Playoff Setup
- Thread starter Aclone
- Start date
Better headline: BIG 12, ACC AGREE TO ACCEPT PERMANENT STATUS AS G5+ IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYOFF, AS PROPOSED BY B1G AND SEC.
The CFP is a media concoction and not an NCAA championship. I am very much looking forward to watching this whole thing blow up in short order.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
I’m starting to wonder what the downside is of the B12/ACC/G5 telling the B1G/SEC to go pound sand … you want all the marbles to yourselves, then you can just play amongst yourselves. We’ll no longer provide you with games (or “content”); you want to be the P2, you can just be your own MegaSuper group, have your own playoff, we’ll set up our own thing, have our own playoffs, our own bowl games, etc.
I mean, okay, I know the downside (TV contracts), but if you’re gonna get screwed anyway, might as well take away your participation in the screwing.
I mean, okay, I know the downside (TV contracts), but if you’re gonna get screwed anyway, might as well take away your participation in the screwing.
Because Big12 and ACC universities are probably a year away from having to make a 70m balloon payment to settle a wage issue that's working its way through Supreme Court.
Universities will be able to borrow against the future revenue to make the payment.
With this split it’s only 6-7mil difference between a big ten school and a Big12 school. Smaller difference than if you went on a per bid basis due to stupid biases. Why would presidents want tell them to pound sand over that? They still are making much more than before.
The article mentions that at the end (see bolded sentence). I expect they will try to settle for a smaller amount but they are potentially going to be on the hook for a huge sum. Here are a few of the relevant paragraphs:
Revenue is more significant than ever. The major conferences and their members are gearing up for a future athlete compensation model. The concept — whether employment, revenue sharing or collective bargaining — necessitates extra cash flow to be put aside for players.
The leagues are also in jeopardy of owing billions of dollars in retroactive NIL pay and television distribution as result of several ongoing antitrust lawsuits.
No school’s revenue will decrease as the CFP is expected to earn three times the amount it did in the four-team version. Major conference schools currently receive about $6 million in distribution from the CFP. The SEC and Big Ten schools will see their annual distribution triple if not quadruple into the low $20 million range. The Big 12 and ACC are set to see a doubling of their previous amounts. Notre Dame is expected to receive its own annual distribution that is expected to increase significantly from its current distribution.
Gonna be awesome when the B1G and SEC teams decide that this antitrust settlement needs to be borne equally among all power 5 schools.
I hadn’t thought of that but I would bet you are right, there won’t be much openness to sharing that cost evenly.
Here’s another article I just saw today on those upcoming settlements.
Put up the yellow crime scene tape and pull up a chair because "what if?" is getting complicated. The NCAA and the Power Five conferences find themselves as defendants in four high-profile antitrust lawsuits. Settlements in those cases have become the next hurdle toward whatever college sports will look like in the future.
NCAA president Charlie Baker is being urged by a sizable portion of the membership to settle the cases because the alternative is too chilling to consider.
"You may bankrupt some universities," another Power Five AD said.
The biggest, most concerning obstacle is the House v. NCAA suit that goes to trial in 10 months. Given that timetable, this may be the last March Madness played under the old rules, if not the current membership.
I think the difference is closer to Big10/SEC making $9-$10M more than Big12/ACC. That figure is logical based the Big10/SEC are getting close to double Big12/ACC as the split is 58%/32%.
I would use the reverse logic. Why not an even split? The Big10/SEC are already making $30M+ on their Conference TV deal. Why disrupt the market place for an extra $5Mish vs. an even split?
I've said it before, I have no interest in supporting Big10/SEC power play and will not watch their games go forward. The networks probably don't care, but spite makes me feel better.
Because if things go the way they look like, the B1G and SEC's vision for the future for college football is one where they will compete against teams for a CFP title that they have actively hamstrung financially. They realize the NCAA is dead as a governing body, and are throwing in their lot with their TV networks who also agree that media partners should be in charge. They are using the chaotic environment to their advantage currently. I don't think the sport is in the best of hands.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
Well, it’s “only 6-7 million difference,” but you’re basically being asked to eat crap, settle for fewer playoff spots, and admit you don’t (and never will) measure up to the glorious B1G/SEC. Plus, if it’s starting as “only“ 6-7 million, I guaran-damn-tee you the gap will only grow as time goes on.
IMO, and I know I’m just shaking my fist at the clouds here, but it’s the inherent bias of “we’re just better than you are and always will be, so just accept that and be happy about whatever we deign to offer you.” Personally, I hate it - college football is its best when every school is part of the landscape, every team is part of the whole, and an Appalachian State can win in the Big House or a Boise State can knock off Oklahoma. I know I’m living in a dream world - the split between the P5 and the G5 already was bad enough, and there’s no putting the genie back in the bottle (and I’m not talking about going back to any “golden era,” things were off-kilter in a different way in the 50s/60s/70s/etc) - but I do have the feeling that if the two big bullies on the conference stage want to throw their weight around and demand special treatment, maybe it wouldn’t be so bad to just leave them to their own devices and see how they like it if these “lesser, unworthy” teams just don’t want to play with them anymore.
Just pondering off the top of my head, I have no expectation of my ideas ever coming true, lol … heck, I still think interleague play in baseball was stupid, so it’s not like I have a great track record of figuring out what fans want or what makes the most money.
Last edited:
So if the Big10/SEC want to do a power play on college football. Why wouldn't the Big12/ACC/BigEast and all other D1 programs do a power play with College Hoops Tournament. The Big10 has had only 1 National Title in the last 30+ years. So maybe the Big10 should be capped at 4 or 5 NCAA Tournament berths.
And no, UCLA or Maryland National Championships don't count as Big10 titles!!!
And no, UCLA or Maryland National Championships don't count as Big10 titles!!!
The crazy thing is that schools like Michigan State should see the value in a more level playing field but their fans think they'll be all right because it's not their ox that is currently being gored. News flash, just because someone else is losing, doesn't necessarily mean that you are winning. When **** goes real sideways, just remember, you wanted this.
I agree with everything you said. It’s going the way of baseball where teams have vastly different payrolls. The silver lining is that it feels like every year there are teams with huge payrolls that massively underperform and vice versa and I doubt that will change.
I expect that will be especially the case in college sports because recruiting and identifying which 18yo kid will develop is always going to be a bit of a crapshoot. And there will always be good players that want playing time above all else so they won’t sit long at a blue blood before they start looking to enter the portal.
There has been so much worry about the transfer portal and NIL but there hasn’t been any notable trend that I’ve seen yet of good players leaving middle class programs for blue bloods. If anything I’ve noticed kids transferring from one blue blood to another blue blood (Dillon Gabriel, etc).
The basketball tourney will definitely be changing as well. There have been several articles on that.
How to expand the tournament is a lingering question, Yormark and Phillips acknowledge.
Do you eliminate automatic qualifying spots to small-conference champions? That move is sure to backfire politically at a time when congressional help is sought.
Do you simply add more at-large spots to the field? That complicates an already crammed schedule.
And if you expand the men’s event, wouldn’t the women’s tournament need expansion, too?
Not a fan of expanding the hoops tournament- 68 is more than enough! My hope, if the Hoops Tournament expands more slots would go to non Power Conference schools. A prime example is Drake and Indiana State, both should be in from the Valley. Also adding teams would give flexibility to the small conference schools that dominant their conference season but get upset in their Conference Tournament.
I really don't need to see more P4 "bubble" teams get bids, even if they are Big12 teams (that includes ISU). The Big12, SEC, ACC and Big10 should all naturally pick up the Pac12's historical bids with a 68 team tourney.
The reason for expansion is to do the exact opposite unfortunately.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
”Big Ten Classics” on BTN featuring John Wooden’s championship teams begs to differ
Yep. Every single power league team with .500 record is getting in and every single one of the low majors (bottom 16 leagues) is headed to a play in game.
They're going to ruin this too.
