(Missed the edit window) You guys want every conference winner in the playoff? So teams like UCF, Bowling Green, and Troy get a seat? (OK, Troy’s pretty tough). And what if some teams have an atypically great season, and you see the likes of Buffalo or Middle Tennessee State or UAB play? I’m fine with that in the 65 team NCAA Basketball tournament, but in a 16 team football tournament, I personally would have very little interest in watching a LSU-BGSU matchup.
Would you agree Kansas and Missouri are two top five teams now, but that they don’t have the same “tradition” as NCAA football powers like, say, Notre Dame and USC?
If so, you should note that this past saturday’s Missouri-Kansas game drew an overnight grand total of 5.4 million households. Two top-notch teams in the current NCAA field, on a major network’s prime-time air, after a holiday weekend, heavily promoted by both ABC and co-promoter ESPN, and that’s the best they can do.
It’s not fair to compare these to NFL games, although even regional NFL games routinely draw more than double that. However, on the same Saturday night in 2006, USC-Notre Dame drew 27% more viewers. The only reason I can see for that is name cache; yes Notre Dame was amazingly enough ranked 6th going into that game, but everyone knew they had a soft schedule and more than a few close calls before getting buzzsawed in that game and the subsequent, inexplicable BCS bid with LSU. Fans outside the Big 12 have never heard of Kansas or Missouri, so they didn’t bother to watch.
These numbers tell me it’s not at all about what’s “on the field”, no matter how much current BCS fans say it is. It’s about promoting the same 15-20 teams, over and over, every year. And these teams hardly ever play each other, so they beef up on cupcakes to make themselves look like elites. When the occasional competitive game comes along, it’s ignored because folks aren’t familiar with the teams. You think this makes for a compelling sport to follow?
Do you think ESPN gets more viewers by building the Home Depot set on college campuses each week? They’ve got two hours of pre-game to fill; they’d interview the waterboy if they thought they could get away with it.
Gee I think BGSU actually beat a #7-ranked LSU once, the highest rank they ever defeated. And scheduling these early-round games against lesser conference champions would give better teams an advantage they deserve.
Honestly, I have no idea why schools in the MAC, Sun Belt, Conference USA, or the like actually bother with 1-A Football; they never get a share of the big payouts, and usually have to travel to provide the powerhouses an easy trophy victory. If that’s all they’re there for, let’s just have the BCS conferences in 1-A and call the others 1-A* or something. They at least they can have a playoff that gives them a chance at a championship and, potentially, one or two of the “name” bowls for their championship game.
As far as the bowls and the playoff system…I think the Wetzel Plan might actually work for a playoff. However, it doesn’t include the bowls like Omni would like. I’ve always been one for tradition, but after seeing how hugely successful and exciting March Madness is over the last 25 years or so, I think the time has come for a playoff. And as Wetzel says, why would you let a third party (the bowls) do your promoting for you? A playoff system including the bowls would never work because fans just can’t afford to travel two or three weeks weeks in a row to a different city for a different bowl. The only way they would in the Wetzel system is if they were a “Cinderella” (as much as a top 10 team could be a Cinderella).
As far as my Pitt Panthers go, I’ll be rooting against WVU because I always root against WVU. In fact, because I hate WVU. I especially hate WVU because they’ve been so much better than we have over the past 6-7 years. It’s getting more than irksome. Ever since Pittsburgh Central Catholic’s Marc Bulger decided on WVU, I knew our program was in trouble. Even if we lose (WVU should yet again beat the living crap out of us), it might have the excellent side effect of getting coordinators Cavanaugh and Rhoads fired. I do hope Shady McCoy has a good game though. He’s a special RB. Keep an eye out for him if you watch the game.
No, to be fair, Auburn was shut out because that was another year when there were too many teams with excellent credentials (regular season records: Utah 11-0, Southern Cal 12-0, Auburn 12-0, Oklahoma 12-0, Boise State 12-0). Three undefeated teams from BCS conferences, plus 2 other undefeated teams, do not go easily into 2 championship game slots. While USC killed Oklahoma in the championship game, Auburn barely beat a two loss Virginia Tech club by 3 in their bowl game. Boise State and Utah are the ones who got the shaft.
Are you saying that Boise & Utah got more of a raw deal than Auburn?
I always thought that a good idea would be an 8 team playoff: All 6 BCS conferences are in plus the other conferences have a mini-playoff for the last two slots.
No wild cards. You lose your conference, then no national championship. That makes sense to me. If you are Notre Dame, then join a conference or don’t be eligible. I’m tired of them getting a free ride because “they are Notre Dame”.
Are you freaking kidding me? You don’t think that it has anything at all to do with the fact that USC and Notre Dame represent the #2 and #3 media markets in the country!?!?!
Shit…it’s “all about whats on the field” my ass. I might as well beat my head against the wall. Next thing you’ll be arguing that one teams jersey’s are universally more attractive than anothers.
You weren’t aware of the fact that Nike has created outfits fit for the gods themselves for Oregon? Nobody else can hope to compare!
I really don’t like this plan, but it would be very interesting to see a team like Florida come up to Columbus and play in the middle of winter.
March Madness is great, but it has completely destroyed the regular season. I know I don’t start watching college basketball until the conference tournaments start, save for maybe a few marque match ups. On the other hand, I watch every weekend of college football because every game counts in the season. If we had a playoff system like Wetzel’s the regular season would matter much less. Who cares that Kansas lost to Mizzou? All it means is that they go from the 1st seed to the 5th seed. Much less important than getting knocked out of the title race.
…for a new coach.
Well, you could argue that the BCS already destroyed the regular season by forcing teams to schedule cupcakes. I don’t know that I’m willing to make that argument, as I’m still on the fence (Wetzel’s the first one to tilt me toward playoff), but I think it’s a decent argument. But point taken.
In Weitzel’s 16-team playoff, there would be 5 at-large bids. It isn’t necessarily a lock Kansas would get one of those. They’d be considered with the Big 12 championship loser (if Okl. beats Mizzou, it would be hard to take Kansas and not Mizzou), two SEC teams (say Florida and the SEC title game loser; some might even consider Tennessee, but I’d leave them out), potentially the ACC loser (unless it’s BC), and potentially a team from the PAC-10 (If USC loses to rival UCLA–and they did just that last year). Don’t get me wrong, I think Kansas would have a very good chance of getting in, but it’s not a certainty. And even so, at #5 they’d likely be playing a much better team than, say, the MAC or C-USA champion; I’d much rather play 8-4 Bowling Green than undefeated Hawaii.
My contention thoughout this thread is that the regular season isn’t a good place to determine the national championship because the best teams only rarely play each other, which makes too much of the determination subjective/non-game-related. This is another way of saying college football is not very competitive as a national sport; the game experience can’t be beat, but the week-in week-out slog of blowouts and BCS rankings–with the occasional big game that seems to be more a lucky convergence than the result of athletic prowess–is really a poor way to reward athletes who take the game seriously.
When OSU fans root for LSU to get upset, this isn’t an interest in competition–they don’t really care who LSU is playing–it’s a hope that they can somehow game the system. Hawaii–the only undefeated 1-A school–has no chance at the title, and no one can point to a single event in a game they played that merits their exclusion from even a chance to play for the #1 spot.
I have friends who are college football fans actively hoping for WVU-Missouri in the title game; not because they think it will be a great game, but because they know the TV ratings will be low, and maybe this loss of potential revenue will move the powers-that-be toward adopting a playoff. That’s all a little sad IMO, and it totally neglects the hard work of athletes who deserve better that to simply line the pockets of rich old men. They don’t get paid, they are media-hounded like professionals, and how many college students have to put up with a loud “you suck” thrown in their face after every mistake they make? Can’t we at least give them a chance to prove their worth, rather than punishing them because the alumni at whatever school they chose “don’t travel well”, or the campus isn’t located next to a major media market?
Since 2000, it looks like they have 8 wins versus ranked teams–with 5 of those coming in one year. Again, I’m not saying it was terrible to schedule Colorado–especially if it was done after the '02 season. I was saying that they aren’t exactly the powerhouse that they once were. Scheduling a team that wins 6 games a year or so doesn’t really strike me as putting together a tough schedule.
If it was scheduled after the '02 season, then I applaud Georgia for making the move.
Just to clarify: I wasn’t talking about from 2000 to now, I was talking about the 10 year period leading up to the year we scheduled them - 2002 (or early 2003).
I think the major point is that if you are going to disparage the OSU scheduling of Washington, you can’t claim that scheduling Colorado is worth squat. Point is that every major school schedules 1 big non-conference opponent and it’s a total crap shoot as to whether they are going to be any good so long as they aren’t USC, Florida, OSU, Michigan, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Va Tech and up until recently FSU, Notre Dame, Miami, Wisconsin, Nebraska and a couple others. Bashing a “weak schedule” sucks because usually the team that is on the other side of the argument has an equally weak schedule too, or would have if not for one surprise sleeper team.
Hear! Hear! I love the BCS. OK, love is too strong. But I love the week-to-week drama of the regular CFB season, and the BCS maintains that.
But to get us back on track…it’s Big Game Week. Go Bears! Give 'em the Axe! the axe! the axe! Beat Stanfurd! And thereby ensure the Bears of a spot in a dishearteningly minor bowl.
Though Kansas does have ugly jerseys compared to most schools (sorry Jayhawks), it also may have something to do with the number of alumni/connections to alumni for each school. This would also explain why it is well known casinos set the betting line for Notre Dame higher than expected because they know they will get a disproportionate number of “homers” (for lack of a better term) who will bet on Notre Dame no matter what. It also explains why BCS #1 Missouri is an underdog going into the Big 12 final against Oklahoma (more Oklahoma alums will bet). There is also the possibility disinterested sports fans thought Missouri and Kansas weren’t such great teams, despite being blessed as such by the “wonderful” BCS system.
Face it: A higher proportion of “homers”–fans of one particular team–watch college football than folks who follow it generally as a sport, and it’s not hard to see why: Competitive matchups are rare in comparison to other sports. It also seems the homers aren’t enough anymore: TV ratings for 2-9 Notre Dame are averaging a 2-share, lowest in the history of the NBC contract. NBC seems upbeat about it–I guess they have to be–but I think it shows potential fans of the sport are no longer fooled by the “tradition” charade and prefer to watch something more competitive.
I take it you watched the KU-Mizzou game, and found it enjoyable. I also take it you like seeing good teams play each other. If only there was a system by which we could guarantee more competitive matchups near the end of every year…
I’ve always opposed a college football playoff.
Reason #1. Scheduling. There is a lot of political pressure on state schools to schedule some of the in state cupcake state schools. Like it or not, politicians control the budget for state universities and they have their own agendas. Even the composition of the Big 12 conference was influenced by Texas politics.
Reason #2. The playoff games would not sell out. Using the bowls to host the first playoff rounds would be a disaster. An Oregon vs Kansas game in Miami for the first round? That isn’t going to sell out. College football fans aren’t going to travel around the country for 3 rounds of playoffs.
This will happen no matter what system you chose; how does the BCS address this problem? I’d also say that if state universities are so hamstrung by this, they can always forego their tax exemptions on sports revenues (what, I ask, is the “grand educational mission” being served by skybox revenue?)
The Weitzel plan has all rounds up to the championship game at home sites. And what makes you think a BCS Orange bowl with Oregon and Kansas (a real is remote possibility this year) would fare any better?