Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

Posted on: February 27, 2012 12:17 pm
 

The BCS is interested in bringing in two high-profile television consultants as they move to the next level of reconfiguring college football’s postseason beginning in 2014.

CBSSports.com has learned that respected industry consultant Chuck Gerber is expected to be consulting with the BCS. Sports Business Journal reported separately on Monday that Gerber and Dean Jordan of Wasserman Media Group “were finalizing negotiations” to work with the BCS

Bringing in TV consultants is the next step in the reshaping of that postseason. The moves would suggest the BCS commissioners are ready to begin pricing postseason models. CBSSports.com reported last week that a four-team plus-one could be worth as much as $500 million per season in the new contract. The current ESPN contract pays the BCS $125 million per year through the 2013 season (2014 bowls). The BCS distributed approximately $180 million to its members in 2011.

Both men are considered at, or near, the top of the profession. Gerber was hired four years ago by the SEC as a consultant after working at ESPN for 15 years. His work helped land the conference a 15-year, $3 billion deal with ESPN and CBS. The deal was finalized in July 2009. Jordan most recently worked with Conference USA and the Mountain West on the merging of those conferences beginning in 2013.

Sports Business Journal reported that Gerber is currently an independent consultant. Per its website Wasserman Media Group is a “sports and entertainment marketing company with expertise in, among other areas, media rights. The company has six worldwide offices including (in the U.S.) Raleigh, N.C. New York, Los Angeles and Carlsbad, Calif.

While the commissioners could stay with the current model, but it is widely assumed that the postseason will be expanded in 2014. Three plus-one models appear to be most attractive:

--Semifinals on campus sites with the championship game at a neutral site. This model is now supported by both Jim Delany of the Big Ten and Larry Scott of the Pac-12.

 --The entire plus-one played at neutral sites. In both cases those sites would be bid out. Likely interested cities would include Dallas, Atlanta, Detroit and Indianapolis.

--A plus-one within the bowl system. Current BCS bowls – perhaps with additions – would rotate semifinals and championship games.

The games are expected to be played after Dec. 21 with the championship game to be played as close to Jan. 1 as possible. Last week’s BCS meetings in Dallas did not include TV consultants. 

Comments

Since: Jul 9, 2009
Posted on: March 1, 2012 3:46 pm
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

Trust me - I am not a Crimson Tide fan either but I do think that a true championship should be decided on the field with as many participants as possible so that there isn't much debate on who wins it and the process on how they got their opportunity to do so.

I use March Madness as the best example of how the NCAA gets it right with one sport - 68 teams get a chance to compete for a National Championship; WIN OR GO HOME!

NCAA could do the same in DIV I Football if they choose to and you know this - everyone know this!!!!



Since: Jan 9, 2008
Posted on: February 29, 2012 11:56 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

Did anyone notice Delaney wants only conference champions in the playoff ? Perhaps that is yet another pathetic attempt to get Notre Dame to join the Big 10 ?



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 3:00 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

Codyb1701, have fun when the networks turn out the lights for non-support. Which they'd soon do if they got too many ratings like the ones they got from this year's repeat. Been there, done that. Now do it eight years out of ten. Hated it.



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 2:56 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

Codyb1701, Not gonna happen. Why not? Because the other conferences have a long familiarity with the backroom deals that Soouthern voters pull for one another. The writers, the coaches, the old farts, they're all the same. Homers. Corrupt homers.



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 2:53 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

LordBy214, football ain't hoops. The Chaminade football team is never, never, never, never, ever going to beat Vanderbilt, much less Alabama. Thank God, and I'm no lover of the Red Tide. The fact that we swoon over results during March Madness that would launch a full-fledged FBI investigation and months of Congressional hearings if they happened in football is proof positive of one thing. America doesn't really give a rat's ass about the game of college hoops. All that matters is the hoopla.

If Dickie V yelled like that or Sir Chuck bloviated as he does during a Wolverines football game, I'd likely throw a brick through my TV screen. As it is, they don't really bother me, because I don't really care about them or most of what they're talking through. Which tells the tale, because seemingly no one else does either.

TV hoops is for people with ADHD and ADD. Nothing makes sense for anybody, so they're in good company for once.




Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 2:42 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

LSUSMC, another thing to keep in mind is that this is a political negotiation. The other Powers-That-Be will not willingly hand over 1/2 of the extra gravy to another Conference on a regular basis. Anymore than the schools with the eyeballs (that'd be ours) are going to share and share alike with the Houstons and the Tulanes of the world. Much less the avalanche of beggars that would soon come flooding up from the FCS.



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 2:35 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

LSUSMC, Alabama proved very little when they beat your Bengals that we didn't already know for a fact. When closely matched teams meet in the post-season, the most common outcome is that the loser wins. Simple human nature. All it proves is that they're not emotionally dead inside. As for the rest of it, the whole point of using conference champions is that the regular season becomes the initial rounds of the post-season. No dogging it like is commoon among the better basketball schools. (Not to mention the NBA.) Every loss matters; the whole point is to make it ALL worth watching, or as much as is humanly possible.

Under the scenario outlined for 2011, the Tide and the Hogs and the Hens had already LOST--eat dirt, losers. Ditto the others, except the Broncos, who had yet to try. The fun part is going to be listening to the screams from the SEC when their representative stumbles. Imagine the opportunities to rag on your rivals for at least a year, without let-up, with ten other schools jumping in with both feet. Sweet!



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 2:20 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

Haggardlab, In that case, just play your precious SEC Championship and call it a day. Obviously you already would know who the most deserving team was, so why bother with anyone else's opinion? This time around, you may secede with our blessings, sir.



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: February 29, 2012 2:13 am
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

mgunze10 wrote: "Call it what you like. I like the idea of playing at campus sites in late December with some teams playing above the Mason Dixon line from time to time on a rotational schedule. I am just not sure the fans will warm up to the idea. Best to wait and see how the Super Bowl draws to the outdoor venue in NJ." Can't much say that I care one damn bit what the usual over-monied riff-raff and assorted corporate stooges who attend the Superbowl find to do instead of bogarting tickets that might otherwise be available for actual FANS of the game. Let the World's Biggest Rolling Whore Fest stay in Vegas where it belongs. Or LA, as if there's a difference.




Since: Oct 31, 2011
Posted on: February 28, 2012 5:05 pm
 

Two high-profile TV consultants considered by BCS

I'd like it if it would be the 4 best conf champs that have to be in the top 8, or filled by a wild card. That way a #7 or #8 ACC or Big East team would ge in before  a 3rd SEC team, but also allow for 2 wild cards if one conf is just so much better then the rest. Hypotheticall example<ol>

<li>LSU * SEC champs</li>

<li>Bama  *Wild card</li>

<li>Oregon *Pac champ</li>

<li>Arkansas *2ndWildcard</li>

<li>Stanford</li>

<li>Texas but not B12 champs</li>

<li>Michigan but not B1G champ</li>

<li>Clemson but not ACC champ</li>

</ol>highly unlikely but could happen if by chance the top teams of conf lost in conf championship games and would make the top 4 teams go, I think it should be the top 4 no matter what conf they come from. I also think there should be some writing that teams from same conf should not play each other in the 1st round of the 4 team play off unless 3 from same are top 4.



The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com