NCAA Football Is Now Openly Pro Football

Maybe NBC will bid on the CFL US TV contract. The CFL moves it’s season into mid May. The network needs summer programming for it’s relaunch. It can easily drop the USFL from it’s network since they are sub leasing a limited number of games from FOX, a football TV competitor

1 Like

CFL needs to find some people to set up a team or two in the USA or wait for the Rock and his league to fold and get a team or two playing three downs. I really think the only thing holding the CFL back from getting USA TV money is lack of a team on US soil.

4 Likes

Yeah California smells the money - and they want a cut for Cal - even though Cal has not been relevant in football in the last x number of years or so - Pac 12 is dead they need to merge with the MWC and call it a day.

2 Likes

That’s why I keep harping on Chicago

2 Likes

I don’t see the XFL folding up shop, at least for 3 years. Redbird does not want to be embarrassed, though I could see The Rock quietly selling his stake and just being a glorified PR person, as Mike Ditka was with with old Chicago Rush.

1 Like

Red Bird will decide when to pull the plug, not the Rock. They are already operating in the red and they haven’t played a down. RB is behind FOX/USFL. The Rock/Garcia/Red Bird trio are doing the relaunch all wrong, If FOX pulls great ratings, money and attention than the XFL, RB will exit out. Money has no emotions, the bottom line will tell RB to get out of pro sport leagues

3 Likes

How much would I like for NBC to be involved with the CFL for broadcasts on NBC or USA Network or other NBC regular TV platform so long as they keep the CFL off Peacock except for simulcast. Alternatively, perhaps NBC finally is going to rebrand Peacock and relaunch the inferior service.

The problem is that NBC is already committed to Notre Dame Football home games during the day on Saturday and to Big Ten football at night on every college football Saturday starting in 2023.

So if NBC is going to be involved with the CFL, Saturdays are out starting as soon as Labour Day weekend, so we don’t know how they could be involved.

2 Likes

This is where college football is heading. Money and TV drive the ship and you can either get on or get left behind. The most interesting aspect of this contract is that this is just the Tier 1 rights. This is not counting the Big Ten Network or any other streaming services beyond NBC/Peacock.
The NBC aspect fascinates me because they are almost making it like a Sunday football day in the US for college. The Notre Dame home games at 3:30 and the Big Ten game after that. It is almost like the NFL here where you have the 1PM games on our CBS or Fox, the 4PM games after on one or both of those stations and then the Sunday night game in NBC.
For CFB on Saturday, it is Fox then CBS then the NBC prime time for the Big Ten.
It has been a crazy 12 months for CFB. It is only going to get crazier.
Go Bombers!
David

2 Likes

Totally agree with you - interesting that NBC is now going with the Sunday Night football model except with the Big Ten game every week. Makes sense to me as sports is one of the few shows that viewers will watch without streaming. Also interesting that Peacock is going to show men’s hoops and other sports on that platform.

1 Like

Here’s another update from Dennis Dodd of CBS, my favourite and in my opinion the best writer on college football including this subject matter.

There’s a lot packed into this article including what is one way that not only would the legal situation at hand in California with UCLA be mostly resolved, but also the BigTen would expand a bit more so as to secure mutual interest via Disney / ESPN, which is losing out on all Big Ten conference games starting in 2023 including large media markets in those windows.

I agree with Dodd’s implications in that you bet ESPN, despite having the SEC, wants in for more especially given its expansionist history into college football for decades:

CBS Sports reported last month the Big Ten was evaluating California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington as potential future league members. Rightsholders pushed back on the notion as they did not believe those current Pac-12 schools would bring equal value to the league as USC and UCLA did upon being added. CBS Sports subsequently reported interest had cooled on those four schools; however, adding those four schools would create additional inventory for the Big Ten, which could result in ESPN getting a piece of the action.

Here’s just a taste of so much more in what easily could have been split into three articles!

Fallout from the Big Ten media rights deal

Futures of Pac-12, Big 12 hang in the balance: Separate from any Big Ten discussion, ESPN now has a chance to become somewhat of a “kingmaker” regarding these leagues. Each conference is eying the other’s schools in what could become the next big realignment story. Without a Big Ten deal, ESPN has theoretically freed up money to spend as both conferences are currently in flux.

The Pac-12 is desirable because ESPN would not otherwise have any games in the valuable “fourth window” – after 10 p.m. ET. The “Pac-12 After Dark” tag has been ridiculed by some, but it would be valuable to ESPN.

Taken to the extreme, it’s worth asking: Would ESPN now have an influence over which league survives this round of realignment? There is already word circulating that the Pac-12 – in the middle of its own media rights negotiations – might have to agree to a media rights contract that allows Cal, Oregon Stanford and Washington an “out” if approached by another conference.

1 Like

Outstanding article thank you for sharing!

Well for most under an average age of about 55 now by my estimation, and that number a year ago was more like 45 perhaps, the train had left the station already from over-the-air or cable TV to streaming content, beyond merely movies as in Netflix, for most anything but for live sports.

The following has been true for a few years already even before streaming of content to a big screen, not merely mobile devices, became mainstream:

Costs are a creeping concern for all broadcast network owners, especially as they look to feed their streaming ambitions. NBCU’s Peacock, which launched two years ago, is doubling its spending on content to $3 billion this year, ramping up to $5 billion in the coming years. If NBCU were to scale back in primetime, it could save money it has previously put into original shows intended for broadcast air, in keeping with secular declines in the pay-TV bundle and linear ratings.

The article overlooks some key points including especially that streaming at NBC via Peacock is not profitable and in the now seemingly ancient past in media terms, I am not so sure that the conglomerate that was GE that once owned NBC cared deeply about NBC networks to be major profit-makers, if at all, given all their other associated massive business interests and influence.

As an additional example, the following cited by a media veteran was already true circa late 2014 at a time when FS1, newly launched in 2013 by Fox, was already ailing miserably:

“Networks are at an inflection point in terms of costs,” one broadcast veteran said. “Live sports have emerged as the main driver going forward, and their high prices are putting pressure on costs for the rest of the lineup. The question is whether affiliates would like fewer hours of primetime network programming.”

Major conglomerates that owned media had quite the luxury of cost-shifting between major business entities and very creative accounting as well - ditto the other major American broadcast networks in those years that lasted until about the end of the 00s.

The more some things change, the more some things do stay the same even as of course much otherwise changes all the more for good or for the better.

This one flew well under the radar for a few days given otherwise a whole lot more in the news.

On the surface given the new rules, and even under the old rules this sort of promotion had been done often well under the table for decades with free gear for athletes over and beyond whatever the athletic departments were giving out, so there is no issue. But then let's dig deeper now.

Gee, an NFL media partner with business interests in licensing college football players? Hmm, what could go wrong as this line of business expands hmm?

Think preferential media coverage via Amazon during games, scores of product placement during also college games or cross-promotions during NFL games, et cetera.

Aren't we already pitched enough at the game or when watching an NFL game?

We shall see where this goes, for if it goes further I doubt only Amazon as an NFL media partner will be in on this action.

For example I think ESPN has exploited the athletes enough already beyond their pandering of the NCAA student-athlete propaganda of yore, but no doubt Disney and company and others will want more on this front too.

3 Likes

We will have what I believe is a first for an active college football player, which is an appearance in a paid advertisement AND during games via the starting QB at Alabama Bryce Young, and that is but a slice of more such change to come for better and for worse.

Apparently discussions to expand the college football playoff from 4 to 12 teams not merely 8 teams, which is seriously lame because even 8 teams don’t deserve such status by the end of November, are on the fast-track now.
A vote by a college football board will take place on Friday. Even if this vote fails, the vote will likely be done again within the next year anyway.

So why not then a Sweet Sixteen? “Too many games” some might say, but when has that reason ever stopped expansion in any given thriving sports league?

Sweet Sixteen Football might be where a looming Big 40 pro “college football” league is headed anyway.

Also such a move will likely ultimately remove ESPN from a monopoly on the college football playoff, and good riddance. Restricting the coverage to cable only a few years ago, with token ESPN+ coverage, was a terrible move anyway.

The commissioners failed in their attempt to reach consensus on a long, drawn-out process that extended through 2020 and into February 2022. That’s when the CFP officially announced expansion talks were dead. The presumption then was that playoff expansion would have to wait until at least 2026 when the current deal expires with ESPN.

There is still widespread support for CFP media rights to go out to multiple bidders. If expansion is instituted in 2024, ESPN would still have the rights to all the games for the final two years of a 12-year deal. Sports Illustrated first reported the approaching CFP meeting.

1 Like

And it’s official. The College Football Playoff will involve 12 teams starting in 2026 and then in 2025 if possible, which I think is what will actually happen given the very high stakes.

And ESPN will not have a lock on it any more, and it WILL be on broadcast platforms and streaming no longer this cable-only BS that was antiquated already circa 2018 when ESPN started that crap.

Here is Dennis Dodd’s review of the news after the unanimous vote so as to pass the expansion to 12 teams from the current four. This is a development that has been desired since 1998 when they started with the so-called Bowl Championship Series or as it played out after a few years, the BCS BS given some woeful match-ups once the USC teams (later stripped of their titles) were no longer a factor.

Key quote:

The SEC has won 12 of the last 16 national championships. It sucked in the Big 12’s two best teams (Texas and Oklahoma) in what became a movement about movement. The Big Ten followed, snagging USC and UCLA from the Pac-12.

Consolidation. Never in the history of the game have the game’s best brands and programs been concentrated in such small spaces (two conferences at the top of the game). The SEC and Big Ten were not only monopolizing the money, viewers and talent, they were monopolizing the game.

Ultimately, that wasn’t good. Finally, the presidents decided all of it wasn’t good enough.

Those 11 CFP presidents acted decisively Friday by voting unanimously to expand the four-team bracket to 12 teams beginning in 2026 at the latest. They did what the commissioners failed to do: agree.

“What motivated the presidents, me as well, is that we need to have an opportunity for more participation for our nation’s national championship tournament,” said CFP Board of Managers chairman Mark Keenum, president of Mississippi State. “Having only four teams, we felt like that’s not fair to our student-athletes.”

Then the rest as explained is a bit premature and also complicated, so I remain sceptical of what will actually play out though it’s no longer the SEC and everybody else.

And I have to wince at the quote above when Mark Keenum pretends we are still talking about “student-athletes” so as to attempt to perpetuate that ruse at hand all along for many schools.

They sure are not doing this for the athletes first and foremost, and they are not student-athletes most of them on the elite teams but for the common token academic achiever offensive lineman, kicker, long snapper, or punter, so stop it already.

1 Like

They are expanding to allow others to participate even though the SEC will probably win 8 out of the next 10 Championships. It doesn’t cost them anything to let the others participate and it also helps keep the late season TV ratings up because of the illusion of the possibility of a non SEC team winning a title.

College football is trying to keep from collapsing into a SEC footprint only TV product, and to accomplish this they need the rest of the country to stay tuned in and watching. Hence inviting all the others to the party even though they are going to get crushed.

1 Like

This will affect the XFL and USFL guys recruiting players for their leagues with the extended college post season. And affect the NFL that will also have move the NFL Combine to a later date

1 Like

There is a lot again in this new article by Dennis Dodd, but noting the following last section, I can make a prediction already as perhaps can others.

Given the total stakes of the new playoff format in the billions on top of the billions in valuation of the new Big Ten media contract, you bet that players will want their share and indeed many of the top players will move on and not play, as is the case already due to NFL prospects or academic ineligibility, for sums of money that could be seen as paltry in comparison to NIL income and their future prospects.

This situation will get messier no doubt and one can only imagine how all the gambling will be affected as well, and we have yet to assess the size and nature of media networks’ indirect share of all that new gambling revenue.

Revenue distribution

Among conferences, a plan needs to be formulated by the commissioners and approved by the presidents. We broke down how this could look on Sunday. But what about the players? They’re going to have to get something out of this. If each player was to receive, let’s say, a flat sum of $32,000 as a member of a participating team, that would work out to $38.4 million (based on paying 100 players per team). However, that does not take into account some athletes playing in one first-round game and others potentially playing a total of four.

Using $1.5 billion as the total payout, that $38.4 million figure would represent only 2.5% of the total annual media rights revenue from an expanded playoff. That would be perfectly doable but perhaps not enough. If the CFP eventually takes over the FBS or assumes the responsibilities of managing a smaller group of teams, it is going to have to account for the health and welfare of players. That probably includes paying for post-eligibility insurance.

None of it is going to keep players from skipping the CFP to concentrate on NFL Draft preparation. A five-figure appearance fee is not going to keep a star player in the college game if he has the potential to earn $60 million as a first-round pick. It would only be a meaningful gesture.

Considering that we’re headed toward a pro model eventually where these same commissioners might be in negotiations with
players, it would be a smart labor move to get on their good side as early as possible. Paying them directly with money from the expanded playoff would be a start.

1 Like

As the following took place many times over before NIL deals and now a host of NIL firms including the shady ones, and I even heard these new ads running during the homer radio broadcast of an Ohio State game via Sirius, we can figure to hear more of this sort of ordeal as in this case affected a top recruit who is a high school student and his family, who were evicted from their residence in Georgia and so were trying to make a move out of necessity:

Following the family’s eviction, Cunningham’s father contacted The Levels Group, which was created to facilitate NIL deals for college and high school athletes. According to the filing from Cunningham’s legal team, The Levels Group promised that the Cunningham family would have “a home, transportation and meals in California.”

1 Like

Wow things are changing so fast. I was reading 3Down across the street, and go figure there are even walk-ons in on the NIL and with pro potential.

Check out this walk-on prospect Chad Powers at Penn State for example:

2 Likes