bcs games

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

I'm sure Northern Illinois is going to lose money by going to the Orange Bowl. See UConn's Fiesta Bowl trip 2 years ago, and UConn is in the Big East.

Currently the rule for Notre Dame is that they have to be in the top 8 in the BCS to go to a BCS bowl game, that is actually tougher for them to show than a non-BCS qualifying with a Top 16 rank (thanks to the weak BCS conference of the Big East).

Now this may had changed with Notre Dame's pact with the ACC. Notre Dame could be the ACC representative still for the Orange Bowl where they would have to share all Orange Bowl revenue with the ACC. They also get the luxury of being protected on being an ACC rep for an ACC contracted bowl. Again they would have to share revenue with the ACC. Now if they qualified in the future and ended up going to a different BCS Bowl, then all revenue goes to Notre Dame themselves. This of course can be renegotiated in the future when and if Notre Dame football join the conference. They are also subject to the ridiculous $50 million exit fee even without being fully in the ACC conference.

On a side note, Notre Dame football will not share its NBC contract, and will not receive any revenue from the ACC for its contract with ESPN. I doubt this will ever change unless Notre Dame football joins the conference or may possibly WNDU becomes an ABC affiliate when Notre Dame football's TV contract comes up in 2015. Not saying that it would happen but its a possibility. Then I would a assume the ACC would renegotiate with ESPN with the help from Notre Dame.

i don't know that a team would lose money by going to a bcs bowl. it's an absurdity to me that they have 12 vs 15 in a bcs bowl to begin with. but they made rules about conferences and auto bids, and no more than one in a bcs from a conference (unless one goes to the title game) to keep the money going to more pots/conferences. it's too bad. they don't want all that tv money going to the sec (for example) but want to redistribute revenue to all conferences, which is what causes farcical match-ups like the orange bowl this year.
it's too bad. but what are you going to do?

[k9styl94]

...is any who plays Notre Dame

[Crown@club]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't know that a team would lose money by going to a bcs bowl. it's an absurdity to me that they have 12 vs 15 in a bcs bowl to begin with. but they made rules about conferences and auto bids, and no more than one in a bcs from a conference (unless one goes to the title game) to keep the money going to more pots/conferences. it's too bad. they don't want all that tv money going to the sec (for example) but want to redistribute revenue to all conferences, which is what causes farcical match-ups like the orange bowl this year.
it's too bad. but what are you going to do?

Here's one article on UConn's Fiesta Bowl's experience

http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/R...wl-1038914.php

I'm sure Northern Illinois will have the same experience. Hey maybe the Notre Dame and Alabama fans could make a vacation out of it and help out by buying tickets from Northern Illinois.

Price gouging for these bowl games doesn't help for anybody either, fan or school.

[3kings]

I saw an article yesterday where an anonymous Notre Dame alumnus will pay half of every student ticket purchased. A great gesture and very cool for the students since face value is $300.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

Here's one article on UConn's Fiesta Bowl's experience

http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/R...wl-1038914.php

I'm sure Northern Illinois will have the same experience. Hey maybe the Notre Dame and Alabama fans could make a vacation out of it and help out by buying tickets from Northern Illinois.

Price gouging for these bowl games doesn't help for anybody either, fan or school.

like i said:

"the university foresees residual benefits from the Huskies playing in the Fiesta Bowl, from recruiting, admissions, ticket sales and donations, Enright said.

The blow from the money lost on the Fiesta Bowl will be cushioned by the $3.8 million UConn will receive from the Big East, probably in late spring. Each football-playing school in the league will receive that amount as its cut from bowl and television revenue."



between exposure and their other benefits they mentioned and the cut from tv, they did just fine. and so did all the other schools in that conference, who get their share from the revenue. those shares are exactly why you have acc and others with guaranteed bcs bowl bids-it's so they get a cut whether they have a good team or not, and each school in that conference gets a portion.


i wonder if all the money that the big east receives is paid out in full to the schools. if not, what do they do with whatever share they keep?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

like i said:

"the university foresees residual benefits from the Huskies playing in the Fiesta Bowl, from recruiting, admissions, ticket sales and donations, Enright said.

The blow from the money lost on the Fiesta Bowl will be cushioned by the $3.8 million UConn will receive from the Big East, probably in late spring. Each football-playing school in the league will receive that amount as its cut from bowl and television revenue."



between exposure and their other benefits they mentioned and the cut from tv, they did just fine. and so did all the other schools in that conference, who get their share from the revenue. those shares are exactly why you have acc and others with guaranteed bcs bowl bids-it's so they get a cut whether they have a good team or not, and each school in that conference gets a portion.


i wonder if all the money that the big east receives is paid out in full to the schools. if not, what do they do with whatever share they keep?

The idea that the BCS is more lucratitive than a playoff system is just not correct. The conferences and teams would get far more money by eliminating the bowls and keeping the money for themselves. However the presidents of the SEC, Big 10, ACC and Pac 12 dont want to be controlled by the NCAA (the BCS is a seperate entity from the NCAA) and are willing to tie themselves to this bastardized system where third parties (bowls) are getting a huge share. Lets not kid ourselves that the bowls arent siphoning off cash, benefits to college administrators, athletic directors, etc.

Dan Wetzel I think of Yahoo.com did a great series of articles on this a year or so ago. The NCAA just signed a 14 year, 10.8 billion dollar deal to cover the NCAA basketball tournament. What do you think a footbll tournament could bring in? Considering that college football ratings dwarf basketball ratings you could make case that a playoff might bring in 1 billion a YEAR! Please explain how that isnt more than what they are already getting? Oh yeah the athletic directors wont get their swag, the presidents wont call the shots and in the end the slush funds wont be available anymore.

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dol...big-moneymaker

Because the BCS has sold out to the bowls and has a limited playoff system the number that ESPN paid seems to be a lot less than what was thought to be the going rate

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...970790516.html

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The idea that the BCS is more lucratitive than a playoff system is just not correct. The conferences and teams would get far more money by eliminating the bowls and keeping the money for themselves. However the presidents of the SEC, Big 10, ACC and Pac 12 dont want to be controlled by the NCAA (the BCS is a seperate entity from the NCAA) and are willing to tie themselves to this bastardized system where third parties (bowls) are getting a huge share. Lets not kid ourselves that the bowls arent siphoning off cash, benefits to college administrators, athletic directors, etc.

Dan Wetzel I think of Yahoo.com did a great series of articles on this a year or so ago. The NCAA just signed a 14 year, 10.8 billion dollar deal to cover the NCAA basketball tournament. What do you think a footbll tournament could bring in? Considering that college football ratings dwarf basketball ratings you could make case that a playoff might bring in 1 billion a YEAR! Please explain how that isnt more than what they are already getting? Oh yeah the athletic directors wont get their swag, the presidents wont call the shots and in the end the slush funds wont be available anymore.

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dol...big-moneymaker

Because the BCS has sold out to the bowls and has a limited playoff system the number that ESPN paid seems to be a lot less than what was thought to be the going rate

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...970790516.html

a playoff system might be more lucrative. however, a playoff system wouldn't reward teams like wisconsin and the conference its in. right now some conferences have a guaranteed spot in the bcs because of how the system is set up. thus, their conference also benefits, as does the other teams in the conference.
believe me, if everyone involved thought they could get more money going with a playoff, it would happen. but you won't have smaller conferences (like the one northern illinois is in) involved, because they wouldn't finish high enough to get in a playoff. so that conference wouldn't get squat.
and another question-how would it be decided who played? winners of conferences, or rankings?
if it's conference winners, you still don't have the best facing the best. if it's based on rankings, you would have conferences left out, and they wouldn't get their cut of the $ they get now.

so, the total pie might be a big chunk of change-the trick is getting everyone a piece of it.

they don't go strictly by rankings now for bcs, it's by division. a playoff wouldn't necessarily change who goes where, if it's still based on winning a division. you'd still have your wisconsins and fla states in the playoffs, and teams like georgia and lsu out of it. because if it went by merit, conferences would get no bowl money. and that's the main issue.

i'm not an advocate of either program by the way, i'll watch regardless of what post-season mess they create.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

a playoff system might be more lucrative. however, a playoff system wouldn't reward teams like wisconsin and the conference its in. right now some conferences have a guaranteed spot in the bcs because of how the system is set up. thus, their conference also benefits, as does the other teams in the conference.
believe me, if everyone involved thought they could get more money going with a playoff, it would happen. but you won't have smaller conferences (like the one northern illinois is in) involved, because they wouldn't finish high enough to get in a playoff. so that conference wouldn't get squat.
and another question-how would it be decided who played? winners of conferences, or rankings?
if it's conference winners, you still don't have the best facing the best. if it's based on rankings, you would have conferences left out, and they wouldn't get their cut of the $ they get now.

so, the total pie might be a big chunk of change-the trick is getting everyone a piece of it.

they don't go strictly by rankings now for bcs, it's by division. a playoff wouldn't necessarily change who goes where, if it's still based on winning a division. you'd still have your wisconsins and fla states in the playoffs, and teams like georgia and lsu out of it. because if it went by merit, conferences would get no bowl money. and that's the main issue.

i'm not an advocate of either program by the way, i'll watch regardless of what post-season mess they create.

No you would have the best teams regardless of conference though the idea that the Big 10 or SEC or other big conference wont have 2 or more teams in a 16 game alignment is crazy. Not to mention the shared amount would be so much greater that it wouldnt matter as much. Plus you eliminate all the needless bowl expenses that are still going to have to be paid by those who go.

Wisconsin and FSU arent great examples because clearly Ohio state is the best team in the Big 10 and would be in any system if not for being on probation and FSU would be in a proper 16 team tourney.

Taking the top 16 in the AP poll as of today would put 6 SEC teams, 3 Pac 12, 2 big 12, 2 ACC, 1 Big 10 team, 1 MAC team and notre dame.

Last year would have gotten you 4 SEC teams, 4 Big 12 teams, 3 pac 10, 3 big 10, 2 mountain West teams

2010 would have been 4 SEC, 3 big 10, 2 Pac 12, 3 Mountain west, 1 ACC, 3 Big 12

The Mountain west and Big East are pretty much gone. Who else is there?

[Danzig]

so top 16.

currently, 70 teams play in a bowl. that's a big difference isn't it?

sorry, i just think if a playoff was more lucrative, they'd have done it. but right now people get cuts that perhaps would not in a different system. conferences have multiple teams in a variety of bowls. there's no way that the amount of playoff games and teams involved would match what is currently made with the 35 bowls being played.

8 first round, 4 second round, semis and the final. 15 games. a third of the games, and less than a fourth of the teams that are currently involved.

ncaa basketball is mentioned with their finals as an example. 64 teams go there. so, numbers-wise regarding teams, it's very similar in how many play in the post season.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

Here's one article on UConn's Fiesta Bowl's experience

http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/R...wl-1038914.php

I'm sure Northern Illinois will have the same experience. Hey maybe the Notre Dame and Alabama fans could make a vacation out of it and help out by buying tickets from Northern Illinois.

Price gouging for these bowl games doesn't help for anybody either, fan or school.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--...ff-system.html

[Cannon Shell]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--...committee.html

[Crown@club]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--...ff-system.html

Thanks for the reminder. I forgot about this article.