(07-12-2021 12:33 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 12:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 11:23 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 08:53 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 07:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  That's not what happens at all.

Last season's Tampa Bay Buccaneers were 7-5 after 12 games and won the Super Bowl.

The 2011 NY Giants were 6-6 after 12 games and won the Super Bowl.

The whole point of the NFL format, like it or not, is that your 3-3 team could easily make the playoffs and might even win it all if they get hot. There are many things to dislike about the NFL, IMO, but they do a great job of selling hope to as many fan bases as possible.

They also have the benefit of the draft, salary caps and free agency to keep the gap between the best and worst teams as small as possible. The only way to come close to that in college football is to have much smaller leagues, each with schools with similar resources compared with their competitors. You can't do it with 130 teams in the same division (FBS). Even the entire P5 as a separate division would be too many schools.

College basketball has the same gaps in resources. Yet college basketball has more parity, and more hope for fans of different teams, than college football even with more than 300 teams in Division I. The last 10 NCAA men's basketball tournaments have had 8 different champions and 29 different Final Four teams. And if you extend it out to the Elite 8 and then the Sweet 16 you would have substantially more teams involved over that period of time.

College basketball has a 68-team playoff. And typically, about 40 or so of those teams are from the FBS. So that's 40 out of 130 FBS schools that get in, compared to 12 in the proposed playoff, a much smaller field.

Plus, if you are the P5 conferences, why on earth would you want "more parity"? Parity just means that you lose relative status.

You're thinking solely in terms of conferences, not individual teams. That's not how presidents and ADs think about these things.

Why does "the SEC" want a 12-team playoff? Because the individual members of the SEC think it will help their own school. TAMU, Auburn, Florida, etc. don't have the goal of putting Alabama in the playoff -- they want to see their own team in the playoff. The limited amount of "more parity" that a 12-team playoff offers will benefit the SEC teams who are not Alabama, the Big Ten teams who are not Ohio State, etc., among others. It's about increasing the number of different teams that are involved.

Eh, I think that conference presidents think about their conference because the success of their school and conference are closely intertwined.

In this case, sure, the SEC is in favor of a 12-team playoff over a 8-team playoff because that could mean more SEC teams in the playoffs - no conflict there, good for the SEC 'as a whole' and for its individual teams.

Usually, we only see team/conference goal conflict where the conference isn't the aspirational place for the team. E.g., a GOR might be good for the AAC as a whole, but since individual AAC teams aspire to leave the AAC for a P5, they aren't going to agree to that.

(07-12-2021 11:49 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 11:27 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 11:18 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 10:17 AM)esayem Wrote:  Once again: FBS has more scholarship players than FCS. The two shouldn’t be compared without this in mind.

The only comparison that people are making is that if it's ok to have FCS football players play a season that ends with a 24-team tournament, it's just as ok to have FBS football players play a season that ends with a 24-team tournament. The number of scholarships is irrelevant to that comparison.

No, people are comparing the number of total games. In that case, the number of scholarship players is absolutely relevant.

It's not relevant. FBS has a maximum of 85 football players on scholarship, each of which must be a full scholarship; no partials allowed in FBS football. FCS has a limit of 63 full scholarship equivalents that can be distributed and/or split into partials among a maximum of 85 football players.

So, your argument is that partial-scholarship and walk-on football players can safely play more games in a season than full-scholarship football players. We will have to agree to disagree about that.

My argument is that it leads to larger rosters at the FBS level. Now if I’m wrong about that, then I accept it.

(07-12-2021 01:03 PM)esayem Wrote:  My argument is that it leads to larger rosters at the FBS level. Now if I’m wrong about that, then I accept it.

Bear in mind that "scholarships" means different things in the two different subdivisions ... in FBS Football (as in all Division 1 Basketball), scholarships are "headcount" scholarships: every scholarship is a full scholarship, so the "number of scholarships" and "number of players" is the same thing. FCS works under the normal Full Time Scholarship Equivalent (FTSE) system, where if you give one player a half ride and two players a quarter ride it counts as "one scholarship".

(07-11-2021 08:57 PM)Alanda Wrote:  In a CBS podcast Dodd was a guest speaking on the playoffs, Notre Dame, NIL, and Scott Frost. Here are some things that stuck out to me with the playoff part.

-Believes ESPN didn't renegotiate with Big 12 because they are saving money for the playoff
-I'm paraphrasing, but if bowls are used in quarterfinals he expects tie-ins will be done with
-Bowls not set in stone to be used for quarterfinals
-He thinks future conference media rights deals will be higher because the regular season will be more important

Thanks for sharing. ESPN going for the kill.

Honestly, I think ESPN wants to kill the existing bowl System / NY6 and replace it with this 12-team model. I know the purists will be up in arms calling that blasphemy, but that’s exactly what I think ESPN is up to. They can preserve the game sites as tradition, but the Rose Bowl is going to be culled, at least the once familiar form of it. Ultimately, the QFs cannot be played on NYD. Some other wasteland exhibition bowls are going to fill it up leading to the SemiFinals the following Saturday. The only other possibility is the Rose and Sugar moving out of NYD or simply not participating at all most years.

Won’t happen overnight, but I’m convinced of it. Mark this post.

PS: Dennis Dodd nails exactly what I thought at the 15:30 mark… if you are still having doubts listen to that part x3. This is exactly how I felt about this weeks ago when the 12 team format was announced. He even mentions they won’t get 5:30 ET NYD.

(07-12-2021 08:16 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 08:57 PM)Alanda Wrote:  In a CBS podcast Dodd was a guest speaking on the playoffs, Notre Dame, NIL, and Scott Frost. Here are some things that stuck out to me with the playoff part.

-Believes ESPN didn't renegotiate with Big 12 because they are saving money for the playoff
-I'm paraphrasing, but if bowls are used in quarterfinals he expects tie-ins will be done with
-Bowls not set in stone to be used for quarterfinals
-He thinks future conference media rights deals will be higher because the regular season will be more important

Thanks for sharing. ESPN going for the kill.

Honestly, I think ESPN wants to kill the existing bowl System / NY6 and replace it with this 12-team model. I know the purists will be up in arms calling that blasphemy, but that’s exactly what I think ESPN is up to. They can preserve the game sites as tradition, but the Rose Bowl is going to be culled, at least the once familiar form of it. Ultimately, the QFs cannot be played on NYD. Some other wasteland exhibition bowls are going to fill it up leading to the SemiFinals the following Saturday. The only other possibility is the Rose and Sugar moving out of NYD or simply not participating at all most years.

Won’t happen overnight, but I’m convinced of it. Mark this post.

PS: Dennis Dodd nails exactly what I thought at the 15:30 mark… if you are still having doubts listen to that part x3. This is exactly how I felt about this weeks ago when the 12 team format was announced. He even mentions they won’t get 5:30 ET NYD.

Well, since the conferences seem to be in favor of expanding to 12, ESPN doesn't even need to go in for the kill. They just need to be willing to go along with it. Like you, I suspect they will be.

But, it won't surprise me if ESPN negotiates pretty tough. I suspect Disney thinks that the CFP is pretty eager to get this done sooner rather than later. If so, ESPN will try to drive a hard bargain.

You know, I’m quite shocked that big time college football people shat on Delaney/Scott or whomever is running the show down there in Pasadena. Dodd, “If they want to play a football game… (it could be) Cincinnati playing ISU…” Hahaha. Never would’ve dreamt that in a million years from long time CFB peeps. The Rose and Delaney can suck it…

Finally, I can do other things on NYD as opposed to watching a bloated exhibition football game besides the occasional CFP SFs rotations. SFs will be played 1st Saturday of January. It literally solves every problem… except the travel.

I hope they make ESPN pay with their balls if they force three straight travel weekends on fans. And imagine seeds 9-12 having to win a game on the road followed by potentially three more neutral site games. Just pay them as semi-pros because that’s the right thing to do. Make em’ pay.

(07-12-2021 08:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 08:16 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 08:57 PM)Alanda Wrote:  In a CBS podcast Dodd was a guest speaking on the playoffs, Notre Dame, NIL, and Scott Frost. Here are some things that stuck out to me with the playoff part.

-Believes ESPN didn't renegotiate with Big 12 because they are saving money for the playoff
-I'm paraphrasing, but if bowls are used in quarterfinals he expects tie-ins will be done with
-Bowls not set in stone to be used for quarterfinals
-He thinks future conference media rights deals will be higher because the regular season will be more important

Thanks for sharing. ESPN going for the kill.

Honestly, I think ESPN wants to kill the existing bowl System / NY6 and replace it with this 12-team model. I know the purists will be up in arms calling that blasphemy, but that’s exactly what I think ESPN is up to. They can preserve the game sites as tradition, but the Rose Bowl is going to be culled, at least the once familiar form of it. Ultimately, the QFs cannot be played on NYD. Some other wasteland exhibition bowls are going to fill it up leading to the SemiFinals the following Saturday. The only other possibility is the Rose and Sugar moving out of NYD or simply not participating at all most years.

Won’t happen overnight, but I’m convinced of it. Mark this post.

PS: Dennis Dodd nails exactly what I thought at the 15:30 mark… if you are still having doubts listen to that part x3. This is exactly how I felt about this weeks ago when the 12 team format was announced. He even mentions they won’t get 5:30 ET NYD.

Well, since the conferences seem to be in favor of expanding to 12, ESPN doesn't even need to go in for the kill. They just need to be willing to go along with it. Like you, I suspect they will be.

But, it won't surprise me if ESPN negotiates pretty tough. I suspect Disney thinks that the CFP is pretty eager to get this done sooner rather than later. If so, ESPN will try to drive a hard bargain.

ESPN owns the bowls. https://www.bannersociety.com/2017/12/15...es-playoff

"...ESPN Events, a division of ESPN, owns and operates a large portfolio of 31 collegiate sporting events worldwide. The roster includes three Labor Day weekend college football games; FCS opening-weekend game; 14 college bowl games, 11 college basketball events and two college award shows, which accounts for approximately 300-plus hours of programming, reaches almost 64 million viewers and attracts over 700,000 attendees each year.

ESPN also controls broadcasts of the College Football Playoff and even the rankings shows that lead up to it.
Of the 40 FBS bowl games, about 35 are broadcast on the ESPN family of networks each year, so the company is still deeply invested in even the bowls it doesn’t own. ESPN owns these FBS games:

Texas Bowl
Gasparilla Bowl
Bahamas Bowl
Birmingham Bowl
Celebration Bowl
Boca Raton Bowl
Potato Bowl
Frisco Bowl
New Mexico Bowl
Hawai’i Bowl
Las Vegas Bowl
Armed Forces Bowl
Camellia Bowl
First Responder Bowl
The Myrtle Beach Bowl, joining the fray in 2020, will be an ESPN Events game...."

(07-11-2021 07:28 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 06:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 01:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 01:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Kind of perversely, I think CFB could fall in to an NFL-trap.

An NFL team that is at .500 with 3 games remaining (now that they play 17) maintains fan interest because they still have a very realistic shot at the playoffs. That's not a trap; that's the ideal to which CFB can aspire but never reach.

Compare that to the current state of college football, in which every team is effectively eliminated from playoff contention the minute they pick up their second loss of the season.

If CFB teams with 2 losses still have a chance to reach the playoff, and some teams with 3 losses still have an outside chance in November, there will be a lot more teams playing November games that TV can sell as meaningful, and a lot more teams who can sell hope to their fans in November and not just in September.

CFB isn't the NFL. CFB has been popular for a century without playoffs and with the tiniest of playoffs. Fans care about their school and its teams and want to see them compete regardless of playoffs. We know that because it's been that way for a century+.

The NFL would not have been popular at all without playoffs, as the only reason for the teams existence is to compete for a league championship. Also, because the franchises are creations of the league, all fans are not only "Saints" fans or "Patriots" fans, they are "NFL fans", so they keep watching the playoff games even when their teams aren't in them. So it doesn't matter that in week 14 there are only 50,000 people at the Redskins games instead of 80,000 at the start of the year, because the media money is massive anyway.

I think CFB runs a grave risk if it trades its culture, which has never been playoffs-focused, for a playoffs-focused approach. Because people don't relate to their schools in that same kind of mercenary way that NFL fans relate to their NFL teams. As of now, fans care about their college teams throughout the season because playoffs are a minor part of the overall experience. Ole Miss fans care about Ole Miss all season even though Ole Miss almost never has any chance to make the BCS or the CFP. It's not based on that.

But make it based on that, and then you might have fans dropping out when they realize their 3-3 team isn't going anywhere, like they do in the NFL.

I think the mentality has greatly changed with the 4-team playoff already. The mistake that the powers that be made (or at least underestimated): they thought college football fans would look at the consolation prizes (such as the non-playoff Rose Bowl and other NY6 bowls) in the CFP system same way as they did in the BCS era and that simply hasn’t been the case. So, we are already in a world where the entire national college football discussion revolves around the 4-team playoff, which is why the limited access has been much more damaging to programs (and entire conferences like the Pac-12 recently) compared to the BCS system. There are many rea$on$ why the playoff is expanding, but the hyper-focus on the playoff to the exclusion of virtually everything else in the 4-team CFP system inherently meant that it eventually needed to expand in order to keep more fans interested.

Yes and No. Yes, I think among P5 conferences, the playoffs have become a big prestige-marker. E.g., despite being generally the better football conference than the ACC, the PAC has seen its image suffer the past five years because it hasn't had success getting a team in the playoffs, while Clemson's ongoing mega-success in doing so has given the ACC a free pass on some of the bad seasons it has had. I am surprised that this conference focus on the CFP has developed but it clearly has. Every P5 conference except for the SEC has made changes, or publicly proposed changes, to its structure or conference-title determination system to make it more playoffs-enhancing.

But I don't think that has applied at the program level. The vast majority of schools have no realistic expectations for the playoffs so not making them has been no big deal. And even at major programs with playoff aspirations - I'm thinking blue blood schools like Auburn, Tennessee, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, USC, Texas, FSU, Florida - I don't think there has been much heat on them about not having made the playoffs (or in FSU's case, not since year one). Even at really high-expectation programs, fans realize that you can be very, very good at not make the playoffs. Coaches at Texas and USC and Michigan and other top places have been fired during that time, or have been on a warm/hot seat, but IMO it hasn't been because of missing the playoffs. And even at those places, going to a NY6 bowl still has a lot of meaning and marks a very good season.

So this is a case where I think the issue is more a conference-thing than a school thing. Expanding to 12 would make it a school thing.

(07-12-2021 09:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 08:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 08:16 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 08:57 PM)Alanda Wrote:  In a CBS podcast Dodd was a guest speaking on the playoffs, Notre Dame, NIL, and Scott Frost. Here are some things that stuck out to me with the playoff part.

-Believes ESPN didn't renegotiate with Big 12 because they are saving money for the playoff
-I'm paraphrasing, but if bowls are used in quarterfinals he expects tie-ins will be done with
-Bowls not set in stone to be used for quarterfinals
-He thinks future conference media rights deals will be higher because the regular season will be more important

Thanks for sharing. ESPN going for the kill.

Honestly, I think ESPN wants to kill the existing bowl System / NY6 and replace it with this 12-team model. I know the purists will be up in arms calling that blasphemy, but that’s exactly what I think ESPN is up to. They can preserve the game sites as tradition, but the Rose Bowl is going to be culled, at least the once familiar form of it. Ultimately, the QFs cannot be played on NYD. Some other wasteland exhibition bowls are going to fill it up leading to the SemiFinals the following Saturday. The only other possibility is the Rose and Sugar moving out of NYD or simply not participating at all most years.

Won’t happen overnight, but I’m convinced of it. Mark this post.

PS: Dennis Dodd nails exactly what I thought at the 15:30 mark… if you are still having doubts listen to that part x3. This is exactly how I felt about this weeks ago when the 12 team format was announced. He even mentions they won’t get 5:30 ET NYD.

Well, since the conferences seem to be in favor of expanding to 12, ESPN doesn't even need to go in for the kill. They just need to be willing to go along with it. Like you, I suspect they will be.

But, it won't surprise me if ESPN negotiates pretty tough. I suspect Disney thinks that the CFP is pretty eager to get this done sooner rather than later. If so, ESPN will try to drive a hard bargain.

ESPN owns the bowls.

Right, 35 out of 40. But so?

So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

To me the obvious compromise on travel is to place the semis on campus. This is something I posted about years ago and I think Frank Tank was an advocate as well. This means the 6 bowls can maintain their traditional dates and two would be out of the playoff picture every three years.

Talk about starting the spring semester with a bang on campus!

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

To me the obvious compromise on travel is to place the semis on campus. This is something I posted about years ago and I think Frank Tank was an advocate as well. This means the 6 bowls can maintain their traditional dates and two would be out of the playoff picture every three years.

Talk about starting the spring semester with a bang on campus!

I suspect that both the quarterfinal games would be scheduled when there are no students on campus, and in some cases that might apply to first round games as well.

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

Pretty much.

Though co-owner the City of Pasadena probably doesn't want to host the Quarterfinals AND the Semi-finals every year, so probably best case for the Rose Bow, is they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year, and leave the privilege of hosting the semifinals to the other bowls who aren't guaranteed to host on NYD every year.

___________________

(07-13-2021 07:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 09:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  ESPN owns the bowls.

Right, 35 out of 40. But so?

Some would draw a distinction between the bowls that ESPN Events owns outright and those that ESPN "owns" in the sense that they survive because they had a slot on the ESPN bowl broadcast schedule ... but certainly the highest profile bowls would not consider themselves "owned" by ESPN just because ESPN holds their broadcast rights.

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

Neither do I. The six NY6 bowls should rotate as the QFs and SFs, and that should make everyone happy.

(07-13-2021 10:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

Neither do I. The six NY6 bowls should rotate as the QFs and SFs, and that should make everyone happy.

That's not going to make the Rose Bowl happy. The Rose Parade is always on NYD and they will always want their game to air in the late afternoon EST time slot on that day.

Personally, the only solution I see is to have all playoff games independent of the bowl system entirely.

(07-13-2021 07:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 07:28 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 06:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 01:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-11-2021 01:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Kind of perversely, I think CFB could fall in to an NFL-trap.

An NFL team that is at .500 with 3 games remaining (now that they play 17) maintains fan interest because they still have a very realistic shot at the playoffs. That's not a trap; that's the ideal to which CFB can aspire but never reach.

Compare that to the current state of college football, in which every team is effectively eliminated from playoff contention the minute they pick up their second loss of the season.

If CFB teams with 2 losses still have a chance to reach the playoff, and some teams with 3 losses still have an outside chance in November, there will be a lot more teams playing November games that TV can sell as meaningful, and a lot more teams who can sell hope to their fans in November and not just in September.

CFB isn't the NFL. CFB has been popular for a century without playoffs and with the tiniest of playoffs. Fans care about their school and its teams and want to see them compete regardless of playoffs. We know that because it's been that way for a century+.

The NFL would not have been popular at all without playoffs, as the only reason for the teams existence is to compete for a league championship. Also, because the franchises are creations of the league, all fans are not only "Saints" fans or "Patriots" fans, they are "NFL fans", so they keep watching the playoff games even when their teams aren't in them. So it doesn't matter that in week 14 there are only 50,000 people at the Redskins games instead of 80,000 at the start of the year, because the media money is massive anyway.

I think CFB runs a grave risk if it trades its culture, which has never been playoffs-focused, for a playoffs-focused approach. Because people don't relate to their schools in that same kind of mercenary way that NFL fans relate to their NFL teams. As of now, fans care about their college teams throughout the season because playoffs are a minor part of the overall experience. Ole Miss fans care about Ole Miss all season even though Ole Miss almost never has any chance to make the BCS or the CFP. It's not based on that.

But make it based on that, and then you might have fans dropping out when they realize their 3-3 team isn't going anywhere, like they do in the NFL.

I think the mentality has greatly changed with the 4-team playoff already. The mistake that the powers that be made (or at least underestimated): they thought college football fans would look at the consolation prizes (such as the non-playoff Rose Bowl and other NY6 bowls) in the CFP system same way as they did in the BCS era and that simply hasn’t been the case. So, we are already in a world where the entire national college football discussion revolves around the 4-team playoff, which is why the limited access has been much more damaging to programs (and entire conferences like the Pac-12 recently) compared to the BCS system. There are many rea$on$ why the playoff is expanding, but the hyper-focus on the playoff to the exclusion of virtually everything else in the 4-team CFP system inherently meant that it eventually needed to expand in order to keep more fans interested.

Yes and No. Yes, I think among P5 conferences, the playoffs have become a big prestige-marker. E.g., despite being generally the better football conference than the ACC, the PAC has seen its image suffer the past five years because it hasn't had success getting a team in the playoffs, while Clemson's ongoing mega-success in doing so has given the ACC a free pass on some of the bad seasons it has had. I am surprised that this conference focus on the CFP has developed but it clearly has. Every P5 conference except for the SEC has made changes, or publicly proposed changes, to its structure or conference-title determination system to make it more playoffs-enhancing.

But I don't think that has applied at the program level. The vast majority of schools have no realistic expectations for the playoffs so not making them has been no big deal. And even at major programs with playoff aspirations - I'm thinking blue blood schools like Auburn, Tennessee, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, USC, Texas, FSU, Florida - I don't think there has been much heat on them about not having made the playoffs (or in FSU's case, not since year one). Even at really high-expectation programs, fans realize that you can be very, very good at not make the playoffs. Coaches at Texas and USC and Michigan and other top places have been fired during that time, or have been on a warm/hot seat, but IMO it hasn't been because of missing the playoffs. And even at those places, going to a NY6 bowl still has a lot of meaning and marks a very good season.

So this is a case where I think the issue is more a conference-thing than a school thing. Expanding to 12 would make it a school thing.

ESPN and the general public often judge a conference by its top teams, not its average. Because Kansas so dominates the Big 12 in basketball, it doesn't get much credit except for those who really know the sport. It may well have been the top basketball conference since it dumped the basketball deadweights (Colorado, Nebraska, A&M). The Pac has different teams at the top in football and a solid middle so often doesn't get as much credit as it deserves. The Big 10, on the other hand, has often been abysmal in football over the last 15 years, but Ohio St. has been the winningest program (not necessarily in MNCs) over that period so the Big 10 gets a pass.

As for the playoff, coaches are getting fired because the teams getting in the playoff are mopping up in recruiting. Don't remember for sure, but I think Ohio St. got 3 of the top 5 players in Washington state this year. Similar stories with Alabama and Clemson. OU beat Texas in Texas in recruiting this year. For that matter, Alabama and Ohio St. got more of the top 10-12 players in Texas than UT did.

(07-13-2021 09:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

Pretty much.

Though co-owner the City of Pasadena probably doesn't want to host the Quarterfinals AND the Semi-finals every year, so probably best case for the Rose Bow, is they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year, and leave the privilege of hosting the semifinals to the other bowls who aren't guaranteed to host on NYD every year.

___________________

(07-13-2021 07:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-12-2021 09:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  ESPN owns the bowls.

Right, 35 out of 40. But so?

Some would draw a distinction between the bowls that ESPN Events owns outright and those that ESPN "owns" in the sense that they survive because they had a slot on the ESPN bowl broadcast schedule ... but certainly the highest profile bowls would not consider themselves "owned" by ESPN just because ESPN holds their broadcast rights.

ESPN gets a big benefit from those bowls filling their broadcast schedule. Many of those bowls disappear without ESPN. ESPN is not going to be in favor of killing something they benefit from.

(07-13-2021 10:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 10:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

Neither do I. The six NY6 bowls should rotate as the QFs and SFs, and that should make everyone happy.

That's not going to make the Rose Bowl happy. The Rose Parade is always on NYD and they will always want their game to air in the late afternoon EST time slot on that day.

Personally, the only solution I see is to have all playoff games independent of the bowl system entirely.

One size doesn't fit all. Maybe they don't all rotate. Maybe none rotate. I could see the Rose always being a quarterfinal and the Fiesta always being a semi-final. I don't think the Sugar needs to be on NYD. There's a lot going on in New Orleans. Of course the Big 12 and SEC own the Sugar.

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

To me the obvious compromise on travel is to place the semis on campus. This is something I posted about years ago and I think Frank Tank was an advocate as well. This means the 6 bowls can maintain their traditional dates and two would be out of the playoff picture every three years.

Talk about starting the spring semester with a bang on campus!

The controversy is as Dodd stated, the Rose is coming out of NYD if they want to take part. The QF will take place prior to the 1st (probably at CCG sites or campus sites) to mitigate travel. This way you can get the SF scheduled the Saturday preceding NFL WC weekend.

I can’t believe people believe weeknight SFs will even be considered. Again, listen carefully to the 15 min mark of that podcast. As soon as they announced 6+6 I knew the Rose and its organizers were completely cut out from the setup.

(07-13-2021 12:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  ESPN and the general public often judge a conference by its top teams, not its average. Because Kansas so dominates the Big 12 in basketball, it doesn't get much credit except for those who really know the sport. It may well have been the top basketball conference since it dumped the basketball deadweights (Colorado, Nebraska, A&M). The Pac has different teams at the top in football and a solid middle so often doesn't get as much credit as it deserves. The Big 10, on the other hand, has often been abysmal in football over the last 15 years, but Ohio St. has been the winningest program (not necessarily in MNCs) over that period so the Big 10 gets a pass.

Eh, I'm not sure how abysmal the Big 10 has been the past 15 years. Looking at the MC, the B1G hasn't been the worst power conference since 2009. It's never been the best since then, but has finished second twice.

It's typically 2, 3 or 4 among the P5 conferences.

(07-13-2021 12:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 10:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 10:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 08:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  So worst case scenario for the Rose Bowl is they host a semifinal the week after NYD once every three years and the other two years host the runner-up (possibly second runner ups) of the Big 10/Pac 12 on their traditional date? This would mean campus sites for 1st round and quarterfinals.

Best case they host a quarterfinal on NYD every year with the option to host a semi a week later every three years?

I don’t understand the big controversy.

Neither do I. The six NY6 bowls should rotate as the QFs and SFs, and that should make everyone happy.

That's not going to make the Rose Bowl happy. The Rose Parade is always on NYD and they will always want their game to air in the late afternoon EST time slot on that day.

Personally, the only solution I see is to have all playoff games independent of the bowl system entirely.

One size doesn't fit all. Maybe they don't all rotate. Maybe none rotate. I could see the Rose always being a quarterfinal and the Fiesta always being a semi-final. I don't think the Sugar needs to be on NYD. There's a lot going on in New Orleans. Of course the Big 12 and SEC own the Sugar.

That's right, it doesn't have to be the same deal for each of those games.

But each of those bowls, like ESPN, has a contract under the current format that lasts 5 more seasons, so a 12-team playoff that begins before the end of the current deal has to either give each bowl something they want, or possibly pay them a bunch of money to accept a new format they don't like.