Let’s consider a pair of options:

Option A: The SEC, Big Ten, and ACC expand at the expense of the Big 12. Those 3, along with the PAC 12, form a champs only, plus 1 model 4 team playoff among their champs

Option B: P5 membership remains static, a 5-1-2 Playoff is implemented wherein 2 of the NY6 bowls host both an exhibition game (from the top 4 ranked teams not in the playoff) and a semifinal game while the other 4 host quarterfinal games on rotating basis.

Which would be more lucrative for the parties involved considering both the value of their regular season media income and their revenues from the playoff system and/or other bowl revenue?

P4 champs + 4 at large

Welcome to maximum ratings and content

Whichever format has a Quarterfinal Quadrupleheader on NYD.

P5 champions + 2 at-large and 1 G5 if they’re in the top 15.

A P4 would interrupt more rivalries than it already has and you’d never see a team playing at your place for almost a decade. Georgia coach Kirby Smart was complaining this spring that the Bulldogs played Texas in the Sugar Bowl before they even played Texas A&M in a conference game, seven seasons after the Aggies joined the SEC.

The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

(12-18-2019 02:53 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

it's actually true if the AAC climbs or not. In 5-1-2 a G5 team has an easier path to the playoffs than a P5 team.

That's why e.g had there been a 5-1-2 the last 5 years UCF and Memphis and Houston and Boise would have made the playoffs more often than Florida, Florida State, Tennessee, and Texas.

Those who think the P5 will go for that are IMO naive.

(12-18-2019 02:53 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

That's not the question though.


8 team playoff would be more profitable than a 4 team playoff. Doesn't matter the format. It results in more games where good teams play against each other. There's a reason why playoffs in the pros have only expanded as time goes on. More playoffs = more money. 5-1-2, 5-3, straight 8. All of them will have that result (the amount of money might vary in each scenario).

B. The 5-1-2 is the way to go. We need to give everyone a chance.

(12-18-2019 04:10 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  B. The 5-1-2 is the way to go. We need to give everyone a chance.

Playoffs should be based on merit not merely because you exist. Straight 8.

The question isn't which will make the most money. It's which will make the most money for the SEC and B1G. The SEC would prefer to have it's own 4 team CCT where they get to keep all the revenue rather than have an additional round of playoff games after they have determined their champion.

But please, whatever we do, don't let a playoff be a 5-1-2 model. That's where I check out. In that model, it's entirely possible that 25% of the participants won't deserve to be there. I would have zero interest in watching that.

(12-18-2019 04:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 04:10 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  B. The 5-1-2 is the way to go. We need to give everyone a chance.

Playoffs should be based on merit not merely because you exist. Straight 8.

Why does every thread need to end up here? We don't need to have the exact same argument in 20 different threads.

A lot of folks are focusing on the playoff portion. Sure—a playoff plan that has 9 total games (4 quarterfinals, 2 additional NY6 bowls, 2 semifinals, and a title) is going to have more dollars involved than 3 game system but what about the total impact on their normal tv packages?

(12-18-2019 04:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  But please, whatever we do, don't let a playoff be a 5-1-2 model. That's where I check out. In that model, it's entirely possible that 25% of the participants won't deserve to be there. I would have zero interest in watching that.

Do you watch the NCAA men's basketball tournament?

Don’t know, don’t care. I just hope the American, er the G5 never gets an automatic bid. Memphis this year would have made it. What a joke.

(12-18-2019 04:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 04:10 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  B. The 5-1-2 is the way to go. We need to give everyone a chance.

Playoffs should be based on merit not merely because you exist. Straight 8.

C.R.E.A.M. applies here. A straight 8 does not guarantee yearly P5 access as the P12 would have been left out this year. As far as the disparity with the G5 spot, teams that take issue with it are free to move to the AAC. But we know that won’t happen as money trumps playoff representation.

(12-18-2019 03:01 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 02:53 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

it's actually true if the AAC climbs or not. In 5-1-2 a G5 team has an easier path to the playoffs than a P5 team.

That's why e.g had there been a 5-1-2 the last 5 years UCF and Memphis and Houston and Boise would have made the playoffs more often than Florida, Florida State, Tennessee, and Texas.

Those who think the P5 will go for that are IMO naive.

Tenn and Tex would not sniff a playoff no matter the system in place. UF also was bad for the last 4 years before this year. FSU has been garbage since Jimbo Fisher left. So Memphis, UH, Boise, and UCF should have gone more than those schools.

(12-18-2019 03:01 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 02:53 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

That's not the question though.


8 team playoff would be more profitable than a 4 team playoff. Doesn't matter the format. It results in more games where good teams play against each other. There's a reason why playoffs in the pros have only expanded as time goes on. More playoffs = more money. 5-1-2, 5-3, straight 8. All of them will have that result (the amount of money might vary in each scenario).

Agreed. An 8-team playoff (regardless of format) would still be such a limited field that the value of the regular season conference TV packages would preserved or even enhanced (as more games with playoff implications creates more interest and money) on top of expanding the amount of playoff revenue due to sheer size.

Now, I also agree with some other posters that the core question is really whether the Big Ten and SEC specifically would make more money under that system. On that front, I believe that the answer would be yes as long as there are P5 auto-bids (as a guaranteed slot with an automatic payment is always going to be worth more than variable multiple slots... and you can see that even in today's CFP system where the P5 actually receive significantly more money for their guaranteed runner-up contract bowl slots than they do for actual playoff spots).

At the end of the day, the question isn't whether there will be more *total* revenue, as that's going to obviously favor a playoff expansion. The real issue is whether the revenue *split* for the P5 will increase in a proportional manner. Once they figure that out, then I think it's only just a matter of time (e.g. to be in place after the current CFP contract ends) that we'll see an 8-team playoff.

(12-19-2019 08:06 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 03:01 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 02:53 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

it's actually true if the AAC climbs or not. In 5-1-2 a G5 team has an easier path to the playoffs than a P5 team.

That's why e.g had there been a 5-1-2 the last 5 years UCF and Memphis and Houston and Boise would have made the playoffs more often than Florida, Florida State, Tennessee, and Texas.

Those who think the P5 will go for that are IMO naive.

Tenn and Tex would not sniff a playoff no matter the system in place. UF also was bad for the last 4 years before this year. FSU has been garbage since Jimbo Fisher left. So Memphis, UH, Boise, and UCF should have gone more than those schools.

The one thing that sports proves over and over again is that statements that certain things "never" happen or, in turn "always" happen end up being wrong all of the time. That's why we watch sports in the first place - the drama comes from unpredictable things happening with enough frequency that we're drawn to watch. To say Tennessee or Texas won't ever sniff a playoff is patently incorrect when any of us here that is at least of drinking age have witnessed both of those schools winning national championships within our lifetimes. By the same token, the AAC may not always have the best G5 team (as we've seen over the course of the CFP system), FSU isn't always going to be down (just like Florida), Clemson is eventually going to lose a game or two that we wouldn't have predicted (just like Alabama did this season) that will create chaos with the 4-team CFP system, and many other things that would seem inconceivable today will end up being the reality tomorrow.

UCF fans should know this better than anyone when they went from 0-12 to 13-0 within 2 years. If we were having this conversation in 2015, I'm sure that the consensus would have been that UCF would "never" get the CFP access bowl slot, much less back-to-back bids within 2 years.

We live in a world where we actually witnessed the Chicago Cubs win the World Series with our own eyes. ANYTHING is possible in sports.

(12-18-2019 06:53 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 04:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 04:10 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  B. The 5-1-2 is the way to go. We need to give everyone a chance.

Playoffs should be based on merit not merely because you exist. Straight 8.

C.R.E.A.M. applies here. A straight 8 does not guarantee yearly P5 access as the P12 would have been left out this year. As far as the disparity with the G5 spot, teams that take issue with it are free to move to the AAC. But we know that won’t happen as money trumps playoff representation.

Straight 8 does not guarantee P5 playoff sports, but FWIW, the PAC would have been represented this year as Oregon finished #6 in the CFP rankings.

In fact, had straight 8 been used the last 6 years of the CFP, fully 29/30 of the P5 champs would have made it, only one would have been left out in six years, so really not a practical concern.

Heck, if you are a P5 champ and aren't good enough to be ranked in the top 8, that probably means you don't belong.

(12-19-2019 08:06 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 03:01 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 02:53 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The problem with 5-1-2 is that if the AAC continues its climb, then a school like Tulane actually has a safer path to the CFP than Texas A+M does (although Aggy has the resources to contend for a championship immediately).

it's actually true if the AAC climbs or not. In 5-1-2 a G5 team has an easier path to the playoffs than a P5 team.

That's why e.g had there been a 5-1-2 the last 5 years UCF and Memphis and Houston and Boise would have made the playoffs more often than Florida, Florida State, Tennessee, and Texas.

Those who think the P5 will go for that are IMO naive.

Tenn and Tex would not sniff a playoff no matter the system in place. UF also was bad for the last 4 years before this year. FSU has been garbage since Jimbo Fisher left. So Memphis, UH, Boise, and UCF should have gone more than those schools.

You miss the point: As an example, neither Memphis nor Tennessee deserved to be in a 8 team playoff this year. But under 5-1-2, Memphis would have gone while Tennessee wouldn't.

IMO, that would be intolerable to Tennessee, because of the national brand implications of making the playoffs.

With 5-1-2, you will see #15 ranked Boise/Memphis/UCF teams going to the playoffs, and getting all the media attention and brand building that will bring, while "big brother" P5 schools in the same state will NOT go to the playoffs when they are also ranked #15.

For example, compare Memphis to Florida the last five years, four of which you said Florida was "bad". Memphis was ranked #17 this year and #20 in 2016. Florida was ranked #9 this year, #10 last year, #17 in 2016 and #19 in 2015

And yet under 5-1-2, Memphis would have a trip to the playoffs while Florida would not. So to reiterate, in the past 5 years:

Memphis …. #17 and #20 …. playoff spot

Florida ……. #19, #17, #10, #9 …. no playoff spots.

I don't think the P5 will go for that, but hey, maybe they are dumb.