The commissioner of the Big Ten pushed back against the idea that their conference worked together to stop the expansion of the College Football Playoff.
The narrative that certain people benefit from having out there even if it isn't true is one that I think is beneficial to certain people.
The decision to keep a four-team playoff for the next four years was made by the 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director. The Big Ten, the Atlantic Coast Conference and the Pacific-12 voted against the 12-team proposal, according to the chair of the board of managers.
The formation of the historic alliance was announced by the three leagues on August 24, and it was intended to form scheduling partnerships, bring together like-minded academic institutions and, at the time, stabilization of a landscape that was again uncertain with another round of realignment.
Over the past eight months, debates and discussions about expanding the playoff pushed the relatively new commissioners into the spotlight again. The motion that was brought to the table for them to vote on last week did not split playoff expansion into the current 12-year contract, which runs through 2025, and another vote for Year 13 and beyond. It was one yes-or-no vote on expanding the playoffs to include the six highest-ranked conference champion and the next six highest-ranked teams.
Since this summer, there has been a distrust within the room that has been smoldering. If the vote was specific to the final two seasons of the current contract, the conference would have voted in favor of the proposal.
We have real differences of opinion when we are talking about what to do, and when to do it. We have all been public now that others have decided for us that we should air our laundry instead of making a decision in the room and then announcing it.
The format of the current contract had to be unanimous in order for the format to change within the current contract, and theACC made its position clear long before the vote. In mid-January, the only Power 5 commissioner who served on both the NCAA constitution committee and transformation committee stated that this is not the right time to restructure the organization.
There are too many unanswered questions as it relates to the health and safety of the athletes, the overall disruption in college athletics, and the desperate plea for federal legislation as it relates.
This isn't a voting bloc, according toPhillips.
The Rose Bowl and revenue distribution in Year 13 were unresolved issues for the Big Ten and Pac-12. Without knowing the TV contract, the CFP couldn't say how the revenue would be shared.
After we agree that we are going to expand currently, we will answer that down the road, Warren said. We think it is the right thing to do. For the right reasons, it has to be at the right time.
Mental health, the academic calendar, revenue share, and making sure multiple media partners are assured an opportunity to participate are some of the issues Warren rattled off. The Big Ten has been steadfast in its position that the Power 5 conference winners should have an automatic bid in the expanded playoff.
The future of the Rose Bowl was a concern for the Big Ten and the Pac-12. The Rose Bowl traditionally pits the Big Ten champion against the Pac-12 champion, but if those teams are in the current playoff format, the Rose Bowl takes the next highest-ranked teams from those leagues.
In an expanded playoff, the Rose Bowl would likely be getting the third-best team from the Pac-12 and the fourth-best from the Big Ten, on average, as the top teams would almost certainly be ranked in the top 12. The Rose Bowl doesn't want the semifinal to compete against the bowl game on New Year's Day. The Sugar and Orange Bowls have contracts with the Power 5 conferences.
The Paul Finebaum Show recently aired a story about the Rose Bowl asking for three hours of protection every three years. It's not a big ask. It is difficult to expand the College Football Playoff and hold onto the traditions of the bowl games. We are trying to do that. It is a difficult balance.
Warren said that a difference of opinion in the room should not be divisive.
Warren said we have to work through it if someone penalizes a person for asking questions or if they say we need more information. We will land in a place that makes sense for everyone if we do that.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
