- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ND AD Swarbrick: "There’s Still One Chapter To Come..." (Re: Conf. Realignment).
Posted on 4/22/12 at 7:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 4/22/12 at 7:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the NCAA has little say in this decision this decision will be made by the people who matter: heads of big schools/conferences
Very true. That is why I think the 6+2 will probably happen. Those conferences want their ticket to the show.
1
Posted on 4/22/12 at 8:48 pm to arwicklu
You're forgetting they want to keep the bowls too. The conference commissioners want their good ole boy, ex-commissioner friends running the big bowls to get their money too.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 8:54 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
I hope its a 6 team nfl style format
Posted on 4/22/12 at 8:57 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
You're forgetting they want to keep the bowls too. The conference commissioners want their good ole boy, ex-commissioner friends running the big bowls to get their money too.
That does complicate things. I really think you'd have to do the 8 teams spread out in the Orange, Fiesta, Sugar, and Rose Bowl. You'd then have two additional weeks of games. I'm just not certain how well that would work. It would be pretty hard for people to travel to neutral sites for that many games.
The school hosting the first round would make a lot of sense for the higher seeded team but then you're putting trash in the current BCS Bowls.
It is a tricky one.
Posted on 4/22/12 at 9:40 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
You're forgetting they want to keep the bowls too. The conference commissioners want their good ole boy, ex-commissioner friends running the big bowls to get their money too.
That would be one of the easier aspects to work out. The major bowls would get to host the playoff games, and maybe even get the top teams not in the playoffs. Basically a double hosting system.
For example, the B(C)S bowls and the Cotton rotate the five playoff games. They also host their regular bowls, with the top SEC team not in the playoff going to the Sugar, the top B1G and Pac-12 teams going to the Rose, etc. The bowls that would get squeezed out would be the Meineke Car Care Bowl or the Papajohns.com Bowl.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 1:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SOUNDS like an 8-team playoff with 6 BCS conferences getting in their champ with 2 AL spots
that would force ND's hand, imho
I see two scenarios playing out if that is the case.
Scenario 1 The BIG 10 goes after ND and Rutgers and probably Kansas and KSU. The ACC goes after WVU, UCONN, Louisville, and another Big East team. The SEC goes after two ACC schools (FSU, Clemson, NC State, VT). The PAC goes after Texas, TTU, OU, and OSU.
Scenario 2. ND and Lousiville join the Big 12 and everyone else stays put. This makes the most sense IMO. ND works a tv deal similar to Texas and Louisville escapes the Big East.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 3:57 am to big Tiger 1885
quote:
Scenario 1 The BIG 10 goes after ND and Rutgers and probably Kansas and KSU. The ACC goes after WVU, UCONN, Louisville, and another Big East team. The SEC goes after two ACC schools (FSU, Clemson, NC State, VT). The PAC goes after Texas, TTU, OU, and OSU.
Never happen
Posted on 4/23/12 at 8:07 am to RandyVandy
dont really see what adding kansas or ksu does for the B1G...
Posted on 4/23/12 at 8:08 am to arwicklu
quote:
The school hosting the first round
i seriously doubt hosting is an option. too much money for the "haves" (aka home teams)
Posted on 4/23/12 at 8:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i seriously doubt hosting is an option. too much money for the "haves" (aka home teams
You say this all the time, like its some insurmountable obstacle. Its pretty easy to come up with a plan to split the playoff revenue.
This post was edited on 4/23/12 at 8:42 am
Posted on 4/23/12 at 8:46 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
You say this all the time, like its some insurmountable obstacle. Its pretty easy to come up with a plan to split the playoff revenue.
Most likely you'd have the playoff pot divided among the conferences and they'd decide how to divide among the teams.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 8:49 am to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Most likely you'd have the playoff pot divided among the conferences and they'd decide how to divide among the teams.
Exactly, it will be decided before hand. If you do 8 teams, 3 neutral sites would be a bit much so I'd think you'd need to play of campus. SFP is right that playoffs would mean even more money for the big conferences but it wouldn't be a problem to have games on campus because they can't figure out how to split the money.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 1:15 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
6 with 1 and 2 getting a bye.
That's 5 total games for a national title .... Keeping the bowls rotating with one hosting the national title as well.
This is what needs to happen.
5 BCS games stay where they are as do the rest of the bowls.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 10:06 am to TheCaterpillar
OP updated...
Posted on 4/24/12 at 10:48 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Exactly, it will be decided before hand.
the pot? sure
but that will be a tough negotiation, regardless
the individual home game revenue will be a different (and much tougher) negotiation, imho
it will be seen as a reward for the home team. a financial windfall that i doubt the home team would want to share with its opponent. the accounting alone would be impossible. you couldn't split it on revenue, b/c of the operational costs of using the stadium. if it's split on profits, then we're going to see a lot of "hollywood accounting." there is no incentive for that to not occur
Posted on 4/24/12 at 10:57 am to rocket31
This only came up because one conference started kicking everyone else's arse and started getting more money and glory.
This would never had come up if the SEC hadn't won 6 in a row.
This would never had come up if the SEC hadn't won 6 in a row.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 10:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the pot? sure
but that will be a tough negotiation, regardless
the individual home game revenue will be a different (and much tougher) negotiation, imho
I don't see why that wouldn't be done before hand.
quote:
. if it's split on profits, then we're going to see a lot of "hollywood accounting." there is no incentive for that to not occur
We are not talking about 10's of millions of dollars. What's a home game for LSU generate? 3 Million? Maybe 4-5 at most? Sure there might be some fudging, how much is that going to account for? They could also have outsider auditors if its that big of a deal. You can get a pretty good estimate of revenue a home team gets and split it 60-40. TV money will dwarf that anyway.
I will never understand why people think something they oppose has to be 100% foolproof or it will never work. Teams fudging a few hundred grand is not a deal breaker.
This post was edited on 4/24/12 at 11:03 am
Posted on 4/24/12 at 11:01 am to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
This only came up because one conference started kicking everyone else's arse and started getting more money and glory.
The B1G makes more money over all than the SEC. All the conferences with 2 teams in the BCS made the same regardless of the game they were in.
quote:
This would never had come up if the SEC hadn't won 6 in a row.
Maybe having 2 SEC teams in the BCS CG pushed it a little, but there has been talk about various 4 team playoffs for years, the BCS contracts are up after 2013, so the negotiations would have happened anyway.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 11:11 am to H-Town Tiger
Giving 1 and 2 a bye would keep the value of the regular season as well.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 11:12 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
The B1G makes more money over all than the SEC. All the conferences with 2 teams in the BCS made the same regardless of the game they were in.
Wouldn't you think championship merchandise sales (and other revenues associated with winning national titles) would need to be included in such money talk?
And not just flat BCS payouts? I am aware the B1G makes a lot, but it also has a shite ton more people in their states.
This post was edited on 4/24/12 at 11:13 am
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News