NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:21 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 1:35 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811

Quote:
"*Groan* Too much travelling. I don't feel like going."--millions of football fans.

The matchups are just fine. Only the semis and championship game should be played on neutral sites. There'll have to be some home games under your system.



Three rounds (8 teams) will suffice. Begin the playoffs the second Saturday of December. The top four teams in the country host the next four teams in the first round. The four losers are sent to bowls.

The semis and finals are held in neutral sites.

Just remember--the Pac-10 will never be satisfied.


We see plenty of tickets sold to all the basketball games each year for the tournament. This would be far fewer teams involved and would already favor schools with large followings.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:17 pm 


A lot of those tickets sold for the basketball tourney are for a "package" of games, in a regional area, and usually held within a couple of days...involving 20,000 fans at the most...It would be much more difficult to continue to shell out $50+ for 3 weeks straight...along with the travel cost for the weekend at each site...Bowl Games deal with 50,000+ in most cases...

Bowl Games still sell better because the bowl sponsors sell the tickets on that the whole Bowl Experience as more of a "vacation".


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:56 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1285
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
A school going to March Madness is allotted 500 to 1,000 tickets. With 8 schools at a regional for the first round, and with most of the first rounds in SUB-20,000 arenas (out west, they make do in the 12-17K range), that reduces the local load considerably. BTW, the second games of the weekend often have cheap tickets available from kids whose teams lost in the first round. A championship game ticket is actually easier to come by than a Final Four Saturday ticket, for the same reason. Also, virtually nothing in the way of fan activities is sponsored during regionals.

Meanwhile, the Rose Bowl expects to sell 40,000 tickets to each participating school, and almost always does (a ticket snafu kept down the count of Washington State fans a couple years ago). Out of 40,000 each, the more tour packages sold, the better for them, of course; since March Madness might occur during most spring breaks, the potential to sell those tour packages MIGHT exist, but not with 5 days notice.

Back in 1996, the Cotton Bowl sold 17,000 to Oregon fans and 9,000 to Colorado fans, announced 58,000 attendance (with never more than 40K in the stadium), and the area hotels announced that it was the most active New Year's in memory... probably because the old SWC fans who used to sell it out drove in on game day and drove back the same day. I can only imagine what happened the next year when Kansas State and BYU actually sold the place out, with KSU bringing 35,000. Anyway, the point is that the scale of March Madness is completely different from that of a bowl game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:47 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
You're making my point for me, guys. Bowls are HIGHLY dependent on fans traveling from participating schools, meaning that most bowls generate little interest from local sports fans. The same is true for TV revenues. Most bowl games generate little interest from the general sports fan.

In contrast, the basketball tournament generates tremendous interest from the general sports fan & non-sports fan alike. Office pools are legendary. These alone attest to the high level of interest. Regardless of the size of arenas, most of the revenue for the tournament is generated by TV.

By the time you get to the second weekend of the tournament (round of 32/16), arenas are selling out easily. Final Four weekend is normally played in a football size arena & even still they have to hold a lottery, with the lucky winners being drawn from a pool numbering in the hundreds of thousands.

The present bowl system is indefensible. A play-off would greatly increase the interest of the general fan. Such a tournament adds drama & games actually mean something. Of course, the basketball tournament differs in many ways, but it demonstrates the basic principle. Every game is sudden death & every game means something & every team has hope.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:16 am 
Agreed. The fan interest in a playoff system would result in MUCH higher revenues than the current BCS, and you'd think the bowls would be licking their chops at such a prospect.

My ideal would be a 16-team tourney. Conf. champs get an auto-bid, that would leave 5 at-large (that's a large enough field to prevent exclusion of anyone, who could seriously claim to be a contender for No. 1).

First round might be at 8 top seeded schools (only conf. champs could host).

8 winners move on to Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta. These tickets could be pre-sold by lottery, and I DO think they would sell, cause they would be readily scalp-able, after the pairings are announced.

Then semi's and a final game would be at locations picked by the NCAA (bid on like the BB Final Four, and regional host cities).

To make this happen, one powerful entity would have to line up the powers that be (the bowls, the college presidents, etc.), and satisfy everyone that the money would be an increase over the current unwieldy mess. It might mean having to guarantee part of the money. I see maybe a TV network with Kahunas offering this, in exchange for a long-term exclusive TV rights package.

Naaaahhhhh !!!!! Not in our lifetimes.....


The BCS (as almost all posters here agree) is an unmitigated disaster. It is only a system to pair #1 and #2.

I cannot understand all the wrangling over whether Cal or Texas deserved an at-large. Other than the #1 vs. #2 game (USC-OK), what's the point ? Just money !!!! By sneaking in past Cal, what did Texas earn ? Not a shot at No. 1, just BCS money !

It would be relevant to discuss who got into an 8-, 12-, 16- team tourney, if you could then progress through a bracket and vie for the Title. If such a system were in place, I would think Boise St. would be screaming bloody murder.... but what does it mean to grab the low seed in the Current BCS ? Only money.

The proposed 4+1 or 5+1 talked about last spring was far better. Then getting into the bracket provided all teams an opportunity to move on to the title game (admittedly at 8-3, Pitt would likely not be chosen this year, even if they were to destroy Utah), but such a system would be far superior to the current mess.
AND it would add importance to all the games in the round of 8 (or 10), as they all would then have potential National Championship implications. You'd think that would be attractive to these doofuses in charge of each of the 4 "major" bowls, but they can't seem to see the forest for the trees.






Top
  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 10:59 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
Hey, Dave, did you hit the nail on the head! Ignored amidst all the jubilation for a non-BCS Utah making it to a BCS bowl game is the fact that NO non-BCS team will ever have a shot at a national championship game under this current system - no matter how worthy. As you so aptly stated, they just have a shot at a more lucrative, but still meaningless exhibition game.

To simplify the syste even further for a 16 game tournament, let the league championship game for premium 12 team leagues count as a first round game. Let the remaining teams play each other that same weekend. At present, that would be another 10 teams - 8 conference champions & 2 at-large. The result is that such a system would only add 2 weeks during January intersession for 2 teams & 1 week for 2 other teams.

Can't common sense ever come into play in this thing. How do these men at the top of their professions come out with the comments they do on this topic with a straight face? And why do so many people allow their intelligence to be insulted by such remarks?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:32 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811

Quote:
You're making my point for me, guys. Bowls are HIGHLY dependent on fans traveling from participating schools, meaning that most bowls generate little interest from local sports fans. The same is true for TV revenues. Most bowl games generate little interest from the general sports fan.

In contrast, the basketball tournament generates tremendous interest from the general sports fan & non-sports fan alike. Office pools are legendary. These alone attest to the high level of interest. Regardless of the size of arenas, most of the revenue for the tournament is generated by TV.

By the time you get to the second weekend of the tournament (round of 32/16), arenas are selling out easily. Final Four weekend is normally played in a football size arena & even still they have to hold a lottery, with the lucky winners being drawn from a pool numbering in the hundreds of thousands.

The present bowl system is indefensible. A play-off would greatly increase the interest of the general fan. Such a tournament adds drama & games actually mean something. Of course, the basketball tournament differs in many ways, but it demonstrates the basic principle. Every game is sudden death & every game means something & every team has hope.


So you're saying that there wouldn't be office pools for a football tourney? I think gambling would take off even more with a tourney. You'd have individual games to bet on but also an entire tourney.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:45 pm 

Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: 205.242.93.55

dave
Re: Ways to Fix the BCS
« Reply #23 on 12/16/2004 at 10:05am »
[Quote] [Modify] [Delete]



SORRY about the blank post.

FF, anything like you proposed would be a drastic improvement.

You do grasp my point, that beyond #1 and #2 in the current system, it just doesn't matter.

All the whining about the Big East this year is fed by Lee Corso and Trev Alberts and Kirk Herbstreit. Let's look at who is their employer (ESPN = ABC / Disney, who televises the BCS games that they are paid to hype).

They are required to "create controversy" to stir up interest in the meaningless games that feature BCS seeds #3 - #8.

Is the Big East "down" right now ? Yes - undeniably (but gees! - the 2 defectors - Miami and VT just played to see who represents the ACC !). MEANING the ACC of a year ago was below the Big East of a year ago, so let's cut the Big East a little slack (since nobody complained that the ACC was non-competeitive in the past) !

I grew up outside of Pittsburgh, but went to MIT (not a BE school), but I'd like to see a playoff system where schools from the entire country are represented. We don't need in-fighting between the BE and MWC and WAC and MAC - they all deserve representation, or at the very least, an automatic qualification IF they meet various criteria that are within the realm of possibility (like winning the conference and going undefeated). There is no reason to ASSUME an undefeated Utah or Boise St. team cannot beat some at-large team from one of the BCS auto-bid conferences !

Just because pollsters say a team like Cal or Texas (admittedly very good teams, with just a single loss to the conference champ) have more claim to a title than anybody from a "lesser conference", I don't buy it !

I want to see somebody beat Auburn, Utah, and Boise St. ON THE FIELD, before anybody tells me that their team is better. That is the whole problem with the BCS.
Scrap it - the fans want a playoff, and currently only one Bowl game is meaningful, and it's credibility is in the crapper, because 3 undefeated teams have been cast aside by know-nothing pollsters.

Top
  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:43 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540

Quote:


So you're saying that there wouldn't be office pools for a football tourney? I think gambling would take off even more with a tourney. You'd have individual games to bet on but also an entire tourney.


I think you mis-read my post, Quinn. I'm saying that office pools are one way of guaging the broad interest in the basketball tournament. If such a tournament existed for football, it would also generate broad interest, including office pools.

My point is that the present system doesn't tap the potential for fan interest that is out there. There are no office pools for the college bowls NOW. There would be with a new system.

Cheers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
I'm with you, Dave. If all it takes is a vote, why play any of the games. After all isn't that why you play the games? To find out who wins? If you already knew there'd be no point in playing the d**n games. Just take a poll in September, send everyone home, & just concentrate on the Yankees & Red Sox. ;D The favorite doesn't always win. 8-)

Everyone who wants to defend the bowl system should be required to sit throw a showing of "Hoosiers" & then try to defend their position. ;)



Last edited by friarfan on Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 3:28 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
It IS amazing that some of the college presidents can make some of these comments with a straight face.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 3:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2663
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Friarfan, I understood your point on office pools and totally agree. March madness creates a madness around our offices and football bowl season does not get much attention at all. Of course a lot of us are out of the office during the week after Christmas.

Dave could not agree with you more. We fans want to take the BCS and ------ Its the holiday season so need to be fairly nice.

tid bits.

Only Presidents of BCS schools could love the BCS.

Only the folks running the bowls could love the current bowl system.

Since the is a how to fix the BCS. --------------------------

I would take four more bowls into the mix. For now the Gator, Capitol, Cotton, and Holiday.

This would create 16 openings for BCS bowls. Calm down BCS Presidents and dont lose anything you have just eaten as this is not a playoff idea!

Reward the teams and conferences on how you perform in the BCS bowls and not just getting there.

Take Texas for example. If Holiday and Rose were both BCS bowls, what difference does it make where you play as long as you win. Losing would have less payout.

All 11 division 1A conference champions could make the BCS bowls. This will leave 5 at large BCS bids.

College Presidents - reminder again calm down this is not a playoff.

If the big boys are as big as they claim, should be not problem keeping most of the cash in the big boy conferences. Payouts based on wins.

According to ABC/ESPN Corso, Alberts, James of the world should be no problem due to most mid majors would lose the game and have less payouts and the 5 at large bids would have gone to the big boy conference members in most years.

One exception. Winners of the 8 BCS bowls would be eligible for the championship game a week or two latter.

Have a web site and let the fans select the two teams out of the 8 BCS bowls to play in the championship game. TV Ratings should be fantastic. Well not as good as a true playoff.





Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:37 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
I hadn't thought it was workable, but I like Dave's idea of a 16 team tournament. It works IF you play the first round in December before final exams - preferably the first or second weekend. If it begins in early/mid December, Lash, the office pools would go haywire. And then you come back after the holidays, debrief about the games on New Year's & settle in for the semis & finals. It would all be done before the second semester begins.

Ignored in all of this is the fact that the NFL has opened up a window for this in January by pushing the Super Bowl all the way to the first weekend in February. There used to be a conflict with this play-off idea because of Super Bowl hype potentially at the same time. Not any more.

BTW, any college presidents who want to stand on principle because of the negative effect on academics (Har! Har!) can really stand tall & recommend that their school go the Ivy League route & de-emphasize athletics.


Last edited by friarfan on Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:49 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1285
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
I'm in favor of a playoff, but I'm trying to demonstrate why bowls, and perhaps more importantly, sponsors, do not want to be part of a playoff system.

Sponsoring a playoff generates more interest, but using the same bowls every year, whether and how they are rotated, means that you're trying to sell the same fans EVERY year on attending the big games. I think there's ample evidence that, for the scale of what's required to fill stadia, the fact that interest in college sports still has a large local component makes it harder to sell seats.

More importantly, IMO, what sponsors are protecting are real returns versus the old maxim of "I know I'm wasting half my advertising budget, I just don't know which half." The tour packages are real money for at least one industry and maybe more, and then the sponsor has a captive audience that they can advertise to, face to face. You lose that with a playoff. The issue is further exacerbated by the fact that a lot of the big schools we're talking about already have a tie into the money making business because big time college football draws the most away fans of any American sport, and by a huge margin.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ways to Fix the BCS
PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:16 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
Very good points & well explained, Pounder.

The BCS has eroded this system somewhat because the same fans no longer come back to the same place. Witness the replacement of Cal in the Rose Bowl this year with Texas.

It's certainly true that the present system is a money maker for the local economy - especially in the big bowl cities. A play-off system would not help that & may make it worse - unless the big bowls got more than one date in the play-offs.

But it is an antiquated model. In the 21st century, it is TV that generates revenue. Fannies in the seats is a finite number. TV viewership is ever expanding. Baseball, for example, no longer builds 60-70,000 seat stadiums. The snafu in DC is about a 41,000 seat stadium. I know it's a different sport, but the principle is the same: it's all about the TV dollars.

Most important is that universities are institutions that are designed to strive for excellence. Seeking the highest level of competition would by definition mean a play-off tournament as exists in every other sport & every other division of football. Instead decisions about competition are based on who will draw the most fans - Notre Dame being a prime example. This opposes everything universities stand for.

This system makes no sense either macro-economically or competitively. I know you agree; I'm speaking to the argument proposed by the university defenders of the bowls.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 

cron




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group