2024 college football playoffs
- Thread starter PITT 76
- Start date
Thanks. I hope they don't bow to the SEC. Let's have the results determined on the field for a change.
I wasn't worried about the SEC's power until this FL ST fiasco, but it does look as if they are exerting unearned power.
If they have their way, they'll get in at least 6 teams every year. I do expect that they'll qualify 4 teams, as well as the B10, but I don't want it to become a situation where they totally control who gets in.
I wasn't worried about the SEC's power until this FL ST fiasco, but it does look as if they are exerting unearned power.
If they have their way, they'll get in at least 6 teams every year. I do expect that they'll qualify 4 teams, as well as the B10, but I don't want it to become a situation where they totally control who gets in.
It was 6 of the top conference champs getting in, but the PAC12 collapse has it down to the top 5 conference champs getting in. Most years that will be the SEC, BIG, ACC, and Big XII plus one more.
Now, expect a heavy dose of SEC and BIG teams getting the 7 at large bids. Even if a lot of them beat each other on the field of play in the regular season already.
Now, expect a heavy dose of SEC and BIG teams getting the 7 at large bids. Even if a lot of them beat each other on the field of play in the regular season already.
"The CFP board of managers is composed of 10 FBS presidents and chancellors and Notre Dame president John Jenkins. The Pac-12's representative is Washington State president Kirk Schulz, who could single-handedly prevent the change in format if he wanted to."
11 votes:
SEC & B10 will automatically vote yes for the change. Notre Dame also would like fewer conference champs.
That's 3 yes votes for sure.
The G5 schools will vote no. That's 5 no votes.
The other 3 votes come from ACC, B12, and PAC. I would guess that PAC would want to vote no because Washington ST has the vote and will probably end up in a G5 conference.
It will be interesting to see if they actually allow Washington St. to cast that vote.
Since the ACC and B12 are unlikely to fill the at large spots, I wonder how they'll vote.
11 votes:
SEC & B10 will automatically vote yes for the change. Notre Dame also would like fewer conference champs.
That's 3 yes votes for sure.
The G5 schools will vote no. That's 5 no votes.
The other 3 votes come from ACC, B12, and PAC. I would guess that PAC would want to vote no because Washington ST has the vote and will probably end up in a G5 conference.
It will be interesting to see if they actually allow Washington St. to cast that vote.
Since the ACC and B12 are unlikely to fill the at large spots, I wonder how they'll vote.
Definitely not leaving it 6+6.
Probably 5+7.
Could see SEC again trying for top 12 or drop the 'top 4 champs' get a buy, you know, the "Pitt scenario'.
Followed by the bitching some get a buy waiting for neutral site, while watching others get a 100k home game.
Probably 5+7.
Could see SEC again trying for top 12 or drop the 'top 4 champs' get a buy, you know, the "Pitt scenario'.
Followed by the bitching some get a buy waiting for neutral site, while watching others get a 100k home game.
It will be a much better, fairer and more interesting system with 12 in.
they are exerting unearned power.
What's your definition of unearned? The SEC is the financial engine that drives the college football bus. And, year in year out, it is unquestionably the best league in college football. They would have had 2 teams in this CFP if not for the bad optics of putting Bama in without Texas.
So yes, the SEC does have some sway in these matters. But it certainly isn't "unearned".
Then just have an SEC tournament, forget everyone else exists. maybe have a separate tournament for all the other teams the lowlife non-SEC TEAMS.
A lot of money will exchange hands to make sure the big and SEC get the most teams in.
It doesn’t need to. The SEC and B10, in that order, are driving the vast bulk of the TV revenue stream generated by college football. Obviously a ton more viewers watch SEC and B10 games than the other three leagues. There’s nothing shady about it, it’s very simple: those 2 leagues bring in a lot more money than the ACC, B12 and PAC. That’s just the way it is, the way it has always been, and the way it always will be.
When the G5 says they are going to vote no they are going to be told, that's OK, vote no. We can have a playoff without you guys and no one will miss you. So their choice will be access and money in a system that they may not particularly like, or no access and no money at all.
Whatever is left of the PAC is going to have the same choice. They are going to be told that sure, they can screw things up now, but all that means is that when Washington State and Oregon State merge with the Mountain West they will be on the outside looking in too.
Sure all those school COULD fight this and even win for the moment. But only for the moment. At the expense of completely screwing themselves over the long term.
"Cut off your nose to spite your face" was coined for exactly situations like this.
