Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[bucket]

It would be the worst road trip ever! BYU doesn't allow mountain dew in the state let alone alcohol. Pass!

[SkinnyBenny]

Just quoting some random thing so we can get back to the real title. Thank you.

[GoodForAnother]

Just quoting some random thing so we can get back to the real title. Thank you.

 

[Houstoncat93]

From a WVU 'insider', but this brings up another interesting aspect- the financial reality of the BCS +1:

Ok, so I haven't gotten permission to post this yet but I have decided to do it and take the lashings.
The real numbers that turned the eyes of Clemson's expansion comittee(in their sockets) are not just the media contracts and Tier 3 rights. It certainly isn't hurting our chances but the real math is in the new play-off model that is favored by 3 of the Big BCS conferences and ND.
For all intents and purposes lets say the B12 takes FSU and Clemson and stop at 12(for now)
tv money for Tier 1&2=appx $24 million

But here is where the gap widens and the eyebrows were raised...
The new “playoffs” being discussed are going to fetch upwards of $400 million for three games...THREE GAMES....now comes the math part of it that took my source 3 times to explain to me over the phone. Just to be fair I am going to keep the amount at a low-ball $300 million.

This is the financial sharing in the model opposed by Delaney and Swofford.

25% of the $300 million, or $75 million will be set aside to be divided evenly by the remaining of the 12 BCS conferences that don't qualify for the championship(some years 8, some years maybe 9 or 10). For all intents and purposes lets put this amount at $9.5 million per conference and assume it's being split 8 ways. Thats a lot more than most of those conferences are getting now but also substantially less than what the auto-qualifiers make.

5% of the pot($15 million) goes to the conference that wins it all(in addition to the next level of payouts)

the remaining 70%($210 million) would be dispersed the following way:
Each semi-final game would get 30% ($63 million) to split with the two teams conferences, or $31.5 million per conference. The championship game would have the two teams involved split the remaining 40%($84 million or $42 million per team)

So the total payouts would be as follows:

Winner-$88.5 million
Runner-up-$73.5 million
one-and-done-$31.5 million
non qualifiers-appx $9.5 million

The selection process in this model is the key...top 3 ranked conference champs and one at-large team next highest ranked(can get 2 in from one conference). This is the model with the most support. Delaney and Swofford do not want it but ND, Slive, Neinas, and Scott sure do.

Over the past decade based on the final BCS standings these are the amount of appearances each conference would have had in this format

SEC 12(10 semi's, 6 NC's)
BIG12 9 (4 semi's, 1 NC)
BIG10 7 (2 semi's, 1 NC)
PAC12 6(4 semi's 1 NC*) *revoked
BEAST 3(1 semi, 1 NC*) *Miami
MWC 2
ACC 1
WAC 1


Projected payout's per conference (over ten year period)would have been:

SEC $939 milliom
BIG12 $559 million(includes $19 mil for NQ years)
PAC12 $483.5 million(includes $38 mil for NQ)
BIG10 $431 million($38 mil NQ)
BEAST $291.5 million($66.5 mil NQ)
MWC $139 million($76 mil NQ)
ACC $117 million($85.5 mil NQ)
WAC same as ACC

The Big 12 averaged $55.9 million per year having 9 total participants...divide by 12 and you have over $4.5 million per team per year IF split evenly.....The money gets even crazier when its at the $400 million mark....

Clemson's expansion committee is worried about not getting a big cut of that pie. The ACC only had one team(2007 VT) who would have even qualified for the entire decade.

ACC new deal—max of $18 million per year..
avg per team last 10 years of project BCS playoff money-$.84 million
total---$18.84 million


B12(with CU and FSU) Tier 1&2----$24 mil
Tier3------lowball at--------------------$4 mil
Avg per team last 10 yrs BCS---------$4.5 mil
total---------------------------------------$32.5 million

As you can Imagine this information has been seen by every AD in the ACC...
Now I realize this thread will probably get invaded by the Louisville PR Department and the proud owner of the 2 ugliest dogs in the state of North Carolina so I apologize in advance
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=8921394

Stolen from The Shag http://www.shaggybevo.com/board/showthread.php/108844-Clemson-and-FSU-talk-not-going-away?p=3900003#post3900003

[ben ji]

From a WVU 'insider', but this brings up another interesting aspect- the financial reality of the BCS +1:

Ok, so I haven't gotten permission to post this yet but I have decided to do it and take the lashings.
The real numbers that turned the eyes of Clemson's expansion comittee(in their sockets) are not just the media contracts and Tier 3 rights. It certainly isn't hurting our chances but the real math is in the new play-off model that is favored by 3 of the Big BCS conferences and ND.
For all intents and purposes lets say the B12 takes FSU and Clemson and stop at 12(for now)
tv money for Tier 1&2=appx $24 million

But here is where the gap widens and the eyebrows were raised...
The new “playoffs” being discussed are going to fetch upwards of $400 million for three games...THREE GAMES....now comes the math part of it that took my source 3 times to explain to me over the phone. Just to be fair I am going to keep the amount at a low-ball $300 million.

This is the financial sharing in the model opposed by Delaney and Swofford.

25% of the $300 million, or $75 million will be set aside to be divided evenly by the remaining of the 12 BCS conferences that don't qualify for the championship(some years 8, some years maybe 9 or 10). For all intents and purposes lets put this amount at $9.5 million per conference and assume it's being split 8 ways. Thats a lot more than most of those conferences are getting now but also substantially less than what the auto-qualifiers make.

5% of the pot($15 million) goes to the conference that wins it all(in addition to the next level of payouts)

the remaining 70%($210 million) would be dispersed the following way:
Each semi-final game would get 30% ($63 million) to split with the two teams conferences, or $31.5 million per conference. The championship game would have the two teams involved split the remaining 40%($84 million or $42 million per team)

So the total payouts would be as follows:

Winner-$88.5 million
Runner-up-$73.5 million
one-and-done-$31.5 million
non qualifiers-appx $9.5 million

The selection process in this model is the key...top 3 ranked conference champs and one at-large team next highest ranked(can get 2 in from one conference). This is the model with the most support. Delaney and Swofford do not want it but ND, Slive, Neinas, and Scott sure do.

Over the past decade based on the final BCS standings these are the amount of appearances each conference would have had in this format

SEC 12(10 semi's, 6 NC's)
BIG12 9 (4 semi's, 1 NC)
BIG10 7 (2 semi's, 1 NC)
PAC12 6(4 semi's 1 NC*) *revoked
BEAST 3(1 semi, 1 NC*) *Miami
MWC 2
ACC 1
WAC 1


Projected payout's per conference (over ten year period)would have been:

SEC $939 milliom
BIG12 $559 million(includes $19 mil for NQ years)
PAC12 $483.5 million(includes $38 mil for NQ)
BIG10 $431 million($38 mil NQ)
BEAST $291.5 million($66.5 mil NQ)
MWC $139 million($76 mil NQ)
ACC $117 million($85.5 mil NQ)
WAC same as ACC

The Big 12 averaged $55.9 million per year having 9 total participants...divide by 12 and you have over $4.5 million per team per year IF split evenly.....The money gets even crazier when its at the $400 million mark....

Clemson's expansion committee is worried about not getting a big cut of that pie. The ACC only had one team(2007 VT) who would have even qualified for the entire decade.

ACC new deal—max of $18 million per year..
avg per team last 10 years of project BCS playoff money-$.84 million
total---$18.84 million


B12(with CU and FSU) Tier 1&2----$24 mil
Tier3------lowball at--------------------$4 mil
Avg per team last 10 yrs BCS---------$4.5 mil
total---------------------------------------$32.5 million

As you can Imagine this information has been seen by every AD in the ACC...
Now I realize this thread will probably get invaded by the Louisville PR Department and the proud owner of the 2 ugliest dogs in the state of North Carolina so I apologize in advance
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=8921394

Stolen from The Shag http://www.shaggybevo.com/board/showthread.php/108844-Clemson-and-FSU-talk-not-going-away?p=3900003#post3900003

How likely is that? $100 million a year for 4 games?

I know the price for live content has skyrocketed but that just seems ridiculous.

[Panjandrum]

This all goes back to what I said earlier in this thread.

The first round of realignment was state schools (with no other BCS conference teams) shifting leagues to increase TV payouts based on monopolizing markets.  TCU being the exclusion because they were a defensive add by the Big 12.

The second round of realignment will be schools in states where a different school has a gigantic payout difference leaving them at a competitive disadvantage. 

Every school, sans Maryland, that has been mentioned with the Big 12 (FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami, Louisville) shares a state with an SEC school.  The amount of money they'll make in the ACC or Big East will put them at a tremendous competitive disadvantage.  If they join up with us, there is a chance we'll be financially competitive with the SEC due to the expansion of our footprints.

Honestly, unless ESPN ponies up a tremendous amount of money for the ACC, I expect at least two ACC schools to come over to us.  There's been too much Clemson/FSU smoke for too long for there not to be something very tangible there.  The timeline can be debated, but it's inevitable.

[ben ji]

This all goes back to what I said earlier in this thread.

The first round of realignment was state schools (with no other BCS conference teams) shifting leagues to increase TV payouts based on monopolizing markets.  TCU being the exclusion because they were a defensive add by the Big 12.

The second round of realignment will be schools in states where a different school has a gigantic payout difference leaving them at a competitive disadvantage. 

Every school, sans Maryland, that has been mentioned with the Big 12 (FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami, Louisville) shares a state with an SEC school.  The amount of money they'll make in the ACC or Big East will put them at a tremendous competitive disadvantage.  If they join up with us, there is a chance we'll be financially competitive with the SEC due to the expansion of our footprints.

Honestly, unless ESPN ponies up a tremendous amount of money for the ACC, I expect at least two ACC schools to come over to us.  There's been too much Clemson/FSU smoke for too long for there not to be something very tangible there.  The timeline can be debated, but it's inevitable.

That all makes perfect sense.

FSU/CU joining up with the Big12 to stay competitive is a good point but that just takes into account the standard regular season TV Contracts. If something similar to the Plus 1 mentioned above comes to fruition it could be the final straw in pushing some ACC schools elsewhere.

The question is could the plus 1 really generate $100 million a year for 4 games?

[06wildcat]

How likely is that? $100 million a year for 4 games?

I know the price for live content has skyrocketed but that just seems ridiculous.

It's actually $300-400 million/ year for 3 games. And worth every penny to a network. Live sports that draw huge audiences are loss leaders. If you spend $400 million to air those three games, you might get 70 percent of that back on the actual telecasts of the games.

The rest of the money will come from conversion (promos for other shows on your network), pre and post game shows, increased carriage fees (the bigger the content, the bigger the fee), other media rights, etc.

Look at it this way, if there is a +1 model and ABC/ESPN signs a 10-year deal for $4 billion, would you be shocked?

[ChiComCat]

Advertisers also pay extra big for live sports because people don't TiVo those and skip the commercials

[MadCat]

Advertisers also pay extra big for live sports because people don't TiVo those and skip the commercials

I like to tweet the final scores of games for the benefit of those that do. 

[CNS]

Advertisers also pay extra big for live sports because people don't TiVo those and skip the commercials

I like to tweet the final scores of games for the benefit of those that do. 

#TeamUnfollow

[GoodForAnother]

Advertisers also pay extra big for live sports because people don't TiVo those and skip the commercials

I like to tweet the final scores of games for the benefit of those that do. 

you're the worst kind of person

[Houstoncat93]

How likely is that? $100 million a year for 4 games?

I know the price for live content has skyrocketed but that just seems ridiculous.

WHAT WILL THIS ALL BE WORTH? It depends on how it is packaged. For all the B.C.S. games, including the Rose Bowl’s separate contract, ABC/ESPN pays about $160 million. That number could easily double this time.

But a lot depends on how much inventory the television networks are paying for, as the number of so-called B.C.S. games is likely to expand.

What will probably happen is that the semifinals and the final will still be under the B.C.S. umbrella. But for marketing, advertising and branding purposes, the top-10 teams would still play in so-called B.C.S. bowls, meaning games like the Cotton, Capital One or Chick-fil-A Bowls could be added to the B.C.S. roster.

Then, of course, there is the matter of avoiding matchups that most viewers are not interested in watching, like West Virginia against Clemson, and sidestepping controversies like leaving out deserving teams like Boise State and Kansas State.

From Pete Thamel of the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/sports/ncaafootball/key-issues-in-deciding-college-footballs-new-postseason.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=sports

[bws]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7851441/source-bcs-exploring-neutral-site-4-team-playoff-format

Looks like the home site Final 4 scenario is D.O.A.  It will be interesting to see if they make the semifinal games separate from the bowls in a Western and Eastern location to make it easier for fans, or if they incorporate the semifinals into the existing bowls.

I kind of liked the idea of home semifinal games, but apparently they don't like the idea of smaller schools and college towns hosting big events...

The conference commissioners have reached a conclusion that some FBS schools' stadiums aren't large enough to host a national semifinal game and that many college towns don't have enough hotel rooms to accommodate bigger crowds.

"What happens if TCU finishes No. 2 in the country and hosts a semifinal game?" the source said. "TCU finished No. 3 two years ago. Are they really hosting No. 3 Ohio State in a 45,000-seat stadium? Where are people going to stay if Oregon hosts a semifinal game? In Portland? As much as it would be great for the sport to see a game played in Ann Arbor, Mich., Tuscaloosa, Ala., or Lincoln, Neb., some of the logistical issues are just too severe. I think that idea has come home to roost as far as these guys are concerned."

[KITNfury]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7851441/source-bcs-exploring-neutral-site-4-team-playoff-format

Looks like the home site Final 4 scenario is D.O.A.  It will be interesting to see if they make the semifinal games separate from the bowls in a Western and Eastern location to make it easier for fans, or if they incorporate the semifinals into the existing bowls.

I kind of liked the idea of home semifinal games, but apparently they don't like the idea of smaller schools and college towns hosting big events...

The conference commissioners have reached a conclusion that some FBS schools' stadiums aren't large enough to host a national semifinal game and that many college towns don't have enough hotel rooms to accommodate bigger crowds.

"What happens if TCU finishes No. 2 in the country and hosts a semifinal game?" the source said. "TCU finished No. 3 two years ago. Are they really hosting No. 3 Ohio State in a 45,000-seat stadium? Where are people going to stay if Oregon hosts a semifinal game? In Portland? As much as it would be great for the sport to see a game played in Ann Arbor, Mich., Tuscaloosa, Ala., or Lincoln, Neb., some of the logistical issues are just too severe. I think that idea has come home to roost as far as these guys are concerned."

You could just replace home games with nearest neutral site that seats 70k plus. TCU would play in Dallas, we'd play in KC, etc.

[doom]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7851441/source-bcs-exploring-neutral-site-4-team-playoff-format

Looks like the home site Final 4 scenario is D.O.A.  It will be interesting to see if they make the semifinal games separate from the bowls in a Western and Eastern location to make it easier for fans, or if they incorporate the semifinals into the existing bowls.

I kind of liked the idea of home semifinal games, but apparently they don't like the idea of smaller schools and college towns hosting big events...

The conference commissioners have reached a conclusion that some FBS schools' stadiums aren't large enough to host a national semifinal game and that many college towns don't have enough hotel rooms to accommodate bigger crowds.

"What happens if TCU finishes No. 2 in the country and hosts a semifinal game?" the source said. "TCU finished No. 3 two years ago. Are they really hosting No. 3 Ohio State in a 45,000-seat stadium? Where are people going to stay if Oregon hosts a semifinal game? In Portland? As much as it would be great for the sport to see a game played in Ann Arbor, Mich., Tuscaloosa, Ala., or Lincoln, Neb., some of the logistical issues are just too severe. I think that idea has come home to roost as far as these guys are concerned."

You could just replace home games with nearest neutral site that seats 70k plus. TCU would play in Dallas, we'd play in KC, etc.

Seems pretty simple, but I also like the idea of The Bill hosting some SEC school and hearing the fans bitch about having to stay in Junction and parking in a sheep field. 

[Rage Against the McKee]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7851441/source-bcs-exploring-neutral-site-4-team-playoff-format

Looks like the home site Final 4 scenario is D.O.A.  It will be interesting to see if they make the semifinal games separate from the bowls in a Western and Eastern location to make it easier for fans, or if they incorporate the semifinals into the existing bowls.

I kind of liked the idea of home semifinal games, but apparently they don't like the idea of smaller schools and college towns hosting big events...

The conference commissioners have reached a conclusion that some FBS schools' stadiums aren't large enough to host a national semifinal game and that many college towns don't have enough hotel rooms to accommodate bigger crowds.

"What happens if TCU finishes No. 2 in the country and hosts a semifinal game?" the source said. "TCU finished No. 3 two years ago. Are they really hosting No. 3 Ohio State in a 45,000-seat stadium? Where are people going to stay if Oregon hosts a semifinal game? In Portland? As much as it would be great for the sport to see a game played in Ann Arbor, Mich., Tuscaloosa, Ala., or Lincoln, Neb., some of the logistical issues are just too severe. I think that idea has come home to roost as far as these guys are concerned."

That whole argument is a huge pile of crap. Smaller stadiums lead to higher ticket prices. That's it. It doesn't affect tv at all, and tv is what's important.

[Panjandrum]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7851441/source-bcs-exploring-neutral-site-4-team-playoff-format

Looks like the home site Final 4 scenario is D.O.A.  It will be interesting to see if they make the semifinal games separate from the bowls in a Western and Eastern location to make it easier for fans, or if they incorporate the semifinals into the existing bowls.

I kind of liked the idea of home semifinal games, but apparently they don't like the idea of smaller schools and college towns hosting big events...

The conference commissioners have reached a conclusion that some FBS schools' stadiums aren't large enough to host a national semifinal game and that many college towns don't have enough hotel rooms to accommodate bigger crowds.

"What happens if TCU finishes No. 2 in the country and hosts a semifinal game?" the source said. "TCU finished No. 3 two years ago. Are they really hosting No. 3 Ohio State in a 45,000-seat stadium? Where are people going to stay if Oregon hosts a semifinal game? In Portland? As much as it would be great for the sport to see a game played in Ann Arbor, Mich., Tuscaloosa, Ala., or Lincoln, Neb., some of the logistical issues are just too severe. I think that idea has come home to roost as far as these guys are concerned."

That whole argument is a huge pile of crap. Smaller stadiums lead to higher ticket prices. That's it. It doesn't affect tv at all, and tv is what's important.

Of course it's a pile of crap.  It's the only way you can keep bowl games as a part of the process (with the same level of importance that they have now).

[GoodForAnother]

the basic argument being made here is that college football stadiums are not adequate for hosting college football games

[ksucrcoop]

NEW Big XII

North
KSU
KU
ISU
WV
OSU
OU
Louisville or VaTech

South
BU
TCU
UT
TTU
Clemson
GT
FSU

[steve dave]

NEW Big XII

North
KSU
KU
ISU
WV
OSU
Louisville or VaTech

South
BU
TCU
UT
TTU
Clemson
GT
FSU

They would put clemson in the north before they would put OSU there and split up OU/OSU.  In that fantasy list of teams I'm kicking BU to the curb and taking both Louisville and VTech to make an east west. 

[steve dave]

yeah, your edit makes more sense but they would have to arrange a OU v. TX game every year. 

[scottwildcat]

yeah, your edit makes more sense but they would have to arrange a OU v. TX game every year.

who would our cross over game be? TCU or Florida State would be my pref.

[steve dave]

yeah, your edit makes more sense but they would have to arrange a OU v. TX game every year.

who would our cross over game be? TCU or Florida State would be my pref.

ku, isu and kstate would get ttech, baylor, tcu.  that's pretty obvious. 

[Panjandrum]

yeah, your edit makes more sense but they would have to arrange a OU v. TX game every year.

With 14 teams, I almost think you need to do a nine game conference schedule.

6 division
1 cross rival
2 rotate