A Sea Of Red

BuryYourDuke wrote:http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/n ... &type=lgns

This is the most scathing, well thought out, and constructive critique of the BCS I have read yet. It presents a realistic, profitable, and fair playoff system that would be the best thing for the sport. Thoughts?

I guess i sorta just commented on this in the other forum. Never going to happen. The Bowls are too ingrained, legally and financially, into the system and baring the massive changes i mentioned (i.e. every conference giving up their TV deals) there's no way to eliminate the Bowls from the picture. Yes its about money -- but unless someone can outbid the current contracts nothing will change. The current Big Ten regular season deal is 2.5 billion of 25 years. So, what are you going to be offering the Big Ten that is going to make them want to tear that deal up???

Legally speaking a playoff system is only possible if run by the presidents or the BCS reps. If the NCAA is going to run a playoff then individual conferences have to give up the rights they earned in court, and that means giving up their TV deals to the NCAA.

Presidents will do what they find most financially rewarding. They are beholden to their trustees who reward financially improving the university at which they are employed.

Never say never ... it may in fact be the legal system that forces a playoff system into existence.

IIRC, 75% of the NCAA's revenue came from the NCAA tournament last March (which the NCAA runs).

The BCS is not run by the NCAA. The money being made now goes to the conference/schools. You have to convince the PTB that they will not lose money if D1-A was run by the NCAA. In other words, the PTB are making a ton of money now & see no reason to hand over that gravy train to the NCAA.

Sometimes I think the sportswriter lobby secretly supports the BCS Bowl system, if for no other reason than it gives them column-fodder every year.

didnt obama say he was going to fix this last year?

rueful wrote:didnt obama say he was going to fix this last year?

just something else for snl to add to their list

+1 for the snl list...bwahahaha

Here's a way to solve the problem.

- 12 team playoff (with six conferences getting auto-bids and six at-large bids).
- 8 plays 9, 7 plays 10, 5 plays 12, 6 plays 11 during the week before Christmas. Top four seeds get byes.
- Second round action -- two games on X-Mas Eve, two games on X-Mas.
- Final four (two games) on New Years.
- National Championship the week after.

- The national championship venue rotates between six bowls: Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton, Sun, Rose.
- One Final Four venue is always the Rose Bowl (because of the New Year history). The other venue rotates between the other five.
- The quarterfinal bowl games are the consist of four of the five remaining Bowls (Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton, & Sun).
- The "play-in" games essentially become the Gator Bowl, the Citrus Bowl, the Liberty Bowl & the Peach Bowl.

- Four of the lesser bowls are played the week of X-Mas (Aloha, Independence, Holiday, Outback).
- Six lesser bowls are played the week before X-Mas.
- Eight even lesser bowls are played two weeks before X-Mas.
- Eight more played three weeks before X-Mas.
- For the "lesser" bowls, the newer bowls play earlier. I think it's ridiculous that you have the second-to-last Bowl Game of the year is "Central Michigan vs. Troy State" in the GMAC Bowl.

- Conference championships Thanksgiving weekend.

That's a total of 11 playoff Bowl games plus 26 others for 37, which is a sufficient amount.

- Bowl purse is $100 million. $24 million is given to each of the 12 teams heading into week one. Another $24 million is given to the eight teams remaining after week one, another $26 million for the final four teams and another $26 million is split between the two fighting for the national championship (winner gets $16 million, loser gets $10 million).

So, a team eliminated in round one walks away with $2 million; a team that wins the championship gets $27.5 million.

The way it would work now...
Alabama, Texas, Cincinnati, and TCU get first round byes.

FIRST ROUND:
Gator Bowl: #5 Florida vs. #12 LSU
Citrus Bowl: #8 Ohio State vs. #9 Georgia Tech
Liberty Bowl: #7 Oregon vs. #10 Iowa
Peach Bowl: #6 Boise State vs. #11 Virginia Tech

QUARTERFINALS:
Sun Bowl: #2 Texas vs. winner of #7 / #10
Sugar Bowl: #3 Cincinnati vs. #6 / # 11
Orange Bowl: #1 Alabama vs. winner of #8 / #9
Fiesta Bowl: #4 TCU vs. winner of #5 / #12

FINAL FOUR:
Rose Bowl: Choice of semi-final matchup
Cotton Bowl: Leftover matchup

CHAMPIONSHIP GAME:
Rose Bowl

I dont think giving teams byes really solves anything, just do it like in the article. FCS makes it work, so can the BCS

I listened to the SVP show yesterday and he had the head of the BCS on the show, who coincidentally used to head the NCAA tournament. He said they had models out there that showed a playoff system would actually make them more money in the end. It's the presidents that are stuck listening to old people with lots of money that care about bowls and stupid traditions for some reason

uncafan wrote:I guess i sorta just commented on this in the other forum. Never going to happen. The Bowls are too ingrained, legally and financially, into the system and baring the massive changes i mentioned (i.e. every conference giving up their TV deals) there's no way to eliminate the Bowls from the picture. Yes its about money -- but unless someone can outbid the current contracts nothing will change. The current Big Ten regular season deal is 2.5 billion of 25 years. So, what are you going to be offering the Big Ten that is going to make them want to tear that deal up???

Legally speaking a playoff system is only possible if run by the presidents or the BCS reps. If the NCAA is going to run a playoff then individual conferences have to give up the rights they earned in court, and that means giving up their TV deals to the NCAA.

How does having a playoff system mean the conferences have to give up their regular season tv deals?

We went 15 mins with Dan on this topic on Tuesday... Click hour 2 and enjoy...

http://tinyurl.com/ygw4es3

horrez wrote:

uncafan wrote:I guess i sorta just commented on this in the other forum. Never going to happen. The Bowls are too ingrained, legally and financially, into the system and baring the massive changes i mentioned (i.e. every conference giving up their TV deals) there's no way to eliminate the Bowls from the picture. Yes its about money -- but unless someone can outbid the current contracts nothing will change. The current Big Ten regular season deal is 2.5 billion of 25 years. So, what are you going to be offering the Big Ten that is going to make them want to tear that deal up???

Legally speaking a playoff system is only possible if run by the presidents or the BCS reps. If the NCAA is going to run a playoff then individual conferences have to give up the rights they earned in court, and that means giving up their TV deals to the NCAA.

How does having a playoff system mean the conferences have to give up their regular season tv deals?

Its a legal technicality in the court decision. I should clarify, they have to if the NCAA is going to be involved like it is for FCS.

I think the easiest way to explain it (as I understand the decision) is that the individual conferences and commissioners (presidents etc.) legally won the right to establish their own TV Contracts and licensing agreements outside of the NCAA and outside of NCAA regulations (thus for instance when you watch say the NCAA tourny, or the FCS you see the NCAA logo, but not during BCS games). At the time the conferences took advantage of this by striking their own individual TV deals etc. Bowls were also allowed to have *their* own TV deals because they didn't have to comply with any NCAA mandates since the Bowl system is outside of NCAA regulations. In order for the NCAA to run a playoff one of the following would have to happen: 1) The court ruling be vacated or over-turned (and this wouldn't happen, pretty established and sound case)
2) the conferences could give up their legally earned right and allow the NCAA to control the TV contracts etc. Which is obviously never going to happen.

Now there is the loophole which someone (I think) brought up. The BCS could change the format into a playoff and the BCS could run the 8 team playoff without the NCAA and nothing (legally) would have to be done. But what incentive does the BCS have for that right now? And again it would be the BCS commissioners setting up the playoff format, just like they set up the BCS National Championship game format.

As for more money -- maybe someday more money could be generated. But if a playoff had more earnings potential why haven't they switched?? Think about it. The BCS is 100% about money, not putting the best teams in. What do the BCS people say "we achieved the goal of the BCS, putting the #1/#2 teams in the NC game" and they say this every year. Its because its a business and they have found a way to make the most money in a few highly promoted events.

A home site based playoff system would lose millions of dollars for universities as well as the general business of college football (and rather than have a huge post here, if your interested read the next post)...

OK.... Since I know a bit about certain athletic departments in BCS I'll use an example. I am an Ohio State season ticket holder -- besides any donations or membership fees I paid $63 a ticket per game this year for my season tickets. True, an extra game at home would generate $105,000x63 + parking +concessions etc. etc.

But think about the whole "business" of college football. Sure, ohio state would love to pocket that money -- but what are they getting out of the Rose bowl? Besides their payout ( and btw http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ ... outs_x.htm great article from a couple years ago explaining how that money is distributed etc. how schools don't actually make as much as it might seem in some conferences that 'share' revenue) Ohio State is generating income in Pasadena, stimulating travel in Columbus and throughout Ohio, hotels, air-fare etc. etc.

Now I know, if it were a road game vs. say, alabama, wouldn't that same travel be generated? Of course not. Do you think that Alabama is going to give Ohio State 40,000+ seats in their stadium?? Or vice versa. The rose Bowl gives just over 30,000 tickets to OSU for season ticket holders, plus the big ten gets a chunk of tickets, Rose Bowl ticket holders (locally) get tickets. Its BIG BUSINESS. Ohio State has over half a dozen fundraisers and special events in California the week before the game that range anywhere from free to $150 to enter. They have rented out beach areas, private banquet halls etc. etc. They have charter flights w/ hotel to the game that cost from $2500 and up per person. Private travel groups make a killing on bowl packages...And I'm sure its the same all around the country. Think about all the people that are going to make money on the Rose Bowl, people who stand to lose out if Ohio State either hosts or goes on a road game for a playoff. Its a business, especially at the Big Schools...

The only way to off-set that would be a major TV deal. And I might be wrong in this analysis but I don't see it happen. The logistics of scheduling the games (don't forget the NFL plays saturdays and Thursdays in December) so they can be seen, AND doing it fairly. And still working with the Bowls or whatever else you want to do. There's no way anyone is going to bid anything close to what ESPN paid for the BCS bowls starting in 2 years.

OK end rant... I might be wrong about the TV side, but I do know -- its political. There's a TON of money in the BCS right now and, a lot of people would like to keep the money. If someone comes up with a viable playoff system that includes the Bowls and doesn't diminish the money Rose/Fiesta/Sugar/orange get and can give out to the conferences, maybe its possible. But as yet, I haven't seen anything that is financially and practically possible outside of the "PLUS 1" system (which is basically a 4 team playoff).

Yeah, you're right. I can't see any major networks jumping on the chance to broadcast a game pitting the #1 team in the nation vs. the #8.

uncafan wrote:The only way to off-set that would be a major TV deal. And I might be wrong in this analysis but I don't see it happen. The logistics of scheduling the games (don't forget the NFL plays saturdays and Thursdays in December) so they can be seen, AND doing it fairly. And still working with the Bowls or whatever else you want to do. There's no way anyone is going to bid anything close to what ESPN paid for the BCS bowls starting in 2 years.

OK end rant... I might be wrong about the TV side, but I do know -- its political. There's a TON of money in the BCS right now and, a lot of people would like to keep the money. If someone comes up with a viable playoff system that includes the Bowls and doesn't diminish the money Rose/Fiesta/Sugar/orange get and can give out to the conferences, maybe its possible. But as yet, I haven't seen anything that is financially and practically possible outside of the "PLUS 1" system (which is basically a 4 team playoff).

I guess I'm just having a hard time believing ESPN (or Fox or anyone else) wouldn't pay big money to show the playoffs. College football (at least in the South) is huge (I say at least in the South because I haven't lived any where else, so I can't say for sure how it is other places). It's not like people who follow their favorite college football team 365 days a year are going to go away if there is a playoff. I also have a hard time believing Citi, Allstate, Tostitos, and FedEx would want some of the playoff action. Of course I could be wrong.

BuryYourDuke wrote:you can placate [the bowl committees] by making sure the bowl games still exist for eliminated playoff teams. Those games will have no less meaning than they do now. They are meaningless games that are all about a payday for everyone involved. They still will be with the playoff system in place.

I beg to differ. As it stands currently, one game means everything, and all the others do not. When 15 suddenly mean something, it marginalizes the others even further. I'm not arguing that they mean anything now, just that they'll mean even less then. On top of that, after the networks, as you say, murder each other for the rights to televise the playoff games, what network in their right mind is going to pay money to the now-marignalized, definitively meaningless bowl games that remain? They'll last a couple of years on networks like Versus. And without the TV contract, they can't pay as much to participating teams. Do you see what I'm getting at?

I would foresee these bowls existing for only a few years once a playoff begins, because fans of schools would be less likely to travel, and TV networks won't want the games anymore. Take the same NCAA basketball tournament example, and consider the NIT/CBI tourneys to be the equivalent of the useless bowls that remain. The NIT survives because of the ESPN support. The others aren't going to last. And going back to the bowl side of the analogy, ESPN is no longer going to pay as much for the meaningless, low-end bowls that they currently televise.

All of this to say I'd still be in favor of the playoff in football, just don't for a second tell me that all those other bowls will be placated enough to exist long-term after the inception of a playoff.

I don't see today's lower tier bowls having any different issues if there is a playoff system in place. What is the draw for these bowls today?

The bowls will continue to wallow in their existence because fans will still enjoy making the holiday trips and the networks will colntinue airing them if for no other reason than degenerate gamblers who live for these types of contests.

Back to something earlier in the thread ... the Sun Bowl as a top tier bowl? That is a laughable suggestion. The extra slots would be filled by the highest bidders like Cotton, Texas or Outback.

Sly Fox wrote: Back to something earlier in the thread ... the Sun Bowl as a top tier bowl? That is a laughable suggestion. The extra slots would be filled by the highest bidders like Cotton, Texas or Outback.

I was just going by "Oldest" bowl.

Besides, I think we need to differentiate between something. Advocates of a playoff system are not saying we need to do away with bowls entirely. There still is a place for them. However, I say in addition to the 25-30 other bowls (gotta love those 'Meineike Car Care Bowl' and the "GalleryFurniture.Com Bowl", there would also be a playoffs. It's not an either-or proposition. Let the #4 team in the MAC take on the #5 from Conference USA in the "Nothing Else on TV Bowl". But let's also teams fighting for a real championship.

I like the plan,too. I'm ju not convinced the lower tier bowls will still benefit. But if they do, great!

Don't knock that Meineke Car Care Bowl - I went last year. Great game!

JK37 wrote:Don't knock that Meineke Car Care Bowl - I went last year. Great game!

Depends on which side of the field you were sitting.

blwall1416 wrote:

JK37 wrote:Don't knock that Meineke Car Care Bowl - I went last year. Great game!

Depends on which side of the field you were sitting.

The good guys!

JK37 wrote:I like the plan,too. I'm ju not convinced the lower tier bowls will still benefit. But if they do, great!

Don't knock that Meineke Car Care Bowl - I went last year. Great game!

I was there too...it was a really great.