(05-03-2023 01:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 10:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something to remember -- the CFP exclusive negotiating window with ESPN opens in OCtober 2024.

The new CFP contracts might be negotiated and signed before we get through a single iteration of the 12 team playoff.

No.

They will let the exclusive window lapse. They want multiple bidders.

I was thinking about this the other day, and I'm wondering if "let us sign before the exclusive CFP window elapses" might be the incentive that ESPN needs to consider signing off on and/or helping moves in the ACC now instead of later. Everything could be on the table, 2/4/6, to the P2, merge rest into the big 12/Pac for a bit more money...an extra $150m a year to sort out the ACC to make an extra $750m a year to get the entire CFP is the sort of big profit motivation that could really turbocharge realignment (and CSNBBS). With every vote from the SEC and ACC, and Yormark always up to make a deal, I think that they'd be able to secure the necessary votes.

edit: the above was in response has kind of been percolating in my mind for a while. All of the theories I've seen about opening up the ACC before 2036 struggle to address the reason(s) that ESPN would be on board. However, with the threat and expectation that the new CFP contract will be opened up for bidding, I think that it's reasonable to expect that ESPN would be amenable to giving up a large amount of certain revenue to make 5x that much. All the ACC schools are happy, or at least not mad, and, much more importantly, ESPN is happy, too. It's no magic bullet, and nobody would be "breaking the GoR", but it's a reasonable explanation for why ESPN would help the process along.

(05-03-2023 01:26 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 10:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something to remember -- the CFP exclusive negotiating window with ESPN opens in OCtober 2024.

The new CFP contracts might be negotiated and signed before we get through a single iteration of the 12 team playoff.

No.

They will let the exclusive window lapse. They want multiple bidders.

I was thinking about this the other day, and I'm wondering if "let us sign before the exclusive CFP window elapses" might be the incentive that ESPN needs to consider signing off on and/or helping moves in the ACC now instead of later. Everything could be on the table, 2/4/6, to the P2, merge rest into the big 12/Pac for a bit more money...an extra $150m a year to sort out the ACC to make an extra $750m a year to get the entire CFP is the sort of big profit motivation that could really turbocharge realignment (and CSNBBS). With every vote from the SEC and ACC, and Yormark always up to make a deal, I think that they'd be able to secure the necessary votes.

edit: the above was in response has kind of been percolating in my mind for a while. All of the theories I've seen about opening up the ACC before 2036 struggle to address the reason(s) that ESPN would be on board. However, with the threat and expectation that the new CFP contract will be opened up for bidding, I think that it's reasonable to expect that ESPN would be amenable to giving up a large amount of certain revenue to make 5x that much. All the ACC schools are happy, or at least not mad, and, much more importantly, ESPN is happy, too. It's no magic bullet, and nobody would be "breaking the GoR", but it's a reasonable explanation for why ESPN would help the process along.

How would ESPN get an extra $750 million a year from the CFP? They would be the buyer, not the seller. Even if you assume the additional CFP games would be worth $750 million to somebody (and I doubt that number) it's because somebody like ESPN is paying it (not receiving it).

LOL

Originally, I thought that Jim Phillips bluffed the “Alliance” card in order to get ESPN financial concessions prior to the CFP expansion. ESPN just let “Alliance” talks go to their inevitable conclusion. Phillips came-out looking like a fool (albeit better-off than Kliavkoff).

“Strengthening” the ACC by letting its top brands leave makes even less sense than the Alliance.

(05-03-2023 01:26 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 10:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something to remember -- the CFP exclusive negotiating window with ESPN opens in OCtober 2024.

The new CFP contracts might be negotiated and signed before we get through a single iteration of the 12 team playoff.

No.

They will let the exclusive window lapse. They want multiple bidders.

I was thinking about this the other day, and I'm wondering if "let us sign before the exclusive CFP window elapses" might be the incentive that ESPN needs to consider signing off on and/or helping moves in the ACC now instead of later. Everything could be on the table, 2/4/6, to the P2, merge rest into the big 12/Pac for a bit more money...an extra $150m a year to sort out the ACC to make an extra $750m a year to get the entire CFP is the sort of big profit motivation that could really turbocharge realignment (and CSNBBS). With every vote from the SEC and ACC, and Yormark always up to make a deal, I think that they'd be able to secure the necessary votes.

edit: the above was in response has kind of been percolating in my mind for a while. All of the theories I've seen about opening up the ACC before 2036 struggle to address the reason(s) that ESPN would be on board. However, with the threat and expectation that the new CFP contract will be opened up for bidding, I think that it's reasonable to expect that ESPN would be amenable to giving up a large amount of certain revenue to make 5x that much. All the ACC schools are happy, or at least not mad, and, much more importantly, ESPN is happy, too. It's no magic bullet, and nobody would be "breaking the GoR", but it's a reasonable explanation for why ESPN would help the process along.

I don't think ESPN *wants* to sign early. The only way the conferences agree to sign early is for MORE than the $2B everyone expects as a baseline.

ESPN has expressed willingness to share the package. Why? Because they're not interested in spending $2B if they can avoid it. They're looking for a partner to eat half of that cost.

Me, I'm not sure there is another platform ready and able to spend $1B a year for half of the CFP. A year ago, there were platforms who could get tons of money from Wall Street to fund losses because streaming was The Future. Today, I'm not sure. And in another year, I don't think the picture gets better.

(05-03-2023 02:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:26 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 10:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something to remember -- the CFP exclusive negotiating window with ESPN opens in OCtober 2024.

The new CFP contracts might be negotiated and signed before we get through a single iteration of the 12 team playoff.

No.

They will let the exclusive window lapse. They want multiple bidders.

I was thinking about this the other day, and I'm wondering if "let us sign before the exclusive CFP window elapses" might be the incentive that ESPN needs to consider signing off on and/or helping moves in the ACC now instead of later. Everything could be on the table, 2/4/6, to the P2, merge rest into the big 12/Pac for a bit more money...an extra $150m a year to sort out the ACC to make an extra $750m a year to get the entire CFP is the sort of big profit motivation that could really turbocharge realignment (and CSNBBS). With every vote from the SEC and ACC, and Yormark always up to make a deal, I think that they'd be able to secure the necessary votes.

edit: the above was in response has kind of been percolating in my mind for a while. All of the theories I've seen about opening up the ACC before 2036 struggle to address the reason(s) that ESPN would be on board. However, with the threat and expectation that the new CFP contract will be opened up for bidding, I think that it's reasonable to expect that ESPN would be amenable to giving up a large amount of certain revenue to make 5x that much. All the ACC schools are happy, or at least not mad, and, much more importantly, ESPN is happy, too. It's no magic bullet, and nobody would be "breaking the GoR", but it's a reasonable explanation for why ESPN would help the process along.

I don't think ESPN *wants* to sign early. The only way the conferences agree to sign early is for MORE than the $2B everyone expects as a baseline.

ESPN has expressed willingness to share the package. Why? Because they're not interested in spending $2B if they can avoid it. They're looking for a partner to eat half of that cost.

Me, I'm not sure there is another platform ready and able to spend $1B a year for half of the CFP. A year ago, there were platforms who could get tons of money from Wall Street to fund losses because streaming was The Future. Today, I'm not sure. And in another year, I don't think the picture gets better.

What about more than 1 platform? Maybe Fox and either NBC or CBS (leaning towards the latter)? Fox and the 3rd platform get 1 1st round game each, 1 quarterfinal each, and split 1 of the semifinals (Fox gets it 1 year, the 3rd the other year). ESPN still gets 2 1st round games, 2 quarterfinals, 1 semifinal, and the championship game. ESPN would still spend $1B, but the other 2 only spend $0.5B each. Maybe FOX pays a little more to get 1 of the semifinals both years.

(05-03-2023 02:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:26 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 10:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something to remember -- the CFP exclusive negotiating window with ESPN opens in OCtober 2024.

The new CFP contracts might be negotiated and signed before we get through a single iteration of the 12 team playoff.

No.

They will let the exclusive window lapse. They want multiple bidders.

I was thinking about this the other day, and I'm wondering if "let us sign before the exclusive CFP window elapses" might be the incentive that ESPN needs to consider signing off on and/or helping moves in the ACC now instead of later. Everything could be on the table, 2/4/6, to the P2, merge rest into the big 12/Pac for a bit more money...an extra $150m a year to sort out the ACC to make an extra $750m a year to get the entire CFP is the sort of big profit motivation that could really turbocharge realignment (and CSNBBS). With every vote from the SEC and ACC, and Yormark always up to make a deal, I think that they'd be able to secure the necessary votes.

edit: the above was in response has kind of been percolating in my mind for a while. All of the theories I've seen about opening up the ACC before 2036 struggle to address the reason(s) that ESPN would be on board. However, with the threat and expectation that the new CFP contract will be opened up for bidding, I think that it's reasonable to expect that ESPN would be amenable to giving up a large amount of certain revenue to make 5x that much. All the ACC schools are happy, or at least not mad, and, much more importantly, ESPN is happy, too. It's no magic bullet, and nobody would be "breaking the GoR", but it's a reasonable explanation for why ESPN would help the process along.

I don't think ESPN *wants* to sign early. The only way the conferences agree to sign early is for MORE than the $2B everyone expects as a baseline.

ESPN has expressed willingness to share the package. Why? Because they're not interested in spending $2B if they can avoid it. They're looking for a partner to eat half of that cost.

Me, I'm not sure there is another platform ready and able to spend $1B a year for half of the CFP. A year ago, there were platforms who could get tons of money from Wall Street to fund losses because streaming was The Future. Today, I'm not sure. And in another year, I don't think the picture gets better.

I don't know if they want to sign early or not. I also don't know if they want it all to themselves or if they want one or more partners. I don't know if they'd expect to make an extra $750m or an extra $75m if they got the entire CFP contract. I was just presenting a potential reason that they might be willing to help break up the ACC early (or at least not stand in the way if the ACC schools decided to break up on their own).

I think that we can all agree that the per-year value of the CFP starting in 2026 is going to be a LOT higher than the per year value of the ACC.

(05-03-2023 02:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:26 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 01:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 10:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something to remember -- the CFP exclusive negotiating window with ESPN opens in OCtober 2024.

The new CFP contracts might be negotiated and signed before we get through a single iteration of the 12 team playoff.

No.

They will let the exclusive window lapse. They want multiple bidders.

I was thinking about this the other day, and I'm wondering if "let us sign before the exclusive CFP window elapses" might be the incentive that ESPN needs to consider signing off on and/or helping moves in the ACC now instead of later. Everything could be on the table, 2/4/6, to the P2, merge rest into the big 12/Pac for a bit more money...an extra $150m a year to sort out the ACC to make an extra $750m a year to get the entire CFP is the sort of big profit motivation that could really turbocharge realignment (and CSNBBS). With every vote from the SEC and ACC, and Yormark always up to make a deal, I think that they'd be able to secure the necessary votes.

edit: the above was in response has kind of been percolating in my mind for a while. All of the theories I've seen about opening up the ACC before 2036 struggle to address the reason(s) that ESPN would be on board. However, with the threat and expectation that the new CFP contract will be opened up for bidding, I think that it's reasonable to expect that ESPN would be amenable to giving up a large amount of certain revenue to make 5x that much. All the ACC schools are happy, or at least not mad, and, much more importantly, ESPN is happy, too. It's no magic bullet, and nobody would be "breaking the GoR", but it's a reasonable explanation for why ESPN would help the process along.

I don't think ESPN *wants* to sign early. The only way the conferences agree to sign early is for MORE than the $2B everyone expects as a baseline.

ESPN has expressed willingness to share the package. Why? Because they're not interested in spending $2B if they can avoid it. They're looking for a partner to eat half of that cost.

Me, I'm not sure there is another platform ready and able to spend $1B a year for half of the CFP. A year ago, there were platforms who could get tons of money from Wall Street to fund losses because streaming was The Future. Today, I'm not sure. And in another year, I don't think the picture gets better.

How much did the NY6 bowls and CFP pay out last year? Near as I can tell it was somewhere around $500 million. That was for 7 games, compared to the 11 games in a 12 team CFP in the future. Granted, not all of those were part of a single elimination tournament. Four of them were essentially exhibition games, albeit involving the same team that would have been in a CFP. Personally, I will be very surprised if the CFP pays anywhere near $2 billion.

I would add to the cost, the ROI.

It's not just the spending, but you have to have a model that says adding schools like NC State and OK State to the SEC, and Cal and Virginia to the B1G will bring an significantly in excess $2B in advertising revenue to whatever platform for adding their games.

That doesn't seem remotely plausible. We are talking about companies worried they may not exist in ten years, and in ESPN's case trying to plug a $400M a year revenue shortfall. Spending extra money on a 2nd tier product (NFL, MLB, NBA are 1st tier, CFB is a lower tier) doesn't seem like a way to close a widening gap.

If only there were money trees in real life.