Fan Nation
Forums
Forum list
Search forums
Rules & Policies
Podcast
Mobile App
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Shop
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
Playoff Expansion seems inevitable, my money was not on 12 teams
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jared7" data-source="post: 3018303" data-attributes="member: 7831"><p>The proposed new structure is obviously beneficial to TCU for a wide variety of reasons. TCU would have qualified 8 out of the last 25 seasons under this system but qualified instead for <strong>zero</strong> under the BCS and the current 4-team invitational system. 5 of those were because we were the highest ranked non-BCS/non-AQ/G5 team (2000, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2011) and 3 because we would have been at large selections (2008, 2014, 2015). In addition, the proposed system guarantees the Big12 champ a bid whereas, as 2014 demonstrated, the current system does not (unless your name is Oklahoma, or in theory, Texas). To make the playoffs, we would either have to win the Big 12 or finish in the Top 11-12. This is an undeniable massive change.</p><p></p><p>Financially, it will also benefit all Big 12 schools. The Wilner article projects that the payouts for each of the 6 units will be $333 million per year, which, divided by 10 Big 12 schools, will mean $33.3 million per year. 14-team conferences like the SEC/Big10/ACC will also earn $333 million, but divided by 14, that is $23.6 million. Unless the distribution formula is changed, that means that each Big 12 school will be making $10 million per year more than each 14-team conference school from the new system.</p><p></p><p> But that's just the "conference payout" portion of the formula. In addition, the P5 conferences earn money because of their "contract bowls." That is, Big 12 schools earn about $6 million per year from the conference payout portion and about $3 million (it varies per big bowl and because in some years, that bowl is part of the playoff) for a total of $9 million per year. We don't know for sure how the bowls will be included as yet, but the contract bowl portion will almost certainly remain in the formula in some form. We'll see. But that's even more money (also divided by 10 as compared to 14).</p><p></p><p>Access-wise and money-wise, it will be a windfall for everyone, but especially for the Big 12, who has been left out of 3 CFP's. Now, the champ is a lock, the 2nd place team has a good chance and it's conceivable that there could be a 3rd. The 9-game schedule plus a CCG that is a re-match militates against both a 2nd and 3rd team (the 2nd team will "probably" have at least 2 losses), but that's not a function of the proposed system but the Big 12's rules. The benefits are undeniable. Did some, perhaps, benefit more? Maybe. But that's a different argument than that there is no benefit at all.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jared7, post: 3018303, member: 7831"] The proposed new structure is obviously beneficial to TCU for a wide variety of reasons. TCU would have qualified 8 out of the last 25 seasons under this system but qualified instead for [B]zero[/B] under the BCS and the current 4-team invitational system. 5 of those were because we were the highest ranked non-BCS/non-AQ/G5 team (2000, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2011) and 3 because we would have been at large selections (2008, 2014, 2015). In addition, the proposed system guarantees the Big12 champ a bid whereas, as 2014 demonstrated, the current system does not (unless your name is Oklahoma, or in theory, Texas). To make the playoffs, we would either have to win the Big 12 or finish in the Top 11-12. This is an undeniable massive change. Financially, it will also benefit all Big 12 schools. The Wilner article projects that the payouts for each of the 6 units will be $333 million per year, which, divided by 10 Big 12 schools, will mean $33.3 million per year. 14-team conferences like the SEC/Big10/ACC will also earn $333 million, but divided by 14, that is $23.6 million. Unless the distribution formula is changed, that means that each Big 12 school will be making $10 million per year more than each 14-team conference school from the new system. But that's just the "conference payout" portion of the formula. In addition, the P5 conferences earn money because of their "contract bowls." That is, Big 12 schools earn about $6 million per year from the conference payout portion and about $3 million (it varies per big bowl and because in some years, that bowl is part of the playoff) for a total of $9 million per year. We don't know for sure how the bowls will be included as yet, but the contract bowl portion will almost certainly remain in the formula in some form. We'll see. But that's even more money (also divided by 10 as compared to 14). Access-wise and money-wise, it will be a windfall for everyone, but especially for the Big 12, who has been left out of 3 CFP's. Now, the champ is a lock, the 2nd place team has a good chance and it's conceivable that there could be a 3rd. The 9-game schedule plus a CCG that is a re-match militates against both a 2nd and 3rd team (the 2nd team will "probably" have at least 2 losses), but that's not a function of the proposed system but the Big 12's rules. The benefits are undeniable. Did some, perhaps, benefit more? Maybe. But that's a different argument than that there is no benefit at all. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Which team did TCU defeat in the College Football Playoffs?
Post reply
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
Playoff Expansion seems inevitable, my money was not on 12 teams
Top