11-08-2010, 07:10 PM | #251 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Concord, MA/UMass
|
How does a playoff preclude having the other bowl games? They get played now even though they have no bearing on the national title (or even national relevance for the lower ones). Heck, they have 1-AA/FCS Bowl games concurrently with a larger playoff than anyone is proposing FBS have.
|
11-08-2010, 07:11 PM | #252 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
At least Rainmaker would get his Boise/TCU matchup. :-) |
|
11-08-2010, 07:12 PM | #253 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
|
You could still easily have as many bowl games that generate the same amount of cash as now. Having a playoff won't diminish the already watered-down Bowl season. I love the way BBCF does the playoffs. The non-aq schools will make more money in the games than they would have in the Meineke Car Care bowl...which would they rather have? A nearly sure loss playoff game or a bowl game they have a better chance to win? ... i would hope they'd want the playoff game and more $$.
Last edited by mauchow : 11-08-2010 at 07:14 PM. |
11-08-2010, 07:14 PM | #254 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
You may be right there but it doesn't diminish the fact that they make less money (probably much less money IMO). I am 100% certain that they make more money this way than they would with a playoff. How do I know this? Because we would have a playoff right now if it made more money. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:16 PM | #255 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
I have to disagree with some certainty here. If the playoff game made more $$ they would do a playoff. Obviously it doesn't. They aren't that soaked in tradition, they are that soaked in money. Last edited by panerd : 11-08-2010 at 07:16 PM. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:17 PM | #256 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
A playoff would kill whatever financial viability the bowls have left. The Rose bowl isn't the Rose Bowl if it's what - the 4th place teams of the Big Ten and Pac-10? Last edited by molson : 11-08-2010 at 07:24 PM. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:26 PM | #257 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
Quote:
|
|
11-08-2010, 07:28 PM | #258 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
The mid-tier and lower bowl games rarely ever payout those amounts. It often comes down to bartering with the schools for what they will take in return for an invite. For instance, Florida Atlantic got a Motor City Bowl birth a few years ago because they were willing to take no money from the group behind the bowl. That also doesn't account for the fact that schools are required to sell a certain number of tickets to each game. Usually always in the 5-figure range. Few schools every hit that mark, even for the most prestiguous bowls and are required to eat millions in fees. Virginia Tech lost nearly $2 million in unsold tickets for the Orange Bowl. You can call it a "cover charge" that is rarely reported by people trying to claim the bowl system makes schools money. Most schools lose money on their bowl invites. The folks at Yahoo! went through public records of all the public schools to show this. Schools actually make more money from a regular old home game against a crappy opponent. It's why a school like Florida will give up $500k to an FCS school for a game. They make roughly $4-$5 million for each home game. And that doesn't account for television. The NCAA recently signed a deal with CBS for nearly a billion dollars a year for the rights to the basketball tournament. I find it hard to believe that the TV deal for 3-4 week football tournament would not be astronomical. Especially considering those games actually mean something and are not glorified consolation games (which don't get good ratings). And allowing teams with higher seeds to have home games would produce more money for schools and give even more incentive for winning. Especially since they aren't required to buy tickets they'll never be able to sell. The money is shit for college football's postseason compared to what it should be. So that argument doesn't fly. Sure it works out nicely for the groups running bowls, ESPN, BCS conference directors, and coaches, but it hurts the overall schools greatly. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:31 PM | #259 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
|
Quote:
The BCS bowl games would no longer have to pay out huge money to the teams participating since the same teams will be playing up to 3-4 games through the playoffs. Divvy out the money throughout the other bowl games to ensure one team doesn't rake in 3-4 times of huge $$. The build up to the Championship Game would be TREMENDOUSLY huge and the system it seems could make up for the loss of the 5 BCS games. I don't know, I tend to leave myself out of these discussions but I am definitely Pro-Playoffs and would attempt to create an argument for it. *shrug* |
|
11-08-2010, 07:32 PM | #260 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Concord, MA/UMass
|
I would have to assume the current BCS bowls are incorporated into the playoff system as well as a couple others. I don't see why fans are particularly excited to go to the Music City Bowl, or the Humanitarian Bowl, or the New Mexico Bowl in the first place, but I don't see why the level of excitement would change with the better teams being involved in a playoff instead of merely other bowl games.
|
11-08-2010, 07:32 PM | #261 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
|
11-08-2010, 07:34 PM | #262 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
Yes, in the sense that if there's ever a playoff, it will have to be through the BCS, and not through the NCAA. There could be some kind of deal there. I don't see a 16-team team tournament with the quarter final games all just named after traditional bowls, that basically just turns the bowls into sponsorships. But I could see a +2 or +4 after the bowls, or some kind of setup where you have to win the Fiesta Bowl to get somewhere else. I've been to one or two low-level bowls. It can be a good time. Just a drunken party weekend with college friends and other alum. Usually in a vacation destination. I guess you don't really need football for that, but it works out. Last edited by molson : 11-08-2010 at 07:38 PM. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:37 PM | #263 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
It might be about money, but not for the schools. Just for businessmen, conference presidents, ADs, and coaches. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:40 PM | #264 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
They are in college football. You do know why the BCS was created, don't you? So the NCAA has no power over college football's postseason and freeze out certain conferences from the money.
When it comes to college football, the conferences have way more power than the NCAA. Didn't realize this was news. |
11-08-2010, 07:44 PM | #265 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
And if you want to keep some of the big name bowls, why not move them to the regular season? Have a kickoff weekend with them. Would be a great way to start a season instead of watching power schools slaughter a bunch of FCS schools. |
|
11-08-2010, 07:45 PM | #266 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Quote:
Not if you're the power school selling out the stadium to play NorthSouthEastWest State.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
|
11-08-2010, 07:58 PM | #267 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Concord, MA/UMass
|
And since it's mostly used as an excuse for a vacation reunion, whether among younger (and drunker) graduates or older alumni/donors, I don't see why it would change regardless of whether the better teams are in BCS Bowls or a playoff. (That's also why I singled out bowls like the Humanitarian/New Mexico instead of Las Vegas/New Orleans based ones.)
|
11-08-2010, 08:16 PM | #268 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Different type of fans. Those fans are more about the atmosphere and college part. Others are football fans. If you look at ticket sites, seeing Florida play Alabama is going to have much higher prices than Florida vs Appalachian State.
|
11-08-2010, 09:05 PM | #269 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
|
11-08-2010, 09:51 PM | #270 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Quote:
But who is buying those tickets? These same fans that pay the bigger bucks are the ones who also go to the much worse games (or rather, they buy the tickets, which some gift or sell off) The number of "hey, let's go a road trip that happens to have a football game attached" is pretty damned small, at least in any big-time program I've ever been familiar with. The Sugar Bowl used to have a certain amount of that back in the old SEC-bowl-tie days, but it was still the same basic crowd.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
|
11-08-2010, 10:14 PM | #271 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
Right, there's no entity really that protecting the interests of "colleges as a whole". I'm not even disagreeing about the value of a playoff, I just don't know which entity you're imploring to set it up. Because it doesn't make sense for any entity with any power. I kind of like the idea of pre-season bowl games though. A pre-season Rose Bowl game between last year's Big Ten/Pac-10 conference champions would be a big deal. That does kind of seem like an untapped market, because people are just READY for college football at that point, and that first week tends to be very high profile (and too often its just a 1-AA tuneup for a name program). Last edited by molson : 11-08-2010 at 10:15 PM. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|