Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
Author Message
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 41,350
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1459
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #1
CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
... else the current CFP will have to run its full 12-year course:

"We have time, because if the event is going to change before the end of the term, the end of the 12 years, we have three or four months," Hancock said. "If it's going to change in Year 13, then we have a couple of years."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ure-format
(This post was last modified: 09-28-2021 09:56 PM by quo vadis.)
09-28-2021 09:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


The Cutter of Bish Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,576
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 158
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #2
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.
09-29-2021 06:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,536
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 779
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #3
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2021 08:03 AM by Frank the Tank.)
09-29-2021 08:00 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,140
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #4
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
Maybe there is a short-term window of opportunity to do a temporary expansion to 8 teams total with 4 first round games on campus and/or NFL stadiums close to the team's campus in mid-december.

This way the bowl structure stays the same hosting the CFP semi-finals and the other NY6 bowls. None of that would have to be renegotiated. The only thing to negotiate would be the 4 new games that did not exist before.
09-29-2021 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,536
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 779
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #5
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 08:16 AM)goofus Wrote:  Maybe there is a short-term window of opportunity to do a temporary expansion to 8 teams total with 4 first round games on campus and/or NFL stadiums close to the team's campus in mid-december.

This way the bowl structure stays the same hosting the CFP semi-finals and the other NY6 bowls. None of that would have to be renegotiated. The only thing to negotiate would be the 4 new games that did not exist before.

The SEC and Notre Dame have been clear that they will kill any 8-team playoff unless they're all at-large bids. The other P5 conferences and all of the G5 conferences will kill any 8-team playoff unless they have spots reserved for conference champions.

So, I don't think there's any chance of an 8-team playoff at this point. Initially, I was as surprised that the CFP had suggested a 12-team playoff over an 8-team playoff as much as anyone, but as the various interests of all of the parties have become clearer, I now understand why 12 teams has become the consensus and it's strangely much more of a compromise for everyone involved than an 8-team playoff.

I think it would be a mistake to think that "smaller playoff = compromise" or "smaller playoff = easier to implement" because it's clear that this isn't the case. It truly doesn't look like there's legitimate heartburn over 12 teams. The real debates are (1) how the TV money works and (2) how the Rose Bowl and, by extension, the other bowls are integrated into the system. Those debates aren't resolved by reducing it to an 8-team playoff - we'd still have the exact same issues in play.
09-29-2021 08:32 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,686
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 83
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #6
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

January 2026 which is the start of the new cycle is only 4 years away at this point.

That is not really that long to wait. We already have 6 P5 moves (OU, UT, BYU, UH, UC, UCF) and more G5 moves in the pipeline.

Waiting a year or two to hammer all the points out is not a bad thing when you consider these new conference alignments will impact bowl alignments etc.
09-29-2021 08:56 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,876
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #7
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
Maybe I'm too dense to understand, but I don't quite get the need to only move at the end of a cycle. Couldn't the "next schools up" just get first dibs on the semifinals of a 12 team playoff? What am I missing?
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2021 09:02 AM by Gamecock.)
09-29-2021 09:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 10,703
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 457
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #8
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 08:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.

Gonna play the eternal devil's advocate, just to see what happens.

The 6+6 format gives you 11 valuable games. 1 NCG, 2 semifinals, 4 QF, 4 first-round games.
But that comes at the expense of the current system which has 7 games of comparable value. 1 NCG, 6 New Years Day/Eve bowls.

You're adding 4 first-round games in mid-December. Which has to work around the NFL somehow, or just compete with the NFL regular season Saturday games.
And you're adding 2 semi-finals in January. Which have to work around the NFL playoffs somehow.
You're reducing the value of the 5th and 6th New Years Six bowl games.

It's MORE valuable, but is it double the CFP? 150%? I don't know. ESPN probably knows. But I don't think the B1G and PAC trust ESPN, especially if the number isn't double the current CFP.
09-29-2021 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 10,703
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 457
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #9
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Maybe I'm too dense to understand, but I don't quite get the need to only move at the end of a cycle. Couldn't the "next schools up" just get first dibs on the semifinals of a 12 team playoff? What am I missing?

As the trailer I saw for the Handmaid's Tale series said, "Better doesn't mean better for everyone."

The CFP is a complicated contract between the 10 FBS conferences, Notre Dame, the 6 major bowls, and ESPN. Those aren't all equal partners, but any of those has grounds to sue if their rights under the current contract are voided.

The bowls can argue in court that they signed on the dotted line to host SEMIFINALS once every three years, not just "playoff games." That's worth a very hard to calculate but surely very large amount of money.

The Rose and Sugar Bowls, and I suppose the Orange Bowl, have big contracts with the major conferences that secure big, free-spending fanbases coming to their bowl after a good season with regularity. You mess with the pecking order of who goes to what bowl because the Sugar Bowl gets the #4 SEC team instead of #3, the Sugar Bowl will be able to put together a powerpoint about how much money the Sugar Bowl is losing.

That's the long-winded answer to why this probably happens at the end of the contract.
09-29-2021 09:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 41,350
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1459
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #10
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 08:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.

Presumably, if there is a deal that begins in two years, it would have to be an ESPN deal. I know some have talked about an interim two year deal with ESPN, but I just don't see that happening. So if we assume a long term expanded playoff ESPN deal would be less than a deal that goes to open market, then it's kind of like your Social Security benefits - do you retire early at age 62 for $1000 a month for life, or do you wait until age 67 and get $1400 a month for life? Is the value of getting that $400 extra a month for life from 67 on worth missing the $60,000 in checks you forego between ages 62 and 67?

It's not necessarily the case that one option is better than the other, it has to be kind of forecast out. And with Social Security at least, you know what the greater amount is at 67. With the expanded playoffs, if you pass up the two extra years of greater revenue, you don't really know what your are losing had you waited two years and then gone to the open market. You can have consultants make estimates, but nobody knows for sure.

Of course, there are other considerations too. With SS, you wonder if you are going to live long enough past age 67 to recoup the foregone income from retiring early. Or you worry you will live long enough such that retiring at 62 means you gave up way too much in later benefits. You might think about health too - maybe money at 63 is more valuable to you then money at 73, because at 63 you have better health and can enjoy it more.

With the CFP, for some conferences it might be a decision that is only about straight cash - assuming a new expanded playoff deal will be for 12 years beyond the current CFP, do we make more by getting a bit less for 14 years rather than a bit more for 12 years? But for other conferences, it might be about power - they might be willing to trade off a few dollars (probably not all that many, LOL) to not have ESPN have a "stranglehold" on the playoffs, or whatever.

It's a pickle, IMO. So I am not sure it will be worked out in the next four months.
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2021 09:24 AM by quo vadis.)
09-29-2021 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,536
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 779
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #11
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 08:56 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

January 2026 which is the start of the new cycle is only 4 years away at this point.

That is not really that long to wait. We already have 6 P5 moves (OU, UT, BYU, UH, UC, UCF) and more G5 moves in the pipeline.

Waiting a year or two to hammer all the points out is not a bad thing when you consider these new conference alignments will impact bowl alignments etc.

Eh - I think a lot of people are vastly underestimating the time value of money. 2 extra years of dramatically increased playoff revenue prior to 2026 is incredibly material. If the current CFP contract is allowed to expire, it would mean that the new CFP contract would have to increase even more accordingly (with additional adjustments for inflation) in order to make up what they would otherwise have made during those 2 lost years.

That's why I'm on the optimistic side of this getting done. The opportunity costs of not getting this done are VERY real (e.g. hundreds of millions of dollars for even just 2 years of the expanded CFP). When schools are still recovering from the pandemic, it's almost unconscionable that the powers that be would leave 2 years of massively increased playoff revenue on the table.
09-29-2021 09:31 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,876
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #12
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:15 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Maybe I'm too dense to understand, but I don't quite get the need to only move at the end of a cycle. Couldn't the "next schools up" just get first dibs on the semifinals of a 12 team playoff? What am I missing?

As the trailer I saw for the Handmaid's Tale series said, "Better doesn't mean better for everyone."

The CFP is a complicated contract between the 10 FBS conferences, Notre Dame, the 6 major bowls, and ESPN. Those aren't all equal partners, but any of those has grounds to sue if their rights under the current contract are voided.

The bowls can argue in court that they signed on the dotted line to host SEMIFINALS once every three years, not just "playoff games." That's worth a very hard to calculate but surely very large amount of money.

The Rose and Sugar Bowls, and I suppose the Orange Bowl, have big contracts with the major conferences that secure big, free-spending fanbases coming to their bowl after a good season with regularity. You mess with the pecking order of who goes to what bowl because the Sugar Bowl gets the #4 SEC team instead of #3, the Sugar Bowl will be able to put together a powerpoint about how much money the Sugar Bowl is losing.

That's the long-winded answer to why this probably happens at the end of the contract.

Thanks. Still doesn't make that much sense to me, but I guess that's why they get paid the big bucks.
09-29-2021 09:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 49,683
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1929
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #13
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

They scheduled games with a week notice last season. There's plenty of time. Its just a case of people being willing to do it.
09-29-2021 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 49,683
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1929
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #14
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 08:56 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

January 2026 which is the start of the new cycle is only 4 years away at this point.

That is not really that long to wait. We already have 6 P5 moves (OU, UT, BYU, UH, UC, UCF) and more G5 moves in the pipeline.

Waiting a year or two to hammer all the points out is not a bad thing when you consider these new conference alignments will impact bowl alignments etc.

But it leaves hundreds of millions on the table.
And again, its not hard to figure out. You just need people willing to get it done. They will probably have a bunch of lawyers negotiating who always wait until the last minute to compromise.
09-29-2021 09:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 49,683
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1929
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #15
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:09 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 08:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.

Gonna play the eternal devil's advocate, just to see what happens.

The 6+6 format gives you 11 valuable games. 1 NCG, 2 semifinals, 4 QF, 4 first-round games.
But that comes at the expense of the current system which has 7 games of comparable value. 1 NCG, 6 New Years Day/Eve bowls.

You're adding 4 first-round games in mid-December. Which has to work around the NFL somehow, or just compete with the NFL regular season Saturday games.
And you're adding 2 semi-finals in January. Which have to work around the NFL playoffs somehow.
You're reducing the value of the 5th and 6th New Years Six bowl games.

It's MORE valuable, but is it double the CFP? 150%? I don't know. ESPN probably knows. But I don't think the B1G and PAC trust ESPN, especially if the number isn't double the current CFP.

Based on ratings, you only have 3 games of comparable value. The other 4 NY6 are a big step below. It just doesn't mean more.
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2021 09:45 AM by bullet.)
09-29-2021 09:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArmoredUpKnight Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,937
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 203
I Root For: UCF Knights
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Post: #16
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
Its sad to see the 12-team model die.

But I think most of us knew it was too good to be true. It was a nice fantasy.
09-29-2021 09:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 49,683
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1929
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #17
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 08:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.

Presumably, if there is a deal that begins in two years, it would have to be an ESPN deal. I know some have talked about an interim two year deal with ESPN, but I just don't see that happening. So if we assume a long term expanded playoff ESPN deal would be less than a deal that goes to open market, then it's kind of like your Social Security benefits - do you retire early at age 62 for $1000 a month for life, or do you wait until age 67 and get $1400 a month for life? Is the value of getting that $400 extra a month for life from 67 on worth missing the $60,000 in checks you forego between ages 62 and 67?

It's not necessarily the case that one option is better than the other, it has to be kind of forecast out. And with Social Security at least, you know what the greater amount is at 67. With the expanded playoffs, if you pass up the two extra years of greater revenue, you don't really know what your are losing had you waited two years and then gone to the open market. You can have consultants make estimates, but nobody knows for sure.

Of course, there are other considerations too. With SS, you wonder if you are going to live long enough past age 67 to recoup the foregone income from retiring early. Or you worry you will live long enough such that retiring at 62 means you gave up way too much in later benefits. You might think about health too - maybe money at 63 is more valuable to you then money at 73, because at 63 you have better health and can enjoy it more.

With the CFP, for some conferences it might be a decision that is only about straight cash - assuming a new expanded playoff deal will be for 12 years beyond the current CFP, do we make more by getting a bit less for 14 years rather than a bit more for 12 years? But for other conferences, it might be about power - they might be willing to trade off a few dollars (probably not all that many, LOL) to not have ESPN have a "stranglehold" on the playoffs, or whatever.

It's a pickle, IMO. So I am not sure it will be worked out in the next four months.

Its 3 years of extra revenue, not two.
09-29-2021 09:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,536
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 779
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #18
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:09 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 08:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.

Gonna play the eternal devil's advocate, just to see what happens.

The 6+6 format gives you 11 valuable games. 1 NCG, 2 semifinals, 4 QF, 4 first-round games.
But that comes at the expense of the current system which has 7 games of comparable value. 1 NCG, 6 New Years Day/Eve bowls.

You're adding 4 first-round games in mid-December. Which has to work around the NFL somehow, or just compete with the NFL regular season Saturday games.
And you're adding 2 semi-finals in January. Which have to work around the NFL playoffs somehow.
You're reducing the value of the 5th and 6th New Years Six bowl games.

It's MORE valuable, but is it double the CFP? 150%? I don't know. ESPN probably knows. But I don't think the B1G and PAC trust ESPN, especially if the number isn't double the current CFP.

My educated guess is that the increase in value is going to be on the very high end. The estimates reported earlier in the summer had the CFP TV rights worth around $2 billion per year, which would be more than *triple* in value (not just double) compared to the combined values of the current CFP deal and the separate contract bowl deals for the Rose/Sugar/Orange. (It would actually more than quadruple the current CFP contract alone.)

It makes sense to me: there's simply no comparison in the TV value of single elimination win-or-go home games and this playoff expansion would create 8 more of those compared to the current system. (As a frame of reference, each additional NFL Wild Card game in the latest NFL TV deal was valued at around $100 million apiece. Not a shock that we got NFL playoff expansion!) I don't think there's any comparable value for the non-playoff NY6 bowls and the ratings have reflected that fact: other than the Rose Bowl, they're essentially no different in the minds of viewers than the typical Citrus Bowl.

In any event, if they're able triple/quadruple the value of the CFP deal 2 years earlier, then my wager is that this is going to get done. That's a lot of money to leave on the table even for the SEC and Big Ten.
09-29-2021 09:47 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 49,683
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1929
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #19
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:31 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 08:56 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

January 2026 which is the start of the new cycle is only 4 years away at this point.

That is not really that long to wait. We already have 6 P5 moves (OU, UT, BYU, UH, UC, UCF) and more G5 moves in the pipeline.

Waiting a year or two to hammer all the points out is not a bad thing when you consider these new conference alignments will impact bowl alignments etc.

Eh - I think a lot of people are vastly underestimating the time value of money. 2 extra years of dramatically increased playoff revenue prior to 2026 is incredibly material. If the current CFP contract is allowed to expire, it would mean that the new CFP contract would have to increase even more accordingly (with additional adjustments for inflation) in order to make up what they would otherwise have made during those 2 lost years.

That's why I'm on the optimistic side of this getting done. The opportunity costs of not getting this done are VERY real (e.g. hundreds of millions of dollars for even just 2 years of the expanded CFP). When schools are still recovering from the pandemic, it's almost unconscionable that the powers that be would leave 2 years of massively increased playoff revenue on the table.
And people thought the OU/UGA lawsuit would increase TV money. It actually cut the payouts in half--in the short run. Nobody knows what the market will be like down the road and for certain whether bidding will actually increase the payout.
09-29-2021 09:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 41,350
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1459
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #20
RE: CFP Expansion: Hancock says new plan must be agreed to in 3 to 4 months, or ...
(09-29-2021 09:47 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 09:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 08:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-29-2021 06:49 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I’ve said it elsewhere. It’s too much too fast. I’m shocked it could have changed before the end of the contract. It won’t. It will run its course.

It’s not just the conferences who weren’t in the room that would pump the brakes on this. The bowls had to respond accordingly, too. And for the ones that have good relationships with some of these conferences, there would be more wagon-circling.

I'll be the optimist here (as someone that unabashedly wants to see this expanded playoff happen): I think it will get done and passed before the end of the year. Even two extra years of increased money in the bag playoff revenue is too much to pass up for everyone here. Schools are really going to pass that up when they're moving around in conference realignment at the G5 levels for increased money that's honestly going to be a fraction of what they'll get from an expanded playoff where the 99% of the teams won't even be participating in? Schools are really going to pass that up when even the SEC had to advance money to its members against future projected revenue in order to cover pandemic-related losses? This entire forum is effectively dedicated to how colleges and conferences can maximize revenue, yet they're really going to pass up on the easiest revenue-maker of them all?

It can't be overstated how this is possibly the easiest revenue generator in modern sports history. It's akin to the American League and National League figuring out that they could play the World Series or the old AFL and NFL figuring out that they could play a Super Bowl... only it's taken college football until 2021 to get to that point. I refuse to believe that the powers that be can't figure this out when push comes to shove with this much money on the table.

Presumably, if there is a deal that begins in two years, it would have to be an ESPN deal. I know some have talked about an interim two year deal with ESPN, but I just don't see that happening. So if we assume a long term expanded playoff ESPN deal would be less than a deal that goes to open market, then it's kind of like your Social Security benefits - do you retire early at age 62 for $1000 a month for life, or do you wait until age 67 and get $1400 a month for life? Is the value of getting that $400 extra a month for life from 67 on worth missing the $60,000 in checks you forego between ages 62 and 67?

It's not necessarily the case that one option is better than the other, it has to be kind of forecast out. And with Social Security at least, you know what the greater amount is at 67. With the expanded playoffs, if you pass up the two extra years of greater revenue, you don't really know what your are losing had you waited two years and then gone to the open market. You can have consultants make estimates, but nobody knows for sure.

Of course, there are other considerations too. With SS, you wonder if you are going to live long enough past age 67 to recoup the foregone income from retiring early. Or you worry you will live long enough such that retiring at 62 means you gave up way too much in later benefits. You might think about health too - maybe money at 63 is more valuable to you then money at 73, because at 63 you have better health and can enjoy it more.

With the CFP, for some conferences it might be a decision that is only about straight cash - assuming a new expanded playoff deal will be for 12 years beyond the current CFP, do we make more by getting a bit less for 14 years rather than a bit more for 12 years? But for other conferences, it might be about power - they might be willing to trade off a few dollars (probably not all that many, LOL) to not have ESPN have a "stranglehold" on the playoffs, or whatever.

It's a pickle, IMO. So I am not sure it will be worked out in the next four months.

Its 3 years of extra revenue, not two.

Really? The most recent articles I've seen have Hancock talking about 2024-2025 as the earliest a new playoff could be implemented. I think he did talk about 2023-2024 a couple weeks ago, but I think since then it's been 2024-2025 as the earliest a new plan could be implemented. As an example:

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/sep/29...oval-in-4/
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2021 09:54 AM by quo vadis.)
09-29-2021 09:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.