Big Ten x SEC Alliance and Playoff Expansion Coming Soon?

[Thomallister1291]

I was in the r/CFB reddit and someone posted this tweet with some huge news! I don't know how many people will like them tho.

 

The article mentioned an hypothetical Oregon vs. LSU matchup as an example of what Big Ten vs. SEC matchups would bring a ton of eyeballs.

 

 

[Charles Fischer]

I've changed my mind on this topic, as I am not in favor of getting automatic bids for B1G and SEC after all.  We need that push to earn it...and remove the conference championships and make that weekend the first round of a 16 team playoff with no byes for anyone.

 

With 16 teams...anybody that has a real chance of winning a 'Natty will not get left out.

 

And let's seed, and reseed the damn thing.

 

[Jon Joseph]

 

Charles, I, of course, respect your opinion, I'm LOL at the good doctor and not you, but especially if the B1G and SEC agree to games between the two conferences as a matter of course, and the SEC moves to nine conference games, I believe auto bids for the Power 2 are warranted. I also think the 14-team NFL playoff structure will work better than a 16-team field and not exclude any team with a real shot at the title.

 

Preference for B1G and SEC teams is warranted based on the history of the BCS and the 4-team playoff. Warranted by the number of people who turn in to watch the SEC and B1G play football. Warranted by roster strength; there is not a B12 team with a Blue Chip Roster, and only Clemson and Miami in the ACC are Blue Chip, although FSU is close.

 

Nine conference games in the B12 and eight conference games in the ACC will not equate to nine in the SEC and in most cases, nine in the B1G. G5 schedules are not close in strength of schedule. And from what we saw from the Committee in the first 12-team PO, for example seeding G5 Boise ahead of B12 champ ASU, does not IMO warrant trust in a Committee that does its business in the dark. 

 

Did an SMU team that played a soft schedule and lost to BYU at home deserve to be in over three-loss SEC teams and three-loss Illinois? Illinois had one bad loss, at home vs Minnesota. Its other losses were on the road at Penn State and OBD. For that matter, should SMU have been in over a two-loss BYU team?

 

Sixteen teams, no byes has a definite appeal. But unless the calendar is addressed and fixed by starting the season on week zero and flex scheduling in conference champ games, the season is too long. Of course, if these changes are not made with 12 teams the season is too long.

 

34M people watched OBD play TOSU in the first 4-team playoff title. That far, far fewer people watched two iconic programs play for the first 12-team championship should be clear as a bell. The NFL is more popular than CFB. Going head-to-head against the NFL in the postseason is not savvy.

 

The B1G and the SEC have the power to find a solution once and if they insist on holding a playoff. A playoff like every other division in college football and the NFL that does not worry about using bowls as playoff game sites. This of course will depend on the upper echelon of CFB and not media companies, managing the postseason.

 

With disparate strength of schedule in college football, more wins do not ipso facto mean a team is superior to a team with an extra loss or two. 

 

I think 14 teams with a 4-4-2-2-1-1 format makes sense and makes more sense if Notre Dame has to play in a conference.  Four B1G and Four SEC teams in the field do not mean the eight teams are the top eight seeds. It does not mean that the eight would be rewarded with a playoff home game(s.)

 

ESPN's Bill Connolly ($ wall) went back to the beginning of the BCS era, 1998, and ran the above format for every season. Based on the final pre-BCS and pre-playoff rankings, four B1G and four SEC teams in a 14-team field were what would have happened in almost every season. 

 

Like it or not, this year and every year more people will tune in to watch Alabama at Penn State than SMU at Penn State. And more than ever, the money matters. 

 

Fun to ponder. Not easy to get 'right?'

 

 

[GeotechDuck]

I like the 16 team format with no byes.  In that case, just get rid of the CCGs. 

[Mike West]

On 2/16/2025 at 7:12 PM, Jon Joseph said:

Sixteen teams, no byes has a definite appeal. But unless the calendar is addressed and fixed by starting the season on week zero and flex scheduling in conference champ games, the season is too long. Of course, if these changes are not made with 12 teams the season is too long.

This!!!!!

[HDuck]

These were the numbers on both the 14 and 16 format.   Like the first link, you have to click on the second Dellenger tweet to see the whole table. 

 

There is a lot of "meat" to ponder in the first link.   Probably not preferred reading for fans of the Pac2.

 

 

[NJDuck]

 

Sources: SEC, Big Ten Building Momentum to Further Expand College Football Playoff to 14 or 16 Teams

 

Last spring, during intense and, at times, heated negotiations over the future of the College Football Playoff, leaders of the Big Ten and SEC threatened to create their own postseason system if they were not granted a majority of CFP revenue and full authority over the playoff format.

 

In the end, executives of the 10 FBS leagues and Notre Dame signed a memorandum of understanding handing control over to college football’s two richest conferences.

 

Soon, they are expected to exercise that control.

 

Within the SEC and Big Ten, momentum is building to further expand the playoff to 14 or 16 teams, assign multiple automatic qualifiers per league — as many as four each for themselves — and finalize a scheduling arrangement together that may fetch millions in additional revenue from TV partners, sources told Yahoo Sports.

 

The playoff format change would clear the way for SEC administrators to, finally, make the long-discussed move to play nine regular-season conference games and would trigger, perhaps, all four power leagues to overhaul their conference championship weekend.

 

These ideas and concepts, previously reported by Yahoo Sports as possibilities, are now serious agenda items within the highest governing bodies of the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC, according to officials from each of those leagues. The 11 members of the CFP Management Committee — the 10 FBS conference commissioners and Notre Dame’s athletic director — were contacted for this story, many of them confirming the existence of these potential ideas but declining specific comment on the matter.

 

Final decisions are expected in the coming weeks.

 

Sources: SEC, Big Ten building momentum to further expand College Football Playoff to 14 or 16 teams

SPORTS.YAHOO.COM

---

The conferences are pushing to assign multiple automatic qualifiers per league, with as many as four each for themselves. In short, a plethora of changes are on the table.

 

[GatOrlando]

I'm for it if it eliminates SEC teams scheduling Sun Belt teams. Oregon vs Texas in the regular season, USC vs Texas A&M, Florida hosting Ohio State, Tennessee at Michigan, Wisconsin at South Carolina, Penn State at Georgia, LSU at Washington. Imagine that in the regular season.

[30Duck]

On 2/17/2025 at 9:19 AM, GatOrlando said:

I'm for it if it eliminates SEC teams scheduling Sun Belt teams. Oregon vs Texas in the regular season, USC vs Texas A&M, Florida hosting Ohio State, Tennessee at Michigan, Wisconsin at South Carolina, Penn State at Georgia, LSU at Washington. Imagine that in the regular season.

I'm for this. 12 teams is enough, only half actually have a chance at the Natty, 2 more if it makes the format work. CCG's have to go, why should the first place team after the season need to win the championship again? All the changes we've suggested make perfect sense, but will only be implemented if the $$$ is right. 

[woundedknees]

The PAC/B1G Alliance worked so well! 

 

 

[GatOrlando]

On 2/17/2025 at 12:03 PM, woundedknees said:

The PAC/B1G Alliance worked so well! 

 

 

Ever heard the story of the scorpion and the frog? Just so happened that time there were three frogs.

[Jon Joseph]

 

Amidst Accusations of GREED, here's a take from CBS Sports that I agree with wholeheartedly. 

 

 

A Big Ten/SEC College Football Playoff takeover is inevitable, but what if it's actually the best solution? - CBSSports.com

WWW.CBSSPORTS.COM

---

Multiple automatic bids would take a lot of the guesswork out of determining the 14- or 16-team field

 

There is no business in the world where the lead companies do not control the industry. 

 

College Football is a Big (B1G + SEC) business. It should come as no surprise that the two most profitable enterprises have the most influence. Indeed, in 2024, Notre Dame, the ACC, the B12, and the G5/6 conferences acknowledged that the Power 2 would design the playoff format in 2026 and thereafter.

 

A 4-4-2-2-1-1 format guarantees two teams in the field for the ACC and the B12. As the B12 can attest there is no assurance of the conference getting two teams in the field without a guarantee.

 

In 2026, we will see a 14 or 16-team playoff field with I believe, four teams from the B1G and the SEC assured spots in the field. OK with me. The two conferences have earned this.

 

 

 

 

[Tandaian]

I'm not interested in creating the have's vs the have nots more than it already is.  It is silly to give auto bids.  Most years the B1G TEN and SEC are going to have 4 teams anyway, so why make it permanent?  By giving the B1G TEN and SEC 60-70% of the money also will eventually kill college football.

 

Look at the NBA and MLB.  You have only a handful of teams that can win the championship and that is with revenue sharing, but both leagues essentially have no salary cap.  I don't really watch either sport because it is essentially the same 5-10 teams every year.

 

With the CFP, you are not sharing revenue equally and you have no salary cap.  You will have the B1G TEN and SEC separate themselves even more from the ACC and B12.

 

When you have only 33% of the US interested in the sport, it will eventually die.  Why would the ACC or B12 be interested in watching something where none of their teams have a shot of winning?

[NJDuck]

 

Interesting read:

 

College Football Playoff meetings not about expansion. It's about college sports survival

 

College football’s administrative heavyweights are meeting in New Orleans beginning Wednesday, and it should come as no surprise where this is headed. 

Revenue generation. 

 

Or, this quick summation from universities to players: You want pay for play? We’re getting more games.

Not just an expansion of the College Football Playoff, which currently stands at 12 teams and could move to as many as 16. But an expansion of the championship weekend — which could evolve into a play-in week for the playoff. 

 

Forget about CFP format. This is about financial survival.

 

One SEC athletic director, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the process, gave a rough outline of what championship weekend could look like to USA TODAY Sports. The Big Ten is also considering a similar structure.

 

● The top two seeds play in the conference championship game.

● The next six teams – determined by conference tiebreakers, if needed – will play in a No. 3 vs. No. 8, No. 4 vs. No. 7 and No. 5 vs. No. 6 format.

 

● The winners of those four games would move to the playoff. The losers would be available for at-large selections. 

 

?? The obvious wrinkle: The loser of the championship game, the No. 2 team in the league, isn’t guaranteed a spot in the College Football Playoff. 

 

College Football Playoff meetings not about expansion. It's about college sports survival

WWW.USATODAY.COM

---

College football’s top administrators are meeting this week to talk expansion. It should be no surprise that revenue generation is...

 

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/18/2025 at 12:50 PM, Tandaian said:

I'm not interested in creating the have's vs the have nots more than it already is.  It is silly to give auto bids.  Most years the B1G TEN and SEC are going to have 4 teams anyway, so why make it permanent?  By giving the B1G TEN and SEC 60-70% of the money also will eventually kill college football.

 

Look at the NBA and MLB.  You have only a handful of teams that can win the championship and that is with revenue sharing, but both leagues essentially have no salary cap.  I don't really watch either sport because it is essentially the same 5-10 teams every year.

 

With the CFP, you are not sharing revenue equally and you have no salary cap.  You will have the B1G TEN and SEC separate themselves even more from the ACC and B12.

 

When you have only 33% of the US interested in the sport, it will eventually die.  Why would the ACC or B12 be interested in watching something where none of their teams have a shot of winning?

 

Won't B12 fans be more interested in watching post-season ball with two teams and not one in the field? I respect your POV, of course, but I could not disagree more. All the worries about NIL, the open transfer portal, and money flowing to the Power 2 killing CFB have been unfounded.

 

Viewership was up again in 2024. That the champ game did not draw better is a format problem that can be corrected IF the two most successful conferences lead the way in making the corrections. Positive change is coming, IMO, with tomorrow's second meeting of the B1G and SEC commissioners and athletic directors.  

 

The B1G and the SEC dwarf every other conference in viewership. Going back to the 1998 advent of the BCS and projecting a 14 to 16-team field based on final rankings through 2024-25, four B1G and four SEC teams would be the norm. Why leave this up to chance with a Committee that refuses to disclose its selection methodology? A Committee that in 2024-25 seeded a G5 team ahead of the B12 champ without the support of Boise having the superior strength of schedule or any other justification. 

 

As I have noted before, Alabama at Penn State would have drawn far more eyeballs than SMU at Penn State last season and every season. Assuring the ACC and B12 of two PO participants and the G5 of one PO participant based on postseason history and viewership numbers is generous.

 

Arena League and Canadian League teams do not participate in the NFL playoffs. Sankey and Petitti allowing a conference with no Blue Chip Rosters teams, the B12, and the ACC with two such teams, Clemson and Miami, two playoff spots, and the millions of dollars this will earn for the two conferences is, IMO, far from greedy.  

 

Again. I respect your comment. I think a Super League is coming, NFL-Lite, and I do not think this will kill college football. I believe it will be a recognition of the new college football paradigm and Oregon presented by NIKE will still draw millions of viewers. 

[noDucknewby]

On 2/18/2025 at 10:45 AM, NJDuck said:

 

 

?? The obvious wrinkle: The loser of the championship game, the No. 2 team in the league, isn’t guaranteed a spot in the College Football Playoff. 

 

College Football Playoff meetings not about expansion. It's about college sports survival

WWW.USATODAY.COM

---

College football’s top administrators are meeting this week to talk expansion. It should be no surprise that revenue generation is...

 

OK this is really screwed up.  Playing in a conference championship game should be a reward, not a penalty.  Under this scenario it would be better to be ranked #3 at the end of the season and play #8.  This is just retarded.

 

A series of play-in games makes a certain amount of sense, so how about we just do away with the CC games and have 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7 and so on.  Higher ranked teams need to be rewarded, not penalized.

Edited Tuesday at 07:35 PM by noDucknewby

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/18/2025 at 2:34 PM, noDucknewby said:

OK this is really screwed up.  Playing in a conference championship game should be a reward, not a penalty.  Under this scenario it would be better to be ranked #3 at the end of the season and play #8.  This is just retarded.

 

A series of play-in games makes a certain amount of sense, so how about we just do away with the CC games and have 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7 and so on.  Higher ranked teams need to be rewarded, not penalized.

 

Great points. Conference champ games are factored into media contracts. Flex scheduled to have one play two in the last game of the regular season IMO makes sense. All of these other machinations? Play nine conference games and the log jam at the No.4 spot in the SEC last season could still happen but with fewer logs. 

 

LOL at the ACC Commish managing a 17-team conference that plays eight conference games and wants to jury rig the champ game so the top team does not have to chance losing to a lesser team. 

 

In 2025 we are likely to see the same screwed-up seeding system that had No.1 Oregon playing No. 6 Ohio State in the 1st round. This will disappear in 2026. Automatic bids will not mean that the B1G and SEC teams with the bids will be seeded higher than ACC, B12, G5, and higher-ranked Notre Dame teams.  

 

Come the new media deals beginning in 2030 and with the House settlement on the horizon who knows what college football will look like just a few years down the road? 

 

 

[Tandaian]

Imagine a scenario 20 years from now, where the B1G TEN and SEC have been getting more than twice the money over the ACC and B12 from the CFP.  Are teams from the ACC and B12 really going to be competitive even with auto bids?  I guess auto bids aren't really my point of contention, it is the unequal sharing of money.  

 

Auto bids do entail some extra money, but not enough to overcome the TV contracts and the extra money teams get with wins.  Heading down a path with 2 super conferences and only 34 teams is going to cause the downfall of college football.  The B1G and SEC are so greedy, they don't see what it eventually does to them.

 

The reason why the NFL is the most watch sport in USA is because it tries to make everyone .500 by being equal.

[NJDuck]

 

Why the B1G and SEC Proposed Playoff Changes Are Good for College Football

 

Why the B1G and SEC Proposed Playoff Changes Are Good for College Football - On3

WWW.ON3.COM

---

The Big Ten and the SEC want to alter the playoff model giving them four automatic bids each. Here's why I like it.

 

[Steven A]

Can't we just go back to 4, that would have delivered us our 1st Natty this past year.

[OregonDucks]

Every time college football chases more money, it backfires and we (fans) are worse off. 

[Jon Joseph]

 

Based on Preseason Rankings, a Projection of a 14-team and 16-team Field in 2025-26.

 

Both projections have a 1st-round game of Ducks versus USC(E) Gamecocks in Autzen.

 

 

Projecting the College Football Playoff field if Big Ten-SEC plan comes to fruition

FANSIDED.COM

---

More College Football Playoff expansion could be on the horizon, thanks to the Big Ten and SEC.

 

 

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/19/2025 at 11:16 AM, OregonDucks said:

Every time college football chases more money, it backfires and we (fans) are worse off. 

 

The expansion of the basketball tournament has brought in more revenue every time the field expanded.

 

College football playing 12 and not 10 regular season games brought in more revenue. 

 

Expanding the BCS to a 4-team playoff and to a 12-team playoff brought in significantly more money on both occasions. Expanding further to 14 or 16 teams will bring in more money. 

 

In the Money Ball sports, chasing money via postseason expansion has worked.

[OregonDucks]

On 2/19/2025 at 12:30 PM, Jon Joseph said:

 

The expansion of the basketball tournament has brought in more revenue every time the field expanded.

 

College football playing 12 and not 10 regular season games brought in more revenue. 

 

Expanding the BCS to a 4-team playoff and to a 12-team playoff brought in significantly more money on both occasions. Expanding further to 14 or 16 teams will bring in more money. 

 

In the Money Ball sports, chasing money via postseason expansion has worked.

To be clear, I was not just talking about post season:

 

• Late night games (Pac-10 After Dark)

• Thursday games, then Friday games

• Conference championship games

• Conference realignment 

• …

 

The B1G / SEC scheduling alliance and guaranteed automatic qualifiers are nothing more than a money grab by those two conferences. 
 

Seed the top x number of teams accordingly, based on merit (which should include a strength of schedule component), and let them play. For example, this past year the SEC was not worthy of having more than 2-3 playoff participants. Would the playoff had been better if Alabama or Ole Miss got in over ASU or SMU?

Edited Wednesday at 08:09 PM by OregonDucks