Follow the Money - The Big Business of College Football

[stlnd01]

Genuinely don't know why Alabama's AD of all people is publicly saying this after what we saw last year. SEC championship is now a way for the team that wins it to get in at no cost to the loser because the committee just established that no amount of ass whooping will drop a team.

If no amount of ass-whooping will drop a team - if making the CCG is all you need - then why play it all (and risk injury to key players, for instance).
In retrospect, the jig was up when it became apparent that Georgia was going to clobber Bama and Kirk Herbstreit suddenly began calling the SEC "It Just Means More" Championship a "bonus game." An exhibition game. Something that does not matter relative to teams that aren't playing one, be they Notre Dame or, frankly, A&M and Ole Miss.
If there's no downside to losing why play the game at all? At least we're starting to be honest about it now.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Not sure where else to put this, so...

The NCAA is finally putting some teeth into a rule.
Effective immediately, any program in any sport that signs a transfer, adds a transfer to a roster or allows a transfer to participate in “athletically related activities” before that player’s name is placed into the transfer portal will automatically receive the following punishment:

• a suspension for the head coach from all football and administrative duties (including recruiting, on-field coaching and team meetings) for 50% of his team’s season

• a fine of 20% of a school’s football budget (which would reach into the millions at most schools)

 

[bpob55]

Alabama AD gives big opinion on SEC championship game's future: 'The ship has sailed'


Bama AD thinks the SECCG's days might be numbered.

His team didn’t want to play in the SEC championship game, and they didn’t want the result to matter. Many other teams don’t care about winning their conference anymore(when you have 16-18 team mega conferences filled with teams you have no affiliation with, this makes sense). This feels beyond inevitable.

Conference championship games are a huge money maker, although more important relative to their TV package for the B10 than the SEC. An expanded playoff sliding into that week will offset any losses, especially if Tony Petitti gets his way of multiple guaranteed bids per league.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

His team didn’t want to play in the SEC championship game, and they didn’t want the result to matter. Many other teams don’t care about winning their conference anymore(when you have 16-18 team mega conferences filled with teams you have no affiliation with, this makes sense). This feels beyond inevitable.

Conference championship games are a huge money maker, although more important relative to their TV package for the B10 than the SEC. An expanded playoff sliding into that week will offset any losses, especially if Tony Petitti gets his way of multiple guaranteed bids per league.

Exactly. I don’t think UGA was thrilled when aTm lost to allow the bulldogs to leapfrog them into the CCG. Luckily for them they played a Bama team that didn’t even compete

 

[greyhammer90]

If no amount of ass-whooping will drop a team - if making the CCG is all you need - then why play it all (and risk injury to key players, for instance).

The advantage is a situation where the winner wasn't in the playoff picture otherwise. It's probably not a huge concern for the SEC which has designs on getting its top 10 teams in the playoffs, but there are essentially only positives to having a championship game if you want to mathematically increase your odds of having more teams get into the playoffs under the precident set by the committee. If both teams are already in, they'll stay in. If one of the teams likely isn't already in, a win guarantees they will be in at no cost to the loser.

 

[stlnd01]

The advantage is a situation where the winner wasn't in the playoff picture otherwise. It's probably not a huge concern for the SEC which has designs on getting its top 10 teams in the playoffs, but there are essentially only positives to having a championship game if you want to mathematically increase your odds of having more teams get into the playoffs under the precident set by the committee. If both teams are already in, they'll stay in. If one of the teams likely isn't already in, a win guarantees they will be in at no cost to the loser.

Right. For the ACC and Big 12, the CCG still matters. Virginia and BYU make the CFP last year if they won their respective conference title games, and TTU probably still makes it even if they'd lost. Interesting to ponder what would have happened w/Miami (and us) if Virginia represents the ACC.

But for the SEC and Big Ten it's mainly about seeding at this point. Hard to imagine a scenario where the second-place team in either of those conferences isn't getting an at-large bid. That Indiana-Ohio State game was pointless. And Bama embarassed themselves and still got handed a bid.

 

[bpob55]

 

[Bishop2b5]

Most of us are fine with college players being able to make money via product endorsement, jersey sales, and so on. Teams just lining up sponsorships and essentially buying players was never the intent. It's sure how it's quickly turned out, though. Not only buying rosters in initial recruiting, but enticing established players from other teams' rosters. Even the NFL makes that impossible in most cases so that there's fairness and stability. I absolutely hate this mercenary, unrestricted free agency, no holds barred thing college sports, football especially, has turned into. Maybe This just isn't the game I grew up loving.

 

[stlnd01]

Most of us are fine with college players being able to make money via product endorsement, jersey sales, and so on. Teams just lining up sponsorships and essentially buying players was never the intent. It's sure how it's quickly turned out, though. Not only buying rosters in initial recruiting, but enticing established players from other teams' rosters. Even the NFL makes that impossible in most cases so that there's fairness and stability. I absolutely hate this mercenary, unrestricted free agency, no holds barred thing college sports, football especially, has turned into. Maybe This just isn't the game I grew up loving.

It's still pretty damn fun on a Saturday.

But long-term I worry that the top 30 or so programs - the ones willing/able to spend what it takes to win - are just going to get so far out in front of the rest that the fans of everyone else lose interest. And that'll be what kills the golden goose. College football has always been dominated by the big powers, of course, but the mid-majors could also always tell themselves they could compete on a given Saturday, or a given season or two with the right coach. Now if it's just all about unlimited money, a lot of them won't, and those alums/fans will find something else to root for, and then half the TV eyeballs go away.

 

[Bishop2b5]

It's still pretty damn fun on a Saturday.

But long-term I worry that the top 30 or so programs - the ones willing/able to spend what it takes to win - are just going to get so far out in front of the rest that the fans of everyone else lose interest. And that'll be what kills the golden goose. College football has always been dominated by the big powers, of course, but the mid-majors could also always tell themselves they could compete on a given Saturday, or a given season or two with the right coach. Now if it's just all about unlimited money, a lot of them won't, and those alums/fans will find something else to root for, and then half the TV eyeballs go away.

I agree. Even though my school is one of those that can throw money at the situation and thrive, I'm still aware that it's ruining the game I grew up loving and will almost certainly, as you point out, completely change it for the worse.