We'll see about the scheduling difficulty. There is a reason the SEC and B1G wanted 3 guaranteed spots. They saw that they were going to have some really good teams with some losses. The schedule in this thread shows that ... UGA has to play away at 3 top 10 teams. Then 2 more in the top 25. 9 of the top 10 teams are in the SEC. 24 of 25 are in the P2. If this all goes to chalk, the P2 are going to have teams with multiple losses that are likely far better than teams in the non-P2. What will the committee do when that happens?
Yep, with those 10 schools that's a potential 48 matchups you can create in a season. Then add on top ranked schools like UGA, Bama, (OU, TX, LSU, etc on a good year) who would draw in numbers vs anyone (but not on the level of Mich / OSU).
Bama holds their own with tOSU and UM, but we will see if that lasts once they aren't winning all the time.
Not sure how these are calculated so I'll "assume" and we all know what that does.
We'll see about the scheduling difficulty. There is a reason the SEC and B1G wanted 3 guaranteed spots. They saw that they were going to have some really good teams with some losses. The schedule in this thread shows that ... UGA has to play away at 3 top 10 teams. Then 2 more in the top 25. 9 of the top 10 teams are in the SEC. 24 of 25 are in the P2. If this all goes to chalk, the P2 are going to have teams with multiple losses that are likely far better than teams in the non-P2. What will the committee do when that happens?
It's why the SEC didn't go to the 9th game. They want to see whether the committee will consider SOS instead of just defaulting to the number of wins/losses. If a 4th SEC team that is 9-3 gets left out for a B12/ACC school that is 10-2, the SEC will never go to a 9th game.
There are no more high caliber names out there other than ND, FSU, and Clemson. That's it.
The chart in this great post shows that:
ND has zero reason to go into a conference. They can make about as much as a P2 team can, and they have no problem making up the difference with fundraising. They like their independence and aren't going to move away from that. They could easily get a scheduling agreement with either or both the P2.
"If you want to maintain your rivalries with USC an Michigan, join the B1G."
"Thanks, but no thanks, we'll start new rivalries with UGA, Alabama, and other SEC teams. Thanks for calling."
Explain the economics behind just SEC and B1G and excluding all other teams and conferences? How is that a more attractive product to the viewing audience when you basically cut out 2/3 of the rest of the viewing audience? I keep hearing people say this, but it's never made sense to me.
You still haven't explained how eliminating 2/3 of your fanbase increases your economic situation. Sure, if you can get rid of 2/3 of your fanbase and still make the same money, and you don't have to split it as much, you make more money. But you haven't explained how the popularity of CFB doesn't drop by decreasing your fanbase.
It's the UFL and EVERYONE cares because the Stallions are back to back champions of the world and will repeat this Sunday. The greatest existing dynasty in sports currently.
Let's look at where the money is made - The conferences have their own media contracts, so just focusing the year long competition on 2 conferences won't increase that. If anything, some fans of the ACC/B12/G5 will lose interest in the SEC and B1G games and not watch them. It's not that more will watch once they get eliminated, we can agree on that, so you aren't going to increase your viewership in SEC/B1G games. So, the SEC/B1G at best will hold their media value, but likely lose some viewers. That represents about 66% of the media money.
Agreed.
