Who here thinks a playoff would work in FB?

[cireksu]

It would take longer than a month because they would wait 2 weeks after the last reg, season games to begin, then wait 2 weeks to play the championship.

about a month and a half for 16 teams.


".....No more no less. Those are the rules. Period. Teams #9, #5, #9 and #7 are just left out and that's the way it is.
"

Well the rules of the BCS clearly state that Number 1 and number 2 play each other period, but that doesn't fly with a lot of people especially KSU fans.

[cireksu]

"Or, if keeping attendance up at the playoff sites is the issue, play the playoffs at the higher seeded team's home field for the first couple of rounds then once you're down to the final four play two consecutive weekends at the championship location.  "

That is the best argument that can be made for a playoff.  I still think that it is out of the question because of the ammount of money that is lost by chancing that a small team makes it with no seats to sell.

I'd have to see it happen regularly to believe that 40,000+ fans from 2 different schools would travel consecutive weekends to watch their team in a playoff.

[catsfan20012002]

Well the rules of the BCS clearly state that Number 1 and number 2 play each other period, but that doesn't fly with a lot of people especially KSU fans.

The problem is that it's usually pretty obvious who is #1 but how do you determine who is #2?

[cireksu]

Who determines is the last out of a playoff?

[catsfan20012002]

Who determines is the last out of a playoff?

Who determines the last out of the NFL playoffs, the NBA playoffs, the Stanley Cup playoffs and the MLB Playoffs? 

[cireksu]

^^^^^^^^^^^

Yeah but in the nfl, nba, etc. There are 30 teams and you play about half of them during the season.

NCAA football has 120 or so teams and you play about 1/10 of them.

Who decides who is deserving to make it into the playoff?  I think you would see the same complaining.

[rlatta]

They could still use the BCS  rankings to make up the tournament, maybe the top 10 or 16.   They could still have bowl games for the teams that don't make the tourny.

[ksu_FAN]

The logisitics of a playoff system is not the problem.  That would work fine.

The issue is the $170 million that the BCS conferences are counting on in revenue from the bowls.  The Big 12 this year sits at around $28 million in revenues.  I don't see the same revenue stream coming in from a playoff.

FYI, the NCAA tournament brought the conference around $24.5 million last year.  Most of that money comes from the TV deal with CBS televising 63 games.  It would be interesting to see the projections of what kind of money 15 games from a 16 team playoff would generate compared to that, plus the $$ differentials in attendance, etc between football and basketball.

[catsfan20012002]

Yeah but in the nfl, nba, etc. There are 30 teams and you play about half of them during the season. NCAA football has 120 or so teams and you play about 1/10 of them. Who decides who is deserving to make it into the playoff?  I think you would see the same complaining.

Put together a committee like they do in basketball. Use Strength of Schedule the same way they use R.P.I. in hoops.

[michigancat]

The logisitics of a playoff system is not the problem.  That would work fine.

The issue is the $170 million that the BCS conferences are counting on in revenue from the bowls.  The Big 12 this year sits at around $28 million in revenues.  I don't see the same revenue stream coming in from a playoff.

FYI, the NCAA tournament brought the conference around $24.5 million last year.  Most of that money comes from the TV deal with CBS televising 63 games.  It would be interesting to see the projections of what kind of money 15 games from a 16 team playoff would generate compared to that, plus the $$ differentials in attendance, etc between football and basketball.

I think a "Final Four" weekend + a National championship weekend could easily compete with the 5 BCS games financially.  Throw in a quadruple-header and it probably isn't even close.

[ksu_FAN]

Again, I think the discussion of logistics is missing the point.  The NCAA didn't have trouble figuring out logistics when they expanded the NCAA tournament field, and we all know why the field was expanded.  Yeah, it gave more teams a chance and all that, but it also made the NCAA a lot more money.  

They would change the current football system in a heartbeat if it would do the same.  Its not like they ever had any problem adding all these bowl games.  Again, more bowls makes more money, though I think they'd acknowledge (hopefully) that we're probably at the bowl saturation point.  The fact that we reached a bowl saturation point probably makes switching to a playoff format even more difficult.

I agree with Rusty, the only playoff system I see happening is a 4 team deal.  That would be the next progression of the BCS, but I don't think the NCAA will ever push for more than that, if they even ever agree to do that.  That would probably allow for maintaining the current bowl structure and $$$ while adding more revenue through the BCS.  Anything more than 4 probably is too risky for the bowl structure IMO.

[catsfan20012002]

If you're worried about all worthy teams (a 9th team if it's an 8 team playoff or a 17th team if it's a 16 team playoff) getting in.....There obviously is no perfect answer. Teams get left out of the NCAA Tournament every year that probably should be in it and this would be no different. Look at it this way. If there were an 8 team playoff:

In 1998 K-State and Tulane would have been in it instead of Syracuse and Wisconsin. In 1999 Marshall, Michigan State and K-State would have been in it instead of Stanford, Alabama and Tennessee. In 2000 Virginia Tech, Nebraska and K-State would have been in it insted of Purdue, Notre Dame and Florida. In 2001 Oklahoma, Texas, Tennessee and Louisville would have been in it instead of LSU, Illinois, Colorado and Maryland. In 2002 K-State, Texas and Boise State would have been in instead of Florida State, Iowa and Washington State. In 2003.....Well I'll leave that one out since that's the year we made it.  In 2004 Cal, Boise State and Louisville would have been in it instead of Michigan, Pittsburgh and Virginia Tech and.....In 2005 LSU, tcu and Virginia Tech would have been in it instead of West Virginia, Georgia and Notre Dame.

Alot of those teams would have fared better then the ones that made it.

[FBWillie]

So what's wrong with adding 1 more game between the winner of the (#1 vs. #2) vs. winner of (#3 vs. #4).  Best of both worlds as I see it. Still have the BCS formula, still have all of the meaningless games that bring in $$; and have no controversery over the clear winner.  Surley an undefeated team would be in the Top 4 of the BCS rankings... Would the Rutgers be in the top 4 if they had been undefeated?

[CatsNShocks]

Every major sport in College and in the Professional ranks has a playoff system. But yet, for some reason, people don't think it can work at the D-1 football level. That's crap. I also hate those that say during the last few weeks of the regular season "this is your playoff system". That's bogus also. Those schedules were set at least one year, if not longer, in advance. All those 1-loss teams deserve a shot. SC will get it because of some computer. Let them decide it on the field, using a 16-20 team playoff. Let the top 4 get first round byes (that will make the regular season worth something). There are many playoff scenarios, all of which are better than our current bowl system.

I just don't see any logical reason NOT to have a playoff.

[catsfan20012002]

Most people would probably be happy with that this year, most years it won't work so well, but you'd still have Louisville, Wisconsin and Rutgers left out with one loss.

Which would you prefer.....An 8 team playoff or a 16 team playoff?

Matchups:

Ohio State vs. Boise State or Tennessee
USC vs. Wisconsin or West Virginia
Michigan vs. Louisville or Virginia Tech
Florida vs. LSU or Rutgers

Go even further and you could have.....

LSU vs. Oklahoma
Louisville vs. Auburn
Wisconsin vs. Notre Dame
Boise State vs. Arkansas

[AzCat]

That is the best argument that can be made for a playoff.  I still think that it is out of the question because of the ammount of money that is lost by chancing that a small team makes it with no seats to sell.

Your primary problem is that you have absolutely no idea where the money would really come from in a playoff system.  Ticket sales are pretty much irrelevant when there are folks on the sideline offering to write a billion (yes "billion") plus dollar check for the broadcast rights.  Ticket sales would just be icing on the cake.

[cireksu]

Economic impact on cities that hold bowl games >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than Economic impact of Playoff games.

[AzCat]

So the NCAA is a charitible organization that licenses their teams to play in bowl games at various locations around the country in order to lower the tax burden on on local taxpayers?  That makes no sense at all but it's what you're arguing. 

Fact is that the bowls *ONLY* exist today because of the good ol' boy network inside the NCAA that harbors nostalgic feelings for the bygone days of college football.  No rational organization would skip the payday a playoff would provide so that a handful of cities can skim more tax revenue from visitors. 

[cireksu]

I assumed that the cities had to pay the NCAA for the rights to host a bowl game.  I don't know that though. 

[catsfan20012002]

Joe Schad was on "Cold Pizza" and said that there may be a little bit of hope for the playoff crowd. The Commish of the SEC is open to a playoff system. Why is that significant? Because he's the one currently in charge of the BCS. Also.....I think it has to be significant because the SEC is where all of the big boys are, isn't it?

[catsfan20012002]

During "Cold Pizza" this morning they did a playoff during the "1st and 10" segments with Skip and the new guy (I don't know his name but he's awful so as far as I'm concerned he doesn't deserve a name) that went as follows.....

They went with the Top 8 in the BCS. The matchups were as follows:

#1 Ohio State vs. #8 Boise State
#2 Florida vs. #7 Wisconsin
#3 Michigan vs. #6 Louisville
#4 LSU vs. #5 USC

One had Louisville over Michigan with an Ohio State vs. Louisville final and Ohio State winning. The other had LSU over Ohio State leading to an LSU vs. Michigan final with Michigan winning it all. Maybe we should have had a rematch in the BCS Championship Game after all.