Was the CFP money split designed to keep the ACC together?

[Wild Turkey]

First this only applies to idiot conferences that decided to go coast to coast. Don't fuck up the SEC because they are a bunch of dumbasses and didn't think this through.

Second, quit compounding the problem. Don't grab FSU, Miami, Clemson, and UNC, which would make the problem worse and then crying even more.

Finally, here are some ideas that they should consider before making everyone else change to facilitate their problem:

- They should have taken Cal and Stanford, making 6 in the West, and then run regional pods where most games are played. With unbalanced schedules in pods, you limit travel. They will still have to do that, but it won't be as clean with USC, UCLA, UO, UW, NE, and Iowa as a pod or something like that.

- Establish B1G Athletic campuses on the east and west coast, as well as in the mid-west. Buildings and dorms where the students stay and study while on 2-3 week tours in the other geographical areas. When it is time to play the West teams, fly to the B1G West Campus, stay in the dorms, go to class, and study at the study facilities.

The first you can't do, but they should have. The second will cost a lot of money, but they have a lot of money, and instead of totally upending all of CFB as it has been for over a century, they can handle their problems that way.

The B1G has created a complete mess and it hasn't reared its ugly head yet but it's going to and it's going to be a drain on the conference in the future.

Let's propose they allowed this system to come into play I really don't see it affecting the SEC because it's still regional and has no reason to split anything off. I would be floored if any SEC member attempted to join into some of this crap but can totally see where it would be attractive to the B1G.

B1G football is going to be fine and probably men's basketball but start getting to the other sports and it's going to be painful and those student-athletes who aren't getting big NIL bucks are going to look for alternatives. If you are a swimmer, softball player, volleyball, soccer why would you sign up to make all those cross country trips and kill yourself more than you already are when you can easily get in a conference with an easier travel budget? Zero doubt that recruiting pitch is being made right now.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

The B1G has created a complete mess and it hasn't reared its ugly head yet but it's going to and it's going to be a drain on the conference in the future.

Let's propose they allowed this system to come into play I really don't see it affecting the SEC because it's still regional and has no reason to split anything off. I would be floored if any SEC member attempted to join into some of this crap but can totally see where it would be attractive to the B1G.

B1G football is going to be fine and probably men's basketball but start getting to the other sports and it's going to be painful and those student-athletes who aren't getting big NIL bucks are going to look for alternatives. If you are a swimmer, softball player, volleyball, soccer why would you sign up to make all those cross country trips and kill yourself more than you already are when you can easily get in a conference with an easier travel budget? Zero doubt that recruiting pitch is being made right now.

That's why the idea that they are going to keep growing by moving into the SE is just stupid. Imagine adding Miami so that you stretch from Seattle to Syracuse, Miami to USC/UCLA.

I could obviously be wrong on this, but FSU and Clemson could be in for a really rude awakening.

 

[Wild Turkey]

That's why the idea that they are going to keep growing by moving into the SE is just stupid. Imagine adding Miami so that you stretch from Seattle to Syracuse, Miami to USC/UCLA.

I could obviously be wrong on this, but FSU and Clemson could be in for a really rude awakening.

At this point it wouldn’t surprise me if the B1G took FSU and Clemson. I was very surprised when they initial took USC and UCLA because they were big buds with the PAC and then they just blew them up with no regard.

People bitch about the SEC taking Texas and OU but that wasn’t anywhere close to being as savage as what the B1G did to the PAC. They killed a conference the Rose Bowl and broke up interstate rilvaries with pretty much one stroke.

I disagree with you on the money because I think if either the B1G or SEC wants to pick up Clemson and FSU they can negotiate them in. I agree no one is going to take a pay cut to do it but they will add the money for an extension onto the existing contract to make it happen. If the networks don’t then they run the risk of alienating the conferences when renewals come up. The P2 are money cows and what the networks are paying for them are still a bargain when considering ratings and content.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

At this point it wouldn’t surprise me if the B1G took FSU and Clemson. I was very surprised when they initial took USC and UCLA because they were big buds with the PAC and then they just blew them up with no regard.

People bitch about the SEC taking Texas and OU but that wasn’t anywhere close to being as savage as what the B1G did to the PAC. They killed a conference the Rose Bowl and broke up interstate rilvaries with pretty much one stroke.

I disagree with you on the money because I think if either the B1G or SEC wants to pick up Clemson and FSU they can negotiate them in. I agree no one is going to take a pay cut to do it but they will add the money for an extension onto the existing contract to make it happen. If the networks don’t then they run the risk of alienating the conferences when renewals come up. The P2 are money cows and what the networks are paying for them are still a bargain when considering ratings and content.

Clemson and FSU probably would make sense for a full share or TV money, but that's not all there is ...

1. Do you really think that Auburn would vote FSU and Clemson into the SEC? You are likely underdogs to them most of the time you play them. You guys have averaged 4.6 losses per year for the last 20 years. Auburn would be in the group that would say, "No thanks," it's already hard enough to win in this conference without adding two more teams, especially if they don't bring in any more money.

2. As for the money, at this point, it is about 70% TV viewership and 30% CFP money. Bringing in FSU and Clemson brings in no additional CFP money. It's frozen for the next five years at 29%, no matter how many teams the SEC gets into the CFP. They don't bring any value to the SEC for CFP money, so each team would immediately take a $3 million cut just out of CFP money. The same applies for the B1G ... Clemson and FSU lost their CFP leverage when the SEC and B1G agreed to CFP distribution that didn't involve participation money.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Clemson and FSU probably would make sense for a full share or TV money, but that's not all there is ...

1. Do you really think that Auburn would vote FSU and Clemson into the SEC? You are likely underdogs to them most of the time you play them. You guys have averaged 4.6 losses per year for the last 20 years. Auburn would be in the group that would say, "No thanks," it's already hard enough to win in this conference without adding two more teams, especially if they don't bring in any more money.

2. As for the money, at this point, it is about 70% TV viewership and 30% CFP money. Bringing in FSU and Clemson brings in no additional CFP money. It's frozen for the next five years at 29%, no matter how many teams the SEC gets into the CFP. They don't bring any value to the SEC for CFP money, so each team would immediately take a $3 million cut just out of CFP money. The same applies for the B1G ... Clemson and FSU lost their CFP leverage when the SEC and B1G agreed to CFP distribution that didn't involve participation money.

I can't speak for everyone from Auburn but from my perspective, our schedules have been one of the top 5 toughest in the country every year because we play Alabama and Georgia and no one does anything close to that.

Auburn is in a bad 7 year cycle and it was just our turn (Alabama, Georgia, Tennesee, LSU and now Florida all had them) that is the way it goes but if you look at our recruiting they are going to be back in the next couple of years and I don't fear playing Clemson or FSU because we have done that plenty of times. Word is Vandy is going to rotate onto our schedule as a permanent opponent so load them up. The conference is so big it's not like we are playing them every year. At least the kids can actually get up for those games instead of trap games like Ole Miss and Arkansas (when they are dangerous).

I vote yes because bring them all on, but I don't have a vote.

 

[duckboy33]

The Big Ten is absolutely going to move into the south east. Timing is the question but it's obvious they are trying to create a national profile and the south east pieces in the ACC are next.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I can't speak for everyone from Auburn but from my perspective, our schedules have been one of the top 5 toughest in the country every year because we play Alabama and Georgia and no one does anything close to that.

Auburn is in a bad 7 year cycle and it was just our turn (Alabama, Georgia, Tennesee, LSU and now Florida all had them) that is the way it goes but if you look at our recruiting they are going to be back in the next couple of years and I don't fear playing Clemson or FSU because we have done that plenty of times. Word is Vandy is going to rotate onto our schedule as a permanent opponent so load them up. The conference is so big it's not like we are playing them every year. At least the kids can actually get up for those games instead of trap games like Ole Miss and Arkansas (when they are dangerous).

I vote yes because bring them all on, but I don't have a vote.

I agree that you have the toughest schedule being in the West and having to play UGA and Bama every year. But this isn't just a 7-year cycle. You guys are the most up and down team there is. Either you win big, or you are very mid. You have no sustained success in the last two decades - I mean, you went undefeated while losing five games the year before and the year after.

Year	Wins	Losses	AP High
2023	6	7
2022	5	7
2021	6	7
2020	6	5
2019	9	4	14
2018	8	5
2017	10	4	10
2016	8	5	24
2015	7	6
2014	8	5	22
2013	12	2	2
2012	3	9
2011	8	5
2010	14	0	1
2009	8	5
2008	5	7
2007	9	4	15
2006	11	2	9
2005	9	3	14
2004	13	0	2

It makes no sense to me that a fan of a team with these results, who complains about having the toughest schedule, would say "sure, let's bring in 2 more really good team just after having brought in 2 more really good teams." Especially when it would cost your team $3 million per year.

At least your argument about UNC brings in a team you would beat more often than not.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

The Big Ten is absolutely going to move into the south east. Timing is the question but it's obvious they are trying to create a national profile and the south east pieces in the ACC are next.

Good luck with that.

 

[duckboy33]

Good luck with that.

Appreciate the support

 

[Wild Turkey]

I agree that you have the toughest schedule being in the West and having to play UGA and Bama every year. But this isn't just a 7-year cycle. You guys are the most up and down team there is. Either you win big, or you are very mid. You have no sustained success in the last two decades - I mean, you went undefeated while losing five games the year before and the year after.

Year	Wins	Losses	AP High
2023	6	7
2022	5	7
2021	6	7
2020	6	5
2019	9	4	14
2018	8	5
2017	10	4	10
2016	8	5	24
2015	7	6
2014	8	5	22
2013	12	2	2
2012	3	9
2011	8	5
2010	14	0	1
2009	8	5
2008	5	7
2007	9	4	15
2006	11	2	9
2005	9	3	14
2004	13	0	2

It makes no sense to me that a fan of a team with these results, who complains about having the toughest schedule, would say "sure, let's bring in 2 more really good team just after having brought in 2 more really good teams." Especially when it would cost your team $3 million per year.

At least your argument about UNC brings in a team you would beat more often than not.

The ups and downs is what makes being an Auburn fan great. The highs are so freaking high it’s worth the pain.

The Bammers have been so spoiled they can’t even enjoy making the playoff if they can’t win it all.

When you are an Auburn fan every game matters and you don’t take anything for granted. Bama wasn’t like that under Saban once he got rolling because they really only had one or two decent games a year the rest were unwatchable from a 3rd party perspective. I used to watch all the Bama games but stopped unless I saw the score was close because they are terrible games and there are more exciting ones on.

I’m fine with the ups and downs but disagree but sustained success because we’ve had some great runs since the early 80s. Auburn legit should have 2 more national championships in 83 and 2004 plus an undefeated season in 93. I like who we are and what we’ve accomplished.

 

[Deep Creek]

The ups and downs i

I’m fine with the ups and downs

I'd love to have "ups and downs" instead of just "downs".

 

[Tharvot]

I don't agree with his Apple league and Amazon league ... he's wrong there. And, how do you fund all the other sports if football stands on its own?

From a travel perspective, it makes all the sense in the world.

Well the school, or athletic dept gets the money and distributes as they see fit. Football and Mens hoops have always been the revenue generators for athletics (and maybe in some cases baseball to a lesser extent). ND has done it for years where their football program is independent and does its own thing while the rest of its programs belong to a conference. Could use a similar principle.

 

[Red_Alert]

Well the school, or athletic dept gets the money and distributes as they see fit. Football and Mens hoops have always been the revenue generators for athletics (and maybe in some cases baseball to a lesser extent). ND has done it for years where their football program is independent and does its own thing while the rest of its programs belong to a conference. Could use a similar principle.

Which is what I was thinking.

It would be ideal to have the Big 8, SWC, PAC, SEC, Big East, and ACC back for that sort of thing since they'd be regional and more cost effective for travel in non-revenue generating sports.

Alas..... I think that's water under the bridge at this point.

 

[Deep Creek]

Which is what I was thinking.

It would be ideal to have the Big 8, SWC, PAC, SEC, Big East, and ACC back for that sort of thing since they'd be regional and more cost effective for travel in non-revenue generating sports.

Alas..... I think that's water under the bridge at this point.

I think getting those back together for sports other than football MIGHT work.

Using the PAC, Big 8 and SWC you cited for example, the “big brands” from those three were/are USC, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas. If those four were in a football conference only with other “big brands” that generate revenue commensurate with draw, that might be acceptable. Of course this is going to piss off the non “big brands” that are charter members of the country club, which seems to be unacceptable.

 

[Tharvot]

Which is what I was thinking.

It would be ideal to have the Big 8, SWC, PAC, SEC, Big East, and ACC back for that sort of thing since they'd be regional and more cost effective for travel in non-revenue generating sports.

Alas..... I think that's water under the bridge at this point.

I think you're right on both accounts

 

[OlyDuck]

Which is what I was thinking.

It would be ideal to have the Big 8, SWC, PAC, SEC, Big East, and ACC back for that sort of thing since they'd be regional and more cost effective for travel in non-revenue generating sports.

Alas..... I think that's water under the bridge at this point.

I think you're right on both accounts

wouldnt water under the bridge mean all was forgiven and they would be willing to do it?
i think bridges are burned would be better

 

[Red_Alert]

I think getting those back together for sports other than football MIGHT work.

Using the PAC, Big 8 and SWC you cited for example, the “big brands” from those three were/are USC, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas. If those four were in a football conference only with other “big brands” that generate revenue commensurate with draw, that might be acceptable. Of course this is going to piss off the non “big brands” that are charter members of the country club, which seems to be unacceptable.

I think you're right on both accounts

Seems like a simple concept.

However, it would take massive restructuring by university think-tanks who are known to over-think.

 

[Red_Alert]

wouldnt water under the bridge mean all was forgiven and they would be willing to do it?
i think bridges are burned would be better

No. What I mean by 'water under the bridge' is that it's too late to put the game board back together after someone has already flipped it.

 

[Tharvot]

wouldnt water under the bridge mean all was forgiven and they would be willing to do it?
i think bridges are burned would be better

Maybe so. I took it as "things are too late to change now". Guess that's not really what the phrase means but i think it was the intent of the post.

 

[Deep Creek]

Seems like a simple concept.

However, it would take massive restructuring by university think-tanks who are known to over-think.

No. What I mean by 'water under the bridge' is that it's too late to put the game board back together after someone has already flipped it.

Maybe so. I took it as "things are too late to change now". Guess that's not really what the phrase means but i think it was the intent of the post.

How about we can’t put the genie back in the bottle? Or we can’t unring a bell? Or that train has already left the station? Or……