ADVERTISEMENT

New CFP: Expected media value at $2.2B per season

ttowncoug

Hall Of Fame
Sep 9, 2001
4,835
851
113

That would put the payout - if they do it pro-rata - at $183M per team. If the Pac-12 gets back to 12, 1 team in is with $15M per school.

Dilution of the CFP payouts is going to be a big factor into future conference realignment. And, making sure the conference has at least 1 team - 2 ideally - but we'd need to get to a 14+ team conference to justify that.
 
Nope. My understanding is 8 teams in the opening round. Top 4 have a bye. On campus. (Think week before Christmas).

Then 8 teams in the second round. Played in the big bowl games. (Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, Orange, Cotton) my read.

Semi finals the week after the big bowl games. (also, maybe in the big bowl stadiums).

Finals in mid January at a neutral site.

All the current bowl games stay put.
 
The guarantee of the Pac 12 champion getting a ticket to the CFB playoff makes expansion and reduction silly. Why would Oregon and the dogs go to the BIG if the chances of a Natty are much smaller. I know, money. But still
 
Highest rated 6 conference champs in the current BCS are the autobids. So if the MWC champ goes undefeated with quality non-conference play, they might get in. My assumption is that the Power 5 champs will get in and whoever is the best from the group of 5 gets in. Then the rest go the next 6 based on ranking.

What I think you are going to see is ND sneaking in every year. If true, I'm sticking my prediction, I see USC going the independent route (like ND) and then UCLA comes back to the Pac.

Think about these staggering numbers: if ND gets in, they keep the entire $183M.

Is SC going to turn an eye to that kind of opportunity if they can a) pick their own schedule, and b) get a significantly higher payout.

ND has a football agreement to play 4 ACC games per year.

SC could set that up with the Pac-12, UCLA and Stanford, and then pick the others based on their preference. If you are running USC, in 12 game schedule that includes an ND game, 4 Pac schools then fill the remaining games up with any teams you pick. 2 games against FCS teams. Remaining vs. likely either P-12 or MWC teams for travel/logistics purposes.
 
Going the independent route you are betting on yourself. And you'd need a conference to support your other athletics. (ND and the ACC). Yes, the money is pretty staggering.

From the article, $2.2B for CFP vs. $871M for March Madness.
 
Anyone else ready to give any PAC-12 team who qualifies 25% then split the difference by 11? If it keeps UW, UO and SU in the PAC I certainly am.
 
Highest rated 6 conference champs in the current BCS are the autobids. So if the MWC champ goes undefeated with quality non-conference play, they might get in. My assumption is that the Power 5 champs will get in and whoever is the best from the group of 5 gets in. Then the rest go the next 6 based on ranking.

What I think you are going to see is ND sneaking in every year. If true, I'm sticking my prediction, I see USC going the independent route (like ND) and then UCLA comes back to the Pac.

Think about these staggering numbers: if ND gets in, they keep the entire $183M.

Is SC going to turn an eye to that kind of opportunity if they can a) pick their own schedule, and b) get a significantly higher payout.

ND has a football agreement to play 4 ACC games per year.

SC could set that up with the Pac-12, UCLA and Stanford, and then pick the others based on their preference. If you are running USC, in 12 game schedule that includes an ND game, 4 Pac schools then fill the remaining games up with any teams you pick. 2 games against FCS teams. Remaining vs. likely either P-12 or MWC teams for travel/logistics purposes.
What I read was that ND, if they are in the conversation, could never be seeded higher than 5th and would not get a 1st round bye unless they join a conference. The 4 byes are reserved for conference champs only.

With their existing schedule, ND is usually overrated, and they’ve proved it with their playoff performances. I’d get some pleasure out of seeing them get bounced by a 12 seed…as long as they weren’t taking a spot that should rightfully go to the Cougs.
 
Anyone else ready to give any PAC-12 team who qualifies 25% then split the difference by 11? If it keeps UW, UO and SU in the PAC I certainly am.

I prob wouldnt do it. There would be some value in keeping the conference together if SC and UCLA hadn’t already left. But that 25% payout would routinely be maybe 3-4 teams. After a few years the other 8 would be light years behind. Again.

If Im SC, Oregon, uw, Stanford… I’d prob agree.
 
The guarantee of the Pac 12 champion getting a ticket to the CFB playoff makes expansion and reduction silly. Why would Oregon and the dogs go to the BIG if the chances of a Natty are much smaller. I know, money. But still
One way of thinking of it is (i) money (yes, I know you mentioned it, but there's a lot; more below); and (ii) if you are Oregon or UW and really want to win a natty, you're going to have to be good enough to beat almost all of the other good teams in the Big Ten. You don't even need to be the conference champ, necessarily. That wouldn't be that hard ... look at the current Big Ten West. Increased access to the playoff will help the remaining Pac-12 schools, since Pac-12 schools will be able to say you can win a natty in the Pac-12, but a lot of other things are going to cut in favor of the Big Ten and SEC in recruiting based on $, exposure, and the perception that those two are the superconferences everyone else clearly is behind. If the money picture is as disparate between conferences as I think it will be, you probably will have a lot of years where the Pac-12 champ gets in and is bounced in the first round or by a top 4 team in the second.

As far as money goes, a lot of this is speculative, but if Big Ten schools get, say, $85m a year just from the media deal, with the Pac-12 schools getting $35m, you're up $50m every single year just from that. That's without even counting the likelihood of greater CFP/bowl payouts just from being in the conference, with those being significant. You get more with 1/16 of 2 teams' shares than 1/12 of one team's share. This isn't "just" the Big Ten schools getting 33% more or something like that, like getting $30m instead of $40m. It's almost 3 times as much, just from media rights.
 
One way of thinking of it is (i) money (yes, I know you mentioned it, but there's a lot; more below); and (ii) if you are Oregon or UW and really want to win a natty, you're going to have to be good enough to beat almost all of the other good teams in the Big Ten. You don't even need to be the conference champ, necessarily. That wouldn't be that hard ... look at the current Big Ten West. Increased access to the playoff will help the remaining Pac-12 schools, since Pac-12 schools will be able to say you can win a natty in the Pac-12, but a lot of other things are going to cut in favor of the Big Ten and SEC in recruiting based on $, exposure, and the perception that those two are the superconferences everyone else clearly is behind. If the money picture is as disparate between conferences as I think it will be, you probably will have a lot of years where the Pac-12 champ gets in and is bounced in the first round or by a top 4 team in the second.

As far as money goes, a lot of this is speculative, but if Big Ten schools get, say, $85m a year just from the media deal, with the Pac-12 schools getting $35m, you're up $50m every single year just from that. That's without even counting the likelihood of greater CFP/bowl payouts just from being in the conference, with those being significant. You get more with 1/16 of 2 teams' shares than 1/12 of one team's share. This isn't "just" the Big Ten schools getting 33% more or something like that, like getting $30m instead of $40m. It's almost 3 times as much, just from media rights.

IMO, the worst thing that could happen to the Pac, is a recruit knowing there is no shot at a Natty

Others may say it’s that a recruit isn’t going to make anything, or very little, on their NIL.

All this just stinks for the fans of college football.
 
The new Pac-12 championship format, in my opinion, pretty much guarantees we are in the playoff. The problem I see is getting 2 teams in for the Pac-12.
 
Path to the playoff in the Pac 12 is far better than what it is now, but the trade off is not getting multiple bids and not getting an extra 50+ million per year.

Basically we (the remaining Pac 12 schools) are fighting to be the Gonzaga of college football now.
 
ADVERTISEMENT