CFP Discussion

[Northeast Stinger]

Aside from a brief historical blip known as the BCS, this has always been the process. Even in the BCS, it was a factor.

I hope the playoff is able to provide transparency and “fairness” but I’m not overly optimistic. Backroom handshakes seem to be engrained in the process.

Agree. But my point was akin to “players have always played without helmets” until one day people look back and marvel at “why?”

 

[stinger78]

I was hoping they wouldn’t do it but expected they would. It’s just The Narrative that sEcSPN pushes constantly, and they bankroll the playoff. Follow the money.

 

[Vespidae]

Obviously, and obviously obvious, that was absolutely obviously not going to happen.

I think back to prior to the selection process when I entertained briefly the idea that the SEC would get left out. Logic dictated that they would be but leaving them out has never been done. So then I wondered who the sacrificial goat would be. Naively I thought it might be Alabama, in spite of the outrage that would cause, because Georgia “deserved a shot” based on their past two national championship runs. Quickly decided the easier course would be to eliminate Texas since the committee sometimes arbitrarily discounts early season wins.

For some reason it never dawned on me that an undefeated major conference champion would get left out. I guess because they’ve never done that before. I was shocked when it turned out to be FSU.

There is a very dark cloud over the playoffs this year. The playoffs missed an opportunity for a great story line and lots of non FSU fans tend to watch them when on the national stage.

No matter how the playoffs turn out this controversy will not go away for a long time.

The Athletic reported that the SEC (not Alabama per se) was concerned about getting left out should Alabama win and lobbied hard 3-4 days prior to Saturday that an SEC team (either Georgia or Alabama) should be in the playoff. Having said that, it does not appear that it was a foregone conclusion as some suggest but rather a response to "What if ... Georgia loses?"

Sankey, SEC Commissioner, has long argued that the goal of the conferences (all of them) is to create the best TV matchups that result in higher ratings and that IF College Football can ultimately get the low, very low end of the NFL ... then, everyone can argue for more tv money in the future. Additionally, OutKick reported that overall NFL ratings are down from an average of 16.5 million viewers to 15.7 million. The Alabama - Georgia game had an 8.9 Rating and was watched by 17.5 million people. THAT is an NFL quality rating. No other game last Saturday came anyone close to that, with Michigan-Iowa coming in at 10 million and a 5.1 Rating. FSU-Louisville had a 3.8 Rating and 7.03 million viewers.

FWIW, and GTLorenzo got it right ... the NCAA does not recognize a national champion in FBS, unlike other sports. They punted that to the CFP. I glanced at the remit for the CFP and it doesn't say anything about selecting the four best teams in the country, but rather the four best teams for the "playoff". The playoff itself is a made for tv show that awards a CFP trophy. It doesn't say NCAA FBS Champion, but rather CFP Champion.

It really makes no difference who gets into the playoff. The money is already paid. It doesn't matter what the viewership is and moreover, the average viewership for FSU is on par with Georgia. The only thing that matters is the match up and can you sell the product to the public in a way to justify the tv contract with various conferences. Judging from the weekend's biggest games, the conference championships, the SEC whipped the ACC 15.7 to 3.8 Ratings and 17.5 million to 7.03 million viewers.

I'm indifferent to who got in. Conferences already know how much they are going to get for the playoff spots ($8 million) and the Jan 1 bowls (about $6 million). Divided amongst 16 teams ... it's a few hundred thousand. Not that much.

The real problem, imo, is that broadcast rights and producing product for distribution is the new business model for college sports. If you think it's about determining a "national FBS champion" ... it isn't. If anything, all this controversy does is encourage more people to watch the games to gin up the ratings. I will bet that the Georgia-FSU matchup will be the most heavily watched (and promoted) for that reason.

PS. I have heard that the whole concept of the CFP from Day One was to pit the SEC against the B1G for this very reason. The other two teams, ... no one involved cares. The ratings drive the TV money and everyone wins (financially).

 

[WreckinGT]

The Athletic reported that the SEC (not Alabama per se) was concerned about getting left out should Alabama win and lobbied hard 3-4 days prior to Saturday that an SEC team (either Georgia or Alabama) should be in the playoff. Having said that, it does not appear that it was a foregone conclusion as some suggest but rather a response to "What if ... Georgia loses?"

Sankey, SEC Commissioner, has long argued that the goal of the conferences (all of them) is to create the best TV matchups that result in higher ratings and that IF College Football can ultimately get the low, very low end of the NFL ... then, everyone can argue for more tv money in the future. Additionally, OutKick reported that overall NFL ratings are down from an average of 16.5 million viewers to 15.7 million. The Alabama - Georgia game had an 8.9 Rating and was watched by 17.5 million people. THAT is an NFL quality rating. No other game last Saturday came anyone close to that, with Michigan-Iowa coming in at 10 million and a 5.1 Rating. FSU-Louisville had a 3.8 Rating and 7.03 million viewers.

FWIW, and GTLorenzo got it right ... the NCAA does not recognize a national champion in FBS, unlike other sports. They punted that to the CFP. I glanced at the remit for the CFP and it doesn't say anything about selecting the four best teams in the country, but rather the four best teams for the "playoff". The playoff itself is a made for tv show that awards a CFP trophy. It doesn't say NCAA FBS Champion, but rather CFP Champion.

It really makes no difference who gets into the playoff. The money is already paid. It doesn't matter what the viewership is and moreover, the average viewership for FSU is on par with Georgia. The only thing that matters is the match up and can you sell the product to the public in a way to justify the tv contract with various conferences. Judging from the weekend's biggest games, the conference championships, the SEC whipped the ACC 15.7 to 3.8 Ratings and 17.5 million to 7.03 million viewers.

I'm indifferent to who got in. Conferences already know how much they are going to get for the playoff spots ($8 million) and the Jan 1 bowls (about $6 million). Divided amongst 16 teams ... it's a few hundred thousand. Not that much.

The real problem, imo, is that broadcast rights and producing product for distribution is the new business model for college sports. If you think it's about determining a "national FBS champion" ... it isn't. If anything, all this controversy does is encourage more people to watch the games to gin up the ratings. I will bet that the Georgia-FSU matchup will be the most heavily watched (and promoted) for that reason.

PS. I have heard that the whole concept of the CFP from Day One was to pit the SEC against the B1G for this very reason. The other two teams, ... no one involved cares. The ratings drive the TV money and everyone wins (financially).

It's worth noting as well that the SEC championship was basically unopposed in their TV slot. FSU/Louisville and Michigan/Iowa were on at the same time. I think all of the conference championship games had TV ratings boosted this year by a more interesting playoff scenario. I usually don't watch them at all and I was tuned in all day. It makes you wonder how this will be affected in a 12 team playoff. If the two teams in the SEC or Big 10 championship are already pretty much guaranteed to both be in the playoffs, will people still tune in at the same rate? Will the teams sit players, knowing they are already in the playoffs anyways, watering the game down even more?

 

[roadkill]

It's behind a paywall, but Stewart Mandel has one of the best takedowns of the CFP committee's decision logic that I've seen so far.

Mandel's mailbag: FSU, Texas and Bama, oh my! Why so many quarterbacks in the portal?

Along with CFP drama, the opening of the portal and the coaching carousel, NCAA President Charlie Baker dropped a bomb Tuesday.

theathletic.com

Some key points: After last weekend, Texas jumped 4 spots in their rankings after beating a 9-3 team that had lost to a pair of 6-6 teams. Meanwhile, FSU drops a spot after beating a 10-2 team. If anything, they should have left out Texas. Putting in Texas over FSU makes no sense objectively.

If the CFP's explanation is that they didn't think FSU was capable of winning the title, then the committee was doing its job wrong for the previous nine seasons. Cincinnati in 2021 and TCU in 2022 are the most recent examples. No one could have argued that they really thought those teams were capable of beating Bama or Georgia. But the committee included them because they had earned their opportunities.

 

[CEB]

Agree. But my point was akin to “players have always played without helmets” until one day people look back and marvel at “why?”

 

[Northeast Stinger]

The Athletic reported that the SEC (not Alabama per se) was concerned about getting left out should Alabama win and lobbied hard 3-4 days prior to Saturday that an SEC team (either Georgia or Alabama) should be in the playoff. Having said that, it does not appear that it was a foregone conclusion as some suggest but rather a response to "What if ... Georgia loses?"

Sankey, SEC Commissioner, has long argued that the goal of the conferences (all of them) is to create the best TV matchups that result in higher ratings and that IF College Football can ultimately get the low, very low end of the NFL ... then, everyone can argue for more tv money in the future. Additionally, OutKick reported that overall NFL ratings are down from an average of 16.5 million viewers to 15.7 million. The Alabama - Georgia game had an 8.9 Rating and was watched by 17.5 million people. THAT is an NFL quality rating. No other game last Saturday came anyone close to that, with Michigan-Iowa coming in at 10 million and a 5.1 Rating. FSU-Louisville had a 3.8 Rating and 7.03 million viewers.

FWIW, and GTLorenzo got it right ... the NCAA does not recognize a national champion in FBS, unlike other sports. They punted that to the CFP. I glanced at the remit for the CFP and it doesn't say anything about selecting the four best teams in the country, but rather the four best teams for the "playoff". The playoff itself is a made for tv show that awards a CFP trophy. It doesn't say NCAA FBS Champion, but rather CFP Champion.

It really makes no difference who gets into the playoff. The money is already paid. It doesn't matter what the viewership is and moreover, the average viewership for FSU is on par with Georgia. The only thing that matters is the match up and can you sell the product to the public in a way to justify the tv contract with various conferences. Judging from the weekend's biggest games, the conference championships, the SEC whipped the ACC 15.7 to 3.8 Ratings and 17.5 million to 7.03 million viewers.

I'm indifferent to who got in. Conferences already know how much they are going to get for the playoff spots ($8 million) and the Jan 1 bowls (about $6 million). Divided amongst 16 teams ... it's a few hundred thousand. Not that much.

The real problem, imo, is that broadcast rights and producing product for distribution is the new business model for college sports. If you think it's about determining a "national FBS champion" ... it isn't. If anything, all this controversy does is encourage more people to watch the games to gin up the ratings. I will bet that the Georgia-FSU matchup will be the most heavily watched (and promoted) for that reason.

PS. I have heard that the whole concept of the CFP from Day One was to pit the SEC against the B1G for this very reason. The other two teams, ... no one involved cares. The ratings drive the TV money and everyone wins (financially).

Good analysis.

I think the CFP has both shrewd and coy about both how they word things and how they market things. Georgia vs Alabama was heavily watched for one main reason. Georgia was promoted as the team that had won the national championship two years in a row and this game would determine whether or not Georgia was a threepeat. The CFP was very happy with everyone assuming that the playoff determines national championships and whoever doesn’t get in doesn’t have a chance. That thinking is pretty locked in by now.

The thing about NFL numbers is that they have good numbers to put up week after week. College numbers rarely come close unless there is a good story line with two popular teams and a lot on the line. It’s kind of a shame that college football rights are increasingly going to hinge on the rare unicorn sighting.

 

[GoldZ]

The Athletic reported that the SEC (not Alabama per se) was concerned about getting left out should Alabama win and lobbied hard 3-4 days prior to Saturday that an SEC team (either Georgia or Alabama) should be in the playoff. Having said that, it does not appear that it was a foregone conclusion as some suggest but rather a response to "What if ... Georgia loses?"

Sankey, SEC Commissioner, has long argued that the goal of the conferences (all of them) is to create the best TV matchups that result in higher ratings and that IF College Football can ultimately get the low, very low end of the NFL ... then, everyone can argue for more tv money in the future. Additionally, OutKick reported that overall NFL ratings are down from an average of 16.5 million viewers to 15.7 million. The Alabama - Georgia game had an 8.9 Rating and was watched by 17.5 million people. THAT is an NFL quality rating. No other game last Saturday came anyone close to that, with Michigan-Iowa coming in at 10 million and a 5.1 Rating. FSU-Louisville had a 3.8 Rating and 7.03 million viewers.

FWIW, and GTLorenzo got it right ... the NCAA does not recognize a national champion in FBS, unlike other sports. They punted that to the CFP. I glanced at the remit for the CFP and it doesn't say anything about selecting the four best teams in the country, but rather the four best teams for the "playoff". The playoff itself is a made for tv show that awards a CFP trophy. It doesn't say NCAA FBS Champion, but rather CFP Champion.

It really makes no difference who gets into the playoff. The money is already paid. It doesn't matter what the viewership is and moreover, the average viewership for FSU is on par with Georgia. The only thing that matters is the match up and can you sell the product to the public in a way to justify the tv contract with various conferences. Judging from the weekend's biggest games, the conference championships, the SEC whipped the ACC 15.7 to 3.8 Ratings and 17.5 million to 7.03 million viewers.

I'm indifferent to who got in. Conferences already know how much they are going to get for the playoff spots ($8 million) and the Jan 1 bowls (about $6 million). Divided amongst 16 teams ... it's a few hundred thousand. Not that much.

The real problem, imo, is that broadcast rights and producing product for distribution is the new business model for college sports. If you think it's about determining a "national FBS champion" ... it isn't. If anything, all this controversy does is encourage more people to watch the games to gin up the ratings. I will bet that the Georgia-FSU matchup will be the most heavily watched (and promoted) for that reason.

PS. I have heard that the whole concept of the CFP from Day One was to pit the SEC against the B1G for this very reason. The other two teams, ... no one involved cares. The ratings drive the TV money and everyone wins (financially).

Makes no difference!? Tell that to the fans, players, and coaches. I get the viewership/$ angle, but it sucks. Now, what does an ACC coach tell his players they are playing for next year? Something that goes like: Ok guys, go out there and play your hardest....but don't get hurt, because even if we win, we still can't be champions, because we aren't in the sec. And yes, I realize it's more teams next year, but nos. 5-12 can still get the shaft, especially when there are 6 sec teams or 8 sec/B10 in the damn thing. Maybe the coaches can tell the players they are playing for a bye...yeah that will work huh.
It's going to be very difficult to not define the players as employees with the viewership/$ approach. If it comes to that, then except for the under 40 crowd, cFB is dead for the rest of us at least as we knew it.

 

[Randy Carson]

Who's the motivated team?

Georgia beating FSU proves nothing. So what? You still lost to Bama.

FSU beating Georgia: "See? We belonged, and we are STILL undefeated."

Problem is, I'm not sure FSU wins this game.

 

[Root4GT]

I'm just not seeing FSU beating Georgia.

I'd love to be wrong, of course.

This game is very depends on who opts out for both teams and how motivated either team is to play the game. Both think they should be in the CFP.

 

[Randy Carson]

This game is very depends on who opts out for both teams and how motivated either team is to play the game. Both think they should be in the CFP.

Yep. I was editing along those lines while you were replying. See above.

 

[jackets55]

It's worth noting as well that the SEC championship was basically unopposed in their TV slot. FSU/Louisville and Michigan/Iowa were on at the same time. I think all of the conference championship games had TV ratings boosted this year by a more interesting playoff scenario. I usually don't watch them at all and I was tuned in all day. It makes you wonder how this will be affected in a 12 team playoff. If the two teams in the SEC or Big 10 championship are already pretty much guaranteed to both be in the playoffs, will people still tune in at the same rate? Will the teams sit players, knowing they are already in the playoffs anyways, watering the game down even more?

It is a very good point that the GA-Alabama game had little or no competition at 4 pm. The other games were SMU-Tulane (rating of 1), Boise-UNLV (.7), Troy-App state (.2) and FAMU vs Prarie View (.06). With the Big I and ACC playing at the same time, the combined rating was 8.9 the same as the SEC. I also would submit that the Big I championship game was the previous week between OSU and Michigan which got a rating of 9 with 19 million viewers. If our hopes of getting an invite are based on eyeballs and not performance on the field, we will never get one.

 

[Bogey]

Packer made a very good point on ACC PM. After FSU beat Florida the week before the ACC Championship, the Committee still had then in the playoff. So going into the ACC Championship game they were absolutely good for the playoffs. And then they beat a top 15 team with a 10-2 record in that game with a third string QB who would not even be starting in the playoffs because the QB that beat Florida would be ready and fully prepared to play after his concussion protocol was completed. So anyone with any common sense would expect FSU to be in the playoffs. But no, on Sunday the Committee changed their previous ruling of FSU being rated in the too 4, moved FSU to number 5 and basing it on the poor play of the freshman QB who would become the backup QB in the playoffs. It is clear to me that the committee was most probably lobbied and/or bribed to change their vote, probably by ESPN since they own the playoff television rights and are benefited by having the most attractive match ups rather than the most deserving teams based on the criteria of the last 9 years and the field of play.

 

[Vespidae]

Makes no difference!? Tell that to the fans, players, and coaches. I get the viewership/$ angle, but it sucks. Now, what does an ACC coach tell his players they are playing for next year? Something that goes like: Ok guys, go out there and play your hardest....but don't get hurt, because even if we win, we still can't be champions, because we aren't in the sec. And yes, I realize it's more teams next year, but nos. 5-12 can still get the shaft, especially when there are 6 sec teams or 8 sec/B10 in the damn thing. Maybe the coaches can tell the players they are playing for a bye...yeah that will work huh.
It's going to be very difficult to not define the players as employees with the viewership/$ approach. If it comes to that, then except for the under 40 crowd, cFB is dead for the rest of us at least as we knew it.

It makes no difference to the money. Obviously fans and athletes will be disappointed but … if what I posted is accurate (and I’m not privy to the inner workings of the CFP), the CFP sold a narrative of a “national championship“, when in fact, no such thing exists.

 

[bobongo]

Packer made a very good point on ACC PM. After FSU beat Florida the week before the ACC Championship, the Committee still had then in the playoff. So going into the ACC Championship game they were absolutely good for the playoffs. And then they beat a top 15 team with a 10-2 record in that game with a third string QB who would not even be starting in the playoffs because the QB that beat Florida would be ready and fully prepared to play after his concussion protocol was completed. So anyone with any common sense would expect FSU to be in the playoffs. But no, on Sunday the Committee changed their previous ruling of FSU being rated in the too 4, moved FSU to number 5 and basing it on the poor play of the freshman QB who would become the backup QB in the playoffs. It is clear to me that the committee was most probably lobbied and/or bribed to change their vote, probably by ESPN since they own the playoff television rights and are benefited by having the most attractive match ups rather than the most deserving teams based on the criteria of the last 9 years and the field of play.

No way around that. I would call that the smoking gun.

They were in the top four after Florida and before the conference championship game with the same QB expected to start in the playoffs.
Then won with their third string QB, and by a contortion of logic the committee somehow used that against them.

 

[stinger78]

Packer made a very good point on ACC PM. After FSU beat Florida the week before the ACC Championship, the Committee still had then in the playoff. So going into the ACC Championship game they were absolutely good for the playoffs. And then they beat a top 15 team with a 10-2 record in that game with a third string QB who would not even be starting in the playoffs because the QB that beat Florida would be ready and fully prepared to play after his concussion protocol was completed. So anyone with any common sense would expect FSU to be in the playoffs. But no, on Sunday the Committee changed their previous ruling of FSU being rated in the too 4, moved FSU to number 5 and basing it on the poor play of the freshman QB who would become the backup QB in the playoffs. It is clear to me that the committee was most probably lobbied and/or bribed to change their vote, probably by ESPN since they own the playoff television rights and are benefited by having the most attractive match ups rather than the most deserving teams based on the criteria of the last 9 years and the field of play.

I think this is exactly what happened. Hey, it’s sEcSPN’s party. They can invite who they want. We can also consider the NC game the Orange Bowl, not the CFP.

 

[TooTall]

Just read where espn is producing a schedule reveal for the $ec on the $ec network. 2 hours long.

But yeah f$u is left out because of an injury.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I have no idea if someone I'm ignoring has already pointed this out, but the CFP this year is two B1G teams against 2 $EC teams. Next year Washington is in the B1G and Texas is in the $EC. So, it all kind of makes sense.

 

[roadkill]

No way around that. I would call that the smoking gun.

They were in the top four after Florida and before the conference championship game with the same QB expected to start in the playoffs.
Then won with their third string QB, and by a contortion of logic the committee somehow used that against them.

I hope the proposed lawsuit has legs and we get to see what the committee members say under oath when they are deposed. It will either reveal the conspiracy or reveal the stupidity of their logic.

 

[slugboy]

It makes no difference to the money. Obviously fans and athletes will be disappointed but … if what I posted is accurate (and I’m not privy to the inner workings of the CFP), the CFP sold a narrative of a “national championship“, when in fact, no such thing exists.

If I read this correctly, this costs the ACC $6 million

If FSU goes to the semifinals, then Louisville goes to the Orange Bowl. That’s $6 million for the semifinals and $4 million for the Orange Bowl

With FSU going to the Orange Bowl, the ACC just gets $4 million

The publicity and other effects are bigger—the ACC is cast as little league

College Football Playoff Payouts

How much do teams make for the College Football Playoff? We've got the 2023-24 revenue distribution plan plus payouts from past years.

businessofcollegesports.com