(04-24-2021 12:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2021 12:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-24-2021 12:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2021 10:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-24-2021 09:05 AM)esayem Wrote:  What would that be, 3/7?

Then a program must decide: what’s more important the Big Ten contract or making the playoffs? Penn State is a program that could go Independent and secure their own TV deal while playing a softer schedule made up of eastern teams. I’m sure ESPN would love to have Penn State and Nebraska under their umbrella as Independents.

In some ways I see an expanded playoff being the recipe to destroy the super-conference concept.

The other option is straight 16, which I’m sure you’d get behind. I initially made that model to work from and Louisiana and BYU (and Carolina ) made it in, so there are still chances for non-P5 teams. Penn State didn’t really produce a profound case to be included this past season!

About the bolded part - why on earth would the B1G and SEC and the ACC and Big 12 put themselves in the position of having to make that choice? Why would these conferences, who control college athletics, endorse a system that puts them in this bind? I don't see it.

As for straight 16, IMO 16 is just too many, I like straight 8. But yes, if we have to go to 16, then straight 16.

The P5 and G5 are about to experience even a bigger gulf between them, in revenue, in ability to compete for top athletes, and in no way is the G5 making the cut for an expanded playoff system because it is Network driven and they want the largest markets possible involved. Why?

Right now they have AD's at the P5 level looking to recover what they are eyeballing as tremendous COVID losses, mostly due to gate and ticket donations more than TV revenue. The Networks see an opportunity to get around Conference Championship Games by promising more revenue to the P5 conferences for their participation in an 8 team playoff than by having the CCG's.

I actually think that an 8 team CFP will bring further consolidation in the P5 after then known effects of NIL and perhaps the removal of caps on stipends. Get down to a P4 (accomplished by the lure of money) and promise each conference that their division champions will be seeded in an 8 team national playoff.

This works because:
1. They offer more money for the 8 team playoff than they do now for CFP and the CCG's.
2. Everyone in the P5 really sees the year as less than optimum when they don't win the national championship and the risk of playing a team again that you've already beaten in the regular season in a CCG where key players might get injured is beginning to be irksome to coaching staffs and some fans even though publicly they lace them up and play because that's the way it is structured.
3. Guaranteeing each conference a regional site first round game against some other conference's #2 seed makes sense, reaches a broader base of fans every year, and holds the interest of the public who attends and the viewing audience.
4. Academics make no concessions in this plan as the number of games remains the same but the revenue goes up.

What I suspect will happen if we expand the playoffs is that the G5 will become a G4 and will hold something similar of their own.

So I don't see any Network driven expansion of the playoffs as an automatic sign that the G5 will be more included. In fact I see it as the bell tolling a more complete separation between the two.

I dont know. That seems pretty pessimistic. Here's the problem from the Networks standpoint---they own ALL of it. CFP rights. P5 rights. G5 rights. FCS rights. They also know that splitting off the G5 will make it less valuable and splitting off the P5 from the G5 likley woudnt make P5 viewership any higher than it is now.

Worse yet---when you slice 65 fan bases from FBS and the CFP---thats more likely to REDUCE viewership. Dont get me wrong---I do think the networks would like to see more high value Bama vs Texas games---but cutting the G5 probably just nets you more Bama vs Purdue games. My sense is going to a 5-1-2 plan draws in the G5 fanbases at a minimal cost of one slot (which is actually where most of the potential future growth in college viewershp exists). Meanwhile, the 5-1-2 guarantees all P5 champs get in (meaning every P5 regular season conference championship race is meaningful and important). Finally, the two wild card picks keeps the "every game is a playoff beauty contest element" that people like to debate over beers alive.

A split may come due to the financial gulf---but I dont think the networks want that. They want the biggest audience possible. That might mean they prefer 2 blue blood P5's in the championship game rather than a small school Cinderella taking one of those slots---but make no mistake--they want all the fans of every Cinderella school in America to be invested enough in the championship that they watch---whether a Cinderella makes the final or not.

As we move to a streaming world schools that draw less actual viewers are less valuable. The move would be to accentuate the value that streaming places upon the most viewed. The CFP expanded by the Networks will be their chance to capture audience independent of streaming services unless that service also pays them the premium. It will therefore generate more interest than just school interest and the synergy of combining combinations of regional markets in the structure of the playoff will provide a payday much larger than the NCAA basketball tournament.

I'm not being optimistic, nor pessimistic, I simply telling you what the business factors will be and they will be for the maximization of exposure of the playoffs and for the maximum number of viewers. It is a commercial enterprise more than a sporting one.

And there is no Cinderella in an 8 team playoff and the presidents and commissioners of the P5 aren't going along with a 16 school playoff because of the academic calendar, the risk of injuries and the exposure to more CTE risk, and because they aren't gong to share the revenue pie more ways than the 5 way split now. And that's giving you credit for the erroneous assumption that the networks care about Cinderella. They don't. Cinderella plays on days and hours in a dance that the Prince never attends. That's how much the Networks care about Cinderella.

If it were left up to me all FBS champions would be in. But I'm not the arbiter of such constructs. Nothing that has transpired since OU/UGa vs the NCAA in the early 80's has indicated any altruism, sense of equity, or fair play, with what the Networks have done with realignment (which initially was market driven) and what they will do now with the playoffs (which will be a maximization of viewers with full knowledge that top brands draw more viewers than lesser known ones. So cynically, but very realistically, I expect further consolidation with accommodations given to the top brands both as schools and to conferences. Greed is good said Gordon Gekko and his character embodies the only ambition of any corporation, profit. Follow the money and you'll see the most likely outcome of all of this. So realism and cynicism says 8 teams divided among a P4.

I dont disagree with most of what you said. Where we disagree is I actually believe there are market reasons for the Networks to want the P5 and G5 to remain connected and for the an 8-team playoff to include a legit path for a G5 school. As far as a money split---I don think the networks care how its split and frankly--I thnk the current split between the P5 and G5 is probably about right. A legit G5 path to the playoff has nothing what so ever to do with who should get the lions share of the money. The P5 should obviously get most of the money. A G5 playoff path in no way changes that.

But while there is no argument that the P5 bring more value---My point is--the networks dont care. Right now the networks get both the P5 and G5 audience for the FBS playoff they paid big bucks for. I see no "market" argument for the networks to have any desire to give up 20% (or whatever college sports audience percentage one wishes to assign to the G5) of the audience. There is no "market" reason to do that. Now maybe the financial costs will eventually cause many G5's to drop out of FBS on thier own accord---but thats entirely different from the tv networks demanding a split.

Understand---I have no illusions about a 16 team playoff, any equal monetary split, or any expectation that every G5 champ will get a slot. All Im saying is I think the networks have zero desire for a split (keeps the total viewership larger) and I suspect the networks would be thrilled to death to see a legit playoff path for the G5 as that brings interest from an entire corner of the sports fans that simply wasnt very invested in the CFP because it basically never included that half of FBS. None of that means that the top P5 brands will receive any less preferential treatment---I suspect they make even more money--not to mention seeing a 75% increase in CFP participation by the blue bloods (with an 8 team playoff, 3 more P5 teams are in every year even with the 1 slot being given to the G5).

That said---the entire recruiting world is about to change with a combination of the "one free transfer rule" and unrestricted NIL. Near wild west free agency is almost upon us. So--who knows how this will all shake out.