BCS trying to defend the BCS

[WashingtonCoug]

This website makes me even more mad than before:

http://playoffproblem.com/wordpress/?p=88

What a ridiculous argument. One of the readers hit it right on the head.

Only the BCS would find it a bigger injustice for a 10-2 BYU team (who didn’t win their conference) to be left out of a 16 team playoff than the three undefeated teams who are being left out of the championship game this year. If BYU or Miami or West Virginia want to be in the playoff, the path is clear; win your conference. If they can’t do that, you’ve got no one to blame but themselves.

[WashingtonCoug]

Here is the full website:

http://playoffproblem.com/

[BigPiney]

The BCS is EVIL.

[Coastal Ute]

The BCS is EVIL.

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act[/ame]

Carnegie, Rockefeller, and now Hancock.

[John McClain]

The BCS is EVIL.

Amen and amen.

[ERCougar]

I didn't read the website but one of the biggest obstacles to a playoff system is attendance at the playoff games. I don't know how many fans can afford to go to 3 or 4 consecutive bowl games--certainly not half a stadium's worth. Do you just follow the NFL's example and put the game at the higher seed's stadium?

I also think everyone ought to be careful what they wish for. We almost certainly would get less money than we currently get. In a 16-team playoff (the best we could hope for), there are 15 games. Say we get 1 of those spots (probably the best we could hope for). Say we win one of those games (not at all a given when we're playing on the road against a top-16 team). That gives us 2/15 of the total playoff money, at best--much less at worse as the NCAA could justifiably weight the later games with higher payouts (ratings higher, etc). So on the best year, with the most favorable circumstances and assumptions, we could hope for about 1/8th of the money. Make an 8-team playoff without an automatic in for conference champions and we'll be left out in the cold quite a bit. So the rich get richer.

[il Padrino Ute]

Why do bowl games need to be used for a playoff when they could be more like the NIT? Teams that don't qualify for a playoff can play in bowl games.

IMO, the best way to do it would be to give homefield to the highest seeded team then the championship game can be played at a neutral site. Granted, that means the lower seeded team would have to travel and that could be a problem for fans, but it's better than the current system.

The way to divide the money is to do it like the basketball tournament. If I'm not mistaken, the tv revenue is what is shared and that amount would be huge if there was a college playoff - much more than what the BCS offers. The reason the BCS and it's conferences are against the playoff is because they won't get a disproportionate amount of money like what happens now.

11 conference champs and 5 at-large bids. That's the right way to do it.

[Moliere]

I didn't read the website but one of the biggest obstacles to a playoff system is attendance at the playoff games. I don't know how many fans can afford to go to 3 or 4 consecutive bowl games--certainly half a stadium's worth. Do you just follow the NFL's example and put the game at the higher seed's stadium?

Why would this be an issue for football when it's not an issue for basketball?

[ERCougar]

Why do bowl games need to be used for a playoff when they could be more like the NIT? Teams that don't qualify for a playoff can play in bowl games.

IMO, the best way to do it would be to give homefield to the highest seeded team then the championship game can be played at a neutral site. Granted, that means the lower seeded team would have to travel and that could be a problem for fans, but it's better than the current system.

The way to divide the money is to do it like the basketball tournament. If I'm not mistaken, the tv revenue is what is shared and that amount would be huge if there was a college playoff - much more than what the BCS offers. The reason the BCS and it's conferences are against the playoff is because they won't get a disproportionate amount of money like what happens now.

11 conference champs and 5 at-large bids. That's the right way to do it.

But even with the scenario...
Say each week gets equal total tv ratings. Also, say that each week, this results in a total of 16 million in revenue, for a total of 64 million. Every first round team gets 1 million. Each second round team gets 2 million. Third round, 4 million and finals 8 million. That means, we pick up 3 million on a good year, 1 million on the others. Meanwhile, BCS conferences will be picking up 2-3 million for the first round, around 4 million for the second round (assuming they have 2 in the top 8), another 4 million for the third round (assuming one in the top 4), and about half the time, another 8 million for placing a finalist. That's 12 million each compared to our 1-3 million. That's a worse ratio than this year, and we've got two going to BCS games.

[ERCougar]

Why would this be an issue for football when it's not an issue for basketball?

Because they stage four teams at each arena, the arenas are smaller, and there are two games (per team) per weekend.

[beefytee]

You and junkie are both hacks!

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=13976

[LiveCoug]

This is why the BCS is a travesty:

"TCU, for instance, will be getting about half as much in payout as the University of Michigan, which finished last in the Big Ten Conference and didn't qualify for even a crappy bowl game."

[ERCougar]

This is why the BCS is a travesty:

"TCU, for instance, will be getting about half as much in payout as the University of Michigan, which finished last in the Big Ten Conference and didn't qualify for even a crappy bowl game."

A playoff will not fix this, and will likely only make it worse.

[LiveCoug]

A playoff will not fix this, and will likely only make it worse.

And you know that how? By the way, I agree with Il Pad... Playoffs can be home field for higher team and then final game in a big bowl. Keep all other bowls as a reward for teams with good seasons (7+ wins).

[Moliere]

Because they stage four teams at each arena, the arenas are smaller, and there are two games (per team) per weekend.

And that is why they won't fill the stadiums? I think you are underestimating the draw that would come from having a playoff system.

The buzz and excitement that would be generated by a playoff would help sell a lot of tickets to people who live in the local area. If I knew Reliant Stadium (Houston) was going to hold a playoff game, I would most likely attend it just to see a decent college football game. The games could be set up to allow the higher seed to play closer to home (Texas would play in Dallas/Houston or Alabama would play in New Orleans, etc.).

It would work just fine. This is just a classic case of the BCS making excuses. The best thing to do is to start with a +1 format (4 team playoff), whcih would be great this year with 5 undefeated teams and let the process expand from there to a decent size playoff structure.