Toggle sidebar

interesting article on CFB future

M

mpbrown27

Junior
May 17, 2006
3,333
303
0
Very interesting article. I was pleased to see Nebraska included as one of the 24 teams in the "College Football Playoff Confederation".

I think all the conference expansion and mega-TV deals is a bubble waiting to burst. As the writer puts it, "Whereas the last round of realignment was driven by inventory -- bundle together as many schools from as many markets as possible to command the highest possible subscriber fees -- the next round will be more about content."
 
T

TheLiberalHunter

Junior
Jan 22, 2016
470
270
0
I really wouldn't have too much of an issue with this, purely from a Fan's view.

I have always thought the absolute best method, to be inclusive for our "L" friends" would be to have 8 16 team Conferences(or whatever # of teams), each with 2 divisions. The ONLY thing that "matters" is that you win your Division and then your Conference for an automatic bid to the playoff. That would allow for Non Conference games to be against whomever you wanted as they would have no effect on the playoff qualifying. That way we could see far more marquee matchups early on.

This keeps ALL fans involved and the gamblers get their occasional Cinderfellas.

Too much is determined on that big upset loss and how do you recover from it, which I find stupid.
 
T

TheBeav815

All-American
Feb 19, 2007
18,955
5,101
0
Expanded playoff is inevitable. The money is too good for them not to do it. 8 teams doesn't feel like quite enough, but 16 feels like too many.

I see what they're saying about the possibility of single-purchase games or networks killing bundled cable, but that won't lead to a scheduling arms race because the counterbalance is that if you play too many bigtime opponents, you'll lose too many games to make the playoff. I don't care who you put in a conference together, there can only be one or two teams that make it through with few enough losses to make noise in the postseason.
 
H

HuskerO58

All-Conference
Sep 11, 2006
13,463
1,707
113
16 teams to me would water down the regular season too much.
I guess I could live with 8 teams, but only if those teams are ranked in the Top 8. No automatic conference winner playoff bids.
At least with 4 (it should always stay this way in my opinion) the regular still means a lot.
 
M

mpbrown27

Junior
May 17, 2006
3,333
303
0
TheBeav815 said:
Expanded playoff is inevitable. The money is too good for them not to do it. 8 teams doesn't feel like quite enough, but 16 feels like too many.

I see what they're saying about the possibility of single-purchase games or networks killing bundled cable, but that won't lead to a scheduling arms race because the counterbalance is that if you play too many bigtime opponents, you'll lose too many games to make the playoff. I don't care who you put in a conference together, there can only be one or two teams that make it through with few enough losses to make noise in the postseason.
Click to expand...

The article proposed a "College Football Playoff Confederation", which contains only what they consider to be big-time opponents. If you are a part of this conference then you would have no choice but to play tough competition every week. The old model of the schools jockeying for the most favorable schedules would be over.

As cable companies lose their grip on customers with bundled packages, college football will respond with these marquee match-ups - less quantity, more quality. In other words, the article is saying that when the people actually have a choice, they will not pay for Nebraska vs. Iowa (outside of local regions), but they'll pay for Nebraska vs. Michigan. So the aim is to give them that quality every week. The next conference realignments will reflect that. The schools won't have a choice.
 
T

TheBeav815

All-American
Feb 19, 2007
18,955
5,101
0
mpbrown27 said:
The article proposed a "College Football Playoff Confederation", which contains only what they consider to be big-time opponents. If you are a part of this conference then you would have no choice but to play tough competition every week. The old model of the schools jockeying for the most favorable schedules would be over.

As cable companies lose their grip on customers with bundled packages, college football will respond with these marquee match-ups - less quantity, more quality. In other words, the article is saying that when the people actually have a choice, they will not pay for Nebraska vs. Iowa (outside of local regions), but they'll pay for Nebraska vs. Michigan. So the aim is to give them that quality every week. The next conference realignments will reflect that. The schools won't have a choice.
Click to expand...
I get what they're saying. My thing is that I don't believe we'll see the games go to a full pay-per-view model like that. Until any major provider fires the first shot in offering networks ala carte, even that is just a pipe dream.

Maybe in another 10 years the internet infrastructure will have come far enough for networks like ESPN to break away from cable providers and offer themselves direct-to-consumer, but even now there are a lot of viewers who have TV service but not fast enough internet service to stream a game, let alone multiple games simultaneously.
 
H

huskerfan1414

Heisman
Oct 25, 2014
12,603
12,739
0
I hate the thought of an 8 team playoff or more, but as others have said it's going to happen. They knew it when they started with 4 as a promise to the traditionalists that it would not ruin the regular season. 8 teams definitely will, and there's something else that bothers me. People thought the playoff was a great idea because we'd get the "top 2" teams, but that's impossible as there will always be debate as to who the top 4 are. That will only continue with 8.
Admitting that there is no perfect system and there will always be debate and conspiracy will help us make wiser decisions. It needs to stay at 4, but it won't. The bowls and regular seasons are and will continue to suffer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuskerO58
H

HuskerO58

All-Conference
Sep 11, 2006
13,463
1,707
113
Charlie Marlow said:
I think the playoff should be 8. Take the champ from each power 5 plus 3 at-larges. No more than 2 teams/conference to eliminate any $EC bias.
Click to expand...
See I think that's where the problem lies. This is about the best 8 teams to find the best team. If 3 or 4 teams come from the SEC (or any other conference) are in the top 8 then they should be in the playoff.

If the top rated Big 12 (or any other conference) team is ranked #10 then they shouldn't get in playoffs over a top 8 SEC school who is ranked 2nd or 3rd in a stacked conference.

Plus an 8 team playoff creates more of an opportunity for multiple SEC schools being in the playoff than a 4 team playoff.
 
Last edited:
C

cmoncraig1066

All-Conference
Jan 21, 2003
6,772
2,616
63
Playoff wise, I'd love to see 4 different 16 team conferences (I'd guess variations on the SEC, BIG, ACC and PAC 12). Split each into 2 divisions, each division winner makes up the 8 team playoff. No committee, no polls needed, win and you are in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan1414
T

TruHusker

All-Conference
Sep 21, 2001
11,959
2,213
98
You could be the fourth or fifth best team in your conference/division and still be the fourth or fifth best in the Nation. The schedules would be brutal. If you start out as one of the teams on the outside looking in, how do you get inside with the big boys? Looks to me like they assume those that have had "it" will continue to do so. In our case, I feel like it is a certain amount of respect for our past, certainly not our recent present.

Don't know how I feel about going to 8 team playoff or more. Seems like it would drag things out forever each year. The bowls have lost their luster for sure. I am one who actually thinks they have done a fair job of getting the top teams right. I also think no matter how many you let in, there will always be arguments for letting in more or who missed the cut.

Another thing, with the schedules that proposed alignment would give us and the increased number of games with a multiple team playoff, you better have some serious depth. It will be killer on the kids from week to week. I can't imagine the pressure, stress of getting up each and every week and keeping up with studies.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan1414
N

nebcountry

Senior
Oct 29, 2013
1,878
801
0
Seems like there would be quite a few hurdles.

Notre Dame and Texas might not want equal revenue sharing, maybe the B1G or SEC teams might have a problem with it as well.

How would an equality conference like the B1G vote internally to allow 6 teams to effectively leave the conference for football only, and allow those 6 teams to keep the revenue from football. Would the current conferences fold, athletic programs fold in the non confederation group without football revenue to buoy them up?

It would definitely change the face of cfb maybe college athletics as a whole. The article talked about paying the players. Salary caps? Scouting combines? Drafts and draft sequencing? What would come next?
 
N

Nebraska Fan

Senior
Sep 1, 2004
5,612
456
0
huskerfan1414 said:
http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...10-years-alabama-ohio-state-notre-dame-051616

Interesting take on future possibilities. Wild, but plausible.
I do believe the playoffs will change college football for the worse and I was pretty much against it.
Click to expand...
It will be interesting for sure. by 2023 the baby boomers will be irrelevant, gen-x and gen-y will be spenders but the millennials will be the big market and nobody has figured them out to date. Commercials pay the tab and the way they multitask I don't think commercials reach them via television.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom