(11-10-2022 03:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  The Rose Parade existed for 25 years without a football game. They can survive having a parade disattached from a football game again.

The last thing on earth that we should care about in establishing a playoff is whether some stupid parade will lose publicity.

The parade is more popular than the games. You want the games to draft off of the popularity of the parade, part of the fabric of the New Years Day holiday in the US for a couple of generations.

Much more popular than the games. Here's their own stats for 2019: https://tournamentofroses.com/wp-content...tics_9.pdf

Nearly 40 million watch the parade (in the US). Just under 17 million watched the game. They estimate an additional 28 million outside of the US watch the parade.

On the same token, the parade brought in $142.8 million, the game brought in $68 million.

The people who own the Rose Bowl (the city of Pasadena) care most about the whole experience together, and second most about the parade.

(11-10-2022 03:20 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:22 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  People wonder why other people find the Rose Bowl and the Big Ten/Pac highly annoying. It's stupid garbage like this:

"We still want our watered down, meaningless game to command a prime time slot NYD DURING the PLAYOFF quarterfinals while we host a semifinal IN THE PLAYOFF the next week."

If that isn't the most arrogant bunch of horse **** I have seen in some time.

The Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl shouldn't have to apologize that they actually have a game of real value and tradition that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

What the rest of the college football is trying to do is get them to just give up all of that for free (and no, the same increased value of the CFP that everyone else is getting *without* having to give up an insanely valuable asset is NOT compensation). I'm an unabashed CFP expansion supporter, but the continuous misconstruing of what's happening here frustrates me. It's easy for fans of the ACC, Big 12, G5 and even SEC to say, "How arrogant!" when they aren't giving up a single cent of actual value - they're all just 100% upside, while the Big Ten and Pac-12 actually have to give up quite a lot of value. As a result, the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl have every right to demand concessions and/or additional compensation to reflect that they're the ones that have to give up value in order to allow everyone ELSE to make money off of them.

The Rose Parade is massive and a huge thing for the city of Pasadena. Tens of thousands of people buy tickets to view the floats after the parade is over...it's basically like a fair, full of vendors and food as well. The tickets alone bring in $1.4 million (estimated based on seeing an estimate of 70,000 visitors yearly and $20 a ticket).

That's nothing compared to sponsors of the parade and all of everything that goes into it. It's so much more than just a football game for the Rose Bowl.

Over a million people line the parade route. Not 70,000.

I've been there. There aren't anywhere in the vicinity of a million. You can't fit a million people in Pasadena.

(11-10-2022 03:20 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:22 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  People wonder why other people find the Rose Bowl and the Big Ten/Pac highly annoying. It's stupid garbage like this:

"We still want our watered down, meaningless game to command a prime time slot NYD DURING the PLAYOFF quarterfinals while we host a semifinal IN THE PLAYOFF the next week."

If that isn't the most arrogant bunch of horse **** I have seen in some time.

The Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl shouldn't have to apologize that they actually have a game of real value and tradition that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

What the rest of the college football is trying to do is get them to just give up all of that for free (and no, the same increased value of the CFP that everyone else is getting *without* having to give up an insanely valuable asset is NOT compensation). I'm an unabashed CFP expansion supporter, but the continuous misconstruing of what's happening here frustrates me. It's easy for fans of the ACC, Big 12, G5 and even SEC to say, "How arrogant!" when they aren't giving up a single cent of actual value - they're all just 100% upside, while the Big Ten and Pac-12 actually have to give up quite a lot of value. As a result, the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl have every right to demand concessions and/or additional compensation to reflect that they're the ones that have to give up value in order to allow everyone ELSE to make money off of them.

The Rose Parade is massive and a huge thing for the city of Pasadena. Tens of thousands of people buy tickets to view the floats after the parade is over...it's basically like a fair, full of vendors and food as well. The tickets alone bring in $1.4 million (estimated based on seeing an estimate of 70,000 visitors yearly and $20 a ticket).

That's nothing compared to sponsors of the parade and all of everything that goes into it. It's so much more than just a football game for the Rose Bowl.

Over a million people line the parade route. Not 70,000.

You should reread what I wrote. I said "after the parade is over" and even put emphasis on the word "after."

These are people who, on January 3rd and 4th, buy tickets to see floats that aren't moving because there's no parade. The whole experience is basically a fair, but instead of rides you see floats.

(11-10-2022 03:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  The Rose Parade existed for 25 years without a football game. They can survive having a parade disattached from a football game again.

The last thing on earth that we should care about in establishing a playoff is whether some stupid parade will lose publicity.

The parade is more popular than the games. You want the games to draft off of the popularity of the parade, part of the fabric of the New Years Day holiday in the US for a couple of generations.

What? The only reason the parade is even on TV is because of its attachment to the football game. I seriously wasted about 10 minutes of my life watching the parade about 10 years ago- it was ridiculously boring and I'll never make the mistake of watching it again.

Why do you think the Rose Bowl cares about having the parade and game on the same day? It's because they know that nobody will watch the parade if the football game is something like 11 days later. Or if the football game is greatly reduced in importance because it doesn't become part of the playoffs.


I wasn't alive from 1890-1915, but I assume that in those days the Rose parade was just a civic pride thing that nobody outside of Pasadena even knew existed. If the playoffs ends up bringing the Parade back to that point, I could hardly care in the least.

(11-10-2022 03:25 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:20 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:22 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  People wonder why other people find the Rose Bowl and the Big Ten/Pac highly annoying. It's stupid garbage like this:

"We still want our watered down, meaningless game to command a prime time slot NYD DURING the PLAYOFF quarterfinals while we host a semifinal IN THE PLAYOFF the next week."

If that isn't the most arrogant bunch of horse **** I have seen in some time.

The Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl shouldn't have to apologize that they actually have a game of real value and tradition that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

What the rest of the college football is trying to do is get them to just give up all of that for free (and no, the same increased value of the CFP that everyone else is getting *without* having to give up an insanely valuable asset is NOT compensation). I'm an unabashed CFP expansion supporter, but the continuous misconstruing of what's happening here frustrates me. It's easy for fans of the ACC, Big 12, G5 and even SEC to say, "How arrogant!" when they aren't giving up a single cent of actual value - they're all just 100% upside, while the Big Ten and Pac-12 actually have to give up quite a lot of value. As a result, the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl have every right to demand concessions and/or additional compensation to reflect that they're the ones that have to give up value in order to allow everyone ELSE to make money off of them.

The Rose Parade is massive and a huge thing for the city of Pasadena. Tens of thousands of people buy tickets to view the floats after the parade is over...it's basically like a fair, full of vendors and food as well. The tickets alone bring in $1.4 million (estimated based on seeing an estimate of 70,000 visitors yearly and $20 a ticket).

That's nothing compared to sponsors of the parade and all of everything that goes into it. It's so much more than just a football game for the Rose Bowl.

Over a million people line the parade route. Not 70,000.

I've been there. There aren't anywhere in the vicinity of a million. You can't fit a million people in Pasadena.

Wrong!

(11-10-2022 03:11 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:09 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:09 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  They simply can't fit in a 12 team playoff without moving everything back a week if NYD is going to be a SF on select years. This is getting beyond stupid... just axe the Bowls already or keep only the third tier bowls for the rest of qualifying FBS schools.

The quote was referring to hosting semis “the same year” as a NYD bowl. They are not referencing semis on NYD but double-hosting.

That said there are years when there are 31 days between CCGs and NYD, more than enough time to stage 2 playoff rounds.

Got you... I assumed the RB was against having a second game after NYD for logistical reasons previously discussed.

Nah. 2 games means twice as much moola. No way they’d turn that down. The CFP needs to quash the double-hosting option. I imagine it existed to sate current contracts, but it should be completely unnecessary after 2026.

(11-10-2022 12:35 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I’m surprised that Kliavkoff is the person being quoted. He still hasn’t learned his lesson (it’s Warren / B1G that have the negotiating leverage, and it’s the Rose Bowl that will gain the most benefit).

Kliavkoff declined to comment for this story. His comments came from an interview with ESPN on July 29th at the Pac-12 Media Day. This is a negotiation and it will eventually be resolved.

(11-10-2022 03:19 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:40 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:23 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  People wonder why other people find the Rose Bowl and the Big Ten/Pac highly annoying. It's stupid garbage like this:

"We still want our watered down, meaningless game to command a prime time slot NYD DURING the PLAYOFF quarterfinals while we host a semifinal IN THE PLAYOFF the next week."

If that isn't the most arrogant bunch of horse **** I have seen in some time.

The Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl shouldn't have to apologize that they actually have a game of real value and tradition that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

What the rest of the college football is trying to do is get them to just give up all of that for free (and no, the same increased value of the CFP that everyone else is getting *without* having to give up an insanely valuable asset is NOT compensation). I'm an unabashed CFP expansion supporter, but the continuous misconstruing of what's happening here frustrates me. It's easy for fans of the ACC, Big 12, G5 and even SEC to say, "How arrogant!" when they aren't giving up a single cent of actual value - they're all just 100% upside, while the Big Ten and Pac-12 actually have to give up quite a lot of value. As a result, the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl have every right to demand concessions and/or additional compensation to reflect that they're the ones that have to give up value in order to allow everyone ELSE to make money off of them.

The Big Ten just snatched almost all the value from the Pac. Some Big Ten fans are acting like it’s 1991 around here. Please take a moment to accept history and tradition are meaningless to the Big Ten.

I’m not misconstruing anything, I’m calling out a conference that will poach its closest ally, and a bowl that thinks it’s important enough to host a semi-final and a watered down version of itself against the same playoff it wants to benefit from.

They’re basically trying to create BCS national championship 2.0 but in this case the semi-finals are hosted by bowl games while maintaining their regular bowl game. Nobody is going to find “the Rose Bowl” traditional or exciting when it’s featuring two lame duck squads outside the playoff, especially the players who won’t be suiting up.

I guess we’re all supposed the accept the Rose Bowl and its cronies sabotaging a playoff every quarter century. Lol

I'm not even talking about history or tradition. The Rose Bowl is $$$$$$ to the Big Ten. The Rose Bowl Game combined with the Rose Parade provide massive value to the Big Ten and Pac-12 specifically. If others can't acknowledge that's the case, then we're not going to get anywhere. So, the Big Ten and Pac-12 are going to need to get something satisfactory in return because they're being asked to give up $$$$$$ in a way that absolutely no one else is having to give up with respect to this CFP expansion.

This isn't about tradition. The Rose Bowl is an asset with a massive amount of value and the Big Ten isn't just going to say, "You know what - we're just going to give up that asset that everyone else doesn't need to give up out of the goodness of our hearts." I certainly wouldn't expect the SEC to do that if it was them in this position.

Never heard of the Sugar Bowl?

And the Big 10 just stuck a dagger into the thigh of the Rose Bowl.

The Sugar Bowl simply isn't the same. From a legal perspective, it's currently the "Champions Bowl" between the SEC and Big 12 that went to the highest bidder between New Orleans and Dallas. To be sure, the SEC wants to get some type of financial/time slot concession for the Sugar Bowl, I certainly think that's fair, too, although we shouldn't pretend that it's in any way equal to the Rose Bowl in value. I recall former SEC commissioner Roy Kramer being quoted in putting together the Bowl Alliance and how the Big Ten/Pac-12/Rose Bowl wasn't included and he essentially admitted (paraphrasing), "If we (the SEC) had the Rose Bowl, we wouldn't have given that up, either."

(11-10-2022 03:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:09 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:40 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:23 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl shouldn't have to apologize that they actually have a game of real value and tradition that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

What the rest of the college football is trying to do is get them to just give up all of that for free (and no, the same increased value of the CFP that everyone else is getting *without* having to give up an insanely valuable asset is NOT compensation). I'm an unabashed CFP expansion supporter, but the continuous misconstruing of what's happening here frustrates me. It's easy for fans of the ACC, Big 12, G5 and even SEC to say, "How arrogant!" when they aren't giving up a single cent of actual value - they're all just 100% upside, while the Big Ten and Pac-12 actually have to give up quite a lot of value. As a result, the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl have every right to demand concessions and/or additional compensation to reflect that they're the ones that have to give up value in order to allow everyone ELSE to make money off of them.

The Big Ten just snatched almost all the value from the Pac. Some Big Ten fans are acting like it’s 1991 around here. Please take a moment to accept history and tradition are meaningless to the Big Ten.

I’m not misconstruing anything, I’m calling out a conference that will poach its closest ally, and a bowl that thinks it’s important enough to host a semi-final and a watered down version of itself against the same playoff it wants to benefit from.

They’re basically trying to create BCS national championship 2.0 but in this case the semi-finals are hosted by bowl games while maintaining their regular bowl game. Nobody is going to find “the Rose Bowl” traditional or exciting when it’s featuring two lame duck squads outside the playoff, especially the players who won’t be suiting up.

I guess we’re all supposed the accept the Rose Bowl and its cronies sabotaging a playoff every quarter century. Lol

I'm not even talking about history or tradition. The Rose Bowl is $$$$$$ to the Big Ten. The Rose Bowl Game combined with the Rose Parade provide massive value to the Big Ten and Pac-12 specifically. If others can't acknowledge that's the case, then we're not going to get anywhere. So, the Big Ten and Pac-12 are going to need to get something satisfactory in return because they're being asked to give up $$$$$$ in a way that absolutely no one else is having to give up with respect to this CFP expansion.

This isn't about tradition. The Rose Bowl is an asset with a massive amount of value and the Big Ten isn't just going to say, "You know what - we're just going to give up that asset that everyone else doesn't need to give up out of the goodness of our hearts." I certainly wouldn't expect the SEC to do that if it was them in this position.

Is it not tradition to have the game follow the parade? What's the harm in having the game a week later every three years?

What the Rose Bowl and co. want is to keep their traditional time, AND host a semi every three years. I would say "Rosey, you can keep your traditional time (once again here we are with tradition that supposedly doesn't matter), but the years you are supposed to host a semi, we will bid it out because you are literally trying to compete with the playoff you benefit from the other 2/3 years."

I don't know how you can't see that.

I do see it.

And if the rest of college football wants to compensate the Big Ten and Pac-12 for moving off of that time so that the rest of college football can make more money, then the Big Ten and Pac-12 should be justly compensated for it and/or provided with concessions.

I was as big of a critic of the Big Ten holding up CFP expansion as anyone. You can see it in my posting history and blog. However, that's different than just rolling over on the Rose Bowl. The Big Ten absolutely shouldn't be giving that up for free and it's unrealistic/unfair for anyone else to expect them to do that. I don't understand why everyone else doesn't see that, either.

Frank, would you say giving up the semifinal rotation counts as a concession?

Because it seems to me that the Rose Bowl, on New Years Day at 5 p.m. Eastern with a Big Ten team, is worth X% more than the Tostitos / Chick Fil A Fiesta/ Peach Bowl.

I don't know if X is 20% or 50% or 100%, but that's real money. that's a real thing. How you split that money up between the Big Ten, the Rose Bowl and maybe the PAC is a different question, but that's none of the CFP's affair

But I don't see that a Rose Bowl semifinal on Thursday, January 12 at 5 p.m. PAcific, 8 p.m. Eastern is worth $1 more than that same game in Las Vegas or at JerryWorld or in Atlanta or New Orleans.

(11-10-2022 03:27 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  The Rose Parade existed for 25 years without a football game. They can survive having a parade disattached from a football game again.

The last thing on earth that we should care about in establishing a playoff is whether some stupid parade will lose publicity.

The parade is more popular than the games. You want the games to draft off of the popularity of the parade, part of the fabric of the New Years Day holiday in the US for a couple of generations.

What? The only reason the parade is even on TV is because of its attachment to the football game. I seriously wasted about 10 minutes of my life watching the parade about 10 years ago- it was ridiculously boring and I'll never make the mistake of watching it again.

Why do you think the Rose Bowl cares about having the parade and game on the same day? It's because they know that nobody will watch the parade if the football game is something like 11 days later. Or if the football game is greatly reduced in importance because it doesn't become part of the playoffs.


I wasn't alive from 1890-1915, but I assume that in those days the Rose parade was just a civic pride thing that nobody outside of Pasadena even knew existed. If the playoffs ends up bringing the Parade back to that point, I could hardly care in the least.

Including international audiences, the parade gets 3 to 4 times as many viewers as the game itself. Not including international audiences it's still more than twice as many viewers (approaching 3 times). If literally every person who tuned in in favor of the game ignored the parade, it would still have more viewership than most sporting events.



Just because you think the parade is useless doesn't make it a reality.

(11-10-2022 02:48 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:32 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:45 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 12:35 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I’m surprised that Kliavkoff is the person being quoted. He still hasn’t learned his lesson (it’s Warren / B1G that have the negotiating leverage, and it’s the Rose Bowl that will gain the most benefit).

Disagree, he's making the right move here by trying to speak a continued PAC - Rose Bowl tie into existence. It might not work, but silence definitely doesn't do him any good.

If the PAC loses the Rose Bowl, it's a catastrophe etc. But nobody is going to say "And on top of that Kliavkoff said XYZ and now it's not happening" The catastrophe is losing the Rose Bowl (on top of losing USC, UCLA), not that K said some stuff that didn't happen

Ehh?? Now that USC and UCLA have announced their departures, the priorities have changed. Playoff expansion and revenue distribution will help solidify the PAC a whole lot more. Media is portraying the Rose Bowl demands as unreasonable. A continued Rose Bowl tie-in would be nice, but the B1G has already shown that this all business. The moment that the Rose Bowl Committee and / or the B1G determine an approach that can exclude the PAC, the PAC’s partnership becomes expendable. Kliavkoff is playing with fire…losing the LA market has dramatically weakened the PAC’s long-term leverage. Kliavkoff can still support the Rose Bowl without being the public spokesperson.

That last part doesn't match anything else you said.

Everything else you said amounts to : The PAC has no real power, no leverage, and will have to accept whatever outcome they are given.

Since that's the case (which I 100% agree), they have zero power in private negotiatons. They have some minimal ability to shape public perception by saying stuff in the media.

Look at it this way:
Worst case scenario (barring the 6+6 playoff getting blown up again): The PAC might lose the Rose Bowl tie in, if the Big Ten wants exclusivity in the new system.

If the PAC stays silent, what's the upside? Nothing, really.
If the PAC runs their mouth in favor of the B1G-PAC Rose Bowl, what's the downside? Nothing really, and it might work.
What's the upside of PAC silence on the Rose Bowl?

My take on the PAC’s status is more nuanced. The PAC has much less influence than the B1G or SEC, roughly equal to the ACC and B12, and more leverage than the collective G5. The public positioning on the Rose Bowl is controversial and may hurt their focus on higher priority items. We don’t know how negotiations on CFP revenue distribution will develop, but the PAC’s vocal push for the Rose Bowl exception makes Kliavkoff a proponent of “every-man-for-himself” positioning.

(11-10-2022 03:37 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:27 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  The Rose Parade existed for 25 years without a football game. They can survive having a parade disattached from a football game again.

The last thing on earth that we should care about in establishing a playoff is whether some stupid parade will lose publicity.

The parade is more popular than the games. You want the games to draft off of the popularity of the parade, part of the fabric of the New Years Day holiday in the US for a couple of generations.

What? The only reason the parade is even on TV is because of its attachment to the football game. I seriously wasted about 10 minutes of my life watching the parade about 10 years ago- it was ridiculously boring and I'll never make the mistake of watching it again.

Why do you think the Rose Bowl cares about having the parade and game on the same day? It's because they know that nobody will watch the parade if the football game is something like 11 days later. Or if the football game is greatly reduced in importance because it doesn't become part of the playoffs.


I wasn't alive from 1890-1915, but I assume that in those days the Rose parade was just a civic pride thing that nobody outside of Pasadena even knew existed. If the playoffs ends up bringing the Parade back to that point, I could hardly care in the least.

Including international audiences, the parade gets 3 to 4 times as many viewers as the game itself. Not including international audiences it's still more than twice as many viewers (approaching 3 times). If literally every person who tuned in in favor of the game ignored the parade, it would still have more viewership than most sporting events.



Just because you think the parade is useless doesn't make it a reality.

Well, then they should be willing to watch the parade if it's not on the same day as the game.

No matter how you look at it, changing the playoffs so that a parade and game can be on the same day is ludicrous.

If they were just looking at 2026 and beyond, they would bid out all the games. The current CFP took pride in that the final was in 10 different cities prior to returning to Atlanta.

They could still bid out multiple years at one time, say five years. Semifinal and final bids could be independent of any bowls. If Los Angeles want to bid for a semifinal or final, they might bid SoFi or the Coliseum.

The Rose Bowl could bid for a quarterfinal every year. The Fiesta Bowl might bid for a quarterfinal every year where Phoenix doesn't have a semifinal. There might still be a Fiesta Bowl in years where Phoenix has a semifinal, but it will be a conventional bowl game, likely moved to late December. But such a procedure might open other cities/bowls to a quarterfinal game (e.g., Houston, Orlando, Nashville).

The NY6 bowl games don't like the possibility of losing their current status, and trying to leverage a desire for a 12-team playoff in 2024 and 2025 into a permanent role. In the case of the Rose Bowl, they probably don't care if they host a semifinal or not. They're pretending that they do so they have an opportunity to keep a particular time slot on NYD.

(11-10-2022 03:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:37 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:27 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  The Rose Parade existed for 25 years without a football game. They can survive having a parade disattached from a football game again.

The last thing on earth that we should care about in establishing a playoff is whether some stupid parade will lose publicity.

The parade is more popular than the games. You want the games to draft off of the popularity of the parade, part of the fabric of the New Years Day holiday in the US for a couple of generations.

What? The only reason the parade is even on TV is because of its attachment to the football game. I seriously wasted about 10 minutes of my life watching the parade about 10 years ago- it was ridiculously boring and I'll never make the mistake of watching it again.

Why do you think the Rose Bowl cares about having the parade and game on the same day? It's because they know that nobody will watch the parade if the football game is something like 11 days later. Or if the football game is greatly reduced in importance because it doesn't become part of the playoffs.


I wasn't alive from 1890-1915, but I assume that in those days the Rose parade was just a civic pride thing that nobody outside of Pasadena even knew existed. If the playoffs ends up bringing the Parade back to that point, I could hardly care in the least.

Including international audiences, the parade gets 3 to 4 times as many viewers as the game itself. Not including international audiences it's still more than twice as many viewers (approaching 3 times). If literally every person who tuned in in favor of the game ignored the parade, it would still have more viewership than most sporting events.



Just because you think the parade is useless doesn't make it a reality.

Well, then they should be willing to watch the game if it's not on the same day as the parade.

No matter how you look at it, changing the playoffs so that a parade and game can be on the same day is ludicrous.

Everything about college football is ludicrous. But if it makes dollars, it makes sense.

(11-10-2022 03:42 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:40 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:37 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:27 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  The parade is more popular than the games. You want the games to draft off of the popularity of the parade, part of the fabric of the New Years Day holiday in the US for a couple of generations.

What? The only reason the parade is even on TV is because of its attachment to the football game. I seriously wasted about 10 minutes of my life watching the parade about 10 years ago- it was ridiculously boring and I'll never make the mistake of watching it again.

Why do you think the Rose Bowl cares about having the parade and game on the same day? It's because they know that nobody will watch the parade if the football game is something like 11 days later. Or if the football game is greatly reduced in importance because it doesn't become part of the playoffs.


I wasn't alive from 1890-1915, but I assume that in those days the Rose parade was just a civic pride thing that nobody outside of Pasadena even knew existed. If the playoffs ends up bringing the Parade back to that point, I could hardly care in the least.

Including international audiences, the parade gets 3 to 4 times as many viewers as the game itself. Not including international audiences it's still more than twice as many viewers (approaching 3 times). If literally every person who tuned in in favor of the game ignored the parade, it would still have more viewership than most sporting events.



Just because you think the parade is useless doesn't make it a reality.

Well, then they should be willing to watch the game if it's not on the same day as the parade.

No matter how you look at it, changing the playoffs so that a parade and game can be on the same day is ludicrous.

Everything about college football is ludicrous. But if it makes dollars, it makes sense.

This isn't making dollars for college football. This is attempting to make dollars for a parade.


The CFB playoff organizers have no duty other than to make money for CFB.

(11-10-2022 03:42 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  If they were just looking at 2026 and beyond, they would bid out all the games. The current CFP took pride in that the final was in 10 different cities prior to returning to Atlanta.

They could still bid out multiple years at one time, say five years. Semifinal and final bids could be independent of any bowls. If Los Angeles want to bid for a semifinal or final, they might bid SoFi or the Coliseum.

The Rose Bowl could bid for a quarterfinal every year. The Fiesta Bowl might bid for a quarterfinal every year where Phoenix doesn't have a semifinal. There might still be a Fiesta Bowl in years where Phoenix has a semifinal, but it will be a conventional bowl game, likely moved to late December. But such a procedure might open other cities/bowls to a quarterfinal game (e.g., Houston, Orlando, Nashville).

The NY6 bowl games don't like the possibility of losing their current status, and trying to leverage a desire for a 12-team playoff in 2024 and 2025 into a permanent role. In the case of the Rose Bowl, they probably don't care if they host a semifinal or not. They're pretending that they do so they have an opportunity to keep a particular time slot on NYD.

That makes a lot of sense from the Rose Bowl perspective.

From the commissioners' perspective, they probably want to make their lives a little easier with a predictable semifinal / quarterfinal rotation, that keeps their NY6 bowl partners inside the tent, rather than causing trouble outside the tent.

(11-10-2022 03:45 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:42 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  If they were just looking at 2026 and beyond, they would bid out all the games. The current CFP took pride in that the final was in 10 different cities prior to returning to Atlanta.

They could still bid out multiple years at one time, say five years. Semifinal and final bids could be independent of any bowls. If Los Angeles want to bid for a semifinal or final, they might bid SoFi or the Coliseum.

The Rose Bowl could bid for a quarterfinal every year. The Fiesta Bowl might bid for a quarterfinal every year where Phoenix doesn't have a semifinal. There might still be a Fiesta Bowl in years where Phoenix has a semifinal, but it will be a conventional bowl game, likely moved to late December. But such a procedure might open other cities/bowls to a quarterfinal game (e.g., Houston, Orlando, Nashville).

The NY6 bowl games don't like the possibility of losing their current status, and trying to leverage a desire for a 12-team playoff in 2024 and 2025 into a permanent role. In the case of the Rose Bowl, they probably don't care if they host a semifinal or not. They're pretending that they do so they have an opportunity to keep a particular time slot on NYD.

That makes a lot of sense from the Rose Bowl perspective.

From the commissioners' perspective, they probably want to make their lives a little easier with a predictable semifinal / quarterfinal rotation, that keeps their NY6 bowl partners inside the tent, rather than causing trouble outside the tent.

The Rose Bowl is not who the CFB playoff organizers should look after. The playoff organizers should look after CFB teams.


If the Rose Bowl makes these demands, then they should be told that they won't have any part in the playoff.

(11-10-2022 03:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:09 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:40 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 02:23 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 01:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl shouldn't have to apologize that they actually have a game of real value and tradition that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

What the rest of the college football is trying to do is get them to just give up all of that for free (and no, the same increased value of the CFP that everyone else is getting *without* having to give up an insanely valuable asset is NOT compensation). I'm an unabashed CFP expansion supporter, but the continuous misconstruing of what's happening here frustrates me. It's easy for fans of the ACC, Big 12, G5 and even SEC to say, "How arrogant!" when they aren't giving up a single cent of actual value - they're all just 100% upside, while the Big Ten and Pac-12 actually have to give up quite a lot of value. As a result, the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl have every right to demand concessions and/or additional compensation to reflect that they're the ones that have to give up value in order to allow everyone ELSE to make money off of them.

The Big Ten just snatched almost all the value from the Pac. Some Big Ten fans are acting like it’s 1991 around here. Please take a moment to accept history and tradition are meaningless to the Big Ten.

I’m not misconstruing anything, I’m calling out a conference that will poach its closest ally, and a bowl that thinks it’s important enough to host a semi-final and a watered down version of itself against the same playoff it wants to benefit from.

They’re basically trying to create BCS national championship 2.0 but in this case the semi-finals are hosted by bowl games while maintaining their regular bowl game. Nobody is going to find “the Rose Bowl” traditional or exciting when it’s featuring two lame duck squads outside the playoff, especially the players who won’t be suiting up.

I guess we’re all supposed the accept the Rose Bowl and its cronies sabotaging a playoff every quarter century. Lol

I'm not even talking about history or tradition. The Rose Bowl is $$$$$$ to the Big Ten. The Rose Bowl Game combined with the Rose Parade provide massive value to the Big Ten and Pac-12 specifically. If others can't acknowledge that's the case, then we're not going to get anywhere. So, the Big Ten and Pac-12 are going to need to get something satisfactory in return because they're being asked to give up $$$$$$ in a way that absolutely no one else is having to give up with respect to this CFP expansion.

This isn't about tradition. The Rose Bowl is an asset with a massive amount of value and the Big Ten isn't just going to say, "You know what - we're just going to give up that asset that everyone else doesn't need to give up out of the goodness of our hearts." I certainly wouldn't expect the SEC to do that if it was them in this position.

Is it not tradition to have the game follow the parade? What's the harm in having the game a week later every three years?

What the Rose Bowl and co. want is to keep their traditional time, AND host a semi every three years. I would say "Rosey, you can keep your traditional time (once again here we are with tradition that supposedly doesn't matter), but the years you are supposed to host a semi, we will bid it out because you are literally trying to compete with the playoff you benefit from the other 2/3 years."

I don't know how you can't see that.

I do see it.

And if the rest of college football wants to compensate the Big Ten and Pac-12 for moving off of that time so that the rest of college football can make more money, then the Big Ten and Pac-12 should be justly compensated for it and/or provided with concessions.

I was as big of a critic of the Big Ten holding up CFP expansion as anyone. You can see it in my posting history and blog. However, that's different than just rolling over on the Rose Bowl. The Big Ten absolutely shouldn't be giving that up for free and it's unrealistic/unfair for anyone else to expect them to do that. I don't understand why everyone else doesn't see that, either.

The easy solution is to host a quarterfinal every season, but the Rose Bowl and the conferences tied to it are instead trying to host two games every three seasons. Nobody should be subjected to compensate the Rose Bowl when the obvious answer is right in their face.

I would just move on and not include the Rose Bowl after 2026 and bring in the LA Bowl. I highly doubt a Big Ten school is going to turn down a playoff invite. It is an invitational after all.

The only leverage Rosey and co. have is that everyone wants to expand before 2026. Once that's gone, they have zero to offer. It's a slippery slope upon which they're treading.

(11-10-2022 03:48 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:45 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:42 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  If they were just looking at 2026 and beyond, they would bid out all the games. The current CFP took pride in that the final was in 10 different cities prior to returning to Atlanta.

They could still bid out multiple years at one time, say five years. Semifinal and final bids could be independent of any bowls. If Los Angeles want to bid for a semifinal or final, they might bid SoFi or the Coliseum.

The Rose Bowl could bid for a quarterfinal every year. The Fiesta Bowl might bid for a quarterfinal every year where Phoenix doesn't have a semifinal. There might still be a Fiesta Bowl in years where Phoenix has a semifinal, but it will be a conventional bowl game, likely moved to late December. But such a procedure might open other cities/bowls to a quarterfinal game (e.g., Houston, Orlando, Nashville).

The NY6 bowl games don't like the possibility of losing their current status, and trying to leverage a desire for a 12-team playoff in 2024 and 2025 into a permanent role. In the case of the Rose Bowl, they probably don't care if they host a semifinal or not. They're pretending that they do so they have an opportunity to keep a particular time slot on NYD.

That makes a lot of sense from the Rose Bowl perspective.

From the commissioners' perspective, they probably want to make their lives a little easier with a predictable semifinal / quarterfinal rotation, that keeps their NY6 bowl partners inside the tent, rather than causing trouble outside the tent.

The Rose Bowl is not who the CFB playoff organizers should look after. The playoff organizers should look after CFB teams.


If the Rose Bowl makes these demands, then they should be told that they won't have any part in the playoff.

That's dumb for a couple of reasons.

1. The NY6 bowls have the power to spike early playoff expansion.
2. The Rose Bowl at 5 p.m. Eastern has economic value, economic value which can be integrated into the CFP.

(11-10-2022 03:48 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:45 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-10-2022 03:42 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  If they were just looking at 2026 and beyond, they would bid out all the games. The current CFP took pride in that the final was in 10 different cities prior to returning to Atlanta.

They could still bid out multiple years at one time, say five years. Semifinal and final bids could be independent of any bowls. If Los Angeles want to bid for a semifinal or final, they might bid SoFi or the Coliseum.

The Rose Bowl could bid for a quarterfinal every year. The Fiesta Bowl might bid for a quarterfinal every year where Phoenix doesn't have a semifinal. There might still be a Fiesta Bowl in years where Phoenix has a semifinal, but it will be a conventional bowl game, likely moved to late December. But such a procedure might open other cities/bowls to a quarterfinal game (e.g., Houston, Orlando, Nashville).

The NY6 bowl games don't like the possibility of losing their current status, and trying to leverage a desire for a 12-team playoff in 2024 and 2025 into a permanent role. In the case of the Rose Bowl, they probably don't care if they host a semifinal or not. They're pretending that they do so they have an opportunity to keep a particular time slot on NYD.

That makes a lot of sense from the Rose Bowl perspective.

From the commissioners' perspective, they probably want to make their lives a little easier with a predictable semifinal / quarterfinal rotation, that keeps their NY6 bowl partners inside the tent, rather than causing trouble outside the tent.

The Rose Bowl is not who the CFB playoff organizers should look after. The playoff organizers should look after CFB teams.


If the Rose Bowl makes these demands, then they should be told that they won't have any part in the playoff.

There aren't any "CFB playoff organizers" here.

The 12-team CFP is ultimately going to be decided by the Big Ten and SEC, just as the 4-team CFP was ultimately decided by the Big Ten and SEC.

As established above, the Big Ten has a massive interest in protecting the Rose Bowl.

Therefore, whether anyone else likes it or not, what happens to the Rose Bowl matters. This isn't the MAC or C-USA that's making a stink who can be shoved aside or even the Sugar Bowl where the SEC clearly doesn't care what happens to them.

Big Ten = Rose Bowl

They are 50% of the "CFB playoff organizers" that matter here as opposed to some sort of outside party.