Bowl Championship Series
I am the founder of BusinessofCollegeSports.com, a nationally-recognized source for news and analysis on the business of college sports. From that site was born a book, Saturday Millionaires: How Winning Football Builds Winning Colleges (Wiley/Turner, 2013). After practicing law for four years, and contributing to Forbes and Comcast Sports Southeast as a sports business analyst, I joined ESPN in 2011 for two years as a sports business reporter. I have a Bachelor of Arts in Politics from Oglethorpe University and a Juris Doctor (J.D.) from University of Florida Levin College of Law.
Follow me on Twitter: @SportsBizMiss. College Football Playoff trophy (Photo by Chris Graythen/Getty Images) We all knew the College Football Playoff would mean more money for everyone in college football. Having tracked the data conference-by-conference since the inception of the new system (links:, ), I thought it would be interesting to look at how each conference’s financial fortunes has changed since the last year of the Bowl Championship Series.
The BCS Payout Formula Under the BCS in its final year, each of the six automatic-qualifying conferences (the current “Power Five” plus the American, formerly the Big East) received a base share $27.897 million each. The other four conferences received a total of $13.168 million, which they split according to a formula they devised. Ten teams were selected for BCS games, including the conference champions from the six automatic-qualifiers and four at-large teams. Each of the four at-large teams received $6.3 million. The CFP Payout Formula The CFP still makes base payments, with a set amount going to each of the Power Five conferences and an aggregate base amount going to the Group of Five (the amounts of which are adjusted each year). Each of the four teams selected for a semifinal game receives an additional $6 million, although there is no additional amount for playing in the national championship game. Where the CFP gets more complicated is in the distinction between “contract bowls” and “access bowls.” The Orange, Rose and Sugar Bowls are contract bowls, while the Cotton, Fiesta and Peach Bowls are access bowls.
Contract bowls are contractually bound to include teams from the conferences with which they have their contracts: the ACC and an opponent from the Big Ten, SEC or Notre Dame for the Orange Bowl, the Big 12 and SEC for the Sugar Bowl, and the Big Ten and Pac-12 for the Rose Bowl. In years when they aren’t hosting a semifinal, the contract bowls as follows (on average over the length of the contracts): $27.5 million to each team in the Orange Bowl (although the share Notre Dame would receive if it were chosen for the game has not previously been disclosed), $40 million to each team in the Rose Bowl and $40 million to each team in the Sugar Bowl. Teams selected for access bowls in years those bowls aren’t hosting a semifinal receive $4 million each. Revenue Distribution One important note: although its the team that “earns” the payout by virtue of its selection for the game, all CFP monies are distributed to the team’s conference. Most conferences divide all bowl monies evenly, with the conference office taking an equal share to the members, with some conferences choosing to give additional money to the participant in the game (such as the SEC, whose policy is detailed ).
For the Group of Five, the base share is pooled between all five conferences and divided based on a revenue-sharing formula the conferences have agreed upon where the majority of funds are divided evenly between the conferences with a small percentage being divided according to performance. There are also additional amounts paid to teams for travel expenses. Those are detailed in the annual conference-by-conference breakdowns linked to above. Here’s how the payouts have played out conference-by-conference since the final year of the BCS: ACC. BCS 2013-14 CFP 2014-15 CFP 2015-16 CFP 2016-17 CFP 2017-18 Base Amount $27,897,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $55,000,000 $54,000,000 BCS At-Large Selection $6,300,000 – – – – CFP Semifinalists – $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $12,000,000 CFP Contract Bowls – $27,500,000 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 $0 CFP Access Bowls – $4,000,000 $0 $0 $4,000,000 TOTAL $34,197,000 $87,500,000 $97,000,000 $101,000,000 $70,000,000 CFP Grand Total: $355,500,000 Group of Five Note: The American was not part of this group for the final year of the BCS but is included for all years of the CFP. BCS 2013-14 CFP 2014-15 CFP 2015-16 CFP 2016-17 CFP 2017-18 Base Amount $13,168,000 $75,000,000 $79,000,000 $83,500,000 $81,320,000 BCS At-Large Selection $0 – – – – CFP Semifinalists – $0 $0 $0 $0 CFP Contract Bowls – – – – – CFP Access Bowls – $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 TOTAL $13,168,000 $79,000,000 $83,000,000 $87,500,000 $85,320,000 CFP Grand Total: $334,820,000 Notre Dame Under both the BCS and CFP, Notre Dame is entitled to a base amount regardless of whether it plays in a bowl game. Beyond that, it can earn additional sums for appearances in a semifinal game, contract or access bowl.
BCS 2013-14 CFP 2014-15 CFP 2015-16 CFP 2016-17 CFP 2017-18 Base Amount $2,319,000 $2,300,000 $2,580,000 $2,830,000 $2,650,000 BCS At-Large Selection $0 – – – – CFP Semifinalists – $0 $0 $0 $0 CFP Contract Bowls – $0 $0 $0 $0 CFP Access Bowls – $0 $4,000,000 $0 $0 TOTAL $2,319,000 $2,300,000 $6,580,000 $2,830,000 $2,650,000 CFP Grand Total: $14,360,000 The other independents share a collective pool each year under the CFP. Thus far, the teams and projected amounts have been:. 2014: $922,658 (Army, Navy, BYU). 2015: $ $618,241 (Army, BYU). 2016: $930,462 (Army, BYU, UMass). 2017: $ 928,503 (Army, BYU, UMass) If any of those teams were to play in a semifinal or access bowl, they would be entitled to the same payouts as any other team participating in those games.
However, none of the independents have played in a CFP game yet. Is a sports business analyst, recovering attorney and author of “.” Twitter.
For only $13.90/page No matter where you stand, arguments for any side of the case can be convincingly made. With this research, my goal will be to show how despite the controversy of the ranking system, it appears that the main purpose of the BCS system is to make as much money as possible through the televising and sponsorship of the bowl games themselves which create millions of dollars through advertising revenue. According to their own website, the BCS “is designed to match the two top-rated teams in a national championship game and to create exciting and competitive matchups between eight other highly regarded teams” (The BCS).
The key words here are, in my opinion, ‘exciting’ and ‘highly regarded’. In other words, the BCS wants teams that translate well to the television due to their popularity and due to the likelihood of creating a high-profile match-up that will draw in millions of viewers as opposed to determining the football programs that deserve to be there based on their play throughout the season. This is understandable from a business point of view, but troubling on the other hand for two major reasons considering the staggering financial numbers. With their new four-year deal with Fox, the BCS is going to rake in $132 million dollars a year to broadcast the four BCS games, or in other words, $33 million a game (Ourand). The first reason is because these are student-athletes that do not reap the financial rewards that the sponsors and colleges are receiving from their labor.
Surely these student-athletes do get special treatment and most of them are on scholarship trying to make it into professional football and the increased media exposure can up their stock, but these benefits pale in comparison to the financial windfalls reaped by the colleges and sponsors. The second problem is that this system creates a cycle where high-profile football conferences maintain their dominance due to the disproportionate amount of money they receive from profiting from the BCS system, which in turn offers these conferences more money to pour into scholarships to attract the best athletes (who have seen these teams on TV and know and want to then play for them), more money to spend on better facilities and training programs, and more money to secure additional television broadcasting rights. According to ESPN’s college football expert Gregg Easterbrook, every team in the six ‘football factory’ conferences stands to make $1. 5 million dollars from their BCS television profit sharing strategy.
Meanwhile teams from the mid-major conferences will only bring in $200,000 if they are fortunate enough to even have a team earn their way into the BCS (Eastbrook). BCS proponents cite these figures to strengthen their argument by saying that the profit-sharing strategy effectively ‘lifts all boats’ when in reality the ‘exciting’ and ‘highly regarded’ programs and the BCS sponsors profit disproportionately at the cost of creating a structure that truly has the student-athlete’s well-being in mind along with actually determining the best team in the land. Works Cited Eastbrook, Gregg. “The BCS doesn’t always give us a clear national champand that’s OK.
Bowl Championship Series Playoff
4 December 2007. “The BCS is” Bowl Championship Series in association with Fox Sports. 15 August 2007. Ourand, John and Michael Smith. “BCS seeks big bump from Fox. ” Sports Business Journal.
Bowl Championship Series History
3 November 2008.