You mean your a 100% confident like you said there is none, zero chance the Bengals even come close to 8 wins this year? Your 100% confidence seems to be a little off this year. So I think you would be 95% wrong in thinking people wouldn' watch it. Most of the people who don't feel like they belong would watch it because they would want to see Boise lose, so they could say see told you they don't belong. Come on man you know people would be eating it up and loving it if they see Boise losing and probably would watch to see it. Plus I think you underesitmate the amount of people who follow Boise lately. That is why if they put them in for Virginia Tech, that the Sugar Bowl wouldn't have lost much at all, and probably got a better tv rating. I don't see many people around looking forward to the Virginia Tech/Michigan game, now that is a game I have no interest in seeing at all.

 

It's not just the tv rating. Michigan and VA Tech travel well. Very well. That's what they are banking on at the Sugar Bowl.

That is about to change...

 

Heard that before. Pardon me, if I don't hold my breath.

The ACC is 2-11 in BCS Bowls, 1-10 in the since 2000. VT is 1-4, however Michigan is 1-3.

The Orange Bowl is usually the worst drawing bowl game. No one in Miami cares. They need strong fanbases to be at this game or they lose money.

It's not just the tv rating. Michigan and VA Tech travel well. Very well. That's what they are banking on at the Sugar Bowl.

 

Agreed. People keep forgetting the hotel/restaurant/tourism angle to bowl games. That makes up a large part of the reason why a playoff (greater than a 1+) will never happen.

This game is the Sugar Bowl, not Orange, and that was my mistake, sorry.

I didn't even read this thread. Just wanted to say I am glad Boise isn't in a BCS bowl and that other than the FSU/ND game and the LSU/Bama game I probably won't watch any of the bowl games closely. Oh...I'll watch Montee Ball set the td record also.

I probably won't watch any other bowl game besides the title game.

 

In all honesty, the only other potential matchups that would interest me are between the great non-BCS schools (like Boise, TCU) and the best of the rest (like Stanford, OK State). Since that never happens, it doesn't matter, but a Boise State vs. Stanford game would have piqued my interest just to see how they'd fare. I could care less about Stanford vs. OK State.

Fact is no mid major is getting a BCS at large bid with a loss.

 

I believe the Fiesta Bowl would be the best BCS option for Boise State because it's close and they would sell a large number of tickets. But they had Oklahoma State automatically and certainly weren't going to pass on taking an even better draw in Stanford.

 

I have heard rumors that Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, who pulled strings to allow the Buckeye Five to play in the Sugar Bowl last year (thus guaranteeing the bowl a big crowd and payday), might have had a say in having the Sugar Bowl invite Virginia Tech (a team his conference team could likely beat) instead of inviting Boise State (a team his conference team might have had less of an opportunity to beat).

Heard that before. Pardon me, if I don't hold my breath.

 

Within the next 3 years, there will be a plus one title game and the best teams will be invited to the top bowl games.

I believe the Fiesta Bowl would be the best BCS option for Boise State because it's close and they would sell a large number of tickets. But they had Oklahoma State automatically and certainly weren't going to pass on taking an even better draw in Stanford.

 

I have heard rumors that Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, who pulled strings to allow the Buckeye Five to play in the Sugar Bowl last year (thus guaranteeing the bowl a big crowd and payday), might have had a say in having the Sugar Bowl invite Virginia Tech (a team his conference team could likely beat) instead of inviting Boise State (a team his conference team might have had less of an opportunity to beat).

It wouldn't surprise me ... I suspect none of the BCS leagues want their teams want to face Boise in a bowl game.

It's not just the tv rating. Michigan and VA Tech travel well. Very well. That's what they are banking on at the Sugar Bowl.

 

Agreed. People keep forgetting the hotel/restaurant/tourism angle to bowl games. That makes up a large part of the reason why a playoff (greater than a 1+) will never happen.

 

I don't know the actual numbers, but does someone know the attendance at the two BCS games Boise was in? Especially the one against Oklahoma? How were the attendance for those games compared to what the average for those games are? Was it about the same, or way less?

 

As for your playoffs comment. Why do people think if there was a playoff system that there would be no bowl games? You can have an 8 team playoff and keep EVERY SINGLE BOWL. Your 1st round of the playoffs start the week after the season ends. Your Semi's are in two BCS Bowls, and the Championship game is a week later. So they would not lose any money, because you have all the bowls, but also probably make even more money. The ratings for playoff games will be even higher than a normal BCS game would get IMO.

^They go undefeated in the Big East, even if it is more mediocre than the other BCS conferences, they'll play for the title, except for the rare instances when there's two other undefeated teams. That was pretty much proven a couple years ago with UC.

 

If they go undefeated when they are in Big East and there are not 2 other undefeated teams, then they automatically qualify for the title game? I think that a 1 loss team from one of the power conferences would deserve the title shot over the teams that now comprise the Big East.

I don't know the actual numbers, but does someone know the attendance at the two BCS games Boise was in? Especially the one against Oklahoma? How were the attendance for those games compared to what the average for those games are? Was it about the same, or way less?

 

As for your playoffs comment. Why do people think if there was a playoff system that there would be no bowl games? You can have an 8 team playoff and keep EVERY SINGLE BOWL. Your 1st round of the playoffs start the week after the season ends. Your Semi's are in two BCS Bowls, and the Championship game is a week later. So they would not lose any money, because you have all the bowls, but also probably make even more money. The ratings for playoff games will be even higher than a normal BCS game would get IMO.

 

Same argument every year. We started down this road in westsider's One idea for a playoff ... . However, when I started questioning and comparing the money making ability of a playoff verses the current system, I got crickets.

 

I want a playoff, too, but I'm also realist. You simply have to look at conference TV deals and realignment to realize that everything is about money when it comes to college football. That leads me to believe that if there was that much better money to be made having a playoff, we'd already have one. When you start looking at the logistics, the reasoning behind sticking with the BCS starts to become clearer.

Same argument every year. We started down this road in westsider's One idea for a playoff ... . However, when I started questioning and comparing the money making ability of a playoff verses the current system, I got crickets.

 

I want a playoff, too, but I'm also realist. You simply have to look at conference TV deals and realignment to realize that everything is about money when it comes to college football. That leads me to believe that if there was that much better money to be made having a playoff, we'd already have one. When you start looking at the logistics, the reasoning behind sticking with the BCS starts to become clearer.

 

The thing is from what I have read and see, when people start talking about a playoff system and the bowl games. They always compare the two and the money like there wouldn't be bowl games if there was a playoff system. So obviously if it was only a playoff system and no bowl games there wouldn't be as much money. However I don't see why they can't keep all the bowl games. Only 8 teams will make the playoffs, so the rest who reach their 6 wins can get into the normal bowl games. For the 8 who make it the first round will be right after the season and at the top seeds home fields, which adds more money because that is 4 more games played. Then the Semi finals will be in two BCS bowls that rotate every year on which two host them. Then the Championship the week after. So if they are not losing bowl games, and actually adding four more games. Then they wouldn't lose money. It seems like the main reason could be just them not wanting teams to play to many games. Even though I doubt those teams would mind playing more games if it means they get to be in the Championship.