CFB revenue sharing model by conference
- Thread starter kougkurt
- Start date
Coupla links below from ESPN. This will end up being a suck shit deal for WSU one way or the other. Don't really understand how the G5 and Pac2 can't throw a wrench in this. We have a 6-5 majority in the Committee(s).
And those B1G and SEC F-ers. They already have tons of money and giant stadiums and lots of boosters. Yet they just want to squeeze everyone else out. I don't know that it wouldn't be better for the G5+Pac-2 just to say F-you, quit begging for pathetic scraps, and go play in our own sandbox. Maybe the CFP will lose interest among enough of the fanbase to fall on its fat face.
Sources: CFP closer to expected 14-team field
The CFP is on the brink of moving one important step closer to an expected 14-team playoff that would begin in 2026, as the 10 FBS conferences and Notre Dame are set to meet a Friday deadline to agree to the next contract.
Sources: CFP 'on target' to sort out revenue split
CFP leaders are "on target" to come to a resolution by the end of the week on a proposed revenue distribution and governance structure in the next contract, sources told ESPN's Heather Dinich.
Coupla links below from ESPN. This will end up being a suck shit deal for WSU one way or the other. Don't really understand how the G5 and Pac2 can't throw a wrench in this. We have a 6-5 majority in the Committee(s).
And those B1G and SEC F-ers. They already have tons of money and giant stadiums and lots of boosters. Yet they just want to squeeze everyone else out. I don't know that it wouldn't be better for the G5+Pac-2 just to say F-you, quit begging for pathetic scraps, and go play in our own sandbox. Maybe the CFP will lose interest among enough of the fanbase to fall on its fat face.
Sources: CFP closer to expected 14-team field
The CFP is on the brink of moving one important step closer to an expected 14-team playoff that would begin in 2026, as the 10 FBS conferences and Notre Dame are set to meet a Friday deadline to agree to the next contract.www.espn.com
Sources: CFP 'on target' to sort out revenue split
CFP leaders are "on target" to come to a resolution by the end of the week on a proposed revenue distribution and governance structure in the next contract, sources told ESPN's Heather Dinich.
If I were running the show at a school like WSU, I would try to work with the other conferences to force the SEC and B1G to level the field or just not play them at all. Without a bunch of scrubs to play, many of the teams in the SEC and B1G become full blown scrubs themselves. Texas A&M is a perennial 8-4 school even with four OOC games. Make them play a full schedule of their conference foes and the B1G and they turn into a 6-6 team Gonna be hard to keep Kyle Field full with that happening too much. My Big 12 brethren are looking forward to seeing Oklahoma and Texas fall on their faces in the SEC.
The SEC and B1G think that there is a desire for another professional football league in the fall and that college football fans only care about them. They don't exist as power conferences without the other 100 schools to play against. Of course, half the people that you meet are dumber than average and we all know that it's an inherent human trait to be a front running t-shirt wearing douchebag...so maybe they are right.
The model proposed above is bullsh!t and frankly, WSU is better off not being part of it.
I believe that for the next two years the Pac-2 has one of 11 votes. Not sure about that. It's f-ing confusing, especially with 2 CFP governing committees - Commissioners and League president reps.
That's nuts. A SJSU will make $1.8 million and a WSU will make $360,000. Who did the math on that windfall of cash.
The further I scroll this thread the worse it gets.
How the f is this even close to being equitable? Do they think our TV viewers are going to magically stop watching because we're orphaned? And less than G5 schools, by a factor of 5? What the literal f?
My read is that they are trying to force us to join another conference right away.
gah gah goo goo!
We're going to hold our breath and stomp our feet!!
Could we be more feckless?
Don't worry. You already know that you're insignificant enough in the eyes of the B1G to be worthy of only a half share. It's cute that you decided to suck hind tit on the Big 10 instead of working to keep a 100 year old conference alive. I hope you f#ckers finish 5-7 for 10 years in a row.
AKA more welfare for WSU, got it.
WSU won't end up getting stiffed like this as they'll have joined a conference by the time it kicks in. The tone of entitlement in some of these posts though 🙄
If WSU, OSU joins the WAC, MTN West, Conference USA, Metro Atlantic Conference, AAC, etc, then WSU is still getting STIFFED, because they dont deserve to be relegated to that.
WSU had the 4th, 5th best TV numbers in the PAC 12, over SOME of the 10 that left the PAC 12 to join the other P4 conferences.
WSU should be in a P4 OVER them, because of BETTER TV NUMBERS, and because for the last about 10+ years WSU has been MORE SUCCESSFUL, with about 7,8 straight bowl games, etc, then CU, Arizona, ASU, etc.
That's not sucking off the teat, as you put it. That's CU, etc, sucking off, draining off the teat, as you put it.
Also since WSU, OSU, PAC 2, can, and IF WSU, OSU, PAC 2 rebuild PAC into WSU, OSU, BSU, SDSU, FRESNO ST, UNLV, AIRFORCE, UTAH ST, MEMPHIS, TULANE, USF, IOWA ST(When they get booted out of Big 12), Cal(When ACC falls apart), then if they do that, they should not get stiffed, punished, with a lesser share then the other G5, MWC, AAC conferences, and should get about 13 mil per team per year at worst, and should get about 1/6, instead of 1/8th, instead of less then the 1/8th that other G5's get, should get 1 of 12 CFP spots if champ goes 10-2, 11-1, 12-0, should get 1 NY6 January Bowl, Alamo, Vegas, Holiday, Sun Bowl, for bowl access, HYBRID G5/SEMI P5 STATUS.
That would be a FAIR, what they would DESERVE arrangement, if WSU, OSU, PAC 2 did that.
You don't realize the hypocrisy of desperately grabbing onto the Big 10 tit at a discounted price while talking sh!t over here. It's pretty f#cking hilarious.
Would we do the same? Sure. It doesn't change the fact that your supposedly proud university is a dollar store discount program that the B1G bought on sale because they could. You can't come here and talk about "tone of entitlement" when your university has it's f#cking hand out saying, "Please sir...I'll take half as long as I get something!".
Soooo...is UW getting more or less than if they had stuck to some notion of a PAC? More you say? Sounds like sound decision making to me. The WSU's of the world didn't make the PAC the PAC, it was already dead when UW and Oregon made their move. Continue to sling "insults" because that's all you got.
That's the deal...you don't know if it was going to be more or less than before because you pussies bailed on it without a fight and chose to lick the excess drippings from the B1G taint rather than work on it. I get that the Pac-12 leadership was incompetent and screwed things up....but your program has already told the B1G that it's willing to take a pay cut to be part of their game. Do you think that they aren't going to remember that in the future?
BTW, you're the insecure prick coming around to a Washington State board seeking validation. What's going to be f#cking brilliant is watching your 2024 schedule play out like below:
Weber State - W
Eastern Michigan - W
Wazzu - L
Northwestern - W
@ Rutgers - W (ranked in the Top 25....you're back, baby!)
Michigan - L (oops)
@ Iowa - L (double oops)
@ Indiana - W
USC - L (well, sh!t)
@ PSU - L (man, traveling east sucks in November)
UCLA - W
@ Oregon - L (ducks ruin everything)
Enjoy your 6-6 season. If Chip Kelly hadn't bailed, I'd say that you wouldn't make a bowl game next year.
This means the Pac-12/2 is not sustainable. They better start planning on the Pac-12 rebuild and getting the same dollars as G5 schools.
"The contract is expected to include a definitive “look-in” provision in 2028, where revenue distribution and format can be re-evaluated. The look-in provision can be triggered earlier by any conference realignment."
This is the only thing that I can think of that Schulz is hoping for a bigger slice of the pie. It seems like we need the ACC to implode and for us to slide in.
"The contract is expected to include a definitive “look-in” provision in 2028, where revenue distribution and format can be re-evaluated. The look-in provision can be triggered earlier by any conference realignment."
This is the only thing that I can think of that Schulz is hoping for a bigger slice of the pie. It seems like we need the ACC to implode and for us to slide in.
My take is that everyone else shot us a giant middle finger to force us to join a conference or rebuild the Pac-12 ASAP.
Yep. We got 2 years of grace, I'll give Sgt Schulz some credit for that. Now don't throw away any of OUR money paying certain teams to bolt their conference(s). The Pac-2 has something to offer our Mt West friends. We don't need to pay them for the privilege of gaining a little esteem.
Replying to this sound-thinking Loyal guy (wait that's me!). With the tourney finally here, the 10-keys should be able to start clicking. Here's the all-knowing analysis:
- First off, after the tourney, we can assess our March madness 6-year distribution monies. If someone is at HQ that can count. And answer some questions - how does the Pac-2 preserve that payout between the 2 of us? Is maintaining the conference necessary (I assume yes). This may not be CFP money, but it is significant
- Right behind, what is left in the P-2 coffers after sharing revenue/expense this year? 10 Million? 100 million? Don't give any (more) of it to anyone
- The crappy deal the G5 is going to get in the CFP is better than the pittance that they have penciled in for WSU and OSU. OK, so how would the new Pac-12/14 distribution fit in? Gotta assume that we can be the top-ranked G5 conference after reverse merger and get that CFP berth. Don't fiddly-f around for too long. We are dead as a P5 conference. Deal with it
- Reverse merger. Pac-2 schools keep all of their earned BB distributions. Mt West mergees keep all of theirs. We share proportionally in distributions earned in future seasons. Math should be easy. MW, with 6 teams in the tourney, will get a nice chunk of change to keep along with that from previous years
- What about this WCC affair? Do we get a 6-year payout of next year's pro-rata tourney revenues? Fun conversation there
- Who joins? IMHO, up to the MT West. Do they bring 10 or all 11/12 (Hawaii being the 12th oddball). We need at least 12 total. Leaves room for future additions
- Quit wet dreaming about the ACC. F-the Big-12. They are already 2nd class citizens
- Buckle our belts, use OUR money prudently, and move forward as a West Coast/Mountain conference. F flying cross country. F some hair-brained "pod" scenario
I've reached the age where I simply don't care anymore. I'm an East coast guy, and the opinion that Moondawg has about WSU is how everyone back East feels about the West coast, particularly the Northwest. Sports out here exists only because of the TV window. The teams are all on the same identity level as the XFL. Huskies, Cougs, Seahawks, M's, Trailblazers....and Kraken. LOL
What makes being a Boston fan so much fun. We have massive neighboring fanbases a few hundred miles away. New York, Philly, Pittsburgh, Ohio, Toronto, Montreal, Baltimore, DC. The same is true with the traditional SEC and B!G. Those teams have up to 7 historic rivals within a few hours of each other. Damn near every week, they have a huge, regionally significant game.
WSU and OSU fading away accelerates the give a $hit college sports demise of this region. The one thing Cougs and Beavs brought to the table were fanbases who loathed UW and Oregon. It was a lot of eyeballs on TV sets, and a lot of trash talk and ball busting at schools and workplaces in the NW. WSU and Oregon State need to accept their place at the G5 table, merge into the best West coast league they can establish, and cut off sports ties with their big conference brothers. Just let it dry up. It'll be a bummer for a couple of years, and then we'll forget about it.
What makes being a Boston fan so much fun. We have massive neighboring fanbases a few hundred miles away. New York, Philly, Pittsburgh, Ohio, Toronto, Montreal, Baltimore, DC. The same is true with the traditional SEC and B!G. Those teams have up to 7 historic rivals within a few hours of each other. Damn near every week, they have a huge, regionally significant game.
WSU and OSU fading away accelerates the give a $hit college sports demise of this region. The one thing Cougs and Beavs brought to the table were fanbases who loathed UW and Oregon. It was a lot of eyeballs on TV sets, and a lot of trash talk and ball busting at schools and workplaces in the NW. WSU and Oregon State need to accept their place at the G5 table, merge into the best West coast league they can establish, and cut off sports ties with their big conference brothers. Just let it dry up. It'll be a bummer for a couple of years, and then we'll forget about it.
Right there with you. After 20+ years, I’ve let my season tickets lapse (or…in 4 days I will). With all the changes and upheaval, CFB just isn’t fun anymore. It’s been heading that way faster and faster for the last 5 years,at least.
I've decreased by degrees how much CFB I watch for probably 15 years, the last season or two I’ve watched almost nothing other than Coug games. Don’t think I watched any bowl games this season - once we were done, the season was over. I actually watched a few NFL games instead, and I’d given up NFL in favor of CFB years ago.
This last round of realignment was the final nail. Commercialization of the game has been undermining it for years, but now it’s not really a game anymore, and it’s certainly not a fair game. That makes it far less interesting.
I’ll still watch Coug games from the comfort of my couch, and will likely make the trek to Pullman sometimes. But my investment in it - personally and financially- will be lower. The mercenary nature of NIL and the portal has torn the heart out of the game I used to follow, and I’m not going to put my time and money into a system I don’t support or agree with.
I’ll still hang around here and discuss it though, because like any addiction….i can’t just quit.
The interesting thing about NFL-lite as opposed to the NFL is that the NFL actually strives for parity, whereas NFL-lite is going 200% in the opposite direction trying to stack the deck for all the biggest players (even more than it already is.)
I said it when all this started coming down: I honestly hope the whole thing burns to the ground. No more NCAA, no more college athletic for anyone. Let Roger Goddell figure out how best to manage NFL-lite and to hell with all of them.
Reverse Merging THE WHOLE ENTIRE MWC, INCLUDING THE WORST 2,3,4 BOTTOM CRAP, WORST teams, MWC programs, DOES NOT give that rebuilt PAC, that way, a CFP berth.
A 11-1 conference champ of that PAC rebuild, COULD end up not going to CFP, and a 12-0:champ from another G5 conference COULD get a, the, 1 of the 12 CFP spots, while the 11-1 champ from that PAC rebuild, could end up not going to CFP.
Reverse merging with whole entire MWC, DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT A 11-1 PAC CHAMP GETS A CFP SPOT.
The ONLY way that would probably semi guarantee 1 CFP spot for a rebuilt PAC is to either get the top 9 MWC programs or top 6 MWC programs into a rebuilt PAC, and then have ACC fall apart, and have CAL rejoin PAC, and have a Iowa St type program get booted out of P4, join PAC, and have Memphis, Tulane join PAC, and that would make the PAC a hybrid, G5/semi P5 conference that would probably get about 14 mil to 20 mil per team per year, 1 CFP spot, 1 NY6 spot, better bowl access, etc.
Your Reverse merger the whole entire MWC into PAC will probably only get the PAC about 5,6,7,8,9 mil per team, per year, no semi guaranteed CFP spot, less money, lesser bowls, etc, and therefore is not as good of a option.
Canzano, Wilner, OSU fans, alumni, administration, and only about 67% of WSU fans, alumni, administration, Schultz, Chun, etc, ARE AGAINST REVERSE MERGING WHOLE ENTIRE MWC INTO PAC. There is wide spread support for PARTIAL top 6 to 9 of MWC Reverse merger into PAC.
The model doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. They’re not recognizing some of the elements that have always made CFB entertaining. The unexpected upsets, the Saturday every season where there’s total carnage in the top 10. The unheralded walk-on who makes the big play to win a game, or who blossoms and turns into a star. Their system pretty much eliminates those things.
I also don’t know about their market assumptions. They’re building their mini-league to create “marquee matchups” between big teams. They don’t seem to understand that part of the reason Michigan-USC and Alabama-Ohio State draw viewers is that they’re rare. If they happen every few years…it’s less interesting. And, those matchups are going to take viewers from each other. They’re assuming that by having those big matchups more often, more people will watch. I don’t think that’s a good assumption. In fact, by excluding and alienating the teams they’re minimizing and leaving out, I think they’ll see a net loss in viewers.
And I’ll be one of them.
I was expecting a smirking middle finger from the SEC and B1G. So, this exceeds my expectations.
It's getting hard. I'll keep my tickets for as long as I have a kid in Pullman.
The thought of going to somewhere like Vegas, Reno or San Diego for one road game a year is starting to sound more appealing.
I agree. Not sure if the egos of the Bama and tOSU fans can handle 8-9 win seasons.
Curious about a couple things:
1. What do you make of USC's suckitude since the founding of the Pac-12?
2. Should uw have been booted from the conference for 0-12? The Gilbertson/Willingham era was epic.
Sorta related to all this. How about a rule that A) Division 1 teams can no longer play FCS teams or FCS games no longer count towards bowl or CFP eligibility (like it used to be). If the G5 and Pac-2 are going to get f-ed, at least being able to schedule more worthy OOC foes (body bag games or not) would add a few bucks to the wallet.
You talking about the guy that at best has been a net neutral, likely more of a net fail, at UW? If Huskers want to pay him 50% more have at him. I assume we're getting some money out of it too but haven't seen a number. Huskers are obviously great decision makers when it comes to athletics.
Of course you didn't want him anyway. Of course.
Nothing but good things will come from a revolving door at AD.
Similar threads
