(07-14-2021 09:19 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Semifinals is a plural. A SF scheduled the Saturday of NFL WC weekend and a SF schedule the Monday of NFL WC weekend is an available alternative.

Nah, Saturday WC weekend will have three NFL games scheduled. Perhaps you meant week 18 or what was formerly WC weekend, in which case it still wouldn't be the following Monday when there is an open Saturday two days prior. This is literally the only date they can play two major SF games and maximize eyeballs so long as the NFL calendar remains stable for the time being.

Here is what I see happening for NYD. You get the Rose Bowl matching up 3rd and 4th place teams from the Pac and B1G. The matchups laid out previously in the thread are respectable. In essence, the quality of the game itself will be more comparable to the Holiday Bowl or a notch above that. However, the Rose will get a QF game every 7 years when the 1st is on a Saturday. This is the latest possible date they'll play the QF in any future cycle (this year not in play, but maybe 29' or some year around there is in play for QFs/NYD).

Gator, Citrus, and Outback bowls may be forced to take some highly ranked AAC, Conf USA, or ACC schools because the B1G and SEC pool will be too diluted to get a quality pairing. Tough pill to swallow, but better than 1/3 of the players from a major school opting out to prepare for the draft.

The Peach, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, Cotton (all of whom will be willing to switch dates) will move back to accommodate a QF game or forward for a SF game. However, we now have a total of 6 games to fill minus the NCG. However, I don't believe they will put the QFs under the Bowl umbrella, but they still could. In that case, we'd have six playoff "bowl" games + NCG. You could see the Gator, Citrus, and Outback being promoted to a QF 6 out of 7 years (when the Rose Bowl doesn't absorb a QF slot on NYD falling on Saturday).

As to my previous paragraph, I think it is slightly less likely because of travel. Traveling to a P5 bye school's regional NFL or on-campus site is more feasible. Rather, I see most of these bowls staying on the 1st and serving their purpose as meaningless exhibition games. Two existing NY6 Bowls (sans the Rose Bowl) will be bumped to first Saturday at least 1 week apart from NYD, serving as national SFs. It can rotate between the 5/6 NY6 bowls (not the Rose) or they can add a sixth partner to retain a three year cycle for all parties involved. I see the current CFP contract running its course, unless we get my original scenario and the Bowls agree they want to take part (with the Rose Bowl vetoing or reluctantly accepting the new guidelines).

(07-14-2021 09:35 PM)owl at the moon 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.

Your point is a good one, but you have dramatically understated how bad the current system is.

Only a third of CFB is eliminated by their second loss.

Another third is eliminated by their FIRST loss.

And I’m sort-of ok with those two shortcomings.

The biggest problem I have with the current system is that one-third of the teams are literally eliminated from contention before they take the field for their very first game.

I assume you mean the G5 teams. Believe it or not, as a USF fan I am OK with the current system. The G5 and P5 aren't in the same competitive league and never have been. So it doesn't make any sense to me to say a system that doesn't allow USF or San Jose State or the Ohio Bobcats a chance to make a playoffs and compete against Alabama or Ohio State or Florida is a broken system.

Florida and Michigan don't compete against San Jose State or Eastern Michigan any more than they compete against FCS or D2 schools and they never have. Doesn't bother me that the latter don't have a shot at the CFP, so doesn't bother me that the former don't either.

I guess the argument with the G5 schools as compared to the FCS/Div II schools is that FCS/Div II schools can still "win a national championship" even though it is a "lesser" championship. The MAC, Sun Belt, and C-USA can easily drop down to FCS (and still play FBS games for big paydays) and compete for national championships but do they want to? Is going to a bowl in Boise at the end of the season better than winning an FCS Championship?

Same thing with other sports. In men's and women's basketball, 3/4 of the conferences know they will never win the national championship, 1/2 of them would be happy to make a Sweet 16. Would they rather win a Div II national championship or lose to Duke or Kentucky in the 1st round? I think we know the answer for most schools not named Hartford.

Let’s say Semifinals are locked into the Saturday of NFL’s Week 18 (Jan 3-9) and QFs are 1 week prior (Dec 27-Jan 2) and the preceding Friday night. As a baseline, we’ll have the NY6 rotate through these spots.

Because the Rose is locked into January 1st, my guess is that the CFP will instead take bids for the 4th quarterfinal (or 2nd semifinal), opening the door for a Midwest location. Theoretically they could bid out all 7 games, but likely the bowl brands are worth keeping around.

Pasadena could successfully bid to be included those years when the QF Saturday is the 1st or 2nd. But other years they’d negotiate to keep B1G vs PAC and maybe even anchor a 2nd tier of “New Years Day” bowls.

(07-15-2021 10:13 AM)Crayton Wrote:  Let’s say Semifinals are locked into the Saturday of NFL’s Week 18 (Jan 3-9) and QFs are 1 week prior (Dec 27-Jan 2) and the preceding Friday night. As a baseline, we’ll have the NY6 rotate through these spots.

Because the Rose is locked into January 1st, my guess is that the CFP will instead take bids for the 4th quarterfinal (or 2nd semifinal), opening the door for a Midwest location. Theoretically they could bid out all 7 games, but likely the bowl brands are worth keeping around.

Pasadena could successfully bid to be included those years when the QF Saturday is the 1st or 2nd. But other years they’d negotiate to keep B1G vs PAC and maybe even anchor a 2nd tier of “New Years Day” bowls.

Exactly, and I feel Lucas Oil is best suited to replace the Rose Bowl. I don’t know what Bowl name they’d use or relocate. Perhaps Detroit or Minnesota. There is no reason to overlap with Phoenix Dallas Or the South East.

(07-15-2021 10:13 AM)Crayton Wrote:  Let’s say Semifinals are locked into the Saturday of NFL’s Week 18 (Jan 3-9) and QFs are 1 week prior (Dec 27-Jan 2) and the preceding Friday night.

Unlikely, because we're assuming that ESPN is going to pay big bucks for this and will insist on scheduling the games in a way that maximizes the number of people watching.

The audience numbers from the CFP years so far make it clear that the way to maximize the audience is to put playoff games on Jan. 1. There are two realistic ways to do that: (1) 3 quarterfinals on Jan. 1, with the other on Dec. 31 or Jan. 2, or (2) Semifinals on Jan. 1, with the quarterfinals at least 7 days earlier (actually at least 8 days earlier, because they're not going to schedule playoff games on Dec. 25).

If we do get a 12-team playoff, bet on seeing either (1) or (2) in the schedule. If I had to guess between the two, I'd say (1), because playing semis on weeknights in January is a better option, for TV, then playing 8 playoff games (4 first-round games and 4 quarterfinal games) on December weekends.

(07-15-2021 11:04 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 10:13 AM)Crayton Wrote:  Let’s say Semifinals are locked into the Saturday of NFL’s Week 18 (Jan 3-9) and QFs are 1 week prior (Dec 27-Jan 2) and the preceding Friday night.

Unlikely, because we're assuming that ESPN is going to pay big bucks for this and will insist on scheduling the games in a way that maximizes the number of people watching.

The audience numbers from the CFP years so far make it clear that the way to maximize the audience is to put playoff games on Jan. 1. There are two realistic ways to do that: (1) 3 quarterfinals on Jan. 1, with the other on Dec. 31 or Jan. 2, or (2) Semifinals on Jan. 1, with the quarterfinals at least 7 days earlier (actually at least 8 days earlier, because they're not going to schedule playoff games on Dec. 25).

If we do get a 12-team playoff, bet on seeing either (1) or (2) in the schedule. If I had to guess between the two, I'd say (1), because playing semis on weeknights in January is a better option, for TV, then playing 8 playoff games (4 first-round games and 4 quarterfinal games) on December weekends.

The only reason the Rose Bowl has drawn better than some SFs is because of the competitiveness of the game. It’s typically tight as opposed to a ND getting blown out in a SF or SEC blowing out their opponent by the first half. NYD is not a ratings phenomenon any more than what it always has been, an evenly matched B1G/PAC or an ultra competitive SF game. The game will still have ratings comparable to an OSU or SEC QF which is exactly why it maximizes TV revenue.

(07-15-2021 11:23 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 11:04 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 10:13 AM)Crayton Wrote:  Let’s say Semifinals are locked into the Saturday of NFL’s Week 18 (Jan 3-9) and QFs are 1 week prior (Dec 27-Jan 2) and the preceding Friday night.

Unlikely, because we're assuming that ESPN is going to pay big bucks for this and will insist on scheduling the games in a way that maximizes the number of people watching.

The audience numbers from the CFP years so far make it clear that the way to maximize the audience is to put playoff games on Jan. 1. There are two realistic ways to do that: (1) 3 quarterfinals on Jan. 1, with the other on Dec. 31 or Jan. 2, or (2) Semifinals on Jan. 1, with the quarterfinals at least 7 days earlier (actually at least 8 days earlier, because they're not going to schedule playoff games on Dec. 25).

If we do get a 12-team playoff, bet on seeing either (1) or (2) in the schedule. If I had to guess between the two, I'd say (1), because playing semis on weeknights in January is a better option, for TV, then playing 8 playoff games (4 first-round games and 4 quarterfinal games) on December weekends.

The only reason the Rose Bowl has drawn better than some SFs is because of the competitiveness of the game. It’s typically tight as opposed to a ND getting blown out in a SF or SEC blowing out their opponent by the first half. NYD is not a ratings phenomenon any more than what it always has been, an evenly matched B1G/PAC or an ultra competitive SF game. The game will still have ratings comparable to an OSU or SEC QF which is exactly why it maximizes TV revenue.

No, the Sugar Bowl also gets strong ratings even when not a semifinal, and some of those have been blowouts. The games played in the morning (early afternoon in the east) before the Rose Bowl always get better ratings than other non-CFP games. There are just more people watching college football on Jan. 1. That's the most valuable "real estate" for bowl or playoff games. ESPN is going to want to use it for playoff games in any expanded playoff.

(07-15-2021 11:44 AM)Wedge Wrote:  No, the Sugar Bowl also gets strong ratings even when not a semifinal, and some of those have been blowouts. The games played in the morning (early afternoon in the east) before the Rose Bowl always get better ratings than other non-CFP games. There are just more people watching college football on Jan. 1. That's the most valuable "real estate" for bowl or playoff games. ESPN is going to want to use it for playoff games in any expanded playoff.

No, the Sugar Bowl negotiated dibs on prime time NYD as the new stand-in tradition only at the advent of the CFP negotiations. It made sense because to Rose Bowl was always locked into 5:00 pm and was to be a SF every three years, so ESPN needed another bowl to pair with the Rose for the other SF. If ESPN thought NYD was a better draw for the SFs, they would have pushed the Sugar out of there and played SF's in the 1:00 pm 8:30 pm ET windows every year when the Rose was not a part of the CFP. This didn't happen.

Now NYD can become exactly what you said, artificially boosted rating from a diluted pool of non-CFP bowl participants. The bowl games will be best served despite not having access to top 12 schools.

The SEC and Big 12 wanted a "Champions" Bowl to counter the Rose Bowl and wanted the New Year's Night slot. The time slot was chosen before the bowl or site was chosen.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-bowl-game
https://www.foxsports.com/arizona/story/...owl-051812

Sugar Bowl chosen:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...2-sec-game

The Orange Bowl followed:

http://www.orangebowl.org/assets/1/7/ACC...artner.pdf

Whether or not the other Access Bowls or Orange wanted or preferred 8:30pm ET NYD is debatable. I’d even concede this point. But here’s deal with 3 playoff games on NYD. Assuming fans sit through all those games in front of their TV or streaming device back to back to back (on a work night most years), you still have a 4th QF game to play. We know the disaster that was scheduling a major bowl NYE. Why throw a QF game away at 4:30pm NYE? And if NYE is a Sunday then that 4th game has to be played the day after NYD which would be a Tuesday. Meaning families and fans would have to extend their vacation by 1 if not 2 days for traveling back. Oh and then the fans have to travel again the following Monday or Tuesday night for a SF! Might as well root for your team to lose in the QF so it’s a win win… bottom line is you need to get the QFs played back to back nights and be done with it.

That’s why last weekend of December will stay in place. A lot of people, maybe 50% of the country have the week completely off. I don’t even think a plane trip will be required for the bye teams if QFs go with regional NFL sites with most of the Bowls played on NYD. All the problems with schedule and travel are solved in this scenario. Anyhow, I’m sure we’ll get an update once the Rose Bowl and Delaney are dealt with, and this is in fact what they settle on.

(07-15-2021 10:57 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 10:13 AM)Crayton Wrote:  Let’s say Semifinals are locked into the Saturday of NFL’s Week 18 (Jan 3-9) and QFs are 1 week prior (Dec 27-Jan 2) and the preceding Friday night. As a baseline, we’ll have the NY6 rotate through these spots.

Because the Rose is locked into January 1st, my guess is that the CFP will instead take bids for the 4th quarterfinal (or 2nd semifinal), opening the door for a Midwest location. Theoretically they could bid out all 7 games, but likely the bowl brands are worth keeping around.

Pasadena could successfully bid to be included those years when the QF Saturday is the 1st or 2nd. But other years they’d negotiate to keep B1G vs PAC and maybe even anchor a 2nd tier of “New Years Day” bowls.

Exactly, and I feel Lucas Oil is best suited to replace the Rose Bowl. I don’t know what Bowl name they’d use or relocate. Perhaps Detroit or Minnesota. There is no reason to overlap with Phoenix Dallas Or the South East.

So, starting in the 2026 season, the Rose 'could' be a quarterfinal in a nice, round 4 of 12 years (NYD '27, '28, '33, and '38).

I do think the CFP will auction off at least 1 QF site each year. If Pasadena wants it those years they can reach for it. If Indy wants it, they can reach for it. Maybe they'll tie dibs on the Big Ten Champ to get the most money possible. But, if the conferences are no longer going through the bowls (as they did leading up to the NY6 format), they'll make the bowls (and perhaps more than just 1 QF site) shell out to be part of their game.

In the end, I do think the initial proposal of QFs on NYD and incorporating the Rose Bowl on an annual basis is much more likely. It may force Semis on Mondays, but I think the bowls still have that much pull for at least 1 more cycle.

(07-15-2021 02:35 PM)Crayton Wrote:  So, starting in the 2026 season, the Rose 'could' be a quarterfinal in a nice, round 4 of 12 years (NYD '27, '28, '33, and '38).

I do think the CFP will auction off at least 1 QF site each year. If Pasadena wants it those years they can reach for it. If Indy wants it, they can reach for it. Maybe they'll tie dibs on the Big Ten Champ to get the most money possible. But, if the conferences are no longer going through the bowls (as they did leading up to the NY6 format), they'll make the bowls (and perhaps more than just 1 QF site) shell out to be part of their game.

In the end, I do think the initial proposal of QFs on NYD and incorporating the Rose Bowl on an annual basis is much more likely. It may force Semis on Mondays, but I think the bowls still have that much pull for at least 1 more cycle.

Yes, I didn't scroll that far ahead on the calendar in the corner of my screen, but 4/12 as a QF and retaining the 1st or the 2nd every year seems like a good tradeoff for the Rose. Maybe the revenue split will be more skewed towards the Rose Bowl relative to the other CFP games/sites, just to make up for the lack of a top 10 matchup in the Rose Bowl 8/12 years. It's the best deal they will get. I don't think Pasadena will ever bid for a SF or NCG unless they want a 2nd game or they want to move out of NYD observed for whatever reason.

Not sure what to make of this---but my sense is it could be mean big changes in how conferences and NCAA operate. Frankly, in light of recent judicial rulings, the NCAA really didnt have much choice but to step back and allow the conferences to take a bigger role. Since conferences cannot coordinate their actions to create national player compensation limits anymore than the NCAA can---there are really no limits as to where this action could eventually lead.


Dan Wolken
@DanWolken
·
1h
Just got off a call with Mark Emmert and a small group of reporters. He wants a thorough rethinking of the NCAA structure and governance, with more power handed down to conferences on the heels of Alston ruling, NIL, etc. More details to come...

(07-15-2021 05:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Not sure what to make of this---but my sense is it could be mean big changes in how conferences and NCAA operate. Frankly, in light of recent judicial rulings, the NCAA really didnt have much choice but to step back and allow the conferences to take a bigger role. Since conferences cannot coordinate their actions to create national player compensation limits anymore than the NCAA can---there are really no limits as to where this action could eventually lead.


Dan Wolken
@DanWolken
·
1h
Just got off a call with Mark Emmert and a small group of reporters. He wants a thorough rethinking of the NCAA structure and governance, with more power handed down to conferences on the heels of Alston ruling, NIL, etc. More details to come...

This seems to be a way for the NCAA to ensure its organizational survival. If it washes its hands of direct compensation rules and puts the onus on the conferences to have them or not, then conferences that ban compensation become the new target for lawsuits. The lawyers may then claim the 14 SEC teams are a 'cartel' artificially fixing prices, etc. If the SEC says that players who want to get paid can play in other conferences, the lawyers will claim that the SEC is a dominant conference with disproportionate influence and market power, etc. You can just visualize this.

Bowl games, including New Year's Day games, were never intended to play a role in determining a national champion. The bowls themselves and the cities that sponsor them, independent of the conferences with tie-ins and independent of the networks that want to use them as valuable inventory, exist for the purpose of providing a lure to tourists looking for a winter vacation at a time when many have limited demands from their jobs.

If those bowls are going to become just one part of an extended post-season (which until recently used to end at New year's) a lot of their incentive to participate is gone. I don't think that fans of playoff teams are likely to commit to spending more than a day or two at a quarterfinal site if they hope (and they all do) they will be traveling again the next week and even the week after that.

The big bucks that the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl pay to the participants aren't coming from the Chambers of Commerce in Pasadena or New Orleans. They are coming from corporate sponsors and media partners. The only reason those entities want to include those bowls in the playoffs is so they don't become competitors for eyeballs on New Year's Day - and binging on football on New Year's Day is a long standing American tradition.

Frankly, I would lobby to have the quarterfinals (or at least 3 of them) on the last Saturday in December with an exclusive window for TV, and they could just as well be hosted on campus by the four schools with the first round byes. That way the top 8 teams would have the chance to host a playoff game instead of just #5-#8. Let the NY Bowls be lesser events with lower payouts.

There are lots of bowls like that (like the Capital One Bowl, etc) now catering to P5 conferences. What's a few more? With no playoff competition they'll still draw eyeballs to ESPN, even if they involve teams ranked outside the top 12 with many players opting out. What else are we going to watch on NYD?

(07-15-2021 08:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  Bowl games, including New Year's Day games, were never intended to play a role in determining a national champion. The bowls themselves and the cities that sponsor them, independent of the conferences with tie-ins and independent of the networks that want to use them as valuable inventory, exist for the purpose of providing a lure to tourists looking for a winter vacation at a time when many have limited demands from their jobs.

If those bowls are going to become just one part of an extended post-season (which until recently used to end at New year's) a lot of their incentive to participate is gone. I don't think that fans of playoff teams are likely to commit to spending more than a day or two at a quarterfinal site if they hope (and they all do) they will be traveling again the next week and even the week after that.

The big bucks that the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl pay to the participants aren't coming from the Chambers of Commerce in Pasadena or New Orleans. They are coming from corporate sponsors and media partners. The only reason those entities want to include those bowls in the playoffs is so they don't become competitors for eyeballs on New Year's Day - and binging on football on New Year's Day is a long standing American tradition.

Frankly, I would lobby to have the quarterfinals (or at least 3 of them) on the last Saturday in December with an exclusive window for TV, and they could just as well be hosted on campus by the four schools with the first round byes. That way the top 8 teams would have the chance to host a playoff game instead of just #5-#8. Let the NY Bowls be lesser events with lower payouts.

There are lots of bowls like that (like the Capital One Bowl, etc) now catering to P5 conferences. What's a few more? With no playoff competition they'll still draw eyeballs to ESPN, even if they involve teams ranked outside the top 12 with many players opting out. What else are we going to watch on NYD?

Yes, the appetite for being a stepping-stone bowl is not as voracious as it would be for a season finale. I get the impression that conferences prefer "neutral" site games, and there will certainly be more local (and corporate) support when the date and place is known years in advance.

Will the Rose Bowl bite? Will the Capital One? Someone will and it'll be spearheaded by bowl committees. There may not be a strict rotation, however, as the CFP board will prefer to hand-pick bids based on $$ and decent geographic spread.

I'd guess ~75% of the QFs+SFs games will be current NYD bowls, but I would not be struck dumb if it was closer to 25%.

(07-13-2021 12:52 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(07-13-2021 12:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  [quote='BruceMcF' pid='17497490' dateline='1626188129']

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.

ESPN wants the bowls to be played just so they can have live sports on TV, but their value is minimal.

This is because other than the contract bowls & playoffs, most most of the bowls don't get great ratings. The average non-contract bowl in 2021 got 2.23 million viewers.

The highest non-contract bowl this year was the Citrus bowl (Auburn-Northwestern), which got a 2.8 rating and 4.78 million viewers. That's about the same as the average 1st round NCAA basketball tournament game on CBS.

4 of the bowls got under 1 million viewers. That's about the same as a First Four NCAA tournament game on True TV.

Sources:
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college...v-ratings/
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2021/03...e-not-bad/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/20...286401002/
“ESPN looks at bowls as a highly profitable venture,” former CBS Sports president Neal Pilson told USA TODAY. “They can get better ratings with a (lower-tier) bowl game than they can get with maybe just another college basketball game.” "And that’s great for business, according to the key market forces driving demand: sponsors, schools, cities, television viewers and ESPN."

First, the TV ratings for college football in 2020 were not great due to the pandemic. There were 11 bowl games canceled in 2020, beside all of the canceled regular season games. Secondly, football gets great ratings compared to everything else. Seven of the top ten rated television shows in 2020 were NFL football games. The LSU vs Clemson championship game was rated No. 7 in 2020. Eight of the top ten TV shows in 2020 were football games.

The NFL added two more playoff games and an extra week of regular season games. The CFP is discussing expansion to 12 teams. It is all about the money. Nike and the NFL are committing a total of $5 million to grow girls flag football at the high school level around the country.
https://news.nike.com/news/nike-x-nfl-pa...initiative

This is being done to grow the sport in this country among females and re-engage younger participants in football. The NFL needs football to be popular at all levels to continue their dominanace of the TV ratings and to have the TV networks continue to pump billions of dollars to the league. They need college and high school football to remain popular. More is better at this point.

(07-15-2021 08:49 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-14-2021 09:19 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Semifinals is a plural. A SF scheduled the Saturday of NFL WC weekend and a SF schedule the Monday of NFL WC weekend is an available alternative.

Nah, Saturday WC weekend will have three NFL games scheduled. Perhaps you meant week 18 or what was formerly WC weekend, in which case it still wouldn't be the following Monday when there is an open Saturday two days prior. This is literally the only date they can play two major SF games and maximize eyeballs so long as the NFL calendar remains stable for the time being.

You are assuming that they are both on the same day in order to contradict the point that they could be played on Saturday then Monday. That seems like a textbook example of the original meaning of "begging the question".

And, yes I am referring to the current WC weekend, or the future Wk18.

Quote:Here is what I see happening for NYD. You get the Rose Bowl matching up 3rd and 4th place teams from the Pac and B1G.

In the 2023 scenario where they are one of the stakeholders with a veto on changing the current system, it seems pretty safe to assume they will not be forced to accept such a dramatic dop in status.

(07-17-2021 01:43 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  You are assuming that they are both on the same day in order to contradict the point that they could be played on Saturday then Monday. That seems like a textbook example of the original meaning of "begging the question".

And, yes I am referring to the current WC weekend, or the future Wk18.

But then why aren’t the SF played on back to back nights in prime time as it is now? There is already plenty of rest until the NCG for both winners as it is. They are both played on the middle Saturday on the same day 2/3 years. Why are people assuming weeknight SFs are feasible when this has never been the case throughout the cycle? They need fans to actually travel to the games and not take vacation days back to back weeks.

Quote:In the 2023 scenario where they are one of the stakeholders with a veto on changing the current system, it seems pretty safe to assume they will not be forced to accept such a dramatic dop in status.

This is the consequence of keeping your game at 5:00 pm ET NYD. You get a ****** exhibition game. They have the option of bidding for another game, but if they want a football game behind the tournament of roses parade, they simply won’t have access to the top B1G and PAC teams. I agree this is the biggest obstacle, but from the info in the podcast, it seems marginalizing the Rose Bowl was a top priority for the other CFP stakeholders.