That's the normal use of "off in the weeds."

He's from Minnesota and says some odd things from time to time. It was implied that this is close to happening and could be announced as soon as this football season. He was cryptic about it like he normally is but he says he's that way so he doesn't burn his sources. So my take on it is the Big 12 is pretty far along with this and mostly likely one or more G5 conference(s) are as well. It probably cannot be implemented until 2026 at the earliest according to him. Like him or not he does appear to have some sources that seem to know what is going on. We shall see.

That’s 12 regular season games, a semi-final conference game, a conference championship game, and potentially up to 4 CFB playoff games (especially if they expand to 16). Not that the pretense of amateurism hasn’t already totally been abandoned, but that schedule doesn’t leave time for a whole lot else for these players.

That’s why the other teams not in the semifinals would have a flex game. Logistically speaking, this would be very challenging with little lead time. Host teams would have to plan for operations at their home stadium and visiting teams would have to book and coordinate their travel. I’m guessing it could be done, but they would probably put a bye week in for everyone before that last game.

OK, maybe it will be UConn.

i think the "flex game" replaces week 12...essentially week 12 will be a conference semi final for 4 teams and a strategically scheduled game for the other X teams to drive tv value and playoff at large potential. so there is no extra week.

this could be a way the ACC keeps FSU in the fold, and attracts more media money for the "post season" semi finals. It would be a way for a conference to bring in more value with games at the end of the season that actually mean something, especially in regards to the playoffs. Of course he also gave a scenario where it helps the B12 as well. He said that the only way it makes sense is if you have enough teams in your conference to have pods, and that would be 16, 20, or 24 team conferences. Geography plays a roll, so both the B12 and ACC are lacking. the B12 in the East, and the ACC in the west (in regards to regional pods). He implies that either the ACC expands, or the B12 expands, and I don't think he was talking about G5 teams. If the ACC gets a better contract, and an extension, it could very well be the B12 that is in peril. (I didn't post a link because it's a B12 You Tuber, and I know how this board views them)

he says in 2 hours what takes most folks less than 30 second to say

among broadcasters with the first name Greg.

Would have taken much of the controversy out of the selection process for BCS and CFP as well as the voting on the national champion pre-BCS. So they go and ruin the entire conference system and hurt a bunch of decent athletic programs in turn, and NOW they want to do flex scheduling? Screw these people.

Indiana, Minnesota, Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland and Northwestern. So they'll load those teams up with one another on their schedule. And if one of them is undefeated near the end of the season, they'll let them play a heavyweight. And if they lose, they won't be in the CFP to tank the network's ratings. That's how it will go down.

You want to get rid of the Little Brown Jug, Floyd of Rosedale, and Paul Bunyan’s Axe?? I don’t think so mister.

Penn State, Ohio State and USC are probably a hard pass though 😆

You can’t start adding extra weeks of conference playoffs if you already have a 4 week playoff. I will say however…the P2 are probably going to restrict B12 and ACC entries to the CFP to an extent that those two leagues may need that conference playoff for $$$. I bet it isn’t very long (maybe after 2026) where the B12 and ACC have literally 1 spot in the CFP. ** Edited by hokieZ71 at 8/10/2024, 3:31:01 PM

with no guaranteed spots for this or that conference champ or G5 program, we will have arrived at the point you're predicting - under that system, it will not be surprising for there to only be one B12 or ACC program represented in the field. There is no "for the good of college football" in the current paradigm - we're looking at pure, dog-eat-dog, Darwinian elimination of half the programs in the sport happening in real time. The current goal for the SEC and B1G is to practically and effectively ice out every other conference from championship access. Then, they will turn on each other. Then, they will turn in on themselves - eventually, the Alabama's and the Ohio State's are going to decide that Vanderbilt and Northwestern will not be allowed to continue cashing big, fat media rights checks they didn't earn. First it will be uneven revenue sharing, then it will be uneven scheduling - Vanderbilt will not even be "allowed" to play Alabama without first meeting certain benchmarks in the W-L column. In practice, those "lesser" programs will be relegated, as will their revenue streams. The SEC and B1G are playing a zero sum game. And, it's all allowed to, and WILL happen, because Disney and FOX's only interest is making sure that only big national brands are playing each other on their primary broadcasts to draw the maximum number of casual eyeballs, while everyone else is buried on a grid of app-only streams that only die-hard fans will actually find and watch.

That would definitely be a new world in the SEC. The SEC is now playing a specifically arranged home & home schedule for the 2024 & 2025 football seasons. I have heard & think it is two years of transitional scheduling. All schools will play the exact same eight other SEC schools for 2024 & 2025, it will just be a home & home with those same eight. Guess what SEC schools have Vandy in those eight? Eight ultimately do but Alabama is in that Eight. When the SEC went to Divisions in 1992. Arkansas got Tennessee & South Carolina from the opposite division as yearly opponents. Alabama got Tennessee & Vandy as their yearly opponent, that arrangement lasted about a decade. Alabama likes playing Vandy. Surely has played Vandy as much or more than any other western division SEC school over the last 30+ years. Alabama positively gets Vandy scheduled a lot more than Arkansas does. In tight competition in divisional standings or even with the new single division of the SEC. One game means a lot in the final standing when playoffs or bowl bids are given at the end of the regular season. Georgia doesn't have Vandy on the 2024 or 2025 football schedule. That means if Georgia beats Alabama but has just one other SEC loss, Alabama can still be tied with Georgia if Alabama wins out in the SEC after losing to Georgia. It also helps keeping Alabama playoff eligible over other schools if Alabama should suffer just one loss. You think all that is lost on the Alabama based SEC front office? No chance and I don't see that changing. ** Edited by WarHog38 at 8/12/2024, 5:20:51 PM ** Edited by WarHog38 at 8/12/2024, 5:22:51 PM

1) The broadcasters are the ones cutting all the checks. They pay what they pay primarily because of advertising they sell. 2) The broadcasters do not want Vanderbilt on TV, because nobody watches Vanderbilt - they would not care one bit if Vanderbilt disappeared from the face of the earth tomorrow. Every time Alabama has to play Vanderbilt (or Ohio State has to play Northwestern) is a blown opportunity for the networks to put another big game in a broadcast window and make more money selling ads. 3) The big brands in the SEC and B1G will eventually want even more money. All businesses do. Growth, growth, growth. At some point, the only way to get more will be to dip into the shares of the negative value legacy brands that are only in the conference because they were there from the beginning. 4) If your financial overlords that are paying all the bills don't want you to play Vanderbilt, and you also want to pay Vanderbilt less money, then the next logical step is to find a pretext to pay Vanderbilt less money based upon the former. "You're non-competitive in football, and you don't get to play the top teams until you improve," is a pretty good pretext to pay them less money. And, do you really think Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Tennessee, Florida, LSU, etc. have the best interests of Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Kentucky, or South Carolina in mind? No. They want to get a leg up, and they want more money. The majority will impose its will on the minority; we're not talking about the ACC, where the zero value do-nothings get to run the show.

They are the reason the PAC went down the drain. The reason why ESPN is dragging their feet on resigning that ACC TV Contract. The fans of those "zero value do-nothings" in the ACC that you mentioned just cannot or will not accept that. I don't have that problem. It is all becoming about big brand match-up football games that get high TV Ratings with those corresponding high advertiser rates. Many things are changing. Revenue sharing, Transfer Portals expanding and unregulated NIL. Then you have this ever progressing conference expansion. The gap between Haves & Have Nots will be ever expanding. The unfair distribution of the last Playoff Contract was just the beginning and the ACC & Big 12 put the noose around their own neck. How can that noose now ever be removed? No way with ESPN ultimately acting as the hangman. My previous comment did refer to the old college football world that is now in death throes. I have even heard the old conspiracy theorist term used to defend ESPN by those here that still see ESPN as a mostly benevolent soul. Conspiracy Theory comes from CIA invention. Used by the CIA in mass media as denigratory against anyone accusing the CIA of worldwide crimes. Most conspiracy allegations over the ages have been proven to be truths with passing years. That is fact.

by trying to consolidate all the major brands. It completely ignores what made the sport great in the first place (regionalism, history, rivalries, pageantry) to try and create something that mirrors the NFL. That's all well and good, but there are a significant number of people in this country, mostly in the northeastern corridor and other large metro areas with long-standing established pro sports teams and culture (and, we should remember, these areas are where a majority of people in this country live) who have always looked down on college football because they believe it's nothing more than bush-league NFL with crappier players. That widely held perception isn't going to change because they put Oregon and Ohio State in the same "division." So why is it happening? Why are more and more people watching, year over year? I'm almost 100% convinced at this juncture that the major driving catalyst behind all this consolidation and realignment is the proliferation and normalization of legalized gambling outside Las Vegas and Atlantic City. Since the proliferation of legalized gambling that's readily available and easily performed on smart phone apps, more and more people want to gamble, and the numbers tell us that, more than any other sport, they want to gamble on FOOTBALL. And there's only so much NFL currently available to gamble on. Another important point is that 99+% of people that gamble are "square" gamblers (i.e., they're not professionals with their own handicapping models, budget management, etc.) They just want to throw $25 or $100 on a game, drink beer, and eat Velveeta dip with their buddies. These are folks that live in Boston, or Philadelphia, or Pittsburgh, etc. that do not regularly watch college football games or consume ancillary college football media. But they know Alabama, Michigan, LSU, and Ohio State, and that's who they want to watch and gamble on. They do not want to watch or gamble on a Louisville-Wake Forest or Kansas State-UCF game. If someone has gambled on a game, they will definitely watch it, and if it's a close game that aligns closely with the spread, they will likely watch the whole thing. A major reason why NFL spreads are so accurate and so tight is that, generally, it's much easier for oddsmakers to set a line when the game involves major brands with plenty of film, exposure, etc. - this is much less so with, say, Western Kentucky. People also want to gamble on the big brands they know. It's all symbiotic, and I believe that's why the emphasis at Disney, FOX, and the other major players is now "let's do whatever we have to do to create a college football landscape where every regular season game we broadcast is like a major bowl game." No more regionalism, no more small market brands. USC will be in the same conference as Penn State, and Oregon State and Washington State will be left to rot. Long term, I think the networks are going to get what they want. Their broadcasts will do big numbers, and they'll make a lot of money. But the collateral damage will include permanent relegation and irrelevancy to the vast majority of the sport outside of those programs' respective fanbase - the same thing that happened to the FCS (previously Div. 1-AA) in the late 70s, and what we've called the G5 for the past 20 years, is now going to happen to a lot of "power conference" programs, particularly those left behind in the ACC and Big 12. That's why the PAC-12 was destroyed. That's why FSU and Clemson are raising cane to get out of the ACC, and get out as soon as they can. That's why you hear all the back room grumblings from Utah about where they ended up. That's why Wake Forest and Boston College are trying to drag FSU's exit out as long as they can, and why they would rather burn the barn and salt the earth instead of just negotiating an equitable exit fee and being done with it. The people running things at Wake Forest and Boston College aren't stupid; they know what the future ultimately holds in store for those athletic departments. The writing is on the wall, and has been for anyone that cares to see and read it. ** Edited by Baltimore_Hokie at 8/13/2024, 11:14:43 AM

they would pat them to go away. No way either of those Universities would ever pay an exit fee to the ACC. If things evolve the way you think they will, they will have to separate football, not Universities and conferences. I think if we get an NFL lite, you can have it. I'll watch college ball, as the Universities not invited to the party will get on with life, educate the kids, and yes, play football.

but the bottom line is, once all the dust settles, if the program you root for doesn't have a seat at the table, then you may as well be rooting for a D3 team, and you'll be watching any games you can't make in person via online stream with remote announcers and bare bones production value. If you're good with that, you're good with that.

not stop me from being a fan though. Only so many schools will be in the NFL lite. That leaves a LOT of football that will not be. You will find me there if that is where my teams are.

conference and it has already been doing something similar for years now. The PSAC has 15 members who sponsor football and the conference decided to divide up into 2 divisions (8 in the East and 7 in the West). In order for the conference to hold a conference championship game and still be able to participate in the NCAA DII Playoffs, which I believe starts 1-2 weeks before Thanksgiving Weekend, the PSAC decided to hold its conference championship game the final week of the regular season. The remaining 6 West teams are paired up with 6 East teams to play a flex game on the final week of the regular season. I am not sure what happens to the 1 East team who isn't paired up with anyone. Anyways, the PSAC alternates years which division gets to host the games including the conference championship game. The East hosts in even years and the West hosts in odd years. If it works at the DII level, then I don't see why it couldn't work at the DI-FBS level too.

Maybe another school dropped, too. That might be the reason for the odd amount of teams. They also added some teams that weren't in the Pennsylvania public university system like Gannon, Shepherd, Mercyhurst Seton Hill... Used to be just the 14 state schools (minus Penn State, Pitt, Temple). The title game was called "The State Game". This is before conference title games were a TV money grab starting in the 1990s.

left the conference to transition to DI and join the Northeast Conference. You are correct that schools have joined and left the conference over the years. Also, Mansfield made the decision to switch from tradition football to sprint football and Cheyney left the PSAC to become an Independent. Also, Cheyney suspended its football program until the university's financial position showed "significant improvement." So I am not sure if Cheyney has dropped it or not. Something I did find interesting is the hyperlink to athletics on the school's website (https://cheyney.edu/) doesn't exist anymore. I don't think the school discontinued its athletic program like NE Illinois did in the early 2000s because the most recent monthly campus newsletter, "The Howl" (dated April 2024), has an article about the sports complex update.

They aren't listed as an NCAA institution any longer And the school has accreditation issues

Kind of a variation of the wild card weekend, expect that other college teams that don’t qualify would also play some OOC games to ensure they have a full schedule.

happens, it’s another reason we are headed to preseason bowls. The months of December through mid January are going to be full of games that have consequences. No opt outs likely in preseason bowls and Conference Championship games or of course the playoffs. More compelling games/inventory, which means more money. PS I’m not surprised the B12 and G5 will test it first, but the others will watch to see if they would make more money too. More money more money more money, never enough money!!

I'd rather do it without pods, just match #1 with #4, and #2 with #3. Play those at #1 and #2, so they will be more likely to win. If FSU and Clemson want more money, this is a pretty good answer. They are both likely to be hosting one of these often.

of increasing revenue. That being said, I continue to be perplexed how often you guys lump the B12 with the G5. Like the PAC, maybe you all need a different prism to view things through. The ACC is not exempt from the realignment of the conferences. All you are doing now, is fighting in court for when that happens. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 8/11/2024, 7:28:00 AM

that the B12 is trying something innovative. I wish our ACC Commissioner would stop trying to live in the past, I guessed you missed my post, but I have criticized him for being a day late and dollar short many times, so has HOO86 who I respect his post as much as anyone who post here.

WVU and Cincinnati. WVU may have declined over their exit fee, but Phillips never even reached out. But he had FSU mucking up the moves he could make. So who knows.

If the ACC implements, it will change the SEC rivalry games after Thanksgiving. I’m sure the ACC will do it once the SEC does. ** Edited by Millpoint at 8/10/2024, 5:48:34 PM

Tennessee. I am thinking you probably play Pitt, so a VT UT game every year at Bristol is alright by me. However, would love playing them in Neyland and Lane too.

although ESPN and Fox try to falsely promote the other 2, its just not true.

ever since the conferences got ridiculously large. If you dont have divisions, you need a more equitable way of determining who plays in a championship game. The ACC is set up (quite easily ) for 2 (or more teams) to be tied that have no head to head result . So it will come down to a crap decision. Why not call an audible and have them play-in the last week of the regular season. There are no great options- this seems to me to be a lesser evil .

teams into the playoffs. Currently, we can assume the top 3 BIG and SEC teams will get playoff bids, sometimes 4. The ACC and B12 will get one, sometimes two. As and example, TCU lost to K-State in the B12 championship, yet still got into the 4 team playoff, while a 2 loss K-State didn't. That will be how the B12 and ACC get 2 teams in, and I think it will happen more times than not. Why in the world would TCU risk their playoff birth and their undefeated season? In the SEC and Big 10, the same can be said. They will already have the strength of schedule, they have the media regular season money, and they already have the guaranteed playoff money. Why would they risk that 4th playoff spot? The G5 however, is a different story. An undefeated Liberty playing Tulane would be a compelling matchup. A one loss Boise State playing an undefeated App. State would get good ratings as well. Add in the MAC top team playing a top team from another conference, would also be watched. The G5 should keep their money games against the P4, but play their conference games early, leaving the last two weekends as a 16 team tournament if you will, leaving the top 4 in the hunt for that guaranteed playoff game. Lose the FCS games, and it is possible that their strength of schedule increases, and when there is a blue moon, they too could get two teams in. It's what I would do, and the viewership numbers could get those conferences more money.

the ACC and Big 12 will never get more than one team each in the 12-team CFP field. Nor will the G5 ever get more than one team in. It's just not going to happen, and it's almost mathematically certain. It's a 12 team field. Top 5 ranked conference champs get in, automatically. That leaves 7 at-large selections. At least half the time, if not more, Notre Dame is taking one of those spots. That leaves 6 at-large selections. The SEC has 16 programs, the B1G has 18. You can pretty much bank that, following the auto-bids for the SEC and B1G champs, the losers of their respective championship games are also going to get placed, and whoever got snubbed from playing in their championship games will get placed (because, remember, no divisions anymore - it's all based on W-L columns and it's a guarantee that there will be tiebreakers pretty much every single year.) That basically leaves 2 more spots. Now, in addition to the 16 ACC programs and 15 Big 12 programs clamoring for those two remaining spots, there will still be 13 SEC programs and 15 B1G programs who have not already been invited. Once you also take into consideration that the commissioners of the ACC and Big 12 have basically admitted that they play in a "junior division" (remember, both commissioners agreed to take significantly less CFP money than the SEC and B1G, with no regard whatsoever given to how many teams from which conferences are actually placed,) and the relentless drumming of the SEC and B1G propaganda machines at ESPN and FOX, who want returns on their enormous investments into those two conferences, it's just completely unrealistic to believe that the ACC or Big 12 are going to get multiple programs into a 12-team CFP field. MAYBE it will happen once every 5-10 years, but I really doubt it - every shred of available evidence tells you otherwise.

It is very probable that the one loss loser of the ACC or B12 championship game get ranked in the top 10, and get an at large. That scenario, with the present make up of the B12 and ACC is not only possible, but likely that one conference or the other get two invites. The B12 this year seems to have too much parity, and no team is projected to go undefeated in the regular season. The ACC, on the other hand, could easily have an undefeated FSU get beat by a two loss VT or Louisville this year. A one loss FSU will not be left out of a 12 team field. Next year? A one loss Utah that is not the conference champion, will certainly get in. All of this doom and gloom because of the consolidation of the blue bloods and media contracts is overblown. The P2 will get their high rated regular season games, but a three loss USC will not get an invite over a one loss Utah.

of College Football. You're entitled to your opinion, but it's not in alignment with any CFP projection I've seen so far from the recruiting sites or the punditry, nor is it in alignment with all the evidence in front of our faces. The SEC and B1G did not expand, nor have they been throwing their weight around with their enormous media rights contracts and incongruent portions of the CFP revenue so they could get fewer member programs into the CFP. And, lest you forget - at the end of the day, the CFP is not an NCAA-sanctioned championship meant to provide fair and equitable access to competitive teams. It's a privately owned money-making scheme designed to generate maximum revenue for its ownership. To generate maximum revenue, it depends on Disney, Fox, CBS, and whomever else to keep bidding on contracts and paying exorbitant rights fees. That doesn't happen unless the teams Disney, Fox, etc. want in the field are in the field, and they do not want their "JV" properties in the field any more than the absolute minimum amount necessary to ensure nobody rocks the boat. Like it or not, the ACC and Big 12 have allowed themselves for over a decade now to be perceived as Shasta and RC Cola to the SEC and B1G's Coke Classic and Pepsi, and that perception has become reality.

If it’s Miami Clemson and FSU I can see two of those . TV loves Miami ** Edited by MrFantastic! at 8/13/2024, 3:00:24 AM

B12, or G5 nobody in the playoffs. they will get the ratings, and at the end of the day, that is what will drive the networks. The bluebloods in the same conference will beat up on each other, and the average casual fan is already weary of Alabama and Georgia. No matter how much the P2 wants to be the NFL, and no matter how much the pundits push for it, the college football fan is much too diversified to consolidate into the same dozen teams year after year. If it was that easy, they would just have a final eight in March madness, with only the blue bloods playing. How boring would that be?

is the complete opposite of reality. The punditry complained and complained and complained about TCU and Cincinnati getting CFP slots, and, when the games were actually played, they garnered appreciably lower ratings than other CFP games featuring more established brands. You're right that the punditry hates it, but the dirty little secret here is that the casual viewers and square gamblers get their opinions from the punditry; that's what the punditry does, and their entire purpose for existing. And Disney, FOX, etc. care about drawing the casual viewers and square gamblers. They don't care about what Iowa State or Georgia Tech fans want. And, your point about the NCAAT is demonstrably wrong. There is a mountain of evidence to demonstrate that people only like Cinderella teams in the NCAAT up to a point. After a specific point, usually around the Sweet 16, viewership of the games is noticeably diminished if small-market teams continue to progress through the tournament and end up featured, even when they are playing a big time opponent. Again, casual fans and square gamblers, who have no vested rooting interest and do not watch large swaths of college sporting events, want to see teams they know about and hear talked about on TV and radio. They, and by extension the networks that pay to broadcast the games, have no interest in seeing Tulane play in the Final Four. That's an indisputable fact.

this latest round of consolidation, before the PAC imploded, and before all of the fans of the B12 and ACC were run through the wringer. You very well could be right, but I dearly hope you are wrong. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone. I will continue to be optimistic that this experiment of consolidating all of the blue bloods will fall flat, and the fans of those schools cashing their checks will wonder what the hell happened.

is because the same people cutting those enormous media rights checks are same (and only) people that create the narrative. Come December, if the talking heads on ESPN and FOX say, all day, every day, that 3 loss Tennessee or Penn State should get in over 1 or 2 loss Louisville, then that's what Joe Casual, who went to community college but didn't finish, works a blue collar job, lives on Long Island, and doesn't really watch any college football until the playoff is on, is going to think, because why wouldn't he? He just wants to watch the game with his boys and throw a couple hundred bucks on a FanDuel bet. And, he's heard of Tennessee and Penn State; he can't even tell you which state Louisville is in without looking it up. THAT's the target demographic in all this. I hate to sound "doom and gloom," but things are clearly happening the way they are for a reason.