(12-16-2019 01:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 12:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 11:35 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-13-2019 09:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  PAC commissioner Larry Scott says missing the playoffs hurts the PAC brand. Also says he would only support 8-team playoff if it had auto-bids for the P5.

Well isn't that special? He would favor a playoff that would guarantee one of his teams gets in, LOL.

Bottom line is, we've seen this before: In 2016 when the Big 12 missed out, they rang the alarm bells. Last year, after the B1G missed out again, Delany of the B1G complained. Now the PAC is talking.

To the credit of the Big 12, they didn't whine about 8 teams, they talked about what they could do to be more competitive in making the 4-team playoff, and they did it. And to Scott's credit, he's not really whining about the 4 team CFP, he does say the PAC needs to get better, only Delany really did that.

But the moral to me is: There IS no general groundswell to move to 8 teams. It's just that whatever conference is left out of that year's four-team playoff grumbles.

https://sports.yahoo.com/commish-pac-12-...49307.html

Except the Big10 has said they might be for a 8 team playoff as well. I think what happens is every time a league misses out, it makes a 8 team playoff with autobids much more attractive. Frankly, by the end of this 12 year CFP cycle, I suspect enough P5 champs will be spectators enough times the ONLY league who won’t be for the 5-1-2 playoff format is the SEC.

If you are talking about what happens six years from now, I don't necessarily disagree. Anything can happen when a new contract is up for negotiation. But some around here seem to think change will come before then, and I don't see that at all.

To get change now, you need a lot of unhappy campers at the same time, but we don't have that. E.g., last year, Delany and the B1G rattled their sabres about the CFP, but now that they are in again, they have basically shut up. So the PAC is complaining now, but they are the only ones. You don't get multiple conferences complaining at once, because whoever is in doesn't complain.

Who told you the Big 10 is no longer interested? McMurphy said just the opposite just a few days ago. I think the number of conferences who have felt (and did not like) the sting of being left out of the CFP is far higher than those conferences who have never been left out and are just fine with the current system. I suspect there is a easy 4-1 majority that would vote for an 8-team playoff with AQ status for P5 champs.

https://saturdaytradition.com/big-ten-fo...l-playoff/

You just proved my point - last year, Delany spoke out publicly and forcefully about the CFP. This year? Nothing but the anemic quote from your article after being asked about it, with vague hedging about "maybe under the right circumstances".

That isn't the kind of ire and fire that sparks immediate change.

Basically, when a conference gets left out, the commissioner speaks out forcefully, like the Big 12 did in 2016, Delany did last year, and Scott is this year. But once they get in again, they quiet up.

Haven't heard a peep from the Big 12 since Oklahoma started getting in every year, and compared to last year, the B1G has quieted up too.

realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

(12-16-2019 02:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 01:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 12:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 11:35 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-13-2019 09:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  PAC commissioner Larry Scott says missing the playoffs hurts the PAC brand. Also says he would only support 8-team playoff if it had auto-bids for the P5.

Well isn't that special? He would favor a playoff that would guarantee one of his teams gets in, LOL.

Bottom line is, we've seen this before: In 2016 when the Big 12 missed out, they rang the alarm bells. Last year, after the B1G missed out again, Delany of the B1G complained. Now the PAC is talking.

To the credit of the Big 12, they didn't whine about 8 teams, they talked about what they could do to be more competitive in making the 4-team playoff, and they did it. And to Scott's credit, he's not really whining about the 4 team CFP, he does say the PAC needs to get better, only Delany really did that.

But the moral to me is: There IS no general groundswell to move to 8 teams. It's just that whatever conference is left out of that year's four-team playoff grumbles.

https://sports.yahoo.com/commish-pac-12-...49307.html

Except the Big10 has said they might be for a 8 team playoff as well. I think what happens is every time a league misses out, it makes a 8 team playoff with autobids much more attractive. Frankly, by the end of this 12 year CFP cycle, I suspect enough P5 champs will be spectators enough times the ONLY league who won’t be for the 5-1-2 playoff format is the SEC.

If you are talking about what happens six years from now, I don't necessarily disagree. Anything can happen when a new contract is up for negotiation. But some around here seem to think change will come before then, and I don't see that at all.

To get change now, you need a lot of unhappy campers at the same time, but we don't have that. E.g., last year, Delany and the B1G rattled their sabres about the CFP, but now that they are in again, they have basically shut up. So the PAC is complaining now, but they are the only ones. You don't get multiple conferences complaining at once, because whoever is in doesn't complain.

Who told you the Big 10 is no longer interested? McMurphy said just the opposite just a few days ago. I think the number of conferences who have felt (and did not like) the sting of being left out of the CFP is far higher than those conferences who have never been left out and are just fine with the current system. I suspect there is a easy 4-1 majority that would vote for an 8-team playoff with AQ status for P5 champs.

https://saturdaytradition.com/big-ten-fo...l-playoff/

You just proved my point - last year, Delany spoke out publicly and forcefully about the CFP. This year? Nothing but the anemic quote from your article after being asked about it, with vague hedging about "maybe under the right circumstances".

That isn't the kind of ire and fire that sparks immediate change.

Basically, when a conference gets left out, the commissioner speaks out forcefully, like the Big 12 did in 2016, Delany did last year, and Scott is this year. But once they get in again, they quiet up.

Haven't heard a peep from the Big 12 since Oklahoma started getting in every year, and compared to last year, the B1G has quieted up too.

I see the exact opposite because context matters with the people that we're talking about here. History says that Jim Delany, in particular, doesn't speak out of turn in public. If you look back at some of the articles when the CFP was being formed, there were reports that Delany actually supported a playoff system internally for many years (even in the 1990s). Yet, when he was asked about it publicly, he vigorously and completely killed it every time for nearly 20 years. Why? Because the Big Ten university presidents wanted nothing to do with it. Delany kept that airtight message to the public for two decades despite personally knowing all along that a playoff system would be a massive financial boon.

As a result, Delany wouldn't ever say publicly that there's even a *chance* for playoff expansion unless the university presidents have authorized him to say that it's on the table. That's why I put in a ton of credence when Delany specifically says something. Larry Scott might be prone to emotional outbursts or throwing random hypothetical scenarios against the wall, so people can dismiss statements from him as irrelevant. However, when Delany speaks, he's speaking for the university presidents.

People can't pass Delany's comments off as if everything is all well and good in 2019 because Ohio State made it to the playoff and everything was bad in 2018 because Ohio State didn't make it to the playoff. The larger picture here is that the Big Ten university presidents (the most stodgy, elitist and establishment group of people in all of college sports) have very clearly authorized Jim Delany to be open minded about a playoff expansion (as opposed to killing it immediately)... and that's a huge deal in reality.

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

(12-16-2019 02:40 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 01:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 12:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 11:35 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Except the Big10 has said they might be for a 8 team playoff as well. I think what happens is every time a league misses out, it makes a 8 team playoff with autobids much more attractive. Frankly, by the end of this 12 year CFP cycle, I suspect enough P5 champs will be spectators enough times the ONLY league who won’t be for the 5-1-2 playoff format is the SEC.

If you are talking about what happens six years from now, I don't necessarily disagree. Anything can happen when a new contract is up for negotiation. But some around here seem to think change will come before then, and I don't see that at all.

To get change now, you need a lot of unhappy campers at the same time, but we don't have that. E.g., last year, Delany and the B1G rattled their sabres about the CFP, but now that they are in again, they have basically shut up. So the PAC is complaining now, but they are the only ones. You don't get multiple conferences complaining at once, because whoever is in doesn't complain.

Who told you the Big 10 is no longer interested? McMurphy said just the opposite just a few days ago. I think the number of conferences who have felt (and did not like) the sting of being left out of the CFP is far higher than those conferences who have never been left out and are just fine with the current system. I suspect there is a easy 4-1 majority that would vote for an 8-team playoff with AQ status for P5 champs.

https://saturdaytradition.com/big-ten-fo...l-playoff/

You just proved my point - last year, Delany spoke out publicly and forcefully about the CFP. This year? Nothing but the anemic quote from your article after being asked about it, with vague hedging about "maybe under the right circumstances".

That isn't the kind of ire and fire that sparks immediate change.

Basically, when a conference gets left out, the commissioner speaks out forcefully, like the Big 12 did in 2016, Delany did last year, and Scott is this year. But once they get in again, they quiet up.

Haven't heard a peep from the Big 12 since Oklahoma started getting in every year, and compared to last year, the B1G has quieted up too.

I see the exact opposite because context matters with the people that we're talking about here. History says that Jim Delany, in particular, doesn't speak out of turn in public. If you look back at some of the articles when the CFP was being formed, there were reports that Delany actually supported a playoff system internally for many years (even in the 1990s). Yet, when he was asked about it publicly, he vigorously and completely killed it every time for nearly 20 years. Why? Because the Big Ten university presidents wanted nothing to do with it. Delany kept that airtight message to the public for two decades despite personally knowing all along that a playoff system would be a massive financial boon.

As a result, Delany wouldn't ever say publicly that there's even a *chance* for playoff expansion unless the university presidents have authorized him to say that it's on the table. That's why I put in a ton of credence when Delany specifically says something. Larry Scott might be prone to emotional outbursts or throwing random hypothetical scenarios against the wall, so people can dismiss statements from him as irrelevant. However, when Delany speaks, he's speaking for the university presidents.

People can't pass Delany's comments off as if everything is all well and good in 2019 because Ohio State made it to the playoff and everything was bad in 2018 because Ohio State didn't make it to the playoff. The larger picture here is that the Big Ten university presidents (the most stodgy, elitist and establishment group of people in all of college sports) have very clearly authorized Jim Delany to be open minded about a playoff expansion (as opposed to killing it immediately)... and that's a huge deal in reality.

I think that was true last year - Delany was speaking for the B1G and expressing their frustration in missing out.

But this year? Delany isn't saying saying nearly as much about it, and as a lame duck (albeit highly respected one) whose retirement has already been announced, he has more freedom to talk off the cuff.

One statement about "we might support it under the right circumstance" or whatever the exact McMurphy quote was is IMO much milder and more mealy-mouthed than what was being said this time last year.

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

Just wondering did you feel the same way about the BCS in 2010/2011? That SEC wouldn't want to make any changes?

(12-16-2019 02:53 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

Just wondering did you feel the same way about the BCS in 2010/2011? That SEC wouldn't want to make any changes?

No, I didn't really feel that way about the BCS changing to the current CFP. Four is reasonable because it is frequently hard to judge the relative strength of 3 of the 5 conference champions on any given year and sometimes more than 3 in some years.

Football is more of a zero sum game and all of the contests should matter. But depth of conferences on any given year is just hard to discern until the bowls are played and thanks to Sr's sitting out the bowls to avoid injury before NFL draft time even bowl season doesn't leave us many solid indications anymore.

I just don't see CCG's going away for the SEC or Big 10 they are simply too profitable. And I don't see the presidents moving for an expanded playoff in addition to the CCG's.

There are too many issues to be worked out logistically to think we will seriously consider expanding the CFP. This is why I think it is much more likely that we see further consolidation among the P5, expansion to 16, or 18, or even 20 schools for some of the P conferences, and an eventual emergence of a conference semi-final before we see an 8 team CFP. Conferences might be able to manage their own logistics to accommodate a conference semi. Four P conferences with conference semis and a champs only CFP effectively expands the playoff to 16 schools and gives each conference 2 more key games to sell to the networks in a manner in which all of the profit goes to them.

That matters to the Big 10 and SEC where our semis might yield 3/4's more of the value of our current CCG's. It would mean something for the ACC and PAC, but not as much as it would for the SEC and Big 10. But it would give all of them more exposure.

Eventually limiting all of their scheduling to P games will get them another boost in pay and that is also likely to eventually come to pass.

These things are within their mutual self interest. These things guarantee the consolidated P4 more exposure, more revenue, and equal access in a fair procedure decided on the field.

That's far more likely than them voting away their CCG revenue in an effort to acquire 3 more non-guaranteed slots which may simply mean that the Big 10 and SEC are guaranteed 2 in most years and the other three are now battling for just one more slot than they were before should the G5 get a slot. So Stever containing expansion within the pay models of the existing conference Championship format would appeal to all of them a lot more than conceding their CCG for the sake of unguaranteed access slots, which even the Big 10 and SEC may feel uneasy about.

Human nature, profit, and ease of adaptation come into all change in life. And none of that favors a CFP with 8 schools.

I tend to think the bowls and conferences are tighter than we’ll ever know, and if major bowls and programs have to present their stuff with the super stars sitting on the bench or not even on the field, nobody is happy about that. Television for darn sure, and they still have a voice in this, too.

The CFP are the only relevant games, and the ratings prove it. The racket would be stupid to keep it as is. There has to be some change coming.

(12-16-2019 05:51 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  The CFP are the only relevant games, and the ratings prove it. The racket would be stupid to keep it as is. There has to be some change coming.

The CFP games get the highest ratings, and that is natural.

But the plethora of other bowl games get decent ratings, better ratings than alternative programming. And they cost relatively little to put on the air.

I don't see anyone at the conference or media level regarding the CFP as a failure.

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

The chances of a P4 are negligible prior to the mid 2030s. ACC has a contract. Texas and Oklahoma have no reason to move.

(12-16-2019 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

The chances of a P4 are negligible prior to the mid 2030s. ACC has a contract. Texas and Oklahoma have no reason to move.

Oh but they will have some reasons to ponder when the next round of contracts are renewed and the ACC is always able to renegotiate should they make additions.

Thing is IMO is the Big Ten and SEC are pretty happy as is- making money hand over fist- and clearly ahead of the Big 12, ACC, and Pac 12.

Also, I really don't think the CCG's are going anywhere at all.... it'll be 12 + 1 + then a 8 team playoff.

(12-16-2019 06:47 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Thing is IMO is the Big Ten and SEC are pretty happy as is- making money hand over fist- and clearly ahead of the Big 12, ACC, and Pac 12.

Also, I really don't think the CCG's are going anywhere at all.... it'll be 12 + 1 + then a 8 team playoff.

I agree. There is a big bias on this board towards "change". People always want to see expansion - expansion of conferences, expansion of playoffs, etc.

But a lot of the time, it's wishful thinking.

(12-16-2019 06:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  realistically we'll start hearing big time rumors in about 4 years.... Remember the CFP initially came around in the Spring of 2012 while there were still 2 full seasons to play in the BCS. So that would mean we'll start hearing real clamoring for change in 4 years- so after the 2023 season....

That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

The chances of a P4 are negligible prior to the mid 2030s. ACC has a contract. Texas and Oklahoma have no reason to move.

Oh but they will have some reasons to ponder when the next round of contracts are renewed and the ACC is always able to renegotiate should they make additions.

There's a grant of rights. Everybody in the ACC is handcuffed to the conference and ESPN.

(12-16-2019 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 06:47 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Thing is IMO is the Big Ten and SEC are pretty happy as is- making money hand over fist- and clearly ahead of the Big 12, ACC, and Pac 12.

Also, I really don't think the CCG's are going anywhere at all.... it'll be 12 + 1 + then a 8 team playoff.

I agree. There is a big bias on this board towards "change". People always want to see expansion - expansion of conferences, expansion of playoffs, etc.

But a lot of the time, it's wishful thinking.

Change in colleges happens when the economic model changes. There were a lot of changes after WWII when the GI Bill massively expanded the state colleges. There were a lot of changes in the late 80s after UGA and Oklahoma played the NCAA in the Supreme Court and won an end to their TV monopoly. Then there were a lot of changes 10 years ago when the conference network model came about.

Next change may be when the conference network model dies.

After WWII conferences separated. The late 80s/early 90s and 2009-11 were expansion rather than contraction. Who knows what the next will be.

(12-16-2019 08:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 06:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  That wouldn't surprise me. Heck, if change is coming you need a year or two to plan and negotiate it.

But many around here seem to think any year now we're getting playoff expansion.

This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

The chances of a P4 are negligible prior to the mid 2030s. ACC has a contract. Texas and Oklahoma have no reason to move.

Oh but they will have some reasons to ponder when the next round of contracts are renewed and the ACC is always able to renegotiate should they make additions.

There's a grant of rights. Everybody in the ACC is handcuffed to the conference and ESPN.

That's not what I said. I said they cold renegotiate their contract with additions.

(12-16-2019 08:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 08:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 06:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  This whole issue is the "new realignment rumor" that surfaces as a talking point at the end of each season and lasts until the following end of August.

Maybe ESPN would like to move to 8 for commercial reasons. Clearly 4 of the P5 have little to no interest especially the SEC and Big 10 who actually have a tidy profit from their CCG's, likely larger than any quarter final playoff round would payout.

I don't think this issue has any legs at all except for with the press trying to jazz print business and blog hits.

We are much likelier to see consolidation to a P4 by 2025, especially due to the SEC and Big 10's upcoming contract renewals, than we are to see any of the surviving P conferences want to move to expanded playoffs.

Control of revenue tells me we are more likely to see conference semis before we see the CFP move to quarter finals.

The chances of a P4 are negligible prior to the mid 2030s. ACC has a contract. Texas and Oklahoma have no reason to move.

Oh but they will have some reasons to ponder when the next round of contracts are renewed and the ACC is always able to renegotiate should they make additions.

There's a grant of rights. Everybody in the ACC is handcuffed to the conference and ESPN.

That's not what I said. I said they cold renegotiate their contract with additions.

But the Big 10 and SEC can't carve them up.

5-1-2 could become moot if the Big Ten and SEC are able to execute a scorched earth campaign against the Big 12. If they pull 4 schools out, including both of the big brands, they turn around and announce a plus one model where the Rose Bowl winner (Big Ten vs PAC 12) meets the winner of the Sugar Bowl (SEC vs ACC). 4 Champs enter—1 champ makes it out (and be loss the de facto national champion)

ND has to decide if their place in the New Order is with the ACC or the Big Ten. When push comes to shove I think they take the easier path and ND and WVU become part of the ACC.

College football suddenly becomes significantly less complicated and gets decided on the field.