Quote:Speaking on this week’s SBJ/SBD Media Podcast, ESPN Executive Vice President of Programming and Scheduling Burke Magnus said ESPN is “not at all” advocating for the current four-team format to expand, worried that any expansion could weaken college football’s regular season.
Because so much of its fall schedule is dominated by college football, ESPN finds it especially important to keep the regular season relevant. Magnus pointed out that ESPN has invested more in college football than “any other category that we do,” given all of the rights deals the network has with various conferences.
“I would worry a little bit that conceivably any change might bring with it some unintended consequences relative to the regular season,” Magnus said. “I also look at the totality of college football and making sure that they don’t unintentionally water down the competition during the regular season such that playoff bids are determined in advance or that we go back to the automatic qualifying business of the BCS, which was not the sport at its best.”
There's more interesting tidbits in the article, but there you go.
I find this fascinating for several reasons.
1) If ESPN is scared of weakening the draw and appeal of the regular season then I can definitely see why they would be against it. An 8-team playoff could be good for a lot of people, but it does run the risk of devaluing conference championships and certain regular season games.
2) ESPN clearly invests more in college sports than anyone else. They have a vested interest in the health of the game. Perhaps then that informs their views on how to guide expansion in a way that both pads their bottom line and contributes to the overall quality of the game.
3) It also means they have a vested interest in other college sports. We kind of already knew that I guess. Now that they're openly talking about it, perhaps that raises some questions about other college sports that aren't necessarily as healthy as they could be...such as basketball.
Quote:Speaking on this week’s SBJ/SBD Media Podcast, ESPN Executive Vice President of Programming and Scheduling Burke Magnus said ESPN is “not at all” advocating for the current four-team format to expand, worried that any expansion could weaken college football’s regular season.
Because so much of its fall schedule is dominated by college football, ESPN finds it especially important to keep the regular season relevant. Magnus pointed out that ESPN has invested more in college football than “any other category that we do,” given all of the rights deals the network has with various conferences.
“I would worry a little bit that conceivably any change might bring with it some unintended consequences relative to the regular season,” Magnus said. “I also look at the totality of college football and making sure that they don’t unintentionally water down the competition during the regular season such that playoff bids are determined in advance or that we go back to the automatic qualifying business of the BCS, which was not the sport at its best.”
There's more interesting tidbits in the article, but there you go.
I find this fascinating for several reasons.
1) If ESPN is scared of weakening the draw and appeal of the regular season then I can definitely see why they would be against it. An 8-team playoff could be good for a lot of people, but it does run the risk of devaluing conference championships and certain regular season games.
2) ESPN clearly invests more in college sports than anyone else. They have a vested interest in the health of the game. Perhaps then that informs their views on how to guide expansion in a way that both pads their bottom line and contributes to the overall quality of the game.
3) It also means they have a vested interest in other college sports. We kind of already knew that I guess. Now that they're openly talking about it, perhaps that raises some questions about other college sports that aren't necessarily as healthy as they could be...such as basketball.
I've told oodles of people that there is no interest in expanding the playoffs. Not at the conference level, the level of college presidents, not really among the coaches, not among the players, and now not at ESPN but it won't stop the endless threads about going to 8 or even the very laughable 16.
Quote:Speaking on this week’s SBJ/SBD Media Podcast, ESPN Executive Vice President of Programming and Scheduling Burke Magnus said ESPN is “not at all” advocating for the current four-team format to expand, worried that any expansion could weaken college football’s regular season.
Because so much of its fall schedule is dominated by college football, ESPN finds it especially important to keep the regular season relevant. Magnus pointed out that ESPN has invested more in college football than “any other category that we do,” given all of the rights deals the network has with various conferences.
“I would worry a little bit that conceivably any change might bring with it some unintended consequences relative to the regular season,” Magnus said. “I also look at the totality of college football and making sure that they don’t unintentionally water down the competition during the regular season such that playoff bids are determined in advance or that we go back to the automatic qualifying business of the BCS, which was not the sport at its best.”
There's more interesting tidbits in the article, but there you go.
I find this fascinating for several reasons.
1) If ESPN is scared of weakening the draw and appeal of the regular season then I can definitely see why they would be against it. An 8-team playoff could be good for a lot of people, but it does run the risk of devaluing conference championships and certain regular season games.
2) ESPN clearly invests more in college sports than anyone else. They have a vested interest in the health of the game. Perhaps then that informs their views on how to guide expansion in a way that both pads their bottom line and contributes to the overall quality of the game.
3) It also means they have a vested interest in other college sports. We kind of already knew that I guess. Now that they're openly talking about it, perhaps that raises some questions about other college sports that aren't necessarily as healthy as they could be...such as basketball.
I've told oodles of people that there is no interest in expanding the playoffs. Not at the conference level, the level of college presidents, not really among the coaches, not among the players, and now not at ESPN but it won't stop the endless threads about going to 8 or even the very laughable 16.
Thanks for the find ATU.
Surprise..Surprise...Surprise!!!
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2018 05:22 AM by XLance.)
RE: Burke Mangus says ESPN is not advocating for CFP expansion
The idea that keeping a small CFP makes the regular season more meaningful is a complete red herring. Logic only dictates with more playoff spots available, a larger number of games during the regular season have an impact on selected teams and the corresponding seeding of teams.
RE: Burke Mangus says ESPN is not advocating for CFP expansion
(01-10-2018 01:32 PM)Win5002 Wrote: The idea that keeping a small CFP makes the regular season more meaningful is a complete red herring. Logic only dictates with more playoff spots available, a larger number of games during the regular season have an impact on selected teams and the corresponding seeding of teams.
There's a point of diminishing returns though.
The more playoff spots you have, the more games lose a sense of urgency. The upset of a power school doesn't quite matter as much, the conference championship race doesn't quite matter as much, and on and on.
College football is insulated from this to some degree because there aren't that many games in the first place. You only play 12 regular season games. With that said, the great appeal of college football is that the results will weed out a truly special team from an average team.
In all honesty, I'm not sure that an 8 team playoff would diminish the importance of the college football regular season. I can understand, however, why the powers that be would be concerned at the prospect. So from their perspective, maybe it's just better not to find out where the line is. Maybe it's better to go with what works.
At some point though, we're going to have to create a system that is equally beneficial to all the major conferences. Perhaps that is more akin to a "champs only" system and perhaps that will involve a resolution to conference realignment.
RE: Burke Mangus says ESPN is not advocating for CFP expansion
(01-10-2018 03:13 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:
(01-10-2018 01:32 PM)Win5002 Wrote: The idea that keeping a small CFP makes the regular season more meaningful is a complete red herring. Logic only dictates with more playoff spots available, a larger number of games during the regular season have an impact on selected teams and the corresponding seeding of teams.
There's a point of diminishing returns though.
The more playoff spots you have, the more games lose a sense of urgency. The upset of a power school doesn't quite matter as much, the conference championship race doesn't quite matter as much, and on and on.
College football is insulated from this to some degree because there aren't that many games in the first place. You only play 12 regular season games. With that said, the great appeal of college football is that the results will weed out a truly special team from an average team.
In all honesty, I'm not sure that an 8 team playoff would diminish the importance of the college football regular season. I can understand, however, why the powers that be would be concerned at the prospect. So from their perspective, maybe it's just better not to find out where the line is. Maybe it's better to go with what works.
At some point though, we're going to have to create a system that is equally beneficial to all the major conferences. Perhaps that is more akin to a "champs only" system and perhaps that will involve a resolution to conference realignment.
All of this is true. And then there is the unspoken reasons as well. Who is it that owns the rights to the post season bowls? How hard to market would those post season bowls be if the playoff was expanded further? How hard to market would they be if the schools insisted on the first round being at the higher seeds home venue? Which is exactly what would happen because nobody has enough fans with enough cash to travel three successive weekends to watch their team play a big game with tickets that start around a $1000.
RE: Burke Mangus says ESPN is not advocating for CFP expansion
The current CFP system is great - from the TV ratings perspective.
In the moment, Auburn-Alabama meant everything and Ohio St.-Wisconsin had likely CFP implications. Although in the end neither game mattered, (from the CFP perspective), you can't take away the possibility of the games mattering - which matters immensely for TV ratings, excitement, and anticipation for the game.
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2018 04:05 PM by YNot.)
/
Burke Mangus says ESPN is not advocating for CFP expansion
