges!
Do they want expanded playoffs? Yes. Do they want top markets and brands to stay plugged in? Yes. Is it easier to control two monolithic conferences with a lot of mutual self-interest and with a track record of being open to corporate partners' needs as well as their own, or five conferences where three remain bitter and apt to recalcitrant behavior?
Nothing changes. We are headed where at least those two networks want to go. The drama and contentiousness just provide a distraction which keeps eyes off of a collaborative effort on the corporate end.
C'mon man. Don't ruin kayfabe for everyone.
Santa and the Tooth Fairy get a pass Porcine. Fantasy, Denial, Lies, and Pleasant Fictions are killing us! They are fentanyl of the mind which enters the brain through the auditory nerve!
(07-09-2022 09:57 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 09:50 PM)Porcine Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
It's clear to everyone who is not living in denial that the Big 10 and SEC are proxy players for FOX and Disney where one is essentially invested in the other and if a state could prove the two were second cousins, they could hit them with incest charges!
Do they want expanded playoffs? Yes. Do they want top markets and brands to stay plugged in? Yes. Is it easier to control two monolithic conferences with a lot of mutual self-interest and with a track record of being open to corporate partners' needs as well as their own, or five conferences where three remain bitter and apt to recalcitrant behavior?
Nothing changes. We are headed where at least those two networks want to go. The drama and contentiousness just provide a distraction which keeps eyes off of a collaborative effort on the corporate end.
C'mon man. Don't ruin kayfabe for everyone.
Santa and the Tooth Fairy get a pass Porcine. Fantasy, Denial, Lies, and Pleasant Fictions are killing us! They are fentanyl of the mind which enters the brain through the auditory nerve!
Well, I guess John Stossel had to get whacked by David Schultz to keep it going before Jim Duggan and Iron Sheik got caught with weed and coke.
(07-09-2022 09:57 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 09:50 PM)Porcine Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2022 08:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Not if your name is SEC or Big Ten.
lol
what do you think the outcome would be then?
Also, how do you think this might affect the rose bowl?
It's clear to everyone who is not living in denial that the Big 10 and SEC are proxy players for FOX and Disney where one is essentially invested in the other and if a state could prove the two were second cousins, they could hit them with incest charges!
Do they want expanded playoffs? Yes. Do they want top markets and brands to stay plugged in? Yes. Is it easier to control two monolithic conferences with a lot of mutual self-interest and with a track record of being open to corporate partners' needs as well as their own, or five conferences where three remain bitter and apt to recalcitrant behavior?
Nothing changes. We are headed where at least those two networks want to go. The drama and contentiousness just provide a distraction which keeps eyes off of a collaborative effort on the corporate end.
C'mon man. Don't ruin kayfabe for everyone.
Santa and the Tooth Fairy get a pass Porcine. Fantasy, Denial, Lies, and Pleasant Fictions are killing us! They are fentanyl of the mind which enters the brain through the auditory nerve!
Right. When the B1G starts to pick apart the SEC as they are already projecting a 1.25 billion deal compared to just 1 billion for the SEC I'm sure Auburn will be left behind with the Mississippi schools.
This zest for absolute power that you have fool hardy.