Expand the playoffs

MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
Yup. The playoff caused this. There's no way conferences would have expanded past 12-14 if there was only a slim shot at sending 1 team to the BCS title game. With 4 spots, conferences got a little more comfortable since they could send multiple teams to the playoff. And with 12 teams in the playoff, there's really no limit to how many good teams can go. The B10 and SEC will likely regularly send 3-4 teams to the playoff so who cares if there are 18 teams in the conference.

I miss the days when bowl games actually kind of meant something and there was a tier of bowl games that were just better than others. Now you go to the Capitol One Bowl and everyone sits out because it's not the playoff. Hell, the Rose Bowl became a consolation prize.

Now, bowls only in the playoff will matter. All other bowl games will be absolutely trash -- and they may start shutting them down.
Click to expand...

Meh.

The playoff isn't driving these consolidations. It's the media rights contracts for the other 3 months of college football.

Those Big 10 and SEC media rights contracts have ZERO to do with the playoff.
 
Red_Alert said:
Meh.

The playoff isn't driving these consolidations. It's the media rights contracts for the other 3 months of college football.

Those Big 10 and SEC media rights contracts have ZERO to do with the playoff.
Click to expand...
No way Texas and OU jump to the SEC, or USC/Oregon to the B10, for money alone if they had absolutely no shot at a national title. The new system allows for 2-3 losses and still making the playoff.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
No way Texas and OU jump to the SEC, or USC/Oregon to the B10, for money alone if they had absolutely no shot at a national title. The new system allows for 2-3 losses and still making the playoff.
Click to expand...

You've always had a disoriented way of looking at things. In a 12 team play-off TX/OU's chances of making it were far easier in the Big 12.
USC's chances of making it were far easier in the PAC.

Did Nebraska go to the Big 10 because of the playoff?
Did A&M go to the SEC because of the playoff?
Did texas flirt with taking 5 other Big 12 teams to the PAC 12 back in 2009/2010 because of the playoff?
Did USC, UCLA, Washington, and Oregon, go to the Big 10 because of the playoff?

The answer to all of those is 'NO', dumbass.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
No way Texas and OU jump to the SEC, or USC/Oregon to the B10, for money alone if they had absolutely no shot at a national title. The new system allows for 2-3 losses and still making the playoff.
Click to expand...
You are 100% correct.

Texas and Oklahoma would have just taken the 35mm a year the Big 12 was estimated to get at the next contract and wouldn't have bothered moving to the SEC and making 100mm a year if it wasn't for the playoffs. How is 70mm more going to actually help your program when you think about it?

No, you have cracked the code because this expansion is all because of the playoffs and not money.
 
Wild Turkey said:
You are 100% correct.

Texas and Oklahoma would have just taken the 35mm a year the Big 12 was estimated to get at the next contract and wouldn't have bothered moving to the SEC and making 100mm a year if it wasn't for the playoffs. How is 70mm more going to actually help your program when you think about it?

No, you have cracked the code because this expansion is all because of the playoffs and not money.
Click to expand...
Red_Alert said:
You've always had a disoriented way of looking at things. In a 12 team play-off TX/OU's chances of making it were far easier in the Big 12.
USC's chances of making it were far easier in the PAC.

Did Nebraska go to the Big 10 because of the playoff?
Did A&M go to the SEC because of the playoff?
Did texas flirt with taking 5 other Big 12 teams to the PAC 12 back in 2009/2010 because of the playoff?
Did USC, UCLA, Washington, and Oregon, go to the Big 10 because of the playoff?

The answer to all of those is 'NO', dumbass.
Click to expand...
I'm specifically talking about the formation of these massive 16-18 team conferences. I'm not talking about Penn State coming to the B10 in the 90's. Or Nebraska coming in 2011. The 12-14 team leagues were sustainable in the BCS format. 16-18 team conferences were not. But TV gets more money from securing exclusive rights to more teams, thus forcing bigger conferences and bigger TV contracts. And they weren't able to convince teams to do that without expanding the chances of getting into a national championship; which is why all of these major moves happened in pretty close proximity to the changes to the CFB playoff.

And really we're talking about two major moves -- Texas/OU and UCLA/USC. Those don't happen if the system is still the BCS. The B10 doesn't get as large of a contract without USC/UCLA joining. The B12 and Pac12 likely get much more comparable TV deals if the conferences stay together. The money only existed because the opportunity existed to form super conferences and still have a shot at getting into the playoff. If the system was the BCS still, I maintain that these moves don't happen. Moves that happened after are just the aftershocks of those moves.

A lot of the moves that happened after were done reluctantly, entirely out of survival. And once major teams leave a conference, of course they aren't going to get TV contracts worth a damn. If Michigan and OSU left the B10 for another conference prior to adding UCLA/USC, the B10 TV right's deal gets cut in half.
 
Wild Turkey said:
The lower tier playoff games aren't going to mean shit as most will be blowouts. Quit kidding yourself.
Click to expand...
Ha..

So we’ve all been wanting an extended playoff for college football but you’re going to nitpick the shit out of it, huh?
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
I'm specifically talking about the formation of these massive 16-18 team conferences. I'm not talking about Penn State coming to the B10 in the 90's. Or Nebraska coming in 2011. The 12-14 team leagues were sustainable in the BCS format. 16-18 team conferences were not. But TV gets more money from securing exclusive rights to more teams, thus forcing bigger conferences and bigger TV contracts. And they weren't able to convince teams to do that without expanding the chances of getting into a national championship; which is why all of these major moves happened in pretty close proximity to the changes to the CFB playoff.

And really we're talking about two major moves -- Texas/OU and UCLA/USC. Those don't happen if the system is still the BCS. The B10 doesn't get as large of a contract without USC/UCLA joining. The B12 and Pac12 likely get much more comparable TV deals if the conferences stay together. The money only existed because the opportunity existed to form super conferences and still have a shot at getting into the playoff. If the system was the BCS still, I maintain that these moves don't happen. Moves that happened after are just the aftershocks of those moves.
Click to expand...
Preach brother!

USC didn’t want the 100mm they would be making in the B1G, the easier schedule in the PAC or local travel. That would be crazy!

They wanted to travel cross country and battle tOSU, Michigan and Penn State so they secure a potential spot in the playoff the hard way.

I honestly don’t know how everybody doesn’t see this.
 
Wild Turkey said:
Preach brother!

USC didn’t want the 100mm they would be making in the B1G, the easier schedule in the PAC or local travel. That would be crazy!

They wanted to travel cross country and battle tOSU, Michigan and Penn State so they secure a potential spot in the playoff the hard way.

I honestly don’t know how everybody doesn’t see this.
Click to expand...
You dont' seem to be understanding the conversation. Obviously USC wanted the money. I'm saying that the money doesn't exist, AND that the Pac12 receives a better contract, if the BSC was in place. The playoff allowed them to leave for the money without sacrificing their ability to win at a high level. Not only would USC not have jumped, but the B10 wouldn't have offered if it harmed the ability of the current schools to get into the title game.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
I'm specifically talking about the formation of these massive 16-18 team conferences. I'm not talking about Penn State coming to the B10 in the 90's. Or Nebraska coming in 2011. The 12-14 team leagues were sustainable in the BCS format. 16-18 team conferences were not. But TV gets more money from securing exclusive rights to more teams, thus forcing bigger conferences and bigger TV contracts. And they weren't able to convince teams to do that without expanding the chances of getting into a national championship; which is why all of these major moves happened in pretty close proximity to the changes to the CFB playoff.

And really we're talking about two major moves -- Texas/OU and UCLA/USC. Those don't happen if the system is still the BCS. The B10 doesn't get as large of a contract without USC/UCLA joining. The B12 and Pac12 likely get much more comparable TV deals if the conferences stay together. The money only existed because the opportunity existed to form super conferences and still have a shot at getting into the playoff. If the system was the BCS still, I maintain that these moves don't happen. Moves that happened after are just the aftershocks of those moves.

A lot of the moves that happened after were done reluctantly, entirely out of survival. And once major teams leave a conference, of course they aren't going to get TV contracts worth a damn. If Michigan and OSU left the B10 for another conference prior to adding UCLA/USC, the B10 TV right's deal gets cut in half.
Click to expand...

Take your mental gymnastics elsewhere.

Do the simple math.

There's far more money made in viewership during the 12 game regular season + CCG's, than there is in a few weeks of playoff.

USC/UCLA/TX/OU's chances of getting into a 12 team playoff were just as good (if not better) if they'd stayed in the PAC or Big 12.

The expansions were about consolidating bluebloods and other teams with good viewership ratings to make the regular season more like bowl season. They're also about getting into the markets where they expanded.
The Big 10 and SEC (in-conference) schedules will have at least one huge game a week. More likely 2-3 really big games every week. Those games are going to get good viewership ratings. That's why the big bucks came out in these contracts.

"tHeY CoNsOLiDaTeD tO GeT iNtO TeH pLaYoFFs" - Derp
 
Red_Alert said:
Take your mental gymnastics elsewhere.

Do the simple math.

There's far more money made in viewership during the 12 game regular season + CCG's, than there is in a few weeks of playoff.

USC/UCLA/TX/OU's chances of getting into a 12 team playoff were just as good (if not better) if they'd stayed in the PAC or Big 12.

The expansions were about consolidating bluebloods and other teams with good viewership ratings to make the regular season more like bowl season. They're also about getting into the markets where they expanded.
The Big 10 and SEC (in-conference) schedules will have at least one huge game a week. More likely 2-3 really big games every week. Those games are going to get good viewership ratings. That's why the big bucks came out in these contracts.

"tHeY CoNsOLiDaTeD tO GeT iNtO TeH pLaYoFFs" - Derp
Click to expand...
This isn't purely about "chances". It was a balance of money and chances. In the BSC system a conference would be ruined by expanding to 18. Just wouldn't have allowed it in that system. Ohio State (and others) wouldn't have voted to allow USC in to make getting into that system harder. Just doesn't happen unless the playoff is introduced.

In a 12 team playoff, USC's chances in the B10 are really no different than had they stayed in the Pac12. And with the consolidation of talent in the B10, the network contracts were able to be bigger.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
Yup. The playoff caused this. There's no way conferences would have expanded past 12-14 if there was only a slim shot at sending 1 team to the BCS title game. With 4 spots, conferences got a little more comfortable since they could send multiple teams to the playoff. And with 12 teams in the playoff, there's really no limit to how many good teams can go. The B10 and SEC will likely regularly send 3-4 teams to the playoff so who cares if there are 18 teams in the conference.

I miss the days when bowl games actually kind of meant something and there was a tier of bowl games that were just better than others. Now you go to the Capitol One Bowl and everyone sits out because it's not the playoff. Hell, the Rose Bowl became a consolation prize.

Now, bowls only in the playoff will matter. All other bowl games will be absolutely trash -- and they may start shutting them down.
Click to expand...
And what caused both conference and playoff expansion. M-O-N-E-Y? Wasn't the BCS birthed because of more money?

Soooooooooooooooooooooo, blame money. But isn't more money ALWAYS better?
 
Deep Creek said:
And what caused both conference and playoff expansion. M-O-N-E-Y? Wasn't the BCS birthed because of more money?

Soooooooooooooooooooooo, blame money. But isn't more money ALWAYS better?
Click to expand...
The BCS was supposed to end things like 1997 where the title was split. It was the first time the conferences agreed to have #1 play #2.

The playoff was caused by money for sure. In seeking money, the playoff allowed superconferences to happen.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
The BCS was supposed to end things like 1997 where the title was split. It was the first time the conferences agreed to have #1 play #2.

The playoff was caused by money for sure. In seeking money, the playoff allowed superconferences to happen.
Click to expand...
Exactly!

Without the playoffs, no one would be so focused on money. In fact, the playoffs are also the direct cause of the creation of the portal and NIL. If the playoffs don't get created then Russia never invades Ukraine.
 
Wild Turkey said:
Exactly!

Without the playoffs, no one would be so focused on money. In fact, the playoffs are also the direct cause of the creation of the portal and NIL. If the playoffs don't get created then Russia never invades Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Butterfly effect?
 
Wild Turkey said:
Exactly!

Without the playoffs, no one would be so focused on money. In fact, the playoffs are also the direct cause of the creation of the portal and NIL. If the playoffs don't get created then Russia never invades Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Aren’t you just the Sarcasm King this wonderful morning!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top