Jon Wilner got some information from Pac-12 sources that the revenue will increase from $9m per (P5) school to $27m with the expanded playoff

Quote:Pac-12 schools, which currently receive approximately $9 million annually from the playoff, could see that amount soar to $27 million per school per year, according to estimates by a data research company that has advised numerous Power Five conferences over the years.

...

In early June, the Hotline reached out to Navigate and asked the Chicago-based firm, which specializes in the valuation of sports rights, to generate revenue projections for the Pac-12 based on various playoff expansion scenarios.

...

“Nothing is certain yet in terms of who will own certain rights to the new games and how revenue will flow to all of the different stakeholders,” explained Navigate’s Matt Balvanz, senior vice president of analytics and innovation.

“(But) it’s clear that this expansion will provide a massive financial lift to all (Power Five) football schools.”

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/06/14/c...am-format/

These athletic departments will be billion dollar industries sooner than later

(06-14-2021 12:24 PM)solohawks Wrote:  These athletic departments will be billion dollar industries sooner than later

How much of that will the players who play these extra games see?

Nothing? All to facilities, coaches and administrators?

Everyone is okay with this, I guess.

If this proves true, than that is one thing that I would have been very wrong about, as I have believed and stated that I didn't think expanding the playoffs to 8 teams, and by inference 12, would result in a significant boost in TV revenue.

A tripling of the money would be, admittedly, a significant boost, LOL.

(06-14-2021 12:12 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Jon Wilner got some information from Pac-12 sources that the revenue will increase from $9m per (P5) school to $27m with the expanded playoff

Quote:Pac-12 schools, which currently receive approximately $9 million annually from the playoff, could see that amount soar to $27 million per school per year, according to estimates by a data research company that has advised numerous Power Five conferences over the years.

...

In early June, the Hotline reached out to Navigate and asked the Chicago-based firm, which specializes in the valuation of sports rights, to generate revenue projections for the Pac-12 based on various playoff expansion scenarios.

...

“Nothing is certain yet in terms of who will own certain rights to the new games and how revenue will flow to all of the different stakeholders,” explained Navigate’s Matt Balvanz, senior vice president of analytics and innovation.

“(But) it’s clear that this expansion will provide a massive financial lift to all (Power Five) football schools.”

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/06/14/c...am-format/

Doesn't ESPN have the rights for the duration of the current contract through 2026? I assume streaming rights are included in ESPN's current deal, right?

(06-14-2021 12:37 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 12:24 PM)solohawks Wrote:  These athletic departments will be billion dollar industries sooner than later

How much of that will the players who play these extra games see?

Nothing? All to facilities, coaches and administrators?

Everyone is okay with this, I guess.

^^^^
This!!!

(06-14-2021 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If this proves true, than that is one thing that I would have been very wrong about, as I have believed and stated that I didn't think expanding the playoffs to 8 teams, and by inference 12, would result in a significant boost in TV revenue.

A tripling of the money would be, admittedly, a significant boost, LOL.

You may be more right than the headline lets on.

A key assumption made is that the value of a first round game in the current 4-team playoff is as valuable as a game in the first-round of a 12-team playoff. I'd suspect ("assume"), NYD Quarterfinals would be the round equivalent to current NYD Semifinals, resulting in a 125% increase in value, not the reported 200%. Also, 50 of that 125 (or 200) are attributed to the general increase in the value of live sports and are not dependent on the playoff format.

Further, the increased value given to the Pac-12 may not be proportional to the increased value of the entire system or even the increased value of other Power conferences.

Can it be assumed all playoff revenue will triple? If so, then both "gaps" will also widen: P5 over G5, G5 over FCS. It'll be interesting to see if any "call-ups" from FCS occur due to this increased revenue.

I don't want to quote the full article, as you need to subscribe. I think I've quoted enough. But ESPN is not opposed and will make a good bid.

The current format remains for 2021 (this year) and 2022 (next year), with 2023 the earliest the new format will start.

The model proposed starts the Playoffs in Mid-December (sounds like the week before Christmas, the week after the Army-Navy game), with four on campus games (seeds 5 thru 8 hosting seeds 9 thru 12), then the quarterfinals on New Years Day. Doesn't sound like they figured out semi-finals, but my guess is back to campus. Not clear on New Years Six, but they need four anyway.

CoVid-19 probably sped up this happening. Schools want to recoup revenue, and the only steady revenue was TV, as gate and donations are down will likely stay down. Power five schools getting $27m instead of $9m per year from the playoffs goes a long way. (I expect G5 will also triple, although they only get about a quarter what the power schools get.) Everyone always needs money. Lots of debts to pay down.

I’m curious where the true value, for ESPN, is in the 12 team, 11 game playoff?

My guess is that they expect to see viewership in all 4 quarterfinals be about where the semi finals are now and hope to see the semis and final to be as good or better than the current final.

To me the wild card, and where I think the profit margin will be is in that opening round. The gravitas and stakes on the line should make them more valuable than your run of the mill, pre-NY bowl (and certainly a lot more than the mostly G5 games that occur that weekend).

I think there’s also a residual benefit to late season games and the CCGs that they hold the rights to, as more fanbases are engaged in playoff hunts.

(06-14-2021 01:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m curious where the true value, for ESPN, is in the 12 team, 11 game playoff?

My guess is that they expect to see viewership in all 4 quarterfinals be about where the semi finals are now and hope to see the semis and final to be as good or better than the current final.

To me the wild card, and where I think the profit margin will be is in that opening round. The gravitas and stakes on the line should make them more valuable than your run of the mill, pre-NY bowl (and certainly a lot more than the mostly G5 games that occur that weekend).

I think there’s also a residual benefit to late season games and the CCGs that they hold the rights to, as more fanbases are engaged in playoff hunts.

There's this and also ESPN likely believes that it will pay less for amending and extending the current contract than they would a few years from now in allowing a new expanded CFP go to the open market (which could spur a bidding war).

My impression is that, at least with the CFP itself, ESPN is more fearful of another competitor (e.g. Fox, Turner) getting the rights if the current contract expires as-is than it is about paying more immediately if they can get an extension.

(06-14-2021 12:37 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 12:24 PM)solohawks Wrote:  These athletic departments will be billion dollar industries sooner than later

How much of that will the players who play these extra games see?

Nothing? All to facilities, coaches and administrators?

Everyone is okay with this, I guess.

You hit on the point that could kill this idea.

(06-14-2021 01:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  To me the wild card, and where I think the profit margin will be is in that opening round. The gravitas and stakes on the line should make them more valuable than your run of the mill, pre-NY bowl (and certainly a lot more than the mostly G5 games that occur that weekend).

I think the opening round will show the greatest increase (from basically zero). Do college football fans prefer to watch Heather Dinich wander around a hotel room near the DFW airport getting little to no information from a bunch of old men (whose never-ending annual message is that Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and 1 other team are assumed to be the best teams because of *reasons*) or watch 4 potentially riveting high-stakes games between 8 of the Top 12 teams, which includes teams from all over the country, Cinderellas, bluebloods and all sorts of storylines with things being decided on the field?

(06-14-2021 01:25 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If this proves true, than that is one thing that I would have been very wrong about, as I have believed and stated that I didn't think expanding the playoffs to 8 teams, and by inference 12, would result in a significant boost in TV revenue.

A tripling of the money would be, admittedly, a significant boost, LOL.

You may be more right than the headline lets on.

A key assumption made is that the value of a first round game in the current 4-team playoff is as valuable as a game in the first-round of a 12-team playoff. I'd suspect ("assume"), NYD Quarterfinals would be the round equivalent to current NYD Semifinals, resulting in a 125% increase in value, not the reported 200%. Also, 50 of that 125 (or 200) are attributed to the general increase in the value of live sports and are not dependent on the playoff format.

Further, the increased value given to the Pac-12 may not be proportional to the increased value of the entire system or even the increased value of other Power conferences.

When you look at the ratings of the playoff games vs. the non-playoff games, you can see that the two new January 1 playoff games will be worth massively more.

(06-14-2021 02:09 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 01:25 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If this proves true, than that is one thing that I would have been very wrong about, as I have believed and stated that I didn't think expanding the playoffs to 8 teams, and by inference 12, would result in a significant boost in TV revenue.

A tripling of the money would be, admittedly, a significant boost, LOL.

You may be more right than the headline lets on.

A key assumption made is that the value of a first round game in the current 4-team playoff is as valuable as a game in the first-round of a 12-team playoff. I'd suspect ("assume"), NYD Quarterfinals would be the round equivalent to current NYD Semifinals, resulting in a 125% increase in value, not the reported 200%. Also, 50 of that 125 (or 200) are attributed to the general increase in the value of live sports and are not dependent on the playoff format.

Further, the increased value given to the Pac-12 may not be proportional to the increased value of the entire system or even the increased value of other Power conferences.

When you look at the ratings of the playoff games vs. the non-playoff games, you can see that the two new January 1 playoff games will be worth massively more.

Yes, absolutely. The ratings data already shows how much more viewership there has been in the CFP for NYD playoff games compared to non-NYD playoff games and it's substantial. If you can guarantee 2 or 3 NYD playoff games every single year, then that in and of itself is a boon to the system (without even taking into account the additional inventory of games overall).

(06-14-2021 01:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 01:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m curious where the true value, for ESPN, is in the 12 team, 11 game playoff?

My guess is that they expect to see viewership in all 4 quarterfinals be about where the semi finals are now and hope to see the semis and final to be as good or better than the current final.

To me the wild card, and where I think the profit margin will be is in that opening round. The gravitas and stakes on the line should make them more valuable than your run of the mill, pre-NY bowl (and certainly a lot more than the mostly G5 games that occur that weekend).

I think there’s also a residual benefit to late season games and the CCGs that they hold the rights to, as more fanbases are engaged in playoff hunts.

There's this and also ESPN likely believes that it will pay less for amending and extending the current contract than they would a few years from now in allowing a new expanded CFP go to the open market (which could spur a bidding war).

My impression is that, at least with the CFP itself, ESPN is more fearful of another competitor (e.g. Fox, Turner) getting the rights if the current contract expires as-is than it is about paying more immediately if they can get an extension.

There is another interesting consequence of this. Should a current P5 conference be absorbed and conferences each stop at 16 the absorbed share even with adding 2 schools to attain it, NETS all of the other P4 schools about another 4 million each.

Now let that sink in. If the B12 is absorbed it won't matter what schools you take they each will approximate the added value of Texas and Oklahoma's T1 & T2 and all solely on CFP money. Now certainly UT and OU would still bring more total value overall, but for purposes of each school being worth adding that extra share divided by the remaining P4 more than covers the 10 members of the B12. So it may not be as initially stabilizing as it appears but after such a consolidation I think it would be.

(06-14-2021 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If this proves true, than that is one thing that I would have been very wrong about, as I have believed and stated that I didn't think expanding the playoffs to 8 teams, and by inference 12, would result in a significant boost in TV revenue.

A tripling of the money would be, admittedly, a significant boost, LOL.

LOL - I mean, if each of the P5 conferences would truly be getting triple their playoff revenue (on the order of nearly $20 million more per school per year), then I believe that we can put to rest any notion that there's really any debate about playoff expansion passing at this point. That's a big time money boost even to the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world. This could quickly wipe out any pandemic-related revenue shortfalls in the short-term and be a huge revenue generator in the long-term.

This may be enough to get BYU to reconsider independence.

(06-14-2021 02:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 01:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 01:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m curious where the true value, for ESPN, is in the 12 team, 11 game playoff?

My guess is that they expect to see viewership in all 4 quarterfinals be about where the semi finals are now and hope to see the semis and final to be as good or better than the current final.

To me the wild card, and where I think the profit margin will be is in that opening round. The gravitas and stakes on the line should make them more valuable than your run of the mill, pre-NY bowl (and certainly a lot more than the mostly G5 games that occur that weekend).

I think there’s also a residual benefit to late season games and the CCGs that they hold the rights to, as more fanbases are engaged in playoff hunts.

There's this and also ESPN likely believes that it will pay less for amending and extending the current contract than they would a few years from now in allowing a new expanded CFP go to the open market (which could spur a bidding war).

My impression is that, at least with the CFP itself, ESPN is more fearful of another competitor (e.g. Fox, Turner) getting the rights if the current contract expires as-is than it is about paying more immediately if they can get an extension.

There is another interesting consequence of this. Should a current P5 conference be absorbed and conferences each stop at 16 the absorbed share even with adding 2 schools to attain it, NETS all of the other P4 schools about another 4 million each.

Now let that sink in. If the B12 is absorbed it won't matter what schools you take they each will approximate the added value of Texas and Oklahoma's T1 & T2 and all solely on CFP money. Now certainly UT and OU would still bring more total value overall, but for purposes of each school being worth adding that extra share divided by the remaining P4 more than covers the 10 members of the B12. So it may not be as initially stabilizing as it appears but after such a consolidation I think it would be.

Walk me through the math here—how does the dissolution of the Big 12 get every P4 conference an extra $4 million/school.

I’m not saying you’re wrong by any means, I’m just trying to work through the numbers.

(06-14-2021 03:07 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 02:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 01:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 01:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m curious where the true value, for ESPN, is in the 12 team, 11 game playoff?

My guess is that they expect to see viewership in all 4 quarterfinals be about where the semi finals are now and hope to see the semis and final to be as good or better than the current final.

To me the wild card, and where I think the profit margin will be is in that opening round. The gravitas and stakes on the line should make them more valuable than your run of the mill, pre-NY bowl (and certainly a lot more than the mostly G5 games that occur that weekend).

I think there’s also a residual benefit to late season games and the CCGs that they hold the rights to, as more fanbases are engaged in playoff hunts.

There's this and also ESPN likely believes that it will pay less for amending and extending the current contract than they would a few years from now in allowing a new expanded CFP go to the open market (which could spur a bidding war).

My impression is that, at least with the CFP itself, ESPN is more fearful of another competitor (e.g. Fox, Turner) getting the rights if the current contract expires as-is than it is about paying more immediately if they can get an extension.

There is another interesting consequence of this. Should a current P5 conference be absorbed and conferences each stop at 16 the absorbed share even with adding 2 schools to attain it, NETS all of the other P4 schools about another 4 million each.

Now let that sink in. If the B12 is absorbed it won't matter what schools you take they each will approximate the added value of Texas and Oklahoma's T1 & T2 and all solely on CFP money. Now certainly UT and OU would still bring more total value overall, but for purposes of each school being worth adding that extra share divided by the remaining P4 more than covers the 10 members of the B12. So it may not be as initially stabilizing as it appears but after such a consolidation I think it would be.

Walk me through the math here—how does the dissolution of the Big 12 get every P4 conference an extra $4 million/school.

I’m not saying you’re wrong by any means, I’m just trying to work through the numbers.

There are 2 ways to approach this. A USA Today estimate cited a 2 billion dollar figure. Under the CFP each P conference got an equal share. Some reported that to be 67 million per conference and some 70 million. This article says the new CFP payout will triple existing shares, but that is because, like everyone else they are assuming certain splits which haven't been addressed by the committee. So let's work this both ways and assume a similar disbursement model to the current CFP.

If you take the 2 billion (actually 1.9 something) number and you divide that 6 ways it comes to 333.3 million per conference and this figure is not adjusted for number of conference schools, just per P conference and while the AAC is not singled out publicly they are the G5 most years in line for a slot. If you divide 2 billion by 5 instead of 6 that's ~67 million more per P conference (including the AAC and ESPN may not cut them in specifically but rather commit that share to G5's in general which would be in keeping with the lesser share they get in the current system). 67 million divided by 16 is 4.18 million more per member school because you took 2 B12 schools to go with your 14. Duplicate this for the B1G, SEC, ACC for adding 2 each and to the PAC for adding 4. It's the division of the other conferences share for the cost of 2 teams. I picked the B12 because there are only 10 which is why CFP money, more so than T1 & T2 rights, gave them more per member share. And like I said I'm assuming a full share here for the G schools. 2nd and 3rd conference members don't draw anything other than a flat sum which was 3 million when Alabama was the second SEC school.

Now if you take the current conference share ~70 million and triple it that's 210 million per conference. Eliminate 1 and divide that share 5 ways and it's only a raise of 42 million for 2 schools added which NETS out at a 2.62 million increase per member school. And all of this assumes pro rata on T1 and T2 rights.

So keep in mind until the committee nails down how the shares are to be divided we only have the current pay model and assumptions to go on and where 3 times the current conference shares and 2 billion to divide 6 ways leaves a large gap but they are just reporters best guesses until we have specifics.

So one way everyone could get 2.6 million more by absorbing the B12 and the other way 4.18 million. Either way it is profitable to do so because of how massive a share is and how few schools you would have to place to do it.