(08-05-2023 11:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 02:02 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  With the PAC dead - I think they reduce it to the Top 5 conference champions which open the door for an extra SEC / B1G school to get an invite (7 at large instead of 6)

If the PAC rebuilds we will have the G6. If the PAC merges with the MWC it will stay at the G5 but the MWC will be solidly in front of the nAAC for the one auto bid.

The PAC will (and should be) stripped of its automatic bid to the 12 team playoff at this point.

I think it's better for the AAC for the PAC 4 to try to backfill and likely weaken the MWC than to merge with the MWC. They may also pull Tulane and SMU from the AAC also further weakening this conference.

Whatever happens it's going to be bad for the nAAC - but some outcomes are worse than others.

The PAC doesn’t have an auto bid to the 12 team playoff. Nobody does. The bids go to the top 6 rated conference champions. Regardless of what those leagues are.

Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

(08-06-2023 11:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 11:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 02:02 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  With the PAC dead - I think they reduce it to the Top 5 conference champions which open the door for an extra SEC / B1G school to get an invite (7 at large instead of 6)

If the PAC rebuilds we will have the G6. If the PAC merges with the MWC it will stay at the G5 but the MWC will be solidly in front of the nAAC for the one auto bid.

The PAC will (and should be) stripped of its automatic bid to the 12 team playoff at this point.

I think it's better for the AAC for the PAC 4 to try to backfill and likely weaken the MWC than to merge with the MWC. They may also pull Tulane and SMU from the AAC also further weakening this conference.

Whatever happens it's going to be bad for the nAAC - but some outcomes are worse than others.

The PAC doesn’t have an auto bid to the 12 team playoff. Nobody does. The bids go to the top 6 rated conference champions. Regardless of what those leagues are.

Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

Not true. The 12 team playoff starts next year. The rule (unless it is changed before they start) is that the top 6 ranked FBS conference champs (regardless of which ones) get bids, and the other 6 slots go to at large teams that may or may not have won their conference.

There are no autobids. No guarantees, although it is pretty obvious that they expect all the original P5 to make it plus one G5. But with the Pac screwed up, they may change the rule now before next season.

Those rules only apply for 2 years anyway, before they start a new contract.

(08-06-2023 12:05 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 11:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 11:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 02:02 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  With the PAC dead - I think they reduce it to the Top 5 conference champions which open the door for an extra SEC / B1G school to get an invite (7 at large instead of 6)

If the PAC rebuilds we will have the G6. If the PAC merges with the MWC it will stay at the G5 but the MWC will be solidly in front of the nAAC for the one auto bid.

The PAC will (and should be) stripped of its automatic bid to the 12 team playoff at this point.

I think it's better for the AAC for the PAC 4 to try to backfill and likely weaken the MWC than to merge with the MWC. They may also pull Tulane and SMU from the AAC also further weakening this conference.

Whatever happens it's going to be bad for the nAAC - but some outcomes are worse than others.

The PAC doesn’t have an auto bid to the 12 team playoff. Nobody does. The bids go to the top 6 rated conference champions. Regardless of what those leagues are.

Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

Not true. The 12 team playoff starts next year. The rule (unless it is changed before they start) is that the top 6 ranked FBS conference champs (regardless of which ones) get bids, and the other 6 slots go to at large teams that may or may not have won their conference.

There are no autobids. No guarantees, although it is pretty obvious that they expect all the original P5 to make it plus one G5. But with the Pac screwed up, they may change the rule now before next season.

Those rules only apply for 2 years anyway, before they start a new contract.

That sounds and awful lot like the P5 & one G5 have autobids. And BTW the A5 each get 2 votes to 1 for everyone else to determine rankings, so how do you thing that comes out? You are splitting hairs my friend. But I'm willing to place a nice wager on who those conferences are who's champs receive bids - i.e., I'm saying it will be the A5 champs & 1 G5.

(08-06-2023 12:24 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:05 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 11:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 11:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 02:02 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  With the PAC dead - I think they reduce it to the Top 5 conference champions which open the door for an extra SEC / B1G school to get an invite (7 at large instead of 6)

If the PAC rebuilds we will have the G6. If the PAC merges with the MWC it will stay at the G5 but the MWC will be solidly in front of the nAAC for the one auto bid.

The PAC will (and should be) stripped of its automatic bid to the 12 team playoff at this point.

I think it's better for the AAC for the PAC 4 to try to backfill and likely weaken the MWC than to merge with the MWC. They may also pull Tulane and SMU from the AAC also further weakening this conference.

Whatever happens it's going to be bad for the nAAC - but some outcomes are worse than others.

The PAC doesn’t have an auto bid to the 12 team playoff. Nobody does. The bids go to the top 6 rated conference champions. Regardless of what those leagues are.

Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

Not true. The 12 team playoff starts next year. The rule (unless it is changed before they start) is that the top 6 ranked FBS conference champs (regardless of which ones) get bids, and the other 6 slots go to at large teams that may or may not have won their conference.

There are no autobids. No guarantees, although it is pretty obvious that they expect all the original P5 to make it plus one G5. But with the Pac screwed up, they may change the rule now before next season.

Those rules only apply for 2 years anyway, before they start a new contract.

That sounds and awful lot like the P5 & one G5 have autobids. And BTW the A5 each get 2 votes to 1 for everyone else to determine rankings, so how do you thing that comes out? You are splitting hairs my friend. But I'm willing to place a nice wager on who those conferences are who's champs receive bids - i.e., I'm saying it will be the A5 champs & 1 G5.

Go read the rules. And I said before you that it is likely the P5 + one G5 will get the conference champ slots, but it is NOT auto-bids, as it was written through this coming season.

It is theoretically possible for two or more G5 conference champs to get one of the 6 slots, although highly unlikely due to P5 bias (or reality), although the PAC may have thrown a monkey wrench in the plan now.

And the A5 has nothing to do with rankings. That's done by a separate committee. The A5 votes on FBS rule changes, not rankings.

(08-06-2023 12:24 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:05 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 11:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 11:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 02:02 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  With the PAC dead - I think they reduce it to the Top 5 conference champions which open the door for an extra SEC / B1G school to get an invite (7 at large instead of 6)

If the PAC rebuilds we will have the G6. If the PAC merges with the MWC it will stay at the G5 but the MWC will be solidly in front of the nAAC for the one auto bid.

The PAC will (and should be) stripped of its automatic bid to the 12 team playoff at this point.

I think it's better for the AAC for the PAC 4 to try to backfill and likely weaken the MWC than to merge with the MWC. They may also pull Tulane and SMU from the AAC also further weakening this conference.

Whatever happens it's going to be bad for the nAAC - but some outcomes are worse than others.

The PAC doesn’t have an auto bid to the 12 team playoff. Nobody does. The bids go to the top 6 rated conference champions. Regardless of what those leagues are.

Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

Not true. The 12 team playoff starts next year. The rule (unless it is changed before they start) is that the top 6 ranked FBS conference champs (regardless of which ones) get bids, and the other 6 slots go to at large teams that may or may not have won their conference.

There are no autobids. No guarantees, although it is pretty obvious that they expect all the original P5 to make it plus one G5. But with the Pac screwed up, they may change the rule now before next season.

Those rules only apply for 2 years anyway, before they start a new contract.

That sounds and awful lot like the P5 & one G5 have autobids. And BTW the A5 each get 2 votes to 1 for everyone else to determine rankings, so how do you thing that comes out? You are splitting hairs my friend. But I'm willing to place a nice wager on who those conferences are who's champs receive bids - i.e., I'm saying it will be the A5 champs & 1 G5.

With the old conference membership you’d be right 9 times out of ten (famously the PAC champ in Covid year would not have qualified as a top 6 conference champ as AAC and iirc MWC champs were both higher).

Even more famously, after the CFP reform committee unanimously recommended the 6+6 format, and everyone (mostly) agreed, the PAC last-minute tried to pull the switcher op to make it A5+1+6 at large. Crickets (other than the SEC, who mildly expressed preference for the original 6+6)

ARESCO had to raise a stick to argue for the 6+6 because it gives a marginally better shot for an AAC to get the bid even if one SBC or MWC has a dream season, if they can just pass one P5 champ.

It was a huge win for the AAC, Aresco, and college football as a whole. It kept all 10 conferences in-play for the CFP.

IMO the 6 champs rule NEEDS to stay on the books regardless of whether there’s 10 conferences or 8 or however many left.

Any tournament MUST be 50% conference champs or else it’s not legit. That’s my feeling.

But bravo to Aresco for keeping the six slots available to all 10 champs, with NO P5 autobids.

Hopefully the rule will continue to hold

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...mmish-says

(08-22-2023 10:22 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...mmish-says

He may not have much legs to change it for the 24 and 25 season. However, for the new contract, all bets are of. Very doubtful it remains top 6 conferences. there are gonna be huge changes considering that it will not need unanimous support to pass like how was required to change the existing format for the last 2 years.

(08-06-2023 12:42 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:24 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:05 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 11:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-05-2023 11:40 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  The PAC doesn’t have an auto bid to the 12 team playoff. Nobody does. The bids go to the top 6 rated conference champions. Regardless of what those leagues are.

Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

Not true. The 12 team playoff starts next year. The rule (unless it is changed before they start) is that the top 6 ranked FBS conference champs (regardless of which ones) get bids, and the other 6 slots go to at large teams that may or may not have won their conference.

There are no autobids. No guarantees, although it is pretty obvious that they expect all the original P5 to make it plus one G5. But with the Pac screwed up, they may change the rule now before next season.

Those rules only apply for 2 years anyway, before they start a new contract.

That sounds and awful lot like the P5 & one G5 have autobids. And BTW the A5 each get 2 votes to 1 for everyone else to determine rankings, so how do you thing that comes out? You are splitting hairs my friend. But I'm willing to place a nice wager on who those conferences are who's champs receive bids - i.e., I'm saying it will be the A5 champs & 1 G5.

Go read the rules. And I said before you that it is likely the P5 + one G5 will get the conference champ slots, but it is NOT auto-bids, as it was written through this coming season.

It is theoretically possible for two or more G5 conference champs to get one of the 6 slots, although highly unlikely due to P5 bias (or reality), although the PAC may have thrown a monkey wrench in the plan now.

And the A5 has nothing to do with rankings. That's done by a separate committee. The A5 votes on FBS rule changes, not rankings.

Isn't the make-up of that "separate committee" determined by the FBS where the A5 schools have the majority vote?

(08-22-2023 11:56 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:42 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:24 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 12:05 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 11:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  Actually there are currently 6 autobids. One each to the champion of the A5 schools & one to the top ranked G5 school.

Not true. The 12 team playoff starts next year. The rule (unless it is changed before they start) is that the top 6 ranked FBS conference champs (regardless of which ones) get bids, and the other 6 slots go to at large teams that may or may not have won their conference.

There are no autobids. No guarantees, although it is pretty obvious that they expect all the original P5 to make it plus one G5. But with the Pac screwed up, they may change the rule now before next season.

Those rules only apply for 2 years anyway, before they start a new contract.

That sounds and awful lot like the P5 & one G5 have autobids. And BTW the A5 each get 2 votes to 1 for everyone else to determine rankings, so how do you thing that comes out? You are splitting hairs my friend. But I'm willing to place a nice wager on who those conferences are who's champs receive bids - i.e., I'm saying it will be the A5 champs & 1 G5.

Go read the rules. And I said before you that it is likely the P5 + one G5 will get the conference champ slots, but it is NOT auto-bids, as it was written through this coming season.

It is theoretically possible for two or more G5 conference champs to get one of the 6 slots, although highly unlikely due to P5 bias (or reality), although the PAC may have thrown a monkey wrench in the plan now.

And the A5 has nothing to do with rankings. That's done by a separate committee. The A5 votes on FBS rule changes, not rankings.

Isn't the make-up of that "separate committee" determined by the FBS where the A5 schools have the majority vote?

Correct, however, however this go around will not need a unanimous result. therefore grandstanding by one conference commissioner will mean nothing. Last time, one conference commissioner not agreeing was enough to torpedo the whole thing.

(08-22-2023 11:12 AM)otown Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 10:22 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...mmish-says

He may not have much legs to change it for the 24 and 25 season. However, for the new contract, all bets are of. Very doubtful it remains top 6 conferences. there are gonna be huge changes considering that it will not need unanimous support to pass like how was required to change the existing format for the last 2 years.

This. We can debate this till the cows come home, but it will change to the way the P2 want it with the next contract. They'll throw a bare minimum bone to the G5 and the rest of the spoils will be split up among the A4.

(08-22-2023 01:18 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 11:12 AM)otown Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 10:22 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...mmish-says

He may not have much legs to change it for the 24 and 25 season. However, for the new contract, all bets are of. Very doubtful it remains top 6 conferences. there are gonna be huge changes considering that it will not need unanimous support to pass like how was required to change the existing format for the last 2 years.

This. We can debate this till the cows come home, but it will change to the way the P2 want it with the next contract. They'll throw a bare minimum bone to the G5 and the rest of the spoils will be split up among the A4.

Same as it ever was.

(08-22-2023 01:20 PM)msu35 Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 01:18 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 11:12 AM)otown Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 10:22 AM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...mmish-says

He may not have much legs to change it for the 24 and 25 season. However, for the new contract, all bets are of. Very doubtful it remains top 6 conferences. there are gonna be huge changes considering that it will not need unanimous support to pass like how was required to change the existing format for the last 2 years.

This. We can debate this till the cows come home, but it will change to the way the P2 want it with the next contract. They'll throw a bare minimum bone to the G5 and the rest of the spoils will be split up among the A4.

Same as it ever was.

Agreed. It may be the top 5 conferences with 7 at-larges but at the end of the day they'll avoid the bad PR (they've already received enough) by giving the peons a shot.

It would be awesome if the "Top 6" thing remains in play although I doubt that will happen.

(08-05-2023 08:17 PM)Crazier Wrote:  [quote='msu35' pid='19058393' dateline='1691267400']
Much of the future is contingent on these absurd media contracts that may not exist -- the same money simply might not be there in a decade. The media landscape is fracturing and traditional, linear media is dying. Who knows what the future holds, but I get the feeling we'll see a shift towards less consolidation and homogenization. Anticipate schools or conferences becoming independent media providers, and more à la carte offerings. If you're a Texas or Alabama, why would you give the conference a cut, subsidizing the unproductive bottom feeders? Ultimately it's more about maximizing revenue and less about association, and I have the feeling a day of reckoning is coming.

It's coming. Cable companies and streaming services are losing money.
[/quote

We all could see this coming from a mile away.
No surprise.
Not even an argument to be put up.

They want to make it where it's only reserved for BIG and SEC schools eventually. The rest of us should give them the bird and have our own playoff to decide a real college champion because those two conferences are fast becoming NFL-Lite

(08-22-2023 02:35 PM)gotigers1 Wrote:  They want to make it where it's only reserved for BIG and SEC schools eventually. The rest of us should give them the bird and have our own playoff to decide a real college champion because those two conferences are fast becoming NFL-Lite

Quote:• The chatter for weeks has been that conferences not named the Big Ten and SEC should be careful about overplaying their hands with revenue or automatic qualifier demands. One source cautioned to The Post that the other conferences risk implosion along the lines of the Pac-12, which greatly overvalued itself in network rights negotiations, if they stand too obstinately in the way of what the Big Ten and SEC want.
• OutKick founder Clay Travis tweeted earlier this month: “Depending on how the CFB playoff criteria are changed, there is also the possibility the SEC & Big Ten create their own 12-team college football playoff and give half the games to ESPN and half to Fox and crown their own champion.”
• The Yahoo Sports story also alluded to the idea that the Big Ten and SEC “are expected to now hold even more clout in the CFP room” in the quest for a greater share of revenue and voting rights and a desire to take the 12 best teams, downplaying the idea of automatic qualifiers from other conferences.

https://archive.is/85Q9v#selection-1775.0-1787.304

(08-22-2023 05:01 PM)blazerjay Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 02:35 PM)gotigers1 Wrote:  They want to make it where it's only reserved for BIG and SEC schools eventually. The rest of us should give them the bird and have our own playoff to decide a real college champion because those two conferences are fast becoming NFL-Lite

Quote:• The chatter for weeks has been that conferences not named the Big Ten and SEC should be careful about overplaying their hands with revenue or automatic qualifier demands. One source cautioned to The Post that the other conferences risk implosion along the lines of the Pac-12, which greatly overvalued itself in network rights negotiations, if they stand too obstinately in the way of what the Big Ten and SEC want.
• OutKick founder Clay Travis tweeted earlier this month: “Depending on how the CFB playoff criteria are changed, there is also the possibility the SEC & Big Ten create their own 12-team college football playoff and give half the games to ESPN and half to Fox and crown their own champion.”
• The Yahoo Sports story also alluded to the idea that the Big Ten and SEC “are expected to now hold even more clout in the CFP room” in the quest for a greater share of revenue and voting rights and a desire to take the 12 best teams, downplaying the idea of automatic qualifiers from other conferences.

https://archive.is/85Q9v#selection-1775.0-1787.304

I sincerely hope the Big Two Conferences break off and do that, and leave the rest of us to play college football. They also want to do the same thing with basketball, eventually.

I doubt they change that for 2024, that’s the old contract. I could see it changing for the new contract and even then I could see lawsuits flying. Is it worth it for one spot?

(08-24-2023 11:43 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  I doubt they change that for 2024, that’s the old contract. I could see it changing for the new contract and even then I could see lawsuits flying. Is it worth it for one spot?

I didn't mean for 2024, of course, or not even 2026. Just sometime soon.

It's not a matter of one spot. It's just an excuse for them to do what they have been plotting to do since at least 2010, perhaps, when I first started hearing rumors about that.

They feel like they are the most valuable college sports properties in the country (the SEC and the B1G), and they have always felt they were being underpaid.

They are slowly consolidating power as they can, and eventually, they plan to break away for both football and basketball, and hold their own tourneys.

The question is, how many teams will that eventually involve? Who knows? But their plans are becoming more obvious as time passes.

(08-22-2023 05:01 PM)blazerjay Wrote:  

(08-22-2023 02:35 PM)gotigers1 Wrote:  They want to make it where it's only reserved for BIG and SEC schools eventually. The rest of us should give them the bird and have our own playoff to decide a real college champion because those two conferences are fast becoming NFL-Lite

Quote:• The chatter for weeks has been that conferences not named the Big Ten and SEC should be careful about overplaying their hands with revenue or automatic qualifier demands. One source cautioned to The Post that the other conferences risk implosion along the lines of the Pac-12, which greatly overvalued itself in network rights negotiations, if they stand too obstinately in the way of what the Big Ten and SEC want.
• OutKick founder Clay Travis tweeted earlier this month: “Depending on how the CFB playoff criteria are changed, there is also the possibility the SEC & Big Ten create their own 12-team college football playoff and give half the games to ESPN and half to Fox and crown their own champion.”
• The Yahoo Sports story also alluded to the idea that the Big Ten and SEC “are expected to now hold even more clout in the CFP room” in the quest for a greater share of revenue and voting rights and a desire to take the 12 best teams, downplaying the idea of automatic qualifiers from other conferences.

https://archive.is/85Q9v#selection-1775.0-1787.304

I don't think the SEC and B1G are in lockstep at all regarding all at large bids. I do think they agree on wanting a larger share, but the B1G has been one of the bigger proponents of conference champs getting an auto bid, and I don't think they want the possibility of 6 or 7 SEC teams getting in and only 2 or 3 B1G teams getting in.