Speaking of this, heard a guest on I think Miller and Condon today who said he expects the SEC and B1G to push for no auto- bids. Because of course they would.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
I really don’t think they’d get an invite and even if they did they’d probably just drop FB before joining the B12. I can’t remember seeing a tweet or link to anything re Cal or Stanford worrying about the PAC collapsing. I don’t think they nor their fans nor anybody else care.
With fans buying into CFB being about "Big Money" and Big10 & SEC domination, those 2 conferences don't benefit from auto bids. Make selection and bye week based on rankings.
What I will be curious about is how Big10 & SEC position to get teams 3-6 in the playoff. Are there ways they will manipulate SOS or timing of games?
I don’t think they need to manipulate things more than is already happening. That’s why perception is going to matter a lot in having a conference get more than 1 bid.
*8 conference games
*Late-season FCS game
*Make sure the top 4 teams rarely play each other, unless absolutely necessary (rivalry game)
What is this, about the 37th posting in this thread about a regents meeting with a vague agenda that could or could not apply to realignment? Consider me very skeptical.
Related to your final point do we see more anticipated big games during the 1st half of the season. That way the school that loses the game has a chance to go on a 5-6 game win streak to end the season.
If they don't make their CCG, the conference's talking heads can point to the team "being one of the hottest teams in CFB" and deserving to be one of the top 12 teams.
Thankfully, they do not have a majority voting bloc to get what they want here. Sure, they could threaten to split off if they don't get what they want. But giving into dropping the auto-bids would essentially do that anyways. But all leagues get a say in how this is setup.
True for the SEC and much less so for the B1G. They have the most money, most fans but they lack the same quality of football perception. The B1G has the most to gain from manipulating the process at this point.
A few quotes in here that seem to tap the brakes somewhat on UConn
Tramel's ScissorTales: Brett Yormark faces resistance on Big 12 adding Gonzaga, UConn
Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark is bullish on basketball, but he's receiving pushback on recruiting basketball schools Gonzaga & Connecticut
www.oklahoman.com
I won’t 100% disagree with you; however….
If Stanford is a Top 10 collegiate brand, they would already be in the Big Ten.
Totally agree. Without doing anything the big ten will always get two teams in a 12 team playoff and most years probably a third. If that isn’t enough for the conference then you could for sure see some other things happening. SEC will most likely also get 3/4 just depends on how the new teams shake things up for both conferences.
I think you are falling short.
IMO the Big10 & SEC feel they should get 3 of 4 teams in most years under the current 4 team playoff.
Once we move to 12 team playoff, I believe their thoughts are 9 combined teams. Why else would they add brands like USC, UT and OU. Schools like LSU, FL, TN and A&M had to be confident the ceiling got significantly higher for # of SEC teams getting bids.
Same goes for Big10 adding USC and leaving door open for OR/WA.
The CFP starting in 26 may be a driving force to add 4 teams instead of 2. Allows you to have a couple undefeated or 1 loss teams to keep them high enough in the rankings to get multiple bids.
Its a feature, not a bug.
SEC and to a lesser extent the B1G has had it figured out for years.
9 is too many. 6-7 is the amount I’m thinking for 12. Add in notre dame, Clemson, Oregon, and the big 12 best team and that gets you to 10/11 with one more team from another conference most years. The thing is adding those teams doesn’t mean you are going to get that many more bids. What it does is raise the floor for how many you get in if some of the other teams have down years. SEC should get 4 in most years with the new adds. Every once in awhile things will line up and they will get more but we have to see how the new additions fair first.
I wish the big ten did any of those things. The late season FCS matchup by the SEC is brilliant
I hadn’t thought about it much until now but I can imagine there will be pushback when teams ranked in the Top 10 don’t get in to the 12 team playoff while teams below them do get in just because of the conference they play in. Especially with teams like Oklahoma that will feel like they would have gotten in with their old schedule (USC to a certain extent will also feel this way, but they haven’t been routinely winning the Pac12 lately anyway).
I realize this happens already in basketball with the auto bids to lesser conferences that take away at large spots but when there are so few teams that get in and so much money at stake in football it’s going to drive quite a bit of discussion I’m sure.
Last edited:
If I’m being honest I’m also a bit jealous, but I’m sure the media deal would have to be less if they did that.
If I had to bet, I think all conferences (even the SEC) in the not-so-distant future are going to go to at least 10 conference games. I saw an article from Wilner the other day saying the Pac12 should do that to help goose up their media deal. It seems the media deals are really driven by a comparatively few number of games that get big viewership and an extra conference game helps increase the number of those.
I know schools love an extra guaranteed home game but with the way the TV money has exploded, at some point it’s going to dwarf the money in concessions and parking that you would have to give up so it’s not going to matter.
