So we probably get a little over a million regardless, and closer to $1.5 million when an AAC team makes a NY6 bowl. Not a bad deal for Notre Dame then to get double that for doing nothing, then they get to keep 100% of their money for making the playoff. So they are the program who will make the most money this year for the post season. Poor BYU gets stuck with 300k.
For 2017-18 each P5 got $54M in playoff money plus $6 million for each team placed in the playoffs. Thus number will probably increase a bit this year.
The sugar bowl payout is $18 million per team as per the contract between the bowl SEC and Big 12.
I read it as they get that money even if they don’t make the CFP and then they will get CFP money as well. And they don’t have to share with anyone.
Ah, makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. Was wondering why Notre Dame would agree to that deal.
So would Notre Dame keep the $6M playoff money or give it to the ACC? Someone was saying in this thread that the ACC had 2 teams in the CFP.
Here you go:
Getting $2M for not making the CFP makes me think of the Brian Regan bit where he talks about farmers getting paid to not grow corn: (1:40 mark but it’s all good IMHO)
3 Likes
I don’t know how ND gets its share. I recall reading they get the same amount regardless of whether they make the playoff. About $4 million.
The payoff for the Irish is substantially less due to its “part time” status as an ACC member. While being a full time member in basketball (and most other sports), Notre Dame is only required to play five ACC games in football. Apparently ND is special.
I grew up as a fan of Brian’s. I entered his profession for a little over a decade and had the pleasure of working with him. I consider him a friend and we get to hang out every year or so when he performs in the Los Angeles area.
2 Likes
Alvarez wasn’t 100 percent in his statement but put it out there that there’s a potential window for expansion. Alvarez noted, “There’s a window I think a year from now where they can make changes. They left that available. It was initially I think an eight-year contract, but there’s an opening when they can make changes, so that’s available.”
There’s a reason why Alvarez is so vocal about expanding the CFP. As he noted in the interview, no Big Ten school has has been involved in the four-team playoff the past three seasons. That’s a lot of money lost for the conference and that could put them behind other conferences like the SEC who routinely have one or two teams involved. Alvarez made no mistake that he was once against expansion and wanted to remain at four but now favors an eight-team setup due to the Big Ten being on the outside but made sure to note that expansion would also favor the game and everyone involved .
Alvarez’s idea to facilitate the added games would be to make the college football season start a week earlier. Even he noted that it would take a multitude of people to sign off, including “presidents, the university presidents and the commissioners,” but if four extra games results in hundreds of millions of dollars more in TV and sponsorship revenue, some version of expansion is inevitable. It’s just a matter of how long it takes until it actually happens.
1 Like
It’s worth remembering that Alvarez is one of the most anti-G5 folks out there. Hopefully it’ll be someone else spearheading the expansion because a bad 8-team model is worse for us than the current 4-team one.
1 Like
Alvarez will probably push for a 6 team playoff. That way #7 undefeated G5 team won’t be in it and a B1G team being 5 or 6 will make it.
Yep a Alavarez will guarantee all P5 champs and the at larges will be from the SEC, B1G, and other P5 flavor of the month.
Whats the point of OOC games if P5 champs get autobids
It speaks volumes about Alvarez’s “character” and “commitment” to the integrity of college football that the only time he was willing to consider expansion for the sport is when it impacted his own personal interests (Big-10).
Now, without so much as a hint of cognitive dissonance, its instead all about “the game and everyone involved.”
Yeah, these are the truly unbiased “character guys” we want on the CFP Committee, as they will never allow personal interests to influence their …. oh wait.
I know he’s not on the committee now, but he used to be. This guy has openly admitted to a willingness to expand the CFP simply because the system no longer gets his conference as much money.
Anyone who thinks this blatant and shameful money bias hasn’t crept into other areas (like selecting the top-4 in the CFP Committee rankings), either now or when “character” guys like Alvarez were there, need simply re-read the above article posted by Patrick.
3 Likes
You had to feel expansion would eventually be popular with 4 of the P5 conferences as they take turns being left out. I expect the first expansion to be like the first BCS, Five P5 champs plus top 3 ranked non conference champs. After 4 or 5 years and a couple of times of a 15th or worse ranked P5 champ getting in and a 8th to 10th place G5 champ being left out, they will add the exception rule. By then, we will already have joined a P5 conference and many Coog fans will be against G5 inclusion.
4 Likes
Home field advantage.
My guess is that the first 4 won’t be bowls. Losers may even go to bowls. At least that’s how I would design it.
Thank you for posting but there is nothing new there. Even at eight Teams the major power brokers have loudly signaled that there is no way a G5 belongs in an eight Teams cfp. The cartel is slowly creating the destruction of college football. The quick money they are making will be their ultimate demise. Local rivalries is what made college football surely not the cfp.
You bet that I will be for a G5 to make the cfp when we get into a P5.
4 Likes
It was never going to benefit the g5. The fix is already in. The same way the original change didn’t really benefit the g5.
Too many powerful interests are making too much money. When you had local rivalries college athletics was not a massively profitable enterprise. As long as the profits keep rolling in, the only ones bemoaning the loss of “local rivalries” are those on the outside looking in.