(07-27-2021 12:47 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Knowing that Sankey was the driver behind expanding to 12, do the other conferences now vote against it? If they expand to 8 instead of 12 that prevents the SEC from placing extra teams and diminishes their revenues. Revenues that will already exceed and in some cases dwarf the other power conferences.

With the Big XII looking more G5 these days, you could adjust the playoff proposal from 12 schools to 8 and guarantee the top 5 (instead of top 6) conferences champions a spot. That still leaves three autobids and does away with the ridiculous 1st round byes for 4 schools. Play the first round on campus.

(07-28-2021 09:43 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  With the Big XII looking more G5 these days, you could adjust the playoff proposal from 12 schools to 8 and guarantee the top 5 (instead of top 6) conferences champions a spot. That still leaves three autobids and does away with the ridiculous 1st round byes for 4 schools. Play the first round on campus.

Yes, I hadn't thought of that, but they will still have to contend with anti-trust in this case. Maybe the need a G5 representative (not from the neoBig 12) regardless.

Too much money on the table with an expanded playoff not to do something. Maybe it's 12 or maybe it's 10 or 8 but we will see some increase in access.

"SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey clarifies stance on playoff expansion"

https://247sports.com/Article/SEC-Commis...14061/Amp/

It doesn't much sound like the SEC is in favor of this.

He didn’t really say anything there except they weren’t the ones clamoring for expansion.

Four isn’t going to net them more participants than they’ve had. Sorry, still not jumping undefeated teams from other regions with your two new galoots. He probably wants 8 at this point.

(07-27-2021 12:57 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 12:52 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I'd say more likely it will go bigger, to a 6+10.

1) Research says the Top 4 conference winners still want the $$$ that comes with hosting a home playoff game.

2) SEC will want to not just have 3 or 4 spots but 5 or 6 in the playoff now that its so large.

I don’t agree on that front.

The home playoff game money seems to be a red herring because the chances of the host team actually keeping ticket revenue is very low. The ticket revenue would likely go to the CFP, but they may get ancillary revenue such as parking and concessions. That’s how it works in the NFL. To be sure, that’s still some extra money, but the reality is that a September home game against an FCS school would net the typical P5 school a lot more revenue.

12 just seems optimal: large enough to make a lot more regular season games relevant, but not so large that it makes the regular season *irrelevant* - there’s a very fine line.

You do know you could still keep the regular season relevant just by including each G5 conference champ versus byes.

Ohio State AD says they should hit the pause button.

https://sports.yahoo.com/ohio-state-ad-g...14298.html

(07-28-2021 09:43 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 12:47 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Knowing that Sankey was the driver behind expanding to 12, do the other conferences now vote against it? If they expand to 8 instead of 12 that prevents the SEC from placing extra teams and diminishes their revenues. Revenues that will already exceed and in some cases dwarf the other power conferences.

With the Big XII looking more G5 these days, you could adjust the playoff proposal from 12 schools to 8 and guarantee the top 5 (instead of top 6) conferences champions a spot. That still leaves three autobids and does away with the ridiculous 1st round byes for 4 schools. Play the first round on campus.

However, that postpones the new CFP until 2026, since the Go5 schools won't vote for that as a replacement for the Access Bowl race.

And more money on the table with a CFP12, which likely means that a CFP8 remains a fallback if they can't get agreement with the Bowls on a CFP12 system, and can't get agreement from the soon to be P4 about breaking it away from the Bowls.

(07-31-2021 12:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  He didn’t really say anything there except they weren’t the ones clamoring for expansion.

Four isn’t going to net them more participants than they’ve had. Sorry, still not jumping undefeated teams from other regions with your two new galoots. He probably wants 8 at this point.

He did say that he supports getting the Pac 12 champ access because they have been excluded a lot since the 4-team playoff's inception and that is in line with what the Pac 12 Commissioner said about a playoff expansion. Instead of the top 6 conference champions when this all shakes out we may see auto bids for certain conference champions and the rest just at-large. SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and Pac 12, highest rated G5 with Auto-bids plus 6 at-large maybe?

(07-31-2021 07:52 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 12:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  He didn’t really say anything there except they weren’t the ones clamoring for expansion.

Four isn’t going to net them more participants than they’ve had. Sorry, still not jumping undefeated teams from other regions with your two new galoots. He probably wants 8 at this point.

He did say that he supports getting the Pac 12 champ access because they have been excluded a lot since the 4-team playoff's inception and that is in line with what the Pac 12 Commissioner said about a playoff expansion. Instead of the top 6 conference champions when this all shakes out we may see auto bids for certain conference champions and the rest just at-large. SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and Pac 12, highest rated G5 with Auto-bids plus 6 at-large maybe?

I think what this has shown is there will be no guaranteed bids. For whatever reason, they decided that wouldn't fly. With the Big 12 still in place, the G5 are going to be strongly opposed to lowering it to the top 5 champions. It will still likely be 12 with 6 champs. Although it could get reduced to 10 with 5 champs, but that still leads to Pac 12/ACC/Big 10 getting left out sometimes.

(07-31-2021 09:44 AM)bullet Wrote:  I think what this has shown is there will be no guaranteed bids. For whatever reason, they decided that wouldn't fly. With the Big 12 still in place, the G5 are going to be strongly opposed to lowering it to the top 5 champions. It will still likely be 12 with 6 champs. Although it could get reduced to 10 with 5 champs, but that still leads to Pac 12/ACC/Big 10 getting left out sometimes.

Quite ... without autobids, top 6 was a wonderful comprise which implied that in most years, even a P5 champion that was a lower ranked division champion with an upset win, in the same year as a very strong best Go5 champion, would most likely simply drop to six and still be in. The +1 is required as a safety margin.

And at the same time, it's incrementally better access than the NY6 Access Bowl race, so the G5 schools would support the proposal, allowing a possibility for it to get done for 2023, which requires unanimous support among all signatories.

If the change in the Big12 is in place for 2023, the safety margin is not as big a deal for the PAC-12 ... but it becomes crucial for the Big12, which is still a signatory to the old contract and still has to support any 2023 CFP reform for it to go ahead.

And money sooner is more valuable than money later: everyone looking to get a big payday from the CFP12 would rather it happen three years sooner.

Just my opinion...they want it to just go to open market...no real changes to the format...we shall see...

(07-31-2021 10:08 AM)Maize Wrote:  Just my opinion...they want it to just go to open market...no real changes to the format...we shall see...

Who is "they" here?

(07-31-2021 10:26 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 10:08 AM)Maize Wrote:  Just my opinion...they want it to just go to open market...no real changes to the format...we shall see...

Who is "they" here?

My guess the Big Ten/Pac 12/Big XII-(yes they are still a conference)...we shall see...in the end it going to get expanded...too much money on the table and it is always about the money...

First off, there's no WAY Sankey doesn't want an expanded playoff. 6 at large spots, and the football brand names in the SEC? You'd see 9 and 3 SEC teams leap frogging other P5 schools with ease.

Expanded playoff and 4 or 5 SEC teams in it? Cha ching.


If you are not the SEC, and you want to put the SEC in a box ... you vote to keep the playoffs at 4. Suddenly, the best the SEC could do is 2 in the playoffs. And now you have massive egos inside the SEC struggling with not being really relevant.

The Ohio State AD says "let's hit pause on this". A PAC12 administrator is publicly saying "we will have a response" regarding these SEC moves.

Will these public stances be enough to stop the momentum towards a 12 team playoff? Breaking it down ....


Big Ten -- let's say they vote NO on 12 team playoff.

ACC -- Dabo Swinney came out publicly against 12 team playoff (Wake's Coach Clawson has said he was for it, but Clemson is Clemson after all), So let's say the ACC says no too.

Big XII 8 -- let's say they say no, out of spite toward the SEC and Texas and Oklahoma.

That's 6 votes against.

SEC obviously votes for.

It's 6 to 2.

American? Access to a playoff would be tough to turn down. But they stand to lose some key members if the Big XII decides to grow. So maybe there's leverage here somewhere ... but I say they vote for expanding playoff.
MAC -- ditto.
Sun Belt -- ditto
MWC - ditto
CUSA - ditto


That makes it 6 to 7.


Does Notre Dame get a vote? I have no idea. If they did, I bet they would vote against. They've been able to make the playoff as it is. Why would they want a bigger playoff? But I don't know if they have a vote in all this.


As much as I would love to see the SEC in a box, I don't see it happening ... unless the Big Ten, ACC, PAC and Big XII 8 somehow convince the G5 conferences to go along with them.

It's not a majority vote on the 2023 CFP12. It's a contract restructure beyond the bounds of decisions the CFP committee can make by majority vote. One vote no, including from a Go5 school, and there is three years of income growth you are waving bye bye.

But OSU is one of the beneficiaries of the CFP4, and among the schools that can best afford to wait for a 2026 version, so it has every reason to call for things to slow down if it thinks the version of the CFP12 on offer could be substantially improved for it's interests and for the interests of it's main partner institutions.

(07-31-2021 10:47 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  It's not a majority vote on the 2023 CFP12. It's a contract restructure beyond the bounds of decisions the CFP committee can make by majority vote. One vote no, including from a Go5 school, and there is three years of income growth you are waving bye bye.

Dennis Dodd...Pac 12...what i hinted at.. money and open market

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...ssion=true

(07-31-2021 10:26 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 10:08 AM)Maize Wrote:  Just my opinion...they want it to just go to open market...no real changes to the format...we shall see...

Who is "they" here?

Would have to think it would be a group led by the B1G & P12. There has to be some level of concern within their camps as Fox centric properties of ESPN fully controlling an expanded playoff field.

Think Big 12 is still on board as long as it remains 6 champs. They've long been in favor of increasing the size. And its hard to turn away 3 years of extra money.

Only issues are Pac 12, Big 10 and players raising a stink. The last is the most likely problem.

(07-31-2021 12:50 AM)esayem Wrote:  He didn’t really say anything there except they weren’t the ones clamoring for expansion.

Four isn’t going to net them more participants than they’ve had. Sorry, still not jumping undefeated teams from other regions with your two new galoots. He probably wants 8 at this point.

Exactly. The SEC was always just fine with a 4 team playoff. If the other conferences want to stop CFP expansion, the SEC would have zero issue with that.