Bama fatique killing college football???

[Camfantasy]

I'm getting burnt out on it myself, honestly. The parity at the top along with the changing dynamics when it comes to amateurism may do me in in the long run.

 

[7samurai13]

in 2019 if Oregon hadnt lost to Arizona State they would have been in. if Utah woulndt have lost to Oregon in the Pac 12 title they would have been in. so get over the perception that the Pac is weak and has no chance. they just havent won their games because of the parity in the conference.

The PAC hasn’t done very well in their non conference against ranked teams lately.

 

[Rolltide94]

No it isn't. When you have 5 P5 conferences and only 4 spots available, it's not as simple as win your games and you're in.

Let's have a season with more than 3 undefeated P5 teams before we start worrying about hypothetical scenarios that are unlikely.

There probably isn't going to be an expansion to the playoffs any time soon. With all the internal things going on at ESPN these days there isn't any inclination to spend more money for less viewers. There is money to be made on showing college football for sure but with the current state of affairs vis a vis streaming and cable, there is just too much unsettled at the moment for anyone to change the playoff format before the contract runs out. A lot is going to happen with how we watch programming at home over the next 5 years and college football and the inevitable playoff expansion is probably going to take a back seat to that....UNLESS, the schools want it bad enough to expand the playoffs and play them for the same CFP/NY6 money...ESPN would be crazy not to take that.

Of course, I believe the contract is rear end loaded and ESPN pays more for the later years than the earlier years, so I guess depending on the dollars involved, it might be possible to restructure the deal if nobody gets too greedy.

 

[Rolltide94]

The PAC hasn’t done very well in their non conference against ranked teams lately.

Not very well is a decided understatement...4 wins in like 25 or so games since 2016. I don't believe any of those were top 15 wins either. Good academics though, and water polo and shit.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

in 2019 if Oregon hadnt lost to Arizona State they would have been in. if Utah woulndt have lost to Oregon in the Pac 12 title they would have been in. so get over the perception that the Pac is weak and has no chance. they just havent won their games because of the parity in the conference.

Aww look, he's trying to be cute again.

 

[Deep Creek]

in 2019 if Oregon hadnt lost to Arizona State they would have been in. if Utah woulndt have lost to Oregon in the Pac 12 title they would have been in. so get over the perception that the Pac is weak and has no chance. they just havent won their games because of the parity in the conference.

Easy now oly. Coulda, shoulda, woulda don't cut it. And, I don't think you want to go down the conference parity road for the Pac right now. The tallest midget is still....a midget!

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

The Pac does get in from time to time, they just can't compete against the big boys. I'm for expanding to 8 teams and hopefully it'll happen some what reasonably soon.

 

[78Cyclones]

The Pac does get in from time to time, they just can't compete against the big boys. I'm for expanding to 8 teams and hopefully it'll happen some what reasonably soon.

If we had a 4 team Playoff during the Carroll Era, USC would have racked up National Championships like Saban does at Alabama every other year. The Pac is down now, but they are not that far removed from that dominant period.

 

[trojanfan12]

Agreed, plus that's a stupid argument ... win most of your game, you aren't in. Win your games but your conference is perceived to be weak - sorry PAC - and you aren't in. The obvious way to get past this malaise, and what is coming is an 8 or 12 team playoff. It will be great for everyone.

USC and Auburn are two teams that would benefit greatly by an expanded CFP, IMO.

I'm definitely a fan of expanding the playoff. I'd rather it be 8 and stay there. I'd be interested in how a 12 team playoff would work. I didn't catch much of it because I was working, but I think it was on Dan Patrick this morning...Joel Klatt had a 2 tiered 14 team playoff that seemed kind of interesting.

I think that's too big, but I'm going to try to find it later and see how it would work.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm not suffering Bama fatigue.

This is my shocked face.

 

[trojanfan12]

There probably isn't going to be an expansion to the playoffs any time soon.

Actually, from what I've heard and read, it seems like it could happen rather than later. It would be a money maker for college football and a lot of athletic departments are looking at losing a lot of money.

 

[Wild Turkey]

I'll leave the crying to you. You're better at it.

You probably should leave the math to those us who know that you can't fit 5 teams into 4 spots.

Wake me up when there is an undefeated team in each conference.

 

[Rolltide94]

Actually, from what I've heard and read, it seems like it could happen rather than later. It would be a money maker for college football and a lot of athletic departments are looking at losing a lot of money.

It's only a money maker if someone pays you money. I just explained to you why that isn't going to happen, but you were unsurprisingly too dense to understand it I guess. But since you started off your post with "Actually" I should have expected that.

 

[Rolltide94]

If we had a 4 team Playoff during the Carroll Era, USC would have racked up National Championships like Saban does at Alabama every other year. The Pac is down now, but they are not that far removed from that dominant period.

Given that Pete only had 4 one-loss or better teams at USC, and one of those lost the Rose Bowl to Texas, I can;t really see where he would do more than 1 better than the two he got. '02 he lost to K-State and Wash St in the regular season. In '06 he was a one-loss #2 heading into unranked UCLA, no way they survive that with 2 losses and '07 they lost to unranked Stanford and then #5 Oregon.

At best 3 in 8 seasons, more like Dabo than Saban.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I'm definitely a fan of expanding the playoff. I'd rather it be 8 and stay there. I'd be interested in how a 12 team playoff would work. I didn't catch much of it because I was working, but I think it was on Dan Patrick this morning...Joel Klatt had a 2 tiered 14 team playoff that seemed kind of interesting.

I think that's too big, but I'm going to try to find it later and see how it would work.

Here are my quick thoughts on this: Playoffs need to extend to at least 8 teams

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

in 2019 if Oregon hadnt lost to Arizona State they would have been in. if Utah woulndt have lost to Oregon in the Pac 12 title they would have been in. so get over the perception that the Pac is weak and has no chance. they just havent won their games because of the parity in the conference.

Call it whatever you want, but when there are 4 slots and 1 CC gets eliminated it's been the PAC more often than anyone else. Perception, they just want to fuck with you west coast commies, doesn't matter why but a 12 teams CFP will enure to your benefit. That's a good thing, BTW. And your parity argument within your conference also makes the CFP good for you. Per your argument, you guys are all fantastic and equal, and beat each other so you don't get in. Well, now you do. Maybe next time realize when you have an allie in a post and don't get your panties in a twist.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Let's have a season with more than 3 undefeated P5 teams before we start worrying about hypothetical scenarios that are unlikely.

There probably isn't going to be an expansion to the playoffs any time soon. With all the internal things going on at ESPN these days there isn't any inclination to spend more money for less viewers. There is money to be made on showing college football for sure but with the current state of affairs vis a vis streaming and cable, there is just too much unsettled at the moment for anyone to change the playoff format before the contract runs out. A lot is going to happen with how we watch programming at home over the next 5 years and college football and the inevitable playoff expansion is probably going to take a back seat to that....UNLESS, the schools want it bad enough to expand the playoffs and play them for the same CFP/NY6 money...ESPN would be crazy not to take that.

Of course, I believe the contract is rear end loaded and ESPN pays more for the later years than the earlier years, so I guess depending on the dollars involved, it might be possible to restructure the deal if nobody gets too greedy.

I understand arguments against expanded playoffs, this is one I haven't heard. Tell me how a CFP doesn't make a shit ton more money with a 12 team, 11 game CFP. They will be printing money. It'll be a fucking ATM. The Bowl games now are profitable as hell ... CFP Bowls make a lot more than March Madness, and when you throw in the community impact it's well over a billion dollars, easily.

Go take a look at Bama's schedule starting mid-20s. Now, tell me that they don't know that we are expanding the playoffs.

In the next decade or so we play series against Clemson (5 times, I believe), tOSU, Texas, FSU, Oregon, Oklahoma, UCLA, and we play GaTech every year.

Starting in 2026 or thereabouts, we go 4 straight years of GaTech each year with Texas/FSU, Texas/Clemson, Clemson/tOSU, tOSU/Oklahoma. That doesn't happen without an expanded playoff where CCs get in, and SOS matters. All the big schools are doing this, as evidenced by those playing us. Your schedule is somewhat similar.

 

[Rolltide94]

I understand arguments against expanded playoffs, this is one I haven't heard. Tell me how a CFP doesn't make a shit ton more money with a 12 team, 11 game CFP. They will be printing money. It'll be a fucking ATM. The Bowl games now are profitable as hell ... CFP Bowls make a lot more than March Madness, and when you throw in the community impact it's well over a billion dollars, easily.

Go take a look at Bama's schedule starting mid-20s. Now, tell me that they don't know that we are expanding the playoffs.

In the next decade or so we play series against Clemson (5 times, I believe), tOSU, Texas, FSU, Oregon, Oklahoma, UCLA, and we play GaTech every year.

Starting in 2026 or thereabouts, we go 4 straight years of GaTech each year with Texas/FSU, Texas/Clemson, Clemson/tOSU, tOSU/Oklahoma. That doesn't happen without an expanded playoff where CCs get in, and SOS matters. All the big schools are doing this, as evidenced by those playing us. Your schedule is somewhat similar.

If it does expand it goes to 8, not 12, maybe not ever 12, but certainly not to start.

It's simple, ESPN already owns the broadcast rights to the CFP and the NY6 bowls. The NY6 bowls already perform at a high level ratings wise and there is a large drop off after those typically. If the playoff expands to 8 teams you replace the Alabama vs Notre Dame Rose Bowl and the Georgia vs Cincinnati Peach Bowl with Alabama vs Cincinnati and Notre Dame vs Texas A&M in those same NY6 bowls. Does the latter significantly outdraw the former in tv ratings, like millions of more people watching significant? Sorry, don't see it, the non-playoff NY6 games already draw millions(last year's LSU/OK semi barely outdrew the Alabama/Michigan Citrus the Oregon/Wisconsin Rose Bowl and the Georgia/Baylor Sugar Bowls). If a #1 vs #4 semi-final game only has 700,000 more viewers than a Rose Bowl between also-rans, what does a quarter-final between #1 and #8 get?

Then all the bowls down the line become even less relevant...not exactly great for the company that owns 18 of those bowls and the broadcast rights to all of them. With Covid and everything else going on, expecting ESPN to pony up hundreds of millions of dollars for games that just cannibalize the ratings for games they already have the rights to seems like bad business, especially in the face of reduced ratings for all the bowl games this year. Like I said earlier, if the schools want it bad enough and are willing to do it at the current contract for the next 5 years, it could happen, if they want hundreds of millions more dollars then ESPN is going to politely tell them to go fuck themselves.

I guess we will find out how bad the conferences want to expand...

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

If it does expand it goes to 8, not 12, maybe not ever 12, but certainly not to start.

It's simple, ESPN already owns the broadcast rights to the CFP and the NY6 bowls. The NY6 bowls already perform at a high level ratings wise and there is a large drop off after those typically. If the playoff expands to 8 teams you replace the Alabama vs Notre Dame Rose Bowl and the Georgia vs Cincinnati Peach Bowl with Alabama vs Cincinnati and Notre Dame vs Texas A&M in those same NY6 bowls. Does the latter significantly outdraw the former in tv ratings, like millions of more people watching significant? Sorry, don't see it, the non-playoff NY6 games already draw millions(last year's LSU/OK semi barely outdrew the Alabama/Michigan Citrus the Oregon/Wisconsin Rose Bowl and the Georgia/Baylor Sugar Bowls). If a #1 vs #4 semi-final game only has 700,000 more viewers than a Rose Bowl between also-rans, what does a quarter-final between #1 and #8 get?

Then all the bowls down the line become even less relevant...not exactly great for the company that owns 18 of those bowls and the broadcast rights to all of them. With Covid and everything else going on, expecting ESPN to pony up hundreds of millions of dollars for games that just cannibalize the ratings for games they already have the rights to seems like bad business, especially in the face of reduced ratings for all the bowl games this year. Like I said earlier, if the schools want it bad enough and are willing to do it at the current contract for the next 5 years, it could happen, if they want hundreds of millions more dollars then ESPN is going to politely tell them to go fuck themselves.

I guess we will find out how bad the conferences want to expand...

I believe they will go to 12 as it makes the most sense with byes, etc. It checks all the boxes and 8 doesn't. That said, they've been incremental in the past, so we will see.

Your numbers are way off, and I don't think you fully understand the economics of bowls. You've been around here a long time, and I know you are knowledgeable, but NY6 bowls that are part of the CFP would vastly out pull them not part of the CFP:

This year's semis pulled 18.9 and 19.1.
The Peach Bowl with UGA Cincy pulled 8.72 million. That's less than half, which is significant.
The Orange Bowl pulled 7.58 million,
The Fiesta 6.68 and
The Cotton 5.7.

Hell those last 3 combined were less than the two semis. The two semis: 38 million, the 4 NY6 were 28 million. Now make them quarter-final games and you are increasing your viewership by what, at least 40 million viewers. With 12 teams you get 4 games at home schools fields, which will draw more than 15 million viewers.

As for non-CFP bowls:

New Year’s Eve Army-West Virginia Liberty Bowl - 3.74 million — up 12% from last year
The Mississippi State-Tulsa Armed Forces Bowl drew 2.25 million earlier in the day (+29%).
The Wake Forest-Wisconsin Charlotte Bowl averaged 1.98 million early last Wednesday (-25%).

As for ESPN being concerned, I know they are going to have to tighten up, but CFB isn't where it's going to happen. Look at what they just paid for the SEC to take them away from CBS ... no problem spending money there. No fuck you for wanting hundreds of millions more, no they gave them billions more.

Read up on the whole bowl system. I did and it was totally not what I expected. Because of the sheer volume, and the popularity of CFB they make a shit ton of money. Far from dying off, they are this ATM for ESPN and the cities that host them. There is a reason that they keep adding them (obviously not in Covid year). ESPN isn't worried about the Bahamas bowl getting 10 million viewers. But when 18 bowls each get 1-3 million, you make shit ton of money.

Bowl Game Payouts are Practically a Small Fortune in College Football

Despite the serious bowl problem of players skipping out on their team one game early, the college football bowl season is the most important stretch of games for so many colleges and universities. Not only is this a chance for smaller schools to receive national attention, but the payday that...

fanbuzz.com

College Football Playoff business is booming at halfway point, but expansion looms

The College Football Playoff is six years into a 12-year deal that has been a financial smash hit. Expansion could mean even more growth.

www.usatoday.com

Rule no. 1 is always "it's about the money." The money rule here says expand, and getting more involved says so as well.

 

[Innermind]

College football has come somewhat predictable and that's led to a level of fatigue. That leads to two questions:

1) Should anything be done about it?
2) If so, what would help?

Also note that ratings were down across the board this year. It was a mess of a season and that impacted interest.

I didn't read thru 5 pages of comments/posts.....


I say allow the super-elite recruits to go pro immediately out of high school.... primarily in Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's XFL and the CFL for one or two years of seasoning before moving on to the NFL. There are probably plenty of elite high school recruits who have no interest in academics/a college degree..... they just want to play football.

Each year there are probably 2 or 3 recruits who might possibly be NFL ready immediately out of high school..... and perhaps another 10 to 12 recruits who would only need one year of seasoning in the XFL or CFL..... and perhaps another 12 to 15 who would need two years of seasoning in the XFL or CFL.

Allowing these approx. 20 to 30 super-elite kids each year to turn pro immediately out of high school instead of being distributed amongst the generally same 7 or 8 elite college programs will somewhat contribute to evening the talent level discrepancy which exists in the power 5 conferences.