Yes, yes..And Yes.

 

There will always be if's, and's, and but's...

So the controversy stays very similar on whether deserving teams are left out or not.

So you are going to replace on NY's Day, USC/Michigan in the Rose Bowl with a UK/Clemson game and expect to get the SAME AMOUNT of money from the sponsors and television contracts?

 

Because if you have the national championship on 1/8, as is now, then only two games will be going on tomorrow in the playoff format. You have a lot of television revenue and time slots to make up with those minor games now playing on NY's Day.

 

And those marquee matchups that you were talking about are away from the NY's Day games as we see now.

 

Now your just putting words in my mouth.. I never said everyone will get the same amount of money and I never said the UK/Clemson game should be played on New Years Day. Who said the NC has to be on 1/8 as it is now, either?

So the controversy stays very similar on whether deserving teams are left out or not.

 

There will always be controversy, but Im not sure it would be that similar.. To me debating who the #10-15 teams in the country are is a lot different than debating who are the top 3.

Now your just putting words in my mouth.. I never said everyone will get the same amount of money and I never said the UK/Clemson game should be played on New Years Day. Who said the NC has to be on 1/8 as it is now, either?

The NCAA will not want it to go much further into the January and the NFL moving playoff games to Saturday will put a hindrance on continuing much farther into January with NCAA games.

 

If you believe that the teams, bowl games, NCAA will take a huge cut in the revenue they bring in that supports the programs for a playoff system, then you are fooling yourself.

 

I used UK/Clemson as an example. There are 7-8 games scheduled on NY's Day. Logic says that the playoffs will culminate at a similar time than they are now. So that means a final game somewhere around 1/8 with semifinals on 1/1. That is 2 games in the semifinals, so you need 5-6 games to finish out the television schedule that the networks are used to.

 

Clemson/UK is as good as any of the other bowl games and I guarantee that will not draw the ratings or ad revenue which in turn translate into money to the bowl games as a USC/Michigan or LSU/ND matchup.

 

While it sounds nice, logic and reality places ALOT OF OBSTACLES in the way of a playoff. As I posted elsewhere, it is more about it is not realistic as much as whether it is a good idea or not.

There will always be controversy, but Im not sure it would be that similar.. To me debating who the #10-15 teams in the country are is a lot different than debating who are the top 3.

Would you agree that in the SEC, Auburn and Florida play 10 teams and a good chance they go 5-5 against each other? If that is the case, not much different between the team playing for the national championship and the team you excluded.

The NCAA will not want it to go much further into the January and the NFL moving playoff games to Saturday will put a hindrance on continuing much farther into January with NCAA games.

 

If you believe that the teams, bowl games, NCAA will take a huge cut in the revenue they bring in that supports the programs for a playoff system, then you are fooling yourself.

 

I used UK/Clemson as an example. There are 7-8 games scheduled on NY's Day. Logic says that the playoffs will culminate at a similar time than they are now. So that means a final game somewhere around 1/8 with semifinals on 1/1. That is 2 games in the semifinals, so you need 5-6 games to finish out the television schedule that the networks are used to.

 

Clemson/UK is as good as any of the other bowl games and I guarantee that will not draw the ratings or ad revenue which in turn translate into money to the bowl games as a USC/Michigan or LSU/ND matchup.

 

While it sounds nice, logic and reality places ALOT OF OBSTACLES in the way of a playoff. As I posted elsewhere, it is more about it is not realistic as much as whether it is a good idea or not.

 

This is getting to deep and speculative for me. I can't tell you EXACTLY how it should be done. But I believe it COULD be done and should be done. Other levels of college football do it and it works fine for them. As far as the money issue, some games would generate less than they do now, but there would be more games played, so that would make up for it. Im not sure what the NFL even has to do with this so I can't really comment on that.

This is getting to deep and speculative for me. I can't tell you EXACTLY how it should be done. But I believe it COULD be done and should be done. Other levels of college football do it and it works fine for them. As far as the money issue, some games would generate less than they do now, but there would be more games played, so that would make up for it. Im not sure what the NFL even has to do with this so I can't really comment on that.

As pointed out in another thread both OSU/Florida is getting $17 million for just the one game. Each of the other bowls are doing payouts. I believe that money is split in some form or fashion to the other SEC schools.

 

If you continue the playoffs into January, the competition for slots for televisioin gets crowded as the NFL is playing 2 games on Saturday and 2 games on Sunday. That hurts ratings which hurts advertising revenue which hurts the amount of $$ the NCAA/teams would get.

 

The other levels are not dealing with figures like $17 million dollar and the potential loss of millions of dollars by putting in a playoff system.

 

It might not be right or fair, but the system that is out there and would need to be replaced.

If you continue the playoffs into January, the competition for slots for televisioin gets crowded as the NFL is playing 2 games on Saturday and 2 games on Sunday. That hurts ratings which hurts advertising revenue which hurts the amount of $$ the NCAA/teams would get.

 

You mentioned 51 days between the end of the regular season and final game earlier.. So say the NCAA has somewhere between 50 and 60 days to get the games in. It could be done with a little thought and intuition.

You mentioned 51 days between the end of the regular season and final game earlier.. So say the NCAA has somewhere between 50 and 60 days to get the games in. It could be done with a little thought and intuition.

I agree that this is a time that could be explored BUT, a huge problem there. Count two weeks in here of finals for the different colleges/universities and the presidents would put a huge frown on traveling and the party atmosphere of a bowl game during finals week.

 

Also, that was for OSU in which the Big 10 does not have a championship game. For Florida, the wait is not that long because of the big $$$$ SEC championship game.

 

But then you end up with the problem of the Orange Bowl being the championship game, the Sugar and Fiesta Bowl being played on 1/1 as semifinals moving the GRAND DADDY of them all, the Rose Bowl being played on 12/24 or somewhere there about. Not sure the Rose Bowl organizers who shell out millions of dollars would be happy with that.

 

It might also be interesting to see if we ever have a situation where a Rose Bowl goes rogue and stays out of the NCAA tournament process, offers a top team $20 million to come play there while the teams only get 3-4-5 million for the NCAA tournament and the AD selects the Rose Bowl instead of the playoffs.

So the #7 team in the nation is left out and this is a better system?

 

Absolutely. Do you prefer the #3 team in the country (the team that beat that #7 team) be left out? Again, I'd MUCH rather argue about the #7 team in the country than the #3 team. Also, the Big11 could solve this problem on their own by having all their teams actually play each other, or adding a team and having a championship game.

 

 

So the runnerup in a BCS power conference and a team that almost made the national championship game and holds a victory over one of your top 8 is left out and this is a better system?

 

I was using BCS rankings (which you seem to be defending). Thats what put WVU ahead of Rutgers. If you'd prefer to take the #1 and #2 teams from each conference you'd leave out LSU in favor or Arkansas or Auburn. The bottom line is your complaining about a 2 loss team being left out. Any team that has 2 losses loses their right to complain.

 

And you would have included an ACC team (bolded) that proved on the field they couldn't beat a middle of the road SEC team but exclude Auburn who is rated higher and this is a better system?

 

Are you referring to the same "middle of the road SEC team" that beat the Auburn team you're complaining about? Auburn couldn't even win their division. I have no problem with them being left out.

 

And all of your complaints are solved by going to a 16 team system.

I agree that this is a time that could be explored BUT, a huge problem there. Count two weeks in here of finals for the different colleges/universities and the presidents would put a huge frown on traveling and the party atmosphere of a bowl game during finals week.

 

Also, that was for OSU in which the Big 10 does not have a championship game. For Florida, the wait is not that long because of the big $$$$ SEC championship game.

 

But then you end up with the problem of the Orange Bowl being the championship game, the Sugar and Fiesta Bowl being played on 1/1 as semifinals moving the GRAND DADDY of them all, the Rose Bowl being played on 12/24 or somewhere there about. Not sure the Rose Bowl organizers who shell out millions of dollars would be happy with that.

 

It might also be interesting to see if we ever have a situation where a Rose Bowl goes rogue and stays out of the NCAA tournament process, offers a top team $20 million to come play there while the teams only get 3-4-5 million for the NCAA tournament and the AD selects the Rose Bowl instead of the playoffs.

 

Again, this is all speculation. As I said before, I can't tell you EXACTLY how to do it, nor do I have the time to attemp to. But Im sure some NCAA bigwig who gets paid to solve these kinds of problems could figure out a way to make it work. IMO, it's only a matter of time before it happens.

Again, this is all speculation. As I said before, I can't tell you EXACTLY how to do it, nor do I have the time to attemp to. But Im sure some NCAA bigwig who gets paid to solve these kinds of problems could figure out a way to make it work. IMO, it's only a matter of time before it happens.

I believe it will happen around the same time the KHSAA scraps the Sweet 16 as is and goes to a class system.

Absolutely. Do you prefer the #3 team in the country (the team that beat that #7 team) be left out? Again, I'd MUCH rather argue about the #7 team in the country than the #3 team. Also, the Big11 could solve this problem on their own by having all their teams actually play each other, or adding a team and having a championship game.

 

 

 

 

I was using BCS rankings (which you seem to be defending). Thats what put WVU ahead of Rutgers. If you'd prefer to take the #1 and #2 teams from each conference you'd leave out LSU in favor or Arkansas or Auburn. The bottom line is your complaining about a 2 loss team being left out. Any team that has 2 losses loses their right to complain.

 

 

 

Are you referring to the same "middle of the road SEC team" that beat the Auburn team you're complaining about? Auburn couldn't even win their division. I have no problem with them being left out.

 

And all of your complaints are solved by going to a 16 team system.

Actually Louisville was the Big East school I was talking about.

 

None of the complaints about $$$ and the New Year's Day television schedule that brings in huge amounts of money to the schools are addressed in a 16-team system.

 

I would like to see the BCS go to a "must win your conference championship to be included" clause.

I believe it will happen around the same time the KHSAA scraps the Sweet 16 as is and goes to a class system.

 

That'll probably happen someday too.

So the #7 team in the nation is left out and this is a better system?

 

So the runnerup in a BCS power conference and a team that almost made the national championship game and holds a victory over one of your top 8 is left out and this is a better system?

 

And you would have included an ACC team (bolded) that proved on the field they couldn't beat a middle of the road SEC team but exclude Auburn who is rated higher and this is a better system?

 

The only problem I have with that playoff scenario is VT getting in. The rule for having a 2 teams per conference rule is a great one. If you can't finish in the top 2 in your conference you shouldn't have a chance for the playoffs in football (basketball is a little different as there are 3 times as many teams competing and 5 times as many playoff spots). That does make the regular season matchups mean more. Wisconsin and Rutgers had their chances this year to win their conference and didn't get it done, same for Auburn.