What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CFP recommended to expand to 12-team model

SuperD

Club Member
Club Member
Yeah, I don’t think the expanded playoffs is coming before the current deal. Another article out quoting Gene Smith (who probably has more credibility than the B1G’s new commissioner, the B1G’s boards hate that guy) saying they need to press pause of the expanded playoff. Based on this article it has as much to do with maximizing the contract value as realignment since if they change it now ESPN has exclusive negotiating rights, plus the other leagues don’t want ESPN to blow their budget before their league deals come up for renewal.

https://sports.yahoo.com/ohio-state...t-over-esp-ns-grip-on-football-212514298.html
 

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
Well, isn’t it possible they lose rights to the pac 12, big 10 and part of the CFP in a couple of years?
In the context of the quote on the tweet, “why would a streaming service want to bid on regular season of B1G and Pac 12 only to hand the playoffs over to ESPN”… I’m confused why that is “ESPN overplaying their hand” as skibum said, and why that is ESPN’s problem? They have clearly gone all in on the SEC and they already have exclusive CFP rights. It was all a calculated move by them. I am going to assume they won’t lose those rights, as they won’t be out bid.
 

onealcd

Club Member
Club Member
In the context of the quote on the tweet, “why would a streaming service want to bid on regular season of B1G and Pac 12 only to hand the playoffs over to ESPN”… I’m confused why that is “ESPN overplaying their hand” as skibum said, and why that is ESPN’s problem? They have clearly gone all in on the SEC and they already have exclusive CFP rights. It was all a calculated move by them. I am going to assume they won’t lose those rights, as they won’t be out bid.
Maybe I am thinking about this incorrectly but espn overplayed their hand pushing the SEC taking texas and OU because they thought the playoff would expand to 12 and it actually might make the other conferences say **** that which would cost espn money.
 

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
In the context of the quote on the tweet, “why would a streaming service want to bid on regular season of B1G and Pac 12 only to hand the playoffs over to ESPN”… I’m confused why that is “ESPN overplaying their hand” as skibum said, and why that is ESPN’s problem? They have clearly gone all in on the SEC and they already have exclusive CFP rights. It was all a calculated move by them. I am going to assume they won’t lose those rights, as they won’t be out bid.
If the assumption is that ESPN was attempting a complete takeover of college football by being able to structure conferences, schedules and post-season while having exclusive broadcast rights to all major games... then they overplayed their hand and we are quickly seeing the backlash.

YouTube has now passed Netflix if streaming is the future. And its parent, Google, is about 3x Disney on revenue & profit. There are competitors out there who can destroy any plans ESPN may have.
 
Last edited:

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
Maybe I am thinking about this incorrectly but espn overplayed their hand pushing the SEC taking texas and OU because they thought the playoff would expand to 12 and it actually might make the other conferences say **** that which would cost espn money.
Gotcha. That makes sense if the rest of CFB decides to say no on the expansion. It also screws OU and UT, and the other SEC programs if the playoff remains at 4
 

Buffs35

Well-Known Member
Gotcha. That makes sense if the rest of CFB decides to say no on the expansion. It also screws OU and UT, and the other SEC programs if the playoff remains at 4
There is no way the SEC would go along with only having a 4 team playoff with their ever expanding collection of big name schools.

When the SEC adds 2 to 4 more blue bloods, it will just create its own playoff for its own teams. Create a closed system and opt out of NCAA and CFP.
 

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
There is no way the SEC would go along with only having a 4 team playoff with their ever expanding collection of big name schools.

When the SEC adds 2 to 4 more blue bloods, it will just create its own playoff for its own teams. Create a closed system and opt out of NCAA and CFP.
That would be fine with me. They can then be university sponsored minor league pro teams. Their athletes won't even need to be students. Everyone else can play college sports.
 

MtnBuff

Not allowed in Barzil 2
Club Member
That would be fine with me. They can then be university sponsored minor league pro teams. Their athletes won't even need to be students. Everyone else can play college sports.
You mean kind of like what they already do now without publicly admitting it (except to the donors who pay for it.)
 

CUAviator

Well-Known Member
There is no way the SEC would go along with only having a 4 team playoff with their ever expanding collection of big name schools.

When the SEC adds 2 to 4 more blue bloods, it will just create its own playoff for its own teams. Create a closed system and opt out of NCAA and CFP.
Called the SEC championship game. I say they eat a dick.
 

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
There is no way the SEC would go along with only having a 4 team playoff with their ever expanding collection of big name schools.

When the SEC adds 2 to 4 more blue bloods, it will just create its own playoff for its own teams. Create a closed system and opt out of NCAA and CFP.
It’s clear that Sankey and ESPN were very deliberate in their creation and timeline of the expanded CFP being announced and agreed upon a few weeks before orchestrating OU and UT to the SEC. The only way it makes sense to add two blue bloods to the conference is with the idea that it won’t affect their ability to make the playoff.

The rest of the CFB world has some power to tell them to **** off and not sign off on the expanded CFP, but it’s going to take the other 3 power conferences to be aligned on that.
 

hawg1

Club Member
Club Member
It’s clear that Sankey and ESPN were very deliberate in their creation and timeline of the expanded CFP being announced and agreed upon a few weeks before orchestrating OU and UT to the SEC. The only way it makes sense to add two blue bloods to the conference is with the idea that it won’t affect their ability to make the playoff.

The rest of the CFB world has some power to tell them to **** off and not sign off on the expanded CFP, but it’s going to take the other 3 power conferences to be aligned on that.
And stay at 4?
 

CarolinaBuff

Club Member
Club Member
It’s clear that Sankey and ESPN were very deliberate in their creation and timeline of the expanded CFP being announced and agreed upon a few weeks before orchestrating OU and UT to the SEC. The only way it makes sense to add two blue bloods to the conference is with the idea that it won’t affect their ability to make the playoff.

The rest of the CFB world has some power to tell them to **** off and not sign off on the expanded CFP, but it’s going to take the other 3 power conferences to be aligned on that.

Wouldn't make sense for the other conferences not to sign off on it and limit their own chances at making the CFP.
 

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
And stay at 4?
I don’t know, but this was all very clearly Sankey and ESPN being devious and disingenuous with the rest of the CFB world. What motivation was there for UT and OU to join the SEC with a 4 team playoff? Yes, money, but they weren’t just going to collect checks while not making a playoff. The timing of the CFP expansion and then the announcement of UT and OU to SEC was all very calculated. The other three conferences can decide no go on the expansion and let 16 SEC programs battle it out for 1 or 2 spots in the 4 team playoff while the others like OU sit at home
 

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
Wouldn't make sense for the other conferences not to sign off on it and limit their own chances at making the CFP.
Gene Smith has already said the expansion likely needs to be halted because of all this. These moves were done with the main purpose of getting 5-6 SEC programs into the playoff every year, while the other three get 1-2 each, if they’re lucky
 

ahoelsken

Club Member
Club Member
I have to say it's refreshing to hear Pac12 people discussing the 9 game conference schedule in terms of "our decision hurt us, maybe we should stop it" instead of "its not fair those other conferences aren't hurting themselves too!"

If I could make one change to this conference, its getting rid of that.
 

CarolinaBuff

Club Member
Club Member
Gene Smith has already said the expansion likely needs to be halted because of all this. These moves were done with the main purpose of getting 5-6 SEC programs into the playoff every year, while the other three get 1-2 each, if they’re lucky

Maybe he's saying that because the B1G is looking at expanding? Just a thought.

Also, and not necessarily from Gene Smith, is the concern that ESPN will get an automatic renewal of the rights instead of waiting for expansion and letting the CFP rights hit the open market therefore increasing the price.
 

skibum

Did not pee on the Alamo.
Club Member
So ESPN is sitting pretty with the rights to SEC, CFP and a few other conferences, so how are other deals their problem?
For a couple years.

The mouse tried to kill off their competition with a few big moves right now. If they had gotten the 12 team playoff right now, triggering the *exclusive* negotiation rights they hold for that, they might have actually pulled it off.

They got the OU/UT SEC move. That was half the plan.

*if* the 12 team playoff had been ratified now, that would have been they other half, because with their current exclusive rights they would have been able to extend that newly renegotiated deal beyond the current P12 and b10 contracts.

Which would mean that both of the those deals would be negotiated in a world where they had the playoff rights completely locked up.

But instead, they overplayed their hand. Now they're going to go into a world where not only are the P12 and b10 contracts up for negotiation, the broadcast rights to, and even the format of the CFP is also going to be out for open bidding.

It was a big dick move they made, but, as with anything UT is involved in, they somehow managed to step on it instead.
 
Last edited:

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
For a couple years.

The mouse tried to kill off their competition with a few big moves right now. If they had gotten the 12 team playoff right now, triggering the *exclusive* negotiation rights they hold for that, the might have actually pulled it off.

They got the OU/UT SEC move. That was half the plan.

*if* the 12 team playoff had been ratified now, that would have been they other half, because with their current exclusive rights they would have been able to extend that newly renegotiated deal beyond the current P12 and b10 contracts.

Which would mean that both of the those deals would be negotiated in a world where they had the playoff rights locked up.

But instead, they overplayed their hand. Now they're going to go into a world where not only are the P12 and b10 contracts up for negotiation, the broadcast rights to, and even the format of the CFP is also going to be out for open bidding.

It was a big dick move they made, but, as with anything UT is involved in, they somehow managed to step on it instead.
Yep. More or less my point. Almost like they should have ratified the CFP expansion this year and then made the UT/OU moves next year or something.
 

skibum

Did not pee on the Alamo.
Club Member
Yep. More or less my point. Almost like they should have ratified the CFP expansion this year and then made the UT/OU moves next year or something.
Yeah, the sequence wasn't quite right for them to actually pull it off.

Someone spilled the beans with the OU/UT move.

I'm guessing (and hoping) that **** bailer is on the receiving end of this beating.

0fee6948988450e12a22b668bf95e5cf.gif
 

Jalapeno

SUN BOWL OR BUST
Club Member
Might as well start with an eight team playoff and four highest ranked conference champions plus four at large.
 

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
Because they have tv deals with the big ten and pac 12??!

So ESPN is sitting pretty with the rights to SEC, CFP and a few other conferences, so how are other deals their problem?

My suspicion is that the B1G and Pac recognize that ESPN is trying to consolidate the pieces it wants into a certain conference at the expense of the others. Moves that really only benefit ESPN. And since the B1G and Pac dont fit into the geography of what works for ESPN, but not for them, they dont like it. Additionally, these moves while helping ESPN/SECs ratings will hurt Fox's/B1Gs ratings.

Because we dont have a powerful organization over football TV that insures equal revenue sharing, ESPN is able to do this because college football is not united and thus easier to divide and conquer as the pick apart each conference and leave the scraps behind. Letting them control a 12 team CFP, where they influence who gets in for their benefit, at the same time this is happening is probably not a good idea.

These moves by ESPN will eventually create even more unequal revenue problems on top of the already wide disparity between P5 and G5, FBS and FCS. Where this is headed if it continues is: Former power 5 becomes the P2 or P1 ($$$$$) -> New Middle 2 or M1($$) -> G6($) -> FCS(¢) -> D2. Less money for all. Money doesnt grow on a tree so we might see reductions in scholarships or programs just disappearing as the SEC absorbs it all. And those athletic scholarships lift a lot of people out of poverty.

Letting ESPN pick winners and losers like this will eventually ruin the game. Anyone paying attention to the last 15 years will notice that NBC has been passing up paying for sports rights. CBS is possibly about to follow suit as well as they exit the SEC. Is ESPN ultimately pricing everyone else out? As Jens pointed out paying $175m for La Liga over the previous $30m raises eyebrows. Thats a little scary because if no one bids the next go round they have tremendous power over your league. If they decide to drop you youre wrecked.
 

BuffsNYC

Captain Jazz Ass
Club Member
My suspicion is that the B1G and Pac recognize that ESPN is trying to consolidate the pieces it wants into a certain conference at the expense of the others. Moves that really only benefit ESPN. And since the B1G and Pac dont fit into the geography of what works for ESPN, but not for them, they dont like it. Additionally, these moves while helping ESPN/SECs ratings will hurt Fox's/B1Gs ratings.

Because we dont have a powerful organization over football TV that insures equal revenue sharing, ESPN is able to do this because college football is not united and thus easier to divide and conquer as the pick apart each conference and leave the scraps behind. Letting them control a 12 team CFP, where they influence who gets in for their benefit, at the same time this is happening is probably not a good idea.

These moves by ESPN will eventually create even more unequal revenue problems on top of the already wide disparity between P5 and G5, FBS and FCS. Where this is headed if it continues is: Former power 5 becomes the P2 or P1 ($$$$$) -> New Middle 2 or M1($$) -> G6($) -> FCS(¢) -> D2. Less money for all. Money doesnt grow on a tree so we might see reductions in scholarships or programs just disappearing as the SEC absorbs it all. And those athletic scholarships lift a lot of people out of poverty.

Letting ESPN pick winners and losers like this will eventually ruin the game. Anyone paying attention to the last 15 years will notice that NBC has been passing up paying for sports rights. CBS is possibly about to follow suit as well as they exit the SEC. Is ESPN ultimately pricing everyone else out? As Jens pointed out paying $175m for La Liga over the previous $30m raises eyebrows. Thats a little scary because if no one bids the next go round they have tremendous power over your league. If they decide to drop you youre wrecked.

Everything I've read about this indicates that live sports are content gold. Someone's going to pay for Pac 12 and B10 content, hopefully some streaming service takes the plunge.
 
Top