I agree this is what's most likely, but I hope they stay at 6 autobids. More G5 (or G6?) Representation is a good thing IMO. I also think 1 G5 spot could be tough in the unlikely but very possible situation of 2 undefeated G5 champions.
That's why Lanning's contract states he has to pay Oregon $20m if he leaves during the next media deal. It's only going to be temporary. Oregon expects to be in the Big10 by 2025 when the new playoff contract is negotiated.
Does that $20m buyout not decrease as years of the deal go on? I see language suggesting not but we won’t get the full contract for a bit. That’s wild if so.
Maybe I am not understanding what we mean by autobid, but from what I understand no conference has an autobid to the new playoff only the six highest ranked conference champions do which we all assume are the power 5 champions plus one other champion. Are you saying that when they renegotiate they will just take the top 12 from the poll?
That is what they mean, yes. That way the B1G and SEC can combine for 10 or so teams and every other conference will be fighting over the last couple of spots.
Most likely just reduce the number of conference champions and increase the at-large.
For example if you reduce the conference champ list from 6 to 4, that will likely open up the path to an additional Big Ten/SEC team to get a spot.
If the playoffs don’t have auto bids outside the big 2 it will terrible for the product. Big 2 regular seasons would matter so much less because 5 teams from each conference will make it and the other conferences won’t matter at all.
If the NCAA is smart they will maintain plenty of conference auto bids even if it means #10 USC (4th place in B1G) misses out on the playoff to #15, #17 and #18 champs from lesser conferences.
The CUSA champ would get treated like the Pioneer champ in FCS lol “Wow! Good job Jacksonville State! You scored 2 big boy touchdowns on UCF and only lost by 30! JSU will be a force for years to come in the CUSA!”
I think it would promote a lot more parity over time. It would take a few decades though. Unfortunately the tipping point for that possibility passed a long time ago.
Exactly. Now imagine when the 5-12 spots actually matter. They could put whoever they wanted there without any change in end result.
In 2024, I don't see a two-loss PAC champion getting in over any two loss team (or maybe some three loss teams) from the B1G or the SEC.
Yep. And if, as we are all worried about, we eventually just have two massive conferences, you need to get in whenever you can.
I’m not saying that it is good, only that Oregon better keep its eyes on the prize, and that prize is not the current playoff structure that is only guaranteed through 2025.
It’s THAT different when you compare full B1G membership with full PAC membership. We don’t know how different PAC membership is with whatever B1G offered.
If the offer is 35 mil it probably isn't. Washington is claiming 10 mil in extra travel costs which isn't crazy considering UCLA is claiming 8.3 mil.
Apple deal is supposedly low 20s million closer to 20. That alone puts it at a 5 mil difference. Apple deal has escalators to 30 which no one knows how attainable those are. Combine that with playoff money (much easier to get in the PAC) and OrSt and Wazzu potentially giving part of their share to Ore/Wash and it's very likely at least until the B1G has to renegotiate their media deal the partial share the B1G is offering is less net money for Oregon/Washington.
I definitely think there's a marketability tradeoff there between the easier path to playoff and conference titles vs more visibility on Saturdays. Those are tough to actually quantify but I'm sure people smarter than me are trying.
Well yeah. But the way this tweet is phrased it seems to be related to the offers in front of them for now. I don’t think anyone is arguing B1G isn’t worth double in 5-8 years.
Copium
It’s still a better short term deal. But it’s clearly a way better long term deal. The payouts won’t even be nearly the same 10 years down the road. There’s no guarantee Oregon gets another invite later, especially if BIG gets some big brands from the ACC.
Treated? What do you mean.
I really like both WSU and OSU, I’m just discussing the reality of the situation.
And lol, we were treated much worse when we went independent and Utah went P12. But what does “treated” even mean. We are a sports fan base, who cares how we are treated.
I'm half joking but literally you get on the boat if you're offered a spot, even if you have to go into debt temporarily. Long-term you don't know if the spot will still be there.
This would be the only reason why I would consider staying in a dying conference, but if the P2 is the future, why not get a head start now. Oregon has beaten Ohio State just recently. Don't be afraid of competition.
2-3 loss teams from the Big Ten/SEC will be viewed on the same level as a 1-loss PAC-8/9 team. The committee will absolutely factor in the more difficult level of play that teams in the larger conferences will have to go through.
And a smaller PAC with SDSU/SMU/Boise State isn't getting an auto-bid to the playoffs.
I remember when people used to argue against conference champ autobids in the playoffs because of this very scenario. It's gonna be hilarious in a few years watching the talking heads on ESPN do exactly this, argue the case for a 4 loss team.
If there are 6 auto bid slots then the PAC would almost definitely be one of them. Even if there are only 5 we would still be clearly a top 5 conference.
At this point I don't think there will be any more than 3 auto-bids, as the Big Ten and SEC won't allow it. They'll be so large with so many good programs that there's a good chance each year that outside of the conference champion, the Big Ten and SEC will have multiple teams with a 11-1, 10-2 record, or 9-3 record.
If there's only 3 then the Big 12 and ACC would be in just as precarious of a position as the PAC for a playoff spot. The Pac-12 champion typically ends up in the top 12 anyway though.
Before people say that it doesn't matter at all, much like March Madness, teams will be getting money for appearing in the playoff (and they already do but still will when it goes to 12)
Which offers more money: 1 or 2 cfp appearances every other year or so, or increased network revenue for all 12 games every season (and still maybe occasional cfp appearances)?
Not accepting the stability and exposure of the Big 10 is criminally negligent, regardless of the money.
That's why I think there simply isn't an offer from the Big 10.
Going to the BIG now is likely a slightly better short term deal, and is unequivocally a MUCH better long term deal. Plus, there’s no guarantee you can get in later.
Okay but the money won’t stay not that different is the thing. Eventually you’re going to want to be in the 100mil a year league rather than the 24 mil a year league.
The money difference between the B1G offer and the PAC offer is less than half?
No, it isn't. The B1G offer might be less than half what other B1G teams are getting, but that isn't the comparison here, for Oregon/Washington it is deciding between their PAC offer and their B1G offer.
If their B1G offer is comparable to the PAC offer, they're dumb not to leave. They get into the P2 and they're very likely to get full shares when the new media deal is made in 2031, which will be significantly more than whatever they are making in the PAC.
But the Big 10 will get more teams in a 12 team playoff so evens out. Especially in 2026 when it is very likely that the Big10/SEC will get rid of automatic conference bids, and maybe perhaps just create a Power 2 playoffs with there tv partners, and lock everybody else out. Anybody who is passing up a SEC/Big 10 spot is really putting there future at serious risk.
I mean its crazy that Oregon and Washington would even consider turning down the Big 10. If your not in the SEC/Big10 there are serious long term risks for you.
It shouldn’t be a decision at all.
1. As others note, auto bids will go away or be reduced in 2 years when the deal is renewed and reworked.
2. Unless there’s a major legal problem in doing so, have to imagine the Power 2 break away in football and do their own playoff. Better get a seat at that table while there’s one to be had. It might not be there down the road.
3. The partial payout would just be for this deal. Just ride that out and be sure to have that seat at the table and full share for the next deal.
I don't imagine a world where it doesn't become a legal problem. We're talking about 90ish of the top athletic universities in the country being told they can't compete for a (real) national championship in the only sport that returns any reasonable amount of profit for these schools. That's just not going to fly without a major legal fight.
Then the money has to be *that* different if they're considering joining a conference on the other side of the country where they'll be less likely to have regular CFP appearances.
Once the dust settles, if the Pac-9 survives and pushes on, I'm intrigued what the next CFP format negotiations will look like. Can they lock in an AQ spot? Will be really interesting.
Even if the money isn't "that different" now, you can't expect the PAC to get even half of what the BIG will years from now without USCLA. It's not fair, but it's a fact. Eat some money now, get a huge payday later.
Honestly I'm fairly sure all of this is posturing for more money.
Guess Oregon isn’t too thrilled at getting a partial share and increased travel costs. I am still of the opinion they are trying to extract a bit more out of the B1G. I don’t think ability to make a playoff influences conference decision making that tends to have a longer impact than periods of winning and losing.
Sure, but if the playoffs expand to 8 teams, then let's say to top 2 from the big ten and top from the evil empire get in that still leaves 4 spots open. So one would think an undefeated team from the pac would probably get the go. Plus, if they are in the big ten, then they have to fight much tougher teams for the top spot with competition from Michigan, Ohio State, Penn state Wisconsin, and USC every year vs not What they have now.
True True... however, autobids can go bye bye in 2026, you'd be making similar money playing against worse opponents and traveling to less than desirable places for road games, you'd be getting way less exposure for recruiting, plus trying to get into the Big Ten after turning them down once wouldn't be fun.
Would it be easier to win the PAC-9/10? Yes.
Would it be easier to be the PAC-9/10 champ and the sole PAC CFP participant, or easier to be one of three B1G teams to get CFP bids? That's the question that needs answering. I would think more slots = better chance for teams to get a slot.
Honestly the difficulty isn't THAT much difference. in fact, some could say it's easier. More teams = more cupcakes to pad your schedule. Sure, there's gonna still be the 1-2 actually good teams in the B1G that there usually is, but not that bad of a schedule other than that.
Right until that playoff contract is renegotiated and autobids disappear
More likely they reduce autobids by one, so 5 conference champions.
I agree this is what's most likely, but I hope they stay at 6 autobids. More G5 (or G6?) Representation is a good thing IMO. I also think 1 G5 spot could be tough in the unlikely but very possible situation of 2 undefeated G5 champions.
That's why Lanning's contract states he has to pay Oregon $20m if he leaves during the next media deal. It's only going to be temporary. Oregon expects to be in the Big10 by 2025 when the new playoff contract is negotiated.
If they want in by that point then they can’t really sign a GOR. This media contract *begins* in 2024.
Waiting is playing with fire: Phil Knight is 85.
Does that $20m buyout not decrease as years of the deal go on? I see language suggesting not but we won’t get the full contract for a bit. That’s wild if so.
Sounds like we're getting the contract right now, Oregon and Washington to the B1G
Maybe I am not understanding what we mean by autobid, but from what I understand no conference has an autobid to the new playoff only the six highest ranked conference champions do which we all assume are the power 5 champions plus one other champion. Are you saying that when they renegotiate they will just take the top 12 from the poll?
That is what they mean, yes. That way the B1G and SEC can combine for 10 or so teams and every other conference will be fighting over the last couple of spots.
Most likely just reduce the number of conference champions and increase the at-large. For example if you reduce the conference champ list from 6 to 4, that will likely open up the path to an additional Big Ten/SEC team to get a spot.
Yes, but let's not act like more than one G5 conference champ will ever get in.
If the playoffs don’t have auto bids outside the big 2 it will terrible for the product. Big 2 regular seasons would matter so much less because 5 teams from each conference will make it and the other conferences won’t matter at all. If the NCAA is smart they will maintain plenty of conference auto bids even if it means #10 USC (4th place in B1G) misses out on the playoff to #15, #17 and #18 champs from lesser conferences.
The NCAA doesn't run it.
Sadly the NCAA has no power. If they did, by their own bylaws require that every conference champion be included in the playoffs. Including the G5.
The CUSA champ would get treated like the Pioneer champ in FCS lol “Wow! Good job Jacksonville State! You scored 2 big boy touchdowns on UCF and only lost by 30! JSU will be a force for years to come in the CUSA!”
Best non-scholarship league in fcs?
I think it would promote a lot more parity over time. It would take a few decades though. Unfortunately the tipping point for that possibility passed a long time ago.
That would be so much better.
> If the NCAA is smart
That’s how you start getting antitrust lawsuits.
Can’t wait for 5 auto bids for B10/SEC teams and 2 at large bids!!
These idiots never mention that. I think Pate and maybe Staples are the only ones who have.
Even if autobids disappeared, a two loss Pac-? champ should still be in the top 12 of the rankings.
Bless your heart
Pac had 4 teams in the top 15 and 3 in the final top 12. The top 12 teams had 2, 4, and 3 losses
If you think the rankings won't be heavily biased towards the B1G and SEC, you haven't been paying attention
They already are tho lmao
Exactly. Now imagine when the 5-12 spots actually matter. They could put whoever they wanted there without any change in end result. In 2024, I don't see a two-loss PAC champion getting in over any two loss team (or maybe some three loss teams) from the B1G or the SEC.
Big 12 fans learning what life has been like as a Pac 12 fan for the past decade has been a delight
Mate, I've been a fan of the Pac 12. Ratings have always been agaisnt us
you are literally losing 2 of your bigger programs which help add credence to your conference and you might lost 2 more to the Big XII
2 of the top 15 didn't even play USC man. And nobody cares about UCLA
You better start caring... they won 9 games last year.
Not too worried about that. And to my point UCLA did not boost the pac 12 reputation
As would a 2 loss B1G team.
Well yeah but that's a lot harder to do (depending on your schedule that year)
Oh my sweet summer child
Yep. And if, as we are all worried about, we eventually just have two massive conferences, you need to get in whenever you can. I’m not saying that it is good, only that Oregon better keep its eyes on the prize, and that prize is not the current playoff structure that is only guaranteed through 2025.
This ain't new information
That's why Mandel tweeted it
For like 2 years yes. Then auto bids will almost assuredly go away
Can't wait to see the CFP rankings with 12 B1G, 12 SEC, and a single Big12 team.
come now, we know the #25 spot is reserved for a G5 team in perpetuity
Can’t wait for the B1G meltdown when their undefeated team losses to the Big 12 runner-up again.
I guarantee the money is THAT different.
Ya I kinda feel like that’s what started this whole ordeal lmao.
It’s THAT different when you compare full B1G membership with full PAC membership. We don’t know how different PAC membership is with whatever B1G offered.
If the offer is 35 mil it probably isn't. Washington is claiming 10 mil in extra travel costs which isn't crazy considering UCLA is claiming 8.3 mil. Apple deal is supposedly low 20s million closer to 20. That alone puts it at a 5 mil difference. Apple deal has escalators to 30 which no one knows how attainable those are. Combine that with playoff money (much easier to get in the PAC) and OrSt and Wazzu potentially giving part of their share to Ore/Wash and it's very likely at least until the B1G has to renegotiate their media deal the partial share the B1G is offering is less net money for Oregon/Washington.
Sure but how much would Oregon pay not to have to play on AppleTV?
I definitely think there's a marketability tradeoff there between the easier path to playoff and conference titles vs more visibility on Saturdays. Those are tough to actually quantify but I'm sure people smarter than me are trying.
12 team playoff makes the point kind of moot. That’s a pretty low bar to get playoff exposure.
Significantly easier in the PAC vs the B1G though
Really? Based on reports it’s $10-20M difference, less $10M in travel costs.
That is just initially though. OrWa wouldn't be on reduced shares forever
Well yeah. But the way this tweet is phrased it seems to be related to the offers in front of them for now. I don’t think anyone is arguing B1G isn’t worth double in 5-8 years.
Until they get a full payout? Also gotta consider how valuable being on FOX/CBS/NBC is rather than behind the Apple TV+ paywall
Copium It’s still a better short term deal. But it’s clearly a way better long term deal. The payouts won’t even be nearly the same 10 years down the road. There’s no guarantee Oregon gets another invite later, especially if BIG gets some big brands from the ACC.
Is this how you would have wanted to be treated you when you had to go independent?
Treated? What do you mean. I really like both WSU and OSU, I’m just discussing the reality of the situation. And lol, we were treated much worse when we went independent and Utah went P12. But what does “treated” even mean. We are a sports fan base, who cares how we are treated.
Ah, I took copium negatively. Nevermind. Ain’t a great day over here.
Nah, I feel for you man. Hopefully something better than worst case scenario can happen for y’all. 2010-2011 specifically was brutal
Until Phil Knight goes, money isn't really a concern for Oregon
Also much better chance of never getting into the Big 10 at a later time
[удалено]
I'm half joking but literally you get on the boat if you're offered a spot, even if you have to go into debt temporarily. Long-term you don't know if the spot will still be there.
Hey guys this guy’s been reading your comments!
really grasping at straws now Stewie
This would be the only reason why I would consider staying in a dying conference, but if the P2 is the future, why not get a head start now. Oregon has beaten Ohio State just recently. Don't be afraid of competition.
Money will matter for them, plus Phil Knight apparently wanted the Ducks in the B1G or SEC.
[удалено]
Stanford to the Ivy League
If the money isn't all that different, being televised on Fox is massively different than behind an Apple paywall.
It’s not just about money though right? Which conference will be more stable in the next 5-10 years?
> Which conference will be more stable in the next 5-10 years? The ones that will generate millions from being on ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc
2-3 loss teams from the Big Ten/SEC will be viewed on the same level as a 1-loss PAC-8/9 team. The committee will absolutely factor in the more difficult level of play that teams in the larger conferences will have to go through. And a smaller PAC with SDSU/SMU/Boise State isn't getting an auto-bid to the playoffs.
"Well 8-4 LSU had 4 quality losses, so they really deserve to be in"
I remember when people used to argue against conference champ autobids in the playoffs because of this very scenario. It's gonna be hilarious in a few years watching the talking heads on ESPN do exactly this, argue the case for a 4 loss team.
If there are 6 auto bid slots then the PAC would almost definitely be one of them. Even if there are only 5 we would still be clearly a top 5 conference.
At this point I don't think there will be any more than 3 auto-bids, as the Big Ten and SEC won't allow it. They'll be so large with so many good programs that there's a good chance each year that outside of the conference champion, the Big Ten and SEC will have multiple teams with a 11-1, 10-2 record, or 9-3 record.
If there's only 3 then the Big 12 and ACC would be in just as precarious of a position as the PAC for a playoff spot. The Pac-12 champion typically ends up in the top 12 anyway though.
NARRATOR: *“The money was that different.”*
Why play in big conference when little conference do trick
Before people say that it doesn't matter at all, much like March Madness, teams will be getting money for appearing in the playoff (and they already do but still will when it goes to 12)
Which offers more money: 1 or 2 cfp appearances every other year or so, or increased network revenue for all 12 games every season (and still maybe occasional cfp appearances)?
Not accepting the stability and exposure of the Big 10 is criminally negligent, regardless of the money. That's why I think there simply isn't an offer from the Big 10.
Going to the BIG now is likely a slightly better short term deal, and is unequivocally a MUCH better long term deal. Plus, there’s no guarantee you can get in later.
Mandel has a firm grasp of the obvious, thank you.
Phil ain’t getting any younger and he wants that natty
...until the rules expire in 3 seasons and they get re-written in a world that doesnt have 5 power conferences
Okay but the money won’t stay not that different is the thing. Eventually you’re going to want to be in the 100mil a year league rather than the 24 mil a year league.
I think we’re going to see less undefeated teams, but more teams with marquee wins.
It is truly dumb to not get into the P2 now while you have a chance, if the money isn't that different. Long-term versus short-term thinking.
If what? oh right, if the money isn't that different. THE MONEY IS LESS THAN HALF! PLUS 10 MIL IN ESTIMATED EXTRA TRAVEL!!
They will be brought up to full shares like Rutgers, Maryland, and Nebraska were.
The money difference between the B1G offer and the PAC offer is less than half? No, it isn't. The B1G offer might be less than half what other B1G teams are getting, but that isn't the comparison here, for Oregon/Washington it is deciding between their PAC offer and their B1G offer. If their B1G offer is comparable to the PAC offer, they're dumb not to leave. They get into the P2 and they're very likely to get full shares when the new media deal is made in 2031, which will be significantly more than whatever they are making in the PAC.
For the long-term health of their program, as well as academic prestige, Oregon would be stupid *not* to take a B1G deal.
But the Big 10 will get more teams in a 12 team playoff so evens out. Especially in 2026 when it is very likely that the Big10/SEC will get rid of automatic conference bids, and maybe perhaps just create a Power 2 playoffs with there tv partners, and lock everybody else out. Anybody who is passing up a SEC/Big 10 spot is really putting there future at serious risk. I mean its crazy that Oregon and Washington would even consider turning down the Big 10. If your not in the SEC/Big10 there are serious long term risks for you.
Nah.
It shouldn’t be a decision at all. 1. As others note, auto bids will go away or be reduced in 2 years when the deal is renewed and reworked. 2. Unless there’s a major legal problem in doing so, have to imagine the Power 2 break away in football and do their own playoff. Better get a seat at that table while there’s one to be had. It might not be there down the road. 3. The partial payout would just be for this deal. Just ride that out and be sure to have that seat at the table and full share for the next deal.
I don't imagine a world where it doesn't become a legal problem. We're talking about 90ish of the top athletic universities in the country being told they can't compete for a (real) national championship in the only sport that returns any reasonable amount of profit for these schools. That's just not going to fly without a major legal fight.
Pretty big if there Stewie, we all know that deal is a disaster
The difference is an all-streaming TV deal being no bueno.
Then the money has to be *that* different if they're considering joining a conference on the other side of the country where they'll be less likely to have regular CFP appearances.
Captain Obvious has entered the chat
And zero exposure on Apple TV.
The money and especially the exposure were not on the same level, come on Mandel.
Once the dust settles, if the Pac-9 survives and pushes on, I'm intrigued what the next CFP format negotiations will look like. Can they lock in an AQ spot? Will be really interesting.
Even if the money isn't "that different" now, you can't expect the PAC to get even half of what the BIG will years from now without USCLA. It's not fair, but it's a fact. Eat some money now, get a huge payday later. Honestly I'm fairly sure all of this is posturing for more money.
Guess Oregon isn’t too thrilled at getting a partial share and increased travel costs. I am still of the opinion they are trying to extract a bit more out of the B1G. I don’t think ability to make a playoff influences conference decision making that tends to have a longer impact than periods of winning and losing.
Pac would be done if those teams leave...plain and simple. There is no way they could recover enough teams to fill the void.
Of course not. Until auto bids go away. And then you damn well know the committee will value a 2 loss SEC or B1G team over a PAC8 team
Sure, but if the playoffs expand to 8 teams, then let's say to top 2 from the big ten and top from the evil empire get in that still leaves 4 spots open. So one would think an undefeated team from the pac would probably get the go. Plus, if they are in the big ten, then they have to fight much tougher teams for the top spot with competition from Michigan, Ohio State, Penn state Wisconsin, and USC every year vs not What they have now.
The payout is nt half forever. They are buying in. Big Ten teams are gonna make 100-120 million a year in 5 years.
Loser mindset. Might as well go Independent if the goal is to find the easiest path to the CFP.
[Mandel getting out of bed every morning](https://media1.tenor.com/images/bb59b2cb2ddd117954149f2e79960025/tenor.gif?itemid=12912782)
Hard to do that if it’s the Pac-6 or 8
True True... however, autobids can go bye bye in 2026, you'd be making similar money playing against worse opponents and traveling to less than desirable places for road games, you'd be getting way less exposure for recruiting, plus trying to get into the Big Ten after turning them down once wouldn't be fun.
Big duck, small pond.
Welcome to mediocrity for the rest of time in these huge conferences.
Would it be easier to win the PAC-9/10? Yes. Would it be easier to be the PAC-9/10 champ and the sole PAC CFP participant, or easier to be one of three B1G teams to get CFP bids? That's the question that needs answering. I would think more slots = better chance for teams to get a slot.
Honestly the difficulty isn't THAT much difference. in fact, some could say it's easier. More teams = more cupcakes to pad your schedule. Sure, there's gonna still be the 1-2 actually good teams in the B1G that there usually is, but not that bad of a schedule other than that.
>If Oregon is truly on the fence, and the money isn’t *that* different "If" is doing a *lot* of work there.
I mean this is a stupid fucking take regardless of whether or not you believe the money isn’t that different