2010 NCAA football thread....

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

A dismal bowl record over how many years? I find most Bowl games outside of the big BCS to be more like celebrations!

In playoffs, it's pressure from Round 1.

Unless we're talking about a 32 team playoff the playoffs would be the BCS bowl games.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by valo403

Unless we're talking about a 32 team playoff the playoffs would be the BCS bowl games.

16 teams is what most 'experts' have suggested.

We'll have to disagree. Teams losing to Boise State or Utah in a BCS bowl game, the coaches are still there. Lose to them in a 1st round game or QF and you're toast.

[PIMking]

Basically what you would have with a playoff system is big schools going into weak conferences for that easy playoff bid.

It would be like watching Alabama leave the SEC for the sunbelt conference and play cupcakes all year.

Playoffs will devalue everything.

[PIMking]

To add to this, If you start to say certain conferences would not be allowed to compete in the playoffs we will be in the same boat that we are in now. BCS auto qualifiers vs Non AQ schools.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by PIMking

To add to this, If you start to say certain conferences would not be allowed to compete in the playoffs we will be in the same boat that we are in now. BCS auto qualifiers vs Non AQ schools.

Yeah a playoff cannot work now with this format. The radical thing I would like to see is conferences merging into megaconferences. There has been news of a bunch of teams like Texas and Oklahoma going to the PAC-10 and more BIG EAST teams going to the ACC. Eventually this would make the smaller conferences so bad and insignificant that they would split off into another division.

A 60ish team Division 1 is the only way a playoff could work.

[transplant99]

Lou Holtz shared an idea on ESPN earlier this week, and it may at least be a step towards a PO system that most could agree to.

he suggests keeping all the major bowl games as is, with traditional teams in them etc, but instead of spreading them over 2 weeks as it has become, play them all on Jan 1. Then after those games have been completed, go back to to the polls/computer and then the top 4 playoff...1vs4/2vs3, winners advance to a NC game.

interesting idea at any rate.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Lou Holtz shared an idea on ESPN earlier this week, and it may at least be a step towards a PO system that most could agree to.

he suggests keeping all the major bowl games as is, with traditional teams in them etc, but instead of spreading them over 2 weeks as it has become, play them all on Jan 1. Then after those games have been completed, go back to to the polls/computer and then the top 4 playoff...1vs4/2vs3, winners advance to a NC game.

interesting idea at any rate.

Lou Holtz is a stupid, senile old fool. And not just based on this.

This is an absurd idea though. Unless by major bowl games he means the traditional big 4 (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar) there is absolutely no way for this to work. Networks aren't going to want to go head to head, and if they're forced to the amount they're willing to pay will drop considerably, so unless the first game starts at 8am ET you simply can't fit them all in. If it's more than those 4 games it turns into a clusterfata of epic proportions.

This is the problem with the vast majority of ideas I hear, they are completely detached from reality. It's always a case of just throwing some idea out there with absolutely no consideration for the fact that this isn't just a football league, it's a billion dollar industry. You wouldn't suggest that GE just up and do something because it would be cool without considering the impact on all the ancillary aspects of the business, but with college football that's what we get every single time. I guess that's somewhat expected when the "experts" are delusional old coaches, hack writers and bloggers, but it would be refreshing to see an approach that actually considers all of the dynamics at play.

[GirlySports]

Yeah you can't play 4 major bowls in one day, that would kill tv ratings. Only the Rose Bowl can be played in the afternoon of Jan 1 purely based on tradition. Everything else has to be primetime.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by valo403

Lou Holtz is a stupid, senile old fool. And not just based on this.

This is an absurd idea though. Unless by major bowl games he means the traditional big 4 (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar) there is absolutely no way for this to work. Networks aren't going to want to go head to head, and if they're forced to the amount they're willing to pay will drop considerably, so unless the first game starts at 8am ET you simply can't fit them all in. If it's more than those 4 games it turns into a clusterfata of epic proportions.

This is the problem with the vast majority of ideas I hear, they are completely detached from reality. It's always a case of just throwing some idea out there with absolutely no consideration for the fact that this isn't just a football league, it's a billion dollar industry. You wouldn't suggest that GE just up and do something because it would be cool without considering the impact on all the ancillary aspects of the business, but with college football that's what we get every single time. I guess that's somewhat expected when the "experts" are delusional old coaches, hack writers and bloggers, but it would be refreshing to see an approach that actually considers all of the dynamics at play.

just curious...name those who would work in your world as an expert?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

just curious...name those who would work in your world as an expert?

Anyone who takes the whole range of impacts into account when coming up with a playoff scheme. As fo yet that list amounts to nobody, or at least nobody I've seen.

[GirlySports]

We do a much better job in this thread then any experts. Everyone's chipped in and it's been a really detailed conversation

[valo403]

I think the big problem is that all the arguments/solutions are based in some sort of sense of outrage or injustice. I mean look at the recent BCS book, it's all about how outrageous the whole thing is and how everyone's being cheated etc. When you're coming from a place like that you're never going to be able to make an informed and intelligent argument that takes everything into account, the bluster gets in the way. Genuine issues are dismissed as irrelevant and common sense goes out the window.

[Gugstanley]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

16 teams is what most 'experts' have suggested.

We'll have to disagree. Teams losing to Boise State or Utah in a BCS bowl game, the coaches are still there. Lose to them in a 1st round game or QF and you're toast.

No shame in losing to Utah or Boise State...they both have had very good teams and could beat any of the top teams this year.

16 team playoff won't see team exit to smaller conferences. They have to stay in the big conferences with the TV revenue to survive. Sunbelt conference might have an easier run to the playoffs but they won't pay teams $20 million a year like the big conferences.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Gugstanley

No shame in losing to Utah or Boise State...they both have had very good teams and could beat any of the top teams this year.

16 team playoff won't see team exit to smaller conferences. They have to stay in the big conferences with the TV revenue to survive. Sunbelt conference might have an easier run to the playoffs but they won't pay teams $20 million a year like the big conferences.

If you're all but guaranteed the playoff payout that loss of the conference TV contract is likely a wash. Add in the proliferation of team/school operated networks and maybe we see Bama in the Sun Belt with games on BamaTV.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Im sure some dont, but most do.







They make a lot of money at most schools, though i still am not convinced that players should get paid. I mean the scholarship athletes must be getting close to 20 grand or so each year alone in tuition, food, supllies etc. (complete guess on my part)...so that would have to be factored in as well.

Honestly, I don't think players should get paid. I went to UT and if college players started getting paid then UT would become a ridiculous monster dynasty in college football. They bring in more money than anyone and also have the 3rd largest endowment behind Harvard and Yale. They couldn't make all players get paid the same as some superstar would sue. It would be the same 4 teams every year competing for national championships with no down cycles.

[Gugstanley]

I would still like to see a playoff and I think you can do it and let the non-AQ conference get a piece of the action. First every conference has to have a minimum of 12 teams and play a championship game. The winner of the AQ conference championship games gets into the playoffs.

We won't have 5 non AQ conferences as the Wac is nearly dead and can just be absorbed by the Mountain West. So the four remaining Non AQ conferences can have their champion play the champion from another non AQ conference and the winner gets into the playoffs. Pull eight at large teams into the mix and SOS still plays a big factor in who makes it. Plus with 16 teams it would be hard to argue someone get left out.
Let the other teams play the bowl games as they are arranged now. The season wouldn't be meaningless.

[GirlySports]

That's not a bad idea. There really needs to be reform of some sort before a playoff can be considered. Also 16 might be too much, maybe the NFL's 12 team playoff would be better. If you have a 16 team playoff, the first round is 8 games, how are you going to fit 8 games into one Saturday without losing major television dollars?

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Gugstanley

I would still like to see a playoff and I think you can do it and let the non-AQ conference get a piece of the action. First every conference has to have a minimum of 12 teams and play a championship game. The winner of the AQ conference championship games gets into the playoffs.

We won't have 5 non AQ conferences as the Wac is nearly dead and can just be absorbed by the Mountain West. So the four remaining Non AQ conferences can have their champion play the champion from another non AQ conference and the winner gets into the playoffs. Pull eight at large teams into the mix and SOS still plays a big factor in who makes it. Plus with 16 teams it would be hard to argue someone get left out.
Let the other teams play the bowl games as they are arranged now. The season wouldn't be meaningless.

These sorts of suggestions aren't logical though.

The conferences operate independent of the BCS and the NCAA. Saying that every conference has a 12 teams and then dispersing the good non-AQ teams through-out them is nice in theory, but there's so many issues with that statement in reality.

Why would any conference want to add teams that don't provide them any real financial benefit?

How do you convince the teams in said conferences to add another team to the conference (taking another piece of the pie) without solid proof that they'd contribute financially?

What happens to the conferences in basketball and other sports? Everyone loves to throw Boise St. in the Pac-10, but they provide almost no benefit to a conference outside of football.

The one thing I've come to realize about a football playoff is that for it to make any logistical sense it'd have to come following a major conference realignment (ie; the 4 conference, 16 teams each superconference rumors that we heard about all summer). The problem is that there's no way for the NCAA to force the teams or conferences into doing this (unless it's financially viable) so it's likely a long ways away.

[GirlySports]

Nebraska looks VERY nervous in this big game. Down 10-0 early.

Texas has 10 points and their QB hasn't completed a pass.

[GirlySports]

Nebraska totally folds when they play a real team.