The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include ‘mailbag’ in the subject line. Or hit me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
Good or bad, what’s been surprising about college football broadcasts this season? Has there been anything disappointing, disturbing or eye opening? — @MrEd315
Frankly, the most disappointing development came on the final Saturday of the regular season, when an egregious conflict of interest played out for the college football world to see.
The talking heads on ESPN’s immensely popular, highly influential ‘College GameDay’ broadcast urged Mississippi to allow Lane Kiffin to lead the Rebels in the College Football Playoff after agreeing to become the head coach of a rival school (LSU).
It wasn’t merely a preposterous viewpoint that ignored the opportunity Kiffin would have to poach players and embarrass the Mississippi brand. It was a massive conflict of interest: Nick Saban, Kirk Herbstreit and others are represented by the same agency (CAA) as Kiffin; they pushed the narrative to millions that served their business partner, which is also Kiffin’s business partner; and they didn’t disclose the conflict.
And that’s not all. While he stumped for Kiffin to coach the Rebels in the CFP, Saban advised Kiffin to take the LSU job.
Our standards for journalistic integrity are nonexistent for ESPN’s studio shows — it’s the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network, after all — but the situation was nauseating nonetheless.
That said, three things were striking about the regular season from a ratings/data perspective:
— ABC’s dominance
Fox aired the two most-watched games, with Ohio State-Michigan and Ohio State-Texas drawing a combined 35 million viewers, according to the Sports Business Journal.
But ABC and the SEC owned the eyeballs to an extent the Hotline could not have foreseen a few years ago.
Of the 20 most-watched games, ABC aired 17.
All 17 involved SEC teams, and 12 were SEC conference games.
Disney’s deal to broadcast the No. 1 SEC game each week for $300 million annually is a screaming bargain.
–– The little guys: NBC and CBS
Remember back in August 2022, when the Big Ten unveiled the $1 billion annual media deal with Fox, NBC and CBS joining arms to provide three broadcast TV windows? Welp, there’s a good chance two of those networks aren’t thrilled with how things have turned out.
From a competitive standpoint, the Big Ten has too much fat — too many mediocre teams and too many ho-hum games. And it’s reflected in the ratings.
NBC had one — one! — of the 20 most-watched games (Penn State-Oregon), while CBS had … zero.
Yes, Fox only had two. But they were mammoth, as we noted above, and the three-way deal with NBC and CBS is a financial boon for Fox, which owns the rights to all the Big Ten games and has a sub-licensing agreement with NBC and CBS.
NBC doesn’t reap the full financial benefits from Penn State-Oregon, for example; Fox retains some of the value through the terms of the sub-licensing deal.
— The Saturday night slide
The final broadcast window of the college football week isn’t the same without the Pac-12, and the numbers bear that out: ESPN’s #AfterDark ratings have taken a hit.
The Hotline compared audience data for Pac-12 games in ESPN’s 7:30 p.m. (Pacific) window in the 2022-23 seasons to the ratings for either ACC or Big 12 games in the same window in 2024-25.
There has been some slippage. It’s not jaw dropping, but it’s noticeable: The 15 Pac-12 games over those two years averaged 1.7 million viewers; the 15 ACC and Big 12 games have averaged 1.5 million. (Figures from Sports Media Watch.)
Also: Five Pac-12 games drew at least 2 million viewers in those two years; but only three ACC or Big 12 games have hit that mark.
We aren’t suggesting — not for a second — that ESPN regrets its strategic decisions in the Pac-12 media rights negotiations. The calculation for the network was about much more than two hundred thousand viewers on Saturday nights.
Instead, we’re simply stating what seems obvious: Cincinnati-Utah in the #AfterDark window is not the same as Oregon-Utah.
We know how much the conferences love the money from their championship games. But if they could find a similar or better revenue stream, would they dump the games? — @SnitchSnatcher
We’ll save a definitive answer for Sunday, because if Alabama loses the SEC championship game and gets knocked out of the playoff — the Crimson Tide is currently two spots above the cut line — then you might see title games go the way of the Dodo sooner than later.
But regardless of the SEC’s specific situation, they are becoming obsolete at an exponential rate, courtesy of the 12-team playoff.
And if the CFP grows to 16, which could happen as early as next season, the championship games will carry even less value.
The calculation is about both time and money.
The SEC title game version is worth a truckload — in the $75 million range, based on information collected over the years from industry sources. (The other Power Four games aren’t at that level.)
If an expanded CFP offers enough revenue to make gutting the title games worthwhile, they won’t last. So far, there’s no evidence to suggest a 16-team field would degenerate enough additional cash. In fact, ESPN would not be obligated to pay a dollar more for the extra inventory.
Any substantial upturn in CFP revenue would come from an overhaul of the contract and implementation of a 24-team field.
But that creates a timing issue.
Whether there are 12 or 16 teams, four rounds of play is sufficient. Beyond 16 teams, a fifth round must be added. Where would that be placed on the calendar? Probably on the Saturday currently reserved for Army-Navy.
That could force teams to play straight through, from regular season finale to the conference championship to the playoffs. That doesn’t appeal to college football officials.
Also, a 24-team field would render conference championships completely meaningless — the CFP would be full of fourth- and fifth-place finishers.
We don’t envision a 24-team playoff materializing in the next two or three years. But as we’re reminded daily, logic and common sense do not apply to college football.
After Tuesday night’s CFP rankings, is Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti about to go from the sport’s red-headed stepchild to the smartest guy in the room, especially when three-loss Texas is not ranked in the top 10? Also, why would a one-bid, if that, ACC and a one-bid Big 12 not support a format that guarantees two teams in the field? — Jon J
Petitti’s plan to create four automatic bids for the Big Ten and the SEC in a 16-team field would limit the impact of non-conference games. The conferences themselves would determine which teams advance to the CFP based on the standings or the outcome of play-in games on the final weekend.
Texas’ loss to Ohio State, which is problematic for the Longhorns under the current system, would matter only for seeding, not for access, using a model based on automatic qualifiers.
But there were two issues with Petitti’s plan for the 16-team field, which isn’t dead but appears comatose:
— The second-class treatment of the ACC and Big 12 (more below).
— The degree to which predetermined access could undermine the regular season. (Not surprisingly, ESPN opposed Petitti’s plan.)
As for the ACC and Big 12, we’d offer two thoughts:
Yes, the ACC could end the current saga with zero bids (if Duke wins the championship game), but it could also grab two bids (the champion and Miami). Meanwhile, the Big 12 could receive one bid (Texas Tech) or two (if BYU wins the championship).
Also, there is a fate for both conferences worse than repeatedly drawing the short straw when it comes to bids, and that’s telling the world that you are only worth half a straw.
The damage to the ACC and Big 12 brands would be immense under the so-called AQ model. They cannot agree to a format in which the Big Ten and SEC are guaranteed to receive twice as many bids.
After attending the Arizona-ASU game and then seeing Saturday’s Big 12 games compared to other conferences, I wonder: Did commissioner Brett Yormark learn something about scheduling games for the final weekend? — @bogeycat85
We’ll assume the question refers to the lack of Big 12 rivalry games on the final Saturday — and yes, they were conspicuous by their absence. No offense to Oklahoma State-Iowa State, but it’s not Bedlam.
But here’s the problem: All the realignment has left the Big 12 with eight new members and precious few natural rivalries.
The few that remain aren’t always played on the last day of the season:
— Farmageddon (Iowa-State-Kansas State) has been played on the final Saturday twice in the past five years and was the season opener, in Ireland, this year.
— The Holy War was slotted into the middle of October this season and has been all over the calendar since Utah and BYU left the Mountain West in the early 2010s.
— The Territorial Cup (Arizona-ASU) was moved to Black Friday this season, as was the case a few years ago.
Why not slot all three rivalries onto the final Saturday?
Because they would get lost in the clutter of Michigan-Ohio State, the Iron Bowl, Texas-Texas A&M and so many other games that attract huge TV audiences.
The Big 12 and its media partners (Fox and ESPN) believe the rivalries will attract more eyeballs if slotted into other spots on the calendar.
That was certainly true of Farmageddon, which drew 4.5 million viewers on Aug. 23. (The Holy War hit the 2-million mark, a figure unlikely to be duplicated on the final Saturday.)
If the goal is to get the most eyeballs on the Big 12’s premier product, moving those rivalries is the right move.
Now that it is bowl season, what will the future bowl tie-ins be for the Pac-12? ESPN will televise dozens of bowl games. Does not having them as a media rights partner have any bearing? — Cory D
Until the College Football Playoff expands, the bowl tie-ins could remain as they are. After all, executives won’t know how many teams from the power conferences are available each year until they know the size of the CFP.
(It could remain as is for next season; we should know for sure by the end of January.)
Once everything settles, the rebuilt Pac-12’s lineup of bowl games could reflect a mix of the current tie-ins for the Pac-12 and Mountain West.
Not having ESPN as a media rights partner shouldn’t play a significant role in the process. The network doesn’t currently partner with the Big Ten or the Mountain West on media rights, and both conferences have sufficient bowl options.
While ESPN Events operates a handful of games, many are independent entities that cut their deals with the conferences, then sell their broadcast rights to the networks.
Geography is the prime driver of bowl tie-ins. Most games are in the Texas-to-Florida stretch of the country, offering warm weather and easy access to fans of SEC, ACC and Big 12 teams.
There aren’t many FBS schools in the western third of the country and, as a result, there aren’t many bowl games.
Our hunch is the rebuilt Pac-12 partners with the Potato and LA Bowls, plus one or two others (e.g., Hawaii). With only eight football teams, it won’t need more than a handful of games.
If an unexpected number of teams become eligible, they can join the at-large pool and fill vacancies elsewhere.
I can’t imagine this comes to fruition, but what the heck: We know what happens if Duke wins the ACC championship (James Madison would be in the CFP). My question is what happens if JMU loses and Duke wins? Do we see the Blue Devils (8-5) in the playoff? Or is UNLV suddenly in? — @dmcknight24
First, UNLV needs to beat Boise State in Boise to win the Mountain West and become eligible as a conference champion.
Second, yes: We could very well end up with a five-loss team in the CFP — a team that lost to Tulane and UConn and won the five-team ACC tiebreaker despite not recording a victory over any of the tied teams.
The entire situation is embarrassing for the ACC, which needs to overhaul its tiebreaker, and for the CFP, which needs safeguards against this very situation.
Our hunch is that minimum standards will be created for automatic qualifiers, forcing them to be ranked above a certain threshold.
Lastly, don’t assume victories by Duke and James Madison would put the Dukes (not Duke) into the CFP.
The Blue Devils are playing the 17th-ranked team in the country (Virginia) while the Dukes are playing four-loss Troy. The committee could use that mammoth disparity in competition as a data point to justify ranking Duke ahead of JMU.
The Hotline will believe two Group of Five teams make the CFP when we see it.
How much are bowl picks based on home attendance? Arizona beat ASU, but are the Sun Devils more deserving of a better bowl because they sold out the season? Does it even matter with the CFP? — @markgstanley
Ticket sales matter a great deal to bowl executives, who view home attendance as an indicator of fan passion.
Arizona’s crowds this season were absurdly sparse given the on-field product — it was an embarrassment to the community, frankly — but we suspect the Wildcats will receive priority over ASU in the selection process.
Because head-to-head results matter.
And rankings matter.
And win totals matter.
Those are the ingredients for fan enthusiasm, and enthusiasm spurs fans to purchase tickets and flights and hotel rooms.
Arizona (9-3) has the edge over ASU (8-4) in most categories, but it’s not a binary choice for the Holiday Bowl: Washington (8-4) is also available.
We expect the Holiday to pick Arizona. If not, there’s only one reason: The poor home crowds.
If you’re Oregon, wouldn’t you want the No. 4 seed in the CFP? To get that, you would likely need BYU to win the Big 12 and knock Texas Tech down from No. 4. That would create a quarterfinal matchup against Mississippi, Duke or a Group of Five team. More importantly, the opening-round bye creates 10-ish more days for the Ducks’ injured receivers to get healthy. — Will D
Yes, you can make the case the Ducks would be best served with the No. 4 seed. The rest would allow them to get healthy, but it would be a 32-day break — that’s enough time for rust to move in, have a picnic and take a nap.
If Oregon receives the No. 5 seed, it would have 20 days off before hosting the opening-round game.
In our view, the opportunity to host a playoff would trump all other considerations because of the university-wide benefits.
It would provide the Ducks with a marketing and fundraising bonanza and instantly become the biggest on-campus event in the history of Oregon athletics (and perhaps the history of the school itself).
Our view is unchanged from August: Whatever scenario leads to a home playoff game is, by far, the best outcome for the Ducks.
That the home game would come against the No. 12 seed, then lead to a quarterfinal matchup with the No. 4 seed, only add to the list of benefits.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com or call 408-920-5716
*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline