Money on the table

So Dennis Dodd is reporting that ESPN’s offer to broadcast the new playoffs is well in excess of what the conferences were initially expecting.  But there’s still a problem.

The price point, though, is less of an issue at this point than the structure. CBSSports.com reported this week that the Big 12 and Pac-12 each want access to another bowl slot. Both conferences currently have only one bowl in the playoff structure. The SEC and Big Ten each have two.

As a way to get that access, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott are advocating establishing another contract bowl with their conferences participating against a team from the so-called Group of Five (MAC, Sun Belt, Big East, Mountain West, Conference USA).

However, multiple sources have said the market won’t support the addition of a seventh playoff bowl. Scott and Bowlsby are reportedly also in support of their game being played within the current six-bowl structure. Big East commissioner Mike Aresco says he still believes a seventh bowl is possible.

Damned market.  There is, however, more than one way to skin the proverbial cat.  Particularly if you’re shortsighted and greedy.  And if the last round of negotiations over the expansion of the basketball tourney tells you anything, it’s that these guys are shortsighted and greedy.

In other words, it’s even money on the football playoff field being expanded before the end of the term of the new broadcast contract is reached.

32 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs, It's Just Bidness

32 responses to “Money on the table

  1. timphd

    Playoff creep. I hate the idea. I can live with 4 teams but more than that is a travesty in my opinion. I really don’t want a team with two or three loses having a shot at the title. I also don’t want Richt to be able to pull his starters against Abuurn because he knows he is guaranteed a spot in the playoffs win or lose. If (probably when) we get to an 8 or 16 team field, both can happen and I would frankly hate it.

    • I would hate it too. A team with 3 losses should have no place in this.

      • Who cares if a team has two or through loses the idea is who is the best team at the end of the year. Look at Green Bay in NFL when they won as a Wild Card. They lost games but at the end of year they turn hot and won the Supper Bowl. We need at least 10 – 15 team play off considering there are around 100 teams in D1 football. The best team will win it does not matter what conference there in.

        • /not sure if serious…

        • timphd

          Thats exactly the scenario i dont want to see, some team with a mediocre season gets hot at the end and wins the NC with no resume. I want the playoffs left to those teams who took care of their regular season. Otherwise we have the NFL model where teams use the regular season to set up a playoff run. I want the game against Tech to matter unlike what happens if UGA were 11and 0 going into the game and assured of a playoff spot. I want every game to be a playoff.

          • Chris

            NCAA Div I Football is the only sport in America that rewards a team for it’s resume, rather than it’s year end production. We can all make up rhetorical situations to suit our argument, but I’m on the side that the best teams on week 14 should be playing rather than teams with the best records.

            I just don’t understand the argument that a reasonable playoff structure (no more than 8 teams), would devalue the regular season. Being in the top 4 or 8 in the country would mean you were the top 3% and 6% of all teams, respectively, and that’s no cakewalk. Seeding and possible top 2 first round BYEs would deter teams from sitting players in non-crucial end year games, which would be few and far between anyway. Plus, who doesn’t like a Cindarella ala 2007 Boise vs OU Fiesta Bowl that would have actually meant something!

            Now, on the Senator’s point, it may be near impossible to get a “reasonable” playoff structure in place as long as the NCAA is running things.

        • Dawgfan Will

          /vomits

        • The Lone Stranger

          / hopes not serious!

  2. gastr1

    Playoff creep before the playoff even begin!
    What a country. :)

  3. paul

    So, while many of us here figured it wouldn’t take long for the whole playoff scenario to metastisize into something far larger than four teams and three games, I don’t think any of us anticpated it would happen before the system even got off the ground. It ain’t creep. It’s bloat. Already.

    • gastr1

      “Damned market.” Too much money floating around for folks to not want to grab some of the pie.

      It’s the American Way, ya’ll.

  4. Cojones

    When you set it up to creep (buzzword for slippery slope) in the first place,…duh!!-it’s going to “creep”. A preferable term would be “inevitable expansion” to a more relevant number.

    Hit the most representative number for teams representing the best teams in the land in the first place and the need for “creep” goes to the vanishing point. Eight teams is the most representative number and should include the top ranked 8 teams in the BCS. Purposefully placing the number to 4 teams selected to replace 2 teams selected leaves us with the same problem of ESPN jury rigging as to who goes, whereas, with 8 teams , that’s a lot tougher number to manipulate plus no plausible reasoning to go further.

  5. Russ

    I’ll be surprised if they don’t add games BEFORE we even get to the new playoff system in 2014.

  6. What fresh hell is this?

    I was sure this article was going to be an explanation of why Auburn continues to be able to recruit top talent.

  7. David

    ESPN could seriously turn into a pay channel as well like HBO, etc. They know we’ll pay it.

    • paul

      They already are a pay channel. Why do you think your cable bill is so high? Cable providers pay far, far more to broadcast ESPN than any other channel. The only reason we don’t pay separately is that there’s no nudity or cussing.

  8. PNWDawg

    As much of a proponent I’ve been for playoffs I’m finding myself in the careful what you wish for camp. But I guess when we get to the inevitable 64-team playoff I can console myself with legal weed out here in WA.

    • What a wonderful comfort. That’s never gonna happen in Georgia. Dammit!

      • PNWDawg

        I should qualify the whole consolation comment as a joke since I made a comment to the contrary in another post. But I support it being legal.

        • I saw that. I believe Pot is wonderful medicine. What is from the earth is of the greatest worth. I do not believe anyone under 21 should use, because just like alcohol, weed is too much for them to handle. Until we make it legal, it will be easily had by the under 21 group and that is not good for this country.

          • Exiled in TX

            I find that to be a very immature comment rife with ignorance. Suffice it to say this is a UGA football blog so I will not get into a debate here with you, but know one person disagrees with you.

            Joyridingdawg I’ve enojyed your football comments in the past. Let’s get back to fundamentals people.

    • AthensHomerDawg

      I don’t think the Feds have signed off on that have they?