College Playoff

[Zander42]

One of the things that kind of gets glossed over when people talk about the unpopularity of the current system, is how successfull it actually is. I think the only way that we'll move to a playoff is if people start tuning out college football in large numbers, and that ain't close to happening.

Hell, I'm not even sure that ESPN and others who "say" they want a playoff, really want one. Contraversy sells, and raises interest. And writers and sportscasters love to find sometihng to bitch about, almost as much as message board members.

I've thought about in for many years, and I'm against a playoff. I ain't going to be convinced otherwise either, it's like religion. If it happens it happens, and it probably will. I'll still love college football if it does, becasue I love the Buckeyes.

But I think that the CFB season, and the bowl system is just about the best thing going in sports. Oh, and I really like to bitch....

-z

 

[JXC]

I am 100% certain viewership of NCAA D-1A football would go up if there were a playoff. Anybody who thinks otherwise, just isn't thinking. If the bowl system were so great, then all these bowls would sell out. It's sad when you watch a bowl game, it it looks like a MAC game when it comes to the attendance.

Beat Michigan!

 

[methomps]

Fans won't travel twice. Like you said: they want a vacation in December or January. A vacation.

That BCS bowl tickets sell for into the thousands suggests there is enough demand to fill every stadium, every round. If demand weren't greater than capacity, the worst tickets would only sell for face. They sell for hundreds more.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Yes, a playoff would be worth SIGNIFICANTLY more than 5 seperate games. CBS will be paying approximately $545 million a year through 2016 to the NCAA for rights to the basketball tournament. The obvious rebuttal is that is way more games. Keep in mind it is basketball, the #2 sport in the country, and many of the games are at non-peak times.

I think a network would be willing to pay close to 300 million for rights to the entire college football depending on the amount of games and format. ESPN paid 125 million for rights to the 5 BCS games beginning 2010 through 2014, but don't have rights to the 2014 championship game...yet. That has to be worth at least 25-50 million more.

Package the games as a playoff that determines the ultimate champion, and the price goes way up.

Regarding naming rights and ad dollars, I'm having trouble finding sponsors ad dollars. Common sense says the price to advertise becomes more expensive in a playoff format. The ratings will be higher in playoff meaning higher asking prices.

The games are already packaged as determining the ultimate champion. And why does common sense say the price to advertise becomes more expensive in a playoff? They're football games. What makes a playoff somehow more appealing.

And yes, the obvious rebuttal is that CBS is paying for more games....59 more to be precise! It's obvious because it's true. You can't just remove that argument by calling it "obvious." ESPN is paying $25 million per game, CBS only about $8.5 million. Since they're playoff games, shouldn't they be paying more? Plenty of those games are in prime time or an otherwise desirable time slot.

That BCS bowl tickets sell for into the thousands suggests there is enough demand to fill every stadium, every round. If demand weren't greater than capacity, the worst tickets would only sell for face. They sell for hundreds more.

About three Boston College fans went to the ACCCG last year, yet their bowl game was the best-attended CS Bowl for about thirteen years. I don't believe people will travel to early rounds if they think they have a decent chance at going to a later one, and they won't travel a second time if they went to the first one. Only the die-hards, RV-type of fan will do that.

 

[OH10]

I think the BCS/Playoff argument is becoming like the abortion argument. All of the possible arguments have been made. We know them by heart. No one is going to change their minds.

For the record, I'm all in for a playoff. But I recognize that it will likely never change - nor will my opinion.

 

[billmac91]

The games are already packaged as determining the ultimate champion. And why does common sense say the price to advertise becomes more expensive in a playoff? They're football games. What makes a playoff somehow more appealing.

And yes, the obvious rebuttal is that CBS is paying for more games....59 more to be precise! It's obvious because it's true. You can't just remove that argument by calling it "obvious." ESPN is paying $25 million per game, CBS only about $8.5 million. Since they're playoff games, shouldn't they be paying more? Plenty of those games are in prime time or an otherwise desirable time slot.


About three Boston College fans went to the ACCCG last year, yet their bowl game was the best-attended CS Bowl for about thirteen years. I don't believe people will travel to early rounds if they think they have a decent chance at going to a later one, and they won't travel a second time if they went to the first one. Only the die-hards, RV-type of fan will do that.

ESPN is paying 125 million for FIVE GAMES.

How many additional playoff games will be added to that five?

59 total games at 545 mill a year vs. 5 for 125 mill.

Say it's an 8 team playoff. That is 7 games...more than the 5 current BCS games.

Say it's a 16 team playoff. 15 games. You're paying 125 million for 5 games currently, what does that go to if it's 7 or 15 games?

And basketball is 545 mill for 59 games? A 16 team playoff could be worth close to 400 mill, easily....In TV rights alone.

The reason as to why viewership goes up is beyond obvious. The games mean more. Every team in a playoff still has a shot at the title. Casual viewers will tune in to see who stays alive, if upsets happen, how the playoff plays out. Just like the NCAA tournament.

In turn, that equals more ad dollars.

To even suggest viewership would stay the same is ridiculous. #1 Alabama vs. #8 Penn State would easily be more viewed that Georgia vs. Hawaii, West Virgina vs. Oklahoma, Kansas vs. Va Tech, etc. (games without any implications other than bragging rights to a BCS game). The viewership of Georgia vs. Hawaii instantly goes up last year if it's a playoff as well. That game had embarrassing ratings, but you make it a playoff game, and folks are tuning in to see if Hawaii has the ability to win a championship.

Especially when seasons are continued or eliminated on it.

 

[methomps]

About three Boston College fans went to the ACCCG last year, yet their bowl game was the best-attended CS Bowl for about thirteen years. I don't believe people will travel to early rounds if they think they have a decent chance at going to a later one, and they won't travel a second time if they went to the first one. Only the die-hards, RV-type of fan will do that.

What does the ACCCG have to do with a BCS playoff? The price for the later rounds will be much higher, so a lot of people won't have a decent chance at going to a later one.

 

[fourteenandoh]

That BCS bowl tickets sell for into the thousands suggests there is enough demand to fill every stadium, every round. If demand weren't greater than capacity, the worst tickets would only sell for face. They sell for hundreds more.

i would also say that his theory falsely assumes that the same group of fans will attend a rose bowl as an orange bowl (for instance). that isn't true. there are plenty of west coast buckeyes that will go to the rose that wouldn't go to an orange and vice versa. then there is the group of fans that will go no matter where the game is.

 

[martinss01]

I am 100% certain viewership of NCAA D-1A football would go up if there were a playoff.

ummm... no, not really no. sure, the playoffs themselves might pull in more viewers than the current bcs setup. but if you think for a second that viewership of the regular season would do anything but plummet through the floor your nuts. look at the nfl. hell look at baseball, the nba, and college bball. is this the part where we start arguing that the average monday night match up in the nfl pulls in as many viewers as any of the marque match ups on any given saturday? ill pit major clashes like tOSU vrs. texas against any monday night game viewer wise. hell, ill pit games like that against any nfl playoff game not the super bowl.

but just for the sake of argument lets say viewership of the playoffs would be double that of the bcs. i seriously doubt it, but hey why not. what exactly does that do for every college that doesn't normally make a bcs bowl currently? as one might suspect they aren't going to make the playoffs year in and year out if ever. what does that have to do with anything? they wouldn't get anything from the bcs either right? well your right, not directly they don't. but lets not forget the only real payday a lot of these schools get is when they play one of the big boys in a glorified scrimmage. if you take away the value of the regular season you also take away that payday. no viewers = no sponsors = no money. so what exactly do they get out of all of this? or do they just not matter?

i keep hearing the same lines over and over again. "a playoff would make far more money than the current setup". "everyone wants a playoff". "noone stands to loose if we move to a playoff".

if that were actually the case then WHY DON'T WE HAVE A PLAYOFF ALREADY?????

 

[Piney]

i keep hearing the same lines over and over again. "a playoff would make far more money than the current setup". "everyone wants a playoff". "noone stands to loose if we move to a playoff".

if that were actually the case then WHY DON'T WE HAVE A PLAYOFF ALREADY?????

The Why is an interesting case study I believe. While the playoffs would make alot more money (like billmac explains) I believe that the unknown of what would happen to their other cash flows scares the big conferences. Does ESPN pay that much money to get a SEC game? Or the current packages on ABC/CBS/ESPN? Heck while there will still be Bowl games like the Capital One & Outback bowls do you really think their payoffs won't decrease? This offsets the money that the playoffs would bring in.

Another aspect is a Plus 1 is much more likely to happen versus a full blown playoff. A Plus 1 format allows the BCS to control the money still, but a bigger playoff might let the NCAA back in to control it and thus controlling the money it makes. THAT is probable what is holding it up more than anything. Cuz if the NCAA gets a gold of it they will take their share and then distribute the money in a more even manner which the BCS conferences don't want.

But then again the 'slippery slope' argument that seems to hold up a Plus 1 format is the fear that it will allow the NCAA to get their hands on the pie and force them to expand to a bigger playoff. So basically the Presidents of these Universities know they have a very good cash cow right now. But they are smart enough to realize that if they get too greedy the extra cash that is made might not end up in their hands.

 

[bukIpower]

Did anyone see that fictional 64 game playoff system ESPN had fixed up?

OSU was in some region ranked #3 facing #14 Rice to start

 

[ScarletStorms]

Playoff 16 team format

This is what a 16 team playoff format would look like to date.

1 Alabama

16 Troy


8 Utah

9 Boise State


5 USC

12 Cincinnati


4 Texas

13 Oregon State




3 Oklahoma

14 Georgia Tech


6 Penn State

11 Ball State


7 Texas Tech

10 Ohio State


2 Florida

15 Tulsa


I apologize for the rudimentary bracket. This model assumes that

- Every Conference Champion Receives a bid
- There is no limit to the number of teams admitted per conference
- Georgia Tech will beat BC in the ACC championship game
- Seeding is based upon the AP poll

Ohio State would receive the final at large bid.

 

[bukIpower]

1 Alabama

16 Troy


8 Utah

9 Boise State


5 USC

12 Cincinnati


4 Texas

13 Oregon State




3 Oklahoma

14 Georgia Tech


6 Penn State

11 Ball State


7 Texas Tech

10 Ohio State


2 Florida

15 Tulsa

2ND ROUND
1 Alabama

10 Ohio State

2 Florida

9 Boise State

3 Oklahoma

6 Penn State

4 Texas

5 USC

3rd round

2 Florida

10 Ohio State

3 Oklahoma

5 USC

Championship
2 Florida

5 USC


I think OSU's corners would give TT fits and beanie would keep their offense off the field. OSU against Alabama to me would come down to who's going to run the ball better and I think OSU with Beanie/Pryor would be a close win. OSU against Florida would be bad.

I think USC's aggressiveness on defense would be more than Any team could handle. Plus the way Pete coaches in big games is pretty impressive. he not only wins, he wins BIG.

 

[ScarletStorms]

2nd round according to your picks would actually be

Alabama vs Boise

USC vs Texas

Oklahoma vs Penn State

Florida vs Ohio State

 

[billmac91]

1 Alabama

16 Troy


8 Utah

9 Boise State


5 USC

12 Cincinnati


4 Texas

13 Oregon State




3 Oklahoma

14 Georgia Tech


6 Penn State

11 Ball State


7 Texas Tech

10 Ohio State


2 Florida

15 Tulsa

2ND ROUND
1 Alabama

10 Ohio State

2 Florida

9 Boise State

3 Oklahoma

6 Penn State

4 Texas

5 USC

3rd round

2 Florida

10 Ohio State

3 Oklahoma

5 USC

Championship
2 Florida

5 USC


I think OSU's corners would give TT fits and beanie would keep their offense off the field. OSU against Alabama to me would come down to who's going to run the ball better and I think OSU with Beanie/Pryor would be a close win. OSU against Florida would be bad.

I think USC's aggressiveness on defense would be more than Any team could handle. Plus the way Pete coaches in big games is pretty impressive. he not only wins, he wins BIG.

A 16 team playoff would be so sweet. Those match-ups are awesome.