Talk me off the ledge please. Why are we giving up such an important part of our history and a game that is very lucrative. Yes I know the answer is more money overall, but surely we could get more money without giving up the game?

(10-17-2026 10:05 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  Talk me off the ledge please. Why are we giving up such an important part of our history and a game that is very lucrative. Yes I know the answer is more money overall, but surely we could get more money without giving up the game?

There is no answer but greed. I'm with you on this one and frankly I'm not sure the money will wind up being enough to cover what we lose. It's just not going to be the same. At 4 entrants we usually had 1 blow out game as most years only 3 of the teams would have been competitive. 24 is just going to be a dump of mediocrity and more opportunities to get key players injured for the truly worthy teams. To me it is more bullcrap participation trophies for the snowflake generation. And it was a way for the networks to eliminate games we owned 100% of the rights to and they had to bid on every year. They'll own the CFP rights if they bid enough and we'll all get paid a share per school per game and I doubt it adds what the one CCG did.

(10-17-2026 11:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-17-2026 10:05 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  Talk me off the ledge please. Why are we giving up such an important part of our history and a game that is very lucrative. Yes I know the answer is more money overall, but surely we could get more money without giving up the game?

There is no answer but greed. I'm with you on this one and frankly I'm not sure the money will wind up being enough to cover what we lose. It's just not going to be the same. At 4 entrants we usually had 1 blow out game as most years only 3 of the teams would have been competitive. 24 is just going to be a dump of mediocrity and more opportunities to get key players injured for the truly worthy teams. To me it is more bullcrap participation trophies for the snowflake generation. And it was a way for the networks to eliminate games we owned 100% of the rights to and they had to bid on every year. They'll own the CFP rights if they bid enough and we'll all get paid a share per school per game and I doubt it adds what the one CCG did.

From what I’m hearing the guaranteed money the sec will be securing will be about $93-95M of the !100M they would have gotten for the championship game. There has been growing support for the 24 team model within the sec, it was only a matter of time so Sankey hopefully got the 10 P4 opponents rule passed to force the B1G to match the sec’s p4 minimum.

Dellenger article today says big 10 and sec are working on a scheduling agreement that would add even more money to the pots. Can ND squeeze into this deal or will this arrangement likely force them to finally consider joining the B1G as they would not be able to schedule enough p2 opponents to prevent a financial gap?

Also, that scheduling dealing along with the CFP payouts and a conclusion to the pcsa should pave the way for some expansion as long as the cap remains at 20 or upgraded to 22. If the pcsa fails, the big ten and sec could and probably go ahead and ezpand with exactly who they want so that the bill working its way in Congress won’t have that leverage on the conferences.

https://x.com/rossdellenger/status/21121...kuex7-QU7A

Link to Dellenger article referenced above