(05-25-2021 05:54 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 10:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'm perfectly OK with leaving the CFP at four schools, with no requirement that they all be conference champions (the way it is now). If that leaves Notre Dame as an independent, so be it.

In my dream scenario, I have Virginia Tech and NC State moving to the SEC, Kansas and Iowa State to the B1G, and all six B12 schools from Texas and Oklahoma going to the ACC as one of three 6 team divisions.

Kansas State and West Virginia are left out of the P4, but not out of an AQ5. That is, they would move to the AAC, which would be guaranteed a spot in an NY6 bowl. Navy becomes a partial football member of the AAC, playing half its members one year and the other half the next.

The path to either the CFP or the NY6 becomes slightly more difficult for the G4 than it already is. They lose their guaranteed spot (which now goes to the AAC). Their best champ would probably need to be ranked in the Top Ten to get an NY6 invitation, or Top Four for the CFP (as is the current case).

The ACC would gain significant financial ground on the B1G and SEC, and would outpace the PAC. Independents, including Notre Dame and BYU, have a theoretical path to the CFP, just like any other FBS school, but should they get invited to either the CFP or NY6 their payout would not exceed what a member of a P4 conference would get as their share from their conference.

That move would disentangle a lot of complicated internal problems with respect to alignment, since the two programs you have leaving would stay well-placed in the region. I would shift Miami to be with the other former Big East programs, reviving both BC-Miami and Syracuse-Miami as annuals to generate more interest in the region. Also, no longer any need to separate Clemson and UNC.

Texas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Baylor
Texas Tech

Louisville
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Boston College
Miami
Wake Forest

North Carolina
Duke
Virginia
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Florida State

The major question is how much Disney would have to pay the Big Ten to take in KU and ISU, because we're not going to pick them up just to pick them up.

That ACC configuration does solve a lot of alignment problems for them. What it also does is set up a lot of interconference rivalry games between the ACC and SEC. There are already four (Clemson-USCe, Florida St-Florida, Georgia Tech-UGa and Louisville-Kentucky). This immediately adds UNC-NC State and Virginia-Va Tech, all against the SEC East. The SEC West could also establish some great rivalries with the Western Division of the ACC (Texas-Texas A&M, Oklahoma-LSU, Baylor-Arkansas). If ESPN is looking to produce more attractive weekly games, this goes a long way to helping that.

Texas needs to separate from Oklahoma.
The Longhorns moving to the ACC with TCU will give them all of the flexibility they need. ESPN will pass on Oklahoma to placate Texas (hoping the Sooners join the B1G with Kansas and enter the same fate as Nebraska).
Texas then has leverage re: RRR in that if Oklahoma backs out of the deal, ESPN can just slide A&M into the game and never miss a beat (in fact it may turn out to be a bigger game than with Oklahoma).
The SEC really does not need to expand for content, but I would expect them to take West Virginia (in an effort to help Tennessee and Kentucky, and I would also expect to see an annual West Virginia v. Pitt game as well as the establishment of Tennessee v. Virginia Tech). The SEC could if they chose pick up a second Texas school (Baylor/Texas Tech) or Oklahoma State/Kansas State to aid the relevance of moving Missouri to the west.

West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Auburn
Alabama, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, A&M, TT/Baylor/OSU/KSU

Texas, TCU, Georgia Tech, Miami, Duke, Carolina, UVa, Pitt
Boston College, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Louisville, Florida State

(05-25-2021 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  Texas needs to separate from Oklahoma.
The Longhorns moving to the ACC with TCU will give them all of the flexibility they need. ESPN will pass on Oklahoma to placate Texas (hoping the Sooners join the B1G with Kansas and enter the same fate as Nebraska).
Texas then has leverage re: RRR in that if Oklahoma backs out of the deal, ESPN can just slide A&M into the game and never miss a beat (in fact it may turn out to be a bigger game than with Oklahoma).
The SEC really does not need to expand for content, but I would expect them to take West Virginia (in an effort to help Tennessee and Kentucky, and I would also expect to see an annual West Virginia v. Pitt game as well as the establishment of Tennessee v. Virginia Tech). The SEC could if they chose pick up a second Texas school (Baylor/Texas Tech) or Oklahoma State/Kansas State to aid the relevance of moving Missouri to the west.

West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Auburn
Alabama, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, A&M, TT/Baylor/OSU/KSU

Texas, TCU, Georgia Tech, Miami, Duke, Carolina, UVa, Pitt
Boston College, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Louisville, Florida State

look, the atm vs UT game would be huge.. but let's be real it isn't the RRR. You can't swap ou for atm or even Arkansas and "not miss a beat".

Hell you couldn't swap UT for atm in the RRR and "not miss a beat". It's UT/ou and luckily they will always play in Dallas every October as conference foes or an OOC matchup like the years before the Big12 conference.

(05-24-2021 06:29 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Irish had to swallow the poison pill of conference membership would they take the ACC or the Big Ten?

They already made that decision. They were a full member of the ACC last season.

I suspect ND's resistance to conference membership is far stronger among the older alumni. They already play 4 or 5 ACC conference games. Nobody squawked last year when they were a conference member.

They aren't likely to join anytime soon, but its not out of the realm of possibility if they get conference membership with only a 6 game commitment.

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

(05-24-2021 12:20 PM)schmolik Wrote:  I may talk about FOX and the Big Ten as being a couple and FOX does part own BTN but at this point ESPN still has rights to the Big Ten so I don't see a real need for ESPN to keep Texas away from the Big 10. Right now, the only difference between the Big 10 and Big 12 is that FOX doesn't own any network rights to the Big 12 (but they do Oklahoma/Sooner Sports). FOX shares first tier rights with ESPN in both conferences. Now once the new Big 10 contract(s) are signed, everything could change. But the idea that the Big Ten and ESPN are enemies and ESPN has to keep UT away from them as opposed to the Big 12 doesn't make sense to me. Should the Big Ten go all in with FOX, I can see ESPN wanting to "keep" Texas but considering how much money they lose on LHN they also have their accountants to answer to.

If you don't believe my opinion that LHN was a disaster for ESPN, here's a few others (although they are a bit dated):

https://awfulannouncing.com/2016/espn-bi...twork.html

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...-thus-far/

https://deadspin.com/is-the-longhorn-net...1766391503

They are dated.

3 or 4 years ago when the ESPN contracts renewed, they got the LHN on about everybody but Comcast. With that broader carriage, they got LHN to breakeven. Their poor rollout of the LHN (not using ESPN leverage to get carriage) taught them how to properly roll out the SECN and ACCN.

(05-25-2021 10:02 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 06:29 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Irish had to swallow the poison pill of conference membership would they take the ACC or the Big Ten?

They already made that decision. They were a full member of the ACC last season.

I suspect ND's resistance to conference membership is far stronger among the older alumni. They already play 4 or 5 ACC conference games. Nobody squawked last year when they were a conference member.

They aren't likely to join anytime soon, but its not out of the realm of possibility if they get conference membership with only a 6 game commitment.

Well last season Notre Dame made the decision right after the Big Ten (and the Pac 12) had initially decided to not play football so I don't know if last year necessarily proved ND would "choose" the ACC over the Big Ten.

Notre Dame is supposedly contractually obligated to join the ACC for football throughout the GOR although I don't know how that could be enforced. The ACC has no media rights for Notre Dame football right now. They have Notre Dame's other sports' media rights but if Big Ten football is valuable enough they can easily make up the difference for the loss of Notre Dame's men's/women's basketball and Olympic sports' revenue.

(05-25-2021 10:02 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 06:29 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Irish had to swallow the poison pill of conference membership would they take the ACC or the Big Ten?

They already made that decision. They were a full member of the ACC last season.

I suspect ND's resistance to conference membership is far stronger among the older alumni. They already play 4 or 5 ACC conference games. Nobody squawked last year when they were a conference member.

They aren't likely to join anytime soon, but its not out of the realm of possibility if they get conference membership with only a 6 game commitment.

This "younger alumni" thing is a myth and only found in posts by fans of other schools on message boards.


Many ACC fans (and fans in general) thought that once Notre Dame tasted the "good life" of conference football in 2020, that attitudes of ND people in favor of football conference membership would increase and attitudes in favor of football independence would lessen.

It appears from all accounts that the effect was entirely the opposite, that football conference membership in the 2020 season actually hardened attitudes against it and in favor of independence.

That occurred despite ND going undefeated in the regular season, beating #1 Clemson, making it to the ACC Championship Game, making the playoffs and garnering high television ratings.

(I think everyone would agree that was a pretty fair first year as a P5 football conference member for ND)

There was also a "conventional wisdom" among non-ND fans that younger Irish fans would enthusiastically embrace conference membership. That did not happen, either.

Jack Swarbrick even discussed it in an interview:


"Among the fan base, Swarbrick said he hasn’t sensed any groundswell support for a permanent move into the ACC. To the contrary, he said, there seems to be renewed confidence in the program’s championship aspirations as an independent after going 43-6 over the past four seasons.

That includes a CFP semifinal appearance in 2018.

“I don’t sense any change,” Swarbrick said. “I guess the one thing I do sense is that because we played so well over an extended period of time now, I do think there is a view among Notre Dame fans that we can succeed independently and still have a shot at the postseason in the way we want it.”

More from the linked article:


"Notre Dame’s traditional status as a football independent remains as sacrosanct as ever.


“We hope we’ve been a great member of the conference,” Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said this week in a video meeting with reporters. “We’ve certainly enjoyed being a member of the conference and having the opportunities it’s presented. It was a very positive experience.’

And yet, it figures to remain a cameo.

“The things that drive us to independence don’t relate to that,” Swarbrick said. “The reasons that we value independence and it continues to be a priority for us aren’t impacted by the positive experience of being in the ACC fully this year.”




https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeberardi...7a0d04e032


The feeling among ND fans is gratitude for being able to play in the ACC in 2020 and a liberated feeling of relief that now ND can return to independent status in 2021.

Playing 9 ACC schools in football last season (even with ND going 9-0) felt very restrictive and "straightjacketed" for ND fans, too regional and repetitive, almost "incestuous".

That may sound strange to non-ND fans, but after being independent for 133 years, ND and its fans are not "wired" to playing football inside a conference.

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

If you take the temperature of the room judging by what we hear on the internet, you might come to the conclusion that the only stakeholders who don't want a champs only playoff model are the SEC, the B1G and ESPN. If the "vote" is 548 to 3 with those being the three, then three is enough to prevent it from happening.

(05-25-2021 11:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

If you take the temperature of the room judging by what we hear on the internet, you might come to the conclusion that the only stakeholders who don't want a champs only playoff model are the SEC, the B1G and ESPN. If the "vote" is 548 to 3 with those being the three, then three is enough to prevent it from happening.

Sankey is satisfied with the current system but says he will listen to his colleagues with an open mind per an interview yesterday. It's all premature anyway. We don't know yet whether we will have a new upper tier, or a breakaway, or how many schools will commit fully until court rulings come in.

(05-25-2021 11:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

If you take the temperature of the room judging by what we hear on the internet, you might come to the conclusion that the only stakeholders who don't want a champs only playoff model are the SEC, the B1G and ESPN. If the "vote" is 548 to 3 with those being the three, then three is enough to prevent it from happening.

+ Notre Dame. It most assuredly does not want a champs only playoff model.

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

I think that "the committee" will settle on an 8 game playoff. The 8 teams will be the division champions of the 4 conferences.
The first round could be the conference championship games or the division champs could rotate (no conference championships played) ie. ACC north v. SEC west, PAC north v. B1G east etc......

(05-25-2021 05:37 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

I think that "the committee" will settle on an 8 game playoff. The 8 teams will be the division champions of the 4 conferences.
The first round could be the conference championship games or the division champs could rotate (no conference championships played) ie. ACC north v. SEC west, PAC north v. B1G east etc......

I think we'll keep the 4 team playoff once we get the rulings this Summer on NIL and next Summer on caps on stipends.

ESPN is in lip service and placate mode to keep all conferences happy until the future is decided by the courts. ESPN and FOX just refused to discuss the B12 contract early and I can appreciate why. We may not have but 4 conferences at the end of those suits and we certainly can't be sure of their composition at this time. Heck we even have Big 10 schools saying they may not participate in pay for play.

So nobody is going to back an 8 team playoff scheme, or sign new contracts until they have a much clearer picture of the new reality. We could have just enough schools to form 4 12 to 14 member conferences or have a new upper tier that might be formed into 2 large conferences with multiple divisions, or a break away, or something else entirely.

My money is on 4 conferences which will send champions to the CFP.

If the Big 12 goes away, which is entirely possible, then I think it means that Oklahoma has gone rogue. Their current 3rd tier deal is not as good as UT's. OU has no real motivation to continue in that position. To me, that situation is the linchpin to the whole thing.

If Oklahoma bolts for a more equitable situation then I gamble on the SEC being the beneficiary.

Texas in the ACC could work under certain circumstances, but the league would have to take a Western flank...and I think it might have to be more than 3 or 4.

I am not sure if it is on this thread or not, but TerryD had an excellent post about how Notre Dame currently views conference membership: Notre Dame fans and alumni, young and old, do not like it at all. Granted, ND didn't get to play Navy (to the best of my knowledge), Stanford, or USC last year, so it is fair to say that we don't know if it would have helped or not. But, from what I gathered from TerryD's post, I seriously have my doubts if that would have helped or not.
And this would go for any conference--Notre Dame just likes being independent just as much as we like being in our conferences.

I say all of that to say this: if the ACC wants to catch up to the SEC and the Big Ten in revenue, Notre Dame is not a realistic option. Texas, as big as its ego is, would be a far better and realistic option for the ACC than Notre Dame would be, IMHO.

(05-26-2021 04:18 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  I am not sure if it is on this thread or not, but TerryD had an excellent post about how Notre Dame currently views conference membership: Notre Dame fans and alumni, young and old, do not like it at all. Granted, ND didn't get to play Navy (to the best of my knowledge), Stanford, or USC last year, so it is fair to say that we don't know if it would have helped or not. But, from what I gathered from TerryD's post, I seriously have my doubts if that would have helped or not.
And this would go for any conference--Notre Dame just likes being independent just as much as we like being in our conferences.

I say all of that to say this: if the ACC wants to catch up to the SEC and the Big Ten in revenue, Notre Dame is not a realistic option. Texas, as big as its ego is, would be a far better and realistic option for the ACC than Notre Dame would be, IMHO.

i get that but I don't feel Texas to the ACC is realistic at all anymore either

We’ve talked on here about a model that results in the ACC being 3 pods of 6 for a total of 18. Could they get away with 16?

Step 1: ESPN brokers a deal to shift 2 basketball schools (let’s say Duke and UNC) to the SEC.

Step 2: ACC adds the Texlahoma 4 and goes to a rotating pod schedule:

Pod 1: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Miami
Pod 2: UVA, VT, NC St, WF
Pod 3: Clemson, GT, Florida St, Louisville
Pod 4: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma St, Oklahoma

ND remains an Olympic member and continues a 5 game ACC football agreement. They play 1 school from each pod a year and a 5th game determined jointly by ND and the conference office with the aim at producing a good tv match up (think more Texas, Oklahoma, Miami games but not WF, OK St, TTU).

(05-25-2021 09:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 05:37 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

I think that "the committee" will settle on an 8 game playoff. The 8 teams will be the division champions of the 4 conferences.
The first round could be the conference championship games or the division champs could rotate (no conference championships played) ie. ACC north v. SEC west, PAC north v. B1G east etc......

I think we'll keep the 4 team playoff once we get the rulings this Summer on NIL and next Summer on caps on stipends.

ESPN is in lip service and placate mode to keep all conferences happy until the future is decided by the courts. ESPN and FOX just refused to discuss the B12 contract early and I can appreciate why. We may not have but 4 conferences at the end of those suits and we certainly can't be sure of their composition at this time. Heck we even have Big 10 schools saying they may not participate in pay for play.

So nobody is going to back an 8 team playoff scheme, or sign new contracts until they have a much clearer picture of the new reality. We could have just enough schools to form 4 12 to 14 member conferences or have a new upper tier that might be formed into 2 large conferences with multiple divisions, or a break away, or something else entirely.

My money is on 4 conferences which will send champions to the CFP.

I think I will stick with 8.
The "networks" will make it worth the conferences while to call the conference championships the first round of the playoff even if those conferences are allowed to keep all their monies.

I'm looking at 4 conferences with 15 teams each. I am moving 5 teams into a "Magnolia" with a few other elite G5 schools.(BC, Wake Forest, Duke, Vanderbilt, Northwestern ((SMU, Tulane, Rice)) ).

This will actually clear out enough space in the ACC for Texas and a few friends.

No divisions, two best play for the conference championship
ACC:
Texas, Baylor, TCU, Notre Dame, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, UVa, VT, Carolina, NC State, Clemson, GT, Miami, Florida State

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Auburn, Alabama, MSU, Ole Miss, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, A&M , Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Texas Tech

B1G
Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Mich. MSU, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minn., Nebraska, Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas

PAC
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah, Ariz. ASU, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford, OSU, Oregon, Washington, WSU

When all of the dust settles and all of the court cases have run their course, this is what we will end up with.

(05-25-2021 09:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 05:37 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

I think that "the committee" will settle on an 8 game playoff. The 8 teams will be the division champions of the 4 conferences.
The first round could be the conference championship games or the division champs could rotate (no conference championships played) ie. ACC north v. SEC west, PAC north v. B1G east etc......

I think we'll keep the 4 team playoff once we get the rulings this Summer on NIL and next Summer on caps on stipends.

ESPN is in lip service and placate mode to keep all conferences happy until the future is decided by the courts. ESPN and FOX just refused to discuss the B12 contract early and I can appreciate why. We may not have but 4 conferences at the end of those suits and we certainly can't be sure of their composition at this time. Heck we even have Big 10 schools saying they may not participate in pay for play.

So nobody is going to back an 8 team playoff scheme, or sign new contracts until they have a much clearer picture of the new reality. We could have just enough schools to form 4 12 to 14 member conferences or have a new upper tier that might be formed into 2 large conferences with multiple divisions, or a break away, or something else entirely.

My money is on 4 conferences which will send champions to the CFP.

If (and when) there is a breakaway by the schools in the power conferences, I would guess we would eventually settle on four conferences, each of which sends its champion to a Final Four following a four team conference championship tournament. That is a de facto 16 team playoff. The difference between that and just a 16 team CFP following the regular season is that the more popular conferences will get better revenue from their CCT than they would have gotten from a CFP. The SEC probably gets more from its CCT than the PAC gets from theirs just because of free market competition for the CCTs.

(05-26-2021 09:00 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 09:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 05:37 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-25-2021 10:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2021 07:20 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Texas/Oklahoma moving to any conference would be enough for the CFP to consider P4 champs only. The rest of the Big 12 would just be screwed unless other conferences throw them lifelines. The SEC and Big Ten don't "need" Texas/Oklahoma and the networks can certainly lowball the Big 12 if they really want Texas/Oklahoma in the SEC or Big Ten (which would make more sense/CENTS) for them. If I'm FOX, I'd rather overpay the Pac 12 to take Texas/Oklahoma than keep overpaying for Texas Tech, Kansas State, West Virginia, etc. At least people live in California. But of course Big Ten+Texas+Oklahoma is the best situation for FOX.

The problem with that scenario is that ESPN doesn't want a champs only. They want to be able to invite a runnerup Alabama or Ohio St.

I think that "the committee" will settle on an 8 game playoff. The 8 teams will be the division champions of the 4 conferences.
The first round could be the conference championship games or the division champs could rotate (no conference championships played) ie. ACC north v. SEC west, PAC north v. B1G east etc......

I think we'll keep the 4 team playoff once we get the rulings this Summer on NIL and next Summer on caps on stipends.

ESPN is in lip service and placate mode to keep all conferences happy until the future is decided by the courts. ESPN and FOX just refused to discuss the B12 contract early and I can appreciate why. We may not have but 4 conferences at the end of those suits and we certainly can't be sure of their composition at this time. Heck we even have Big 10 schools saying they may not participate in pay for play.

So nobody is going to back an 8 team playoff scheme, or sign new contracts until they have a much clearer picture of the new reality. We could have just enough schools to form 4 12 to 14 member conferences or have a new upper tier that might be formed into 2 large conferences with multiple divisions, or a break away, or something else entirely.

My money is on 4 conferences which will send champions to the CFP.

If (and when) there is a breakaway by the schools in the power conferences, I would guess we would eventually settle on four conferences, each of which sends its champion to a Final Four following a four team conference championship tournament. That is a de facto 16 team playoff. The difference between that and just a 16 team CFP following the regular season is that the more popular conferences will get better revenue from their CCT than they would have gotten from a CFP. The SEC probably gets more from its CCT than the PAC gets from theirs just because of free market competition for the CCTs.

Usually what happens is the format which permits conferences to keep the most control over their own revenue and to keep their natural advantages. All other change has to be of mutual self interest among the conferences and networks involved. I say this as a way of indicating my complete agreement with what you have put forward. Conference semis are much more likely IMO than an expanded CFP. And the approximate number of schools in a conference will be easier to gauge once the legal changes occur.