How would a 12 team playoff destroy the bowl system, but an 8 team playoff would not?
Big10 - Pac12 - ACC Merger
- Thread starter Beach_Tornado
- Start date
How would a 12 team playoff destroy the bowl system, but an 8 team playoff would not?
Also the bowl system is already dead. They have been glorified exhibitions for a long time, and people tricked themselves (me included for a long long time) into thinking that they really meant something other than that. I still love bowl season, but the CFP has already made the season obsolete for the most part. Love that we won the Fiesta Bowl because it's a huge bowl game. But in the end, it's just a bigger exhibition than the Alamo Bowl or the Texas Bowl.
From their inception bowl games were exhibitions that were never intended to determine a national champion. They had never meant anything until they tried to shoehorn in a national championship into them back in the early nineties. If you ask me the bowl system was/is the biggest impediment to getting a real playoff established like you have at literally every other level of football.
WVU thrived in the Big Eat. made crap money, but had 3 top 10 finishes, 2 in top 5, in a 4 year period and beat SEC champion georgia in the Sugar, Big 12 champ OU in the Fiesta, and hung 70 points on ACC champion clemson and dabo in the orange.
the little 8 will be fine.
Big 12 will add BYU, UCF, Memphis and cinn and call it a day. That is a league that gets a team in the 12 team playoff every year.
the little 8 will be fine.
Big 12 will add BYU, UCF, Memphis and cinn and call it a day. That is a league that gets a team in the 12 team playoff every year.
That is a league that gets us maybe 20 million a year from TV and does nothing more than give everyone a reason to leave the moment one of the other P5 teams makes them an offer.
ISU has shown that it can compete in a power league, we are never going to be Alabama or Ohio State, but we could end up becoming a school like Michigan St or Iowa, that can compete every year beating the blue bloods now and then and winning 8 to 10 games a year.
Going the old Big East route and hoping to find success is not going to work, if it was such a sweet deal, then why did Miami, Virginia Tech and Louisville leave when they could have stayed? Lack of money, its as simple as that.
Everything you say is true. But I am afraid staying together and trying (no guarantee they will come) to add a couple is starting to look like the best outcome. It certainly appears that the P4 all agree that the demise of the B12 is in their best interest.
Let's get the family together and quietly have a private memorial service for the Big 12.
ISU's future is in a new home with the opportunity to rub elbows with established D-1, P5 programs. In my opinion, breathing life into a new version of the Big 12 will be hard enough especially since we will have to immediately overcome a real/perceived stigma of being left behind and merely picking up the pieces.
I don't think any of the eight schools would choose that outcome over a B1G/Pac/ACC invite. But it is the best outcome if none of those invitations come. And the recent Alliance report suggested that those three leagues have no interest in the eight schools, at least so far.
It’s important to note that right now those conferences would not publicly say they’re interested in any of the schools due to everything that’s going on with ESPN and the SEC.
The alliance doesn't mean the 3 leagues have no interest in the remaining 8 schools. I think it means the 3 leagues have agreed to not race against each other to poach the remaining 8 schools right away, to take a deep breath while the dust settles, and to come to an agreement down the road on how the remaining 8 schools will be divided between them as their TV contracts are being renewed.
Because an 8 team CONFERENCE CHAMPION ONLY playoff is in essence a 16 team play off where the losers of the first round of conference championship games still participate in the bowl system.
The second best team from the SEC is still going to the Sugar Bowl. The second best teams from the B1G and Pac 12 are still going to the Rose Bowl. The second best team from the ACC still plays in the Orange Bowl.
The third and fourth best teams from each conference are still going to another bowl game.
As currently proposed, the 12 team playoffs will send the top 3 or 4 teams from each P4 conference to the CFP and those conferences are sending their 4th or 5th best teams to the rest of the NY6 and even lower quality teams to the rest of their conference slate of bowl games.
The media narrative also switches to who is going to win their conference to make the playoffs and away from E$PN's constant primping of the SEC teams or a few other blue bloods and constantly coming up with even more creative and stupid ways to trash non blue blood teams from other conferences.
This will give people a reason to watch each conference race and get people invested enough in the second and third best teams from each conference that they will tune in to watch them in a bowl game.
You then have people watching meaningful bowl games to decide for themselves using scoreboards to argue which conference is strongest from top to bottom.
Last edited:
The report said otherwise. You can read it in The Athletic; I didn’t make up the part where it said the three leagues aren’t interested in the 8 right now. Maybe you’re right or maybe they’re waiting for legal dust to settle. Of course I hope that they want ISU eventually. It’s just that right now all we have is that hope because we don’t have any reports at all that those leagues have ISU interest at the current time.
But the 12-team playoff proposal was to use bowl games for quarterfinals and semifinals. Six games. That is the NY6 right there. The teams that miss the playoff would go to Alamo, Camping World, Citrus, Outback etc. That tier of bowl games.
You saying that the NY6 will be filled with teams that miss the playoff shows you aren’t familiar with the 12-team proposal’s details.
I think this is the key part of what was said. No conference is going to touch another member of the Big 12 until everything with the Big 12, Texas & OU, ESPN, and the SEC is figured out.
When that happens, conversations that actually mean something will be had for the remaining members. Until then, those conferences are focusing on destabilizing the potential monopoly ESPN and the SEC are trying to create on CFB.
The current proposal didn't address what was going to happen with the bowl games. Even if they do decide to use the NY6 bowls as quarter and semi final games, those bowl games will be forced off their traditional dates and conference affiliations and lose their identity.
I would say you are not familiar with what was actually proposed and just listening to some talking heads in the media with an agenda spouting a bunch of click bait nonsense.
They can't say they're interested in poaching.
And if they truly aren't, I'm highly confident that they'd be willing to work with the Big 12 to at least give us a guaranteed spot in the new playoff. Any spot they know can't go to the SEC is something they're going to all likely support.
They literally can’t say they are interested even if they are. Do you understand the legal issues around that?
All of these articles are saying - the Big 12 is not part of this alliance, meaning the other conferences aren't interested in these teams.
As others have said, they can't say they are interested in poaching now.
As for a scheduling alliance, why in the hell would these conferences engage in a scheduling agreement with a league that you don't know who will be in it, or if it will even exist in a couple of years?
For example, if the PAC thinks they may want to poach ISU, Okie State, KU and TTU, the last thing they'd want to do is have some sort of agreement that might tie them up with the leftovers of the leftovers.
It makes zero sense to work with the Big 12 right now as a conference. It makes zero sense to express ANY interest in expansion or poaching. The other conferences want the OU and UT deal to get settled quickly, send big checks to the Big 12 members, and enable them to join at reduced rates because they have a little OU and UT cash to float them. They have to stay quiet, stay away from the Big 12, let that legal issue get settled, then bargain shop for additional members.
Sure. I know you’re right. But the fact they can’t say they’re interested doesn’t mean that they are interested and are keeping quiet. My point is that we don’t know if they are interested. Sure feels like some people here are convinced that they are - they might not be. It’s just an uncomfortable quiet and Pollard is keeping everything under wraps (which is smart) and we just have to wait.
Honestly I like your system, but - why would the P5 (P4?) want to share playoff spots (and thus cash) with G5s? So much more lucrative to have 11 out of 12 spots than 4 or 5 out of 8... So I don't see it happening based on that. Unless the B1G, ACC, Pac12 are so strongly opposed to ESPN/SEC that they bring in the G5 as additional weight against them, which I suppose is possible though maybe not even necessary.
Will be interesting going forward to see what that alliance is really wanting to accomplish, and if they can stay united vs ESPN/SEC.
