bcs games

[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.

[Danzig]

there are 11 fbs conferences, so if each conference champ was an auto, that leave five at large bids.
if the intent is to have the 16 best teams to play in a playoff, that automatically excludes some conferences. so in what way would they benefit with that change? they wouldn't.
so they would demand an auto seed, which means now you don't have the 16 best. so what would be the point?
wisconsin is 8 and 5, and in the rose bowl and they aren't even ranked. but certain conferences get an auto bid because of their conference...so if you took the champs, you leave out a lot of good teams in order to keep each conference happy, and money going their way.

there is no way to assure conferences their money, and guarantee the top teams playoff under that scenario. it wouldn't clear up the year-end question of who's better, because bad teams would get in (like now) and good teams would be left out (like now).

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by 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.

Most of the bowls are not money makers for the team because the money is divided among all the conference teams and may of the bowls dont pay enough to cover travel expenses alone for the teams. Only the top 7 or 8 bowls pay big money which are the ones the BCS and big conferences have locked up. The playoff would be far more lucrative overall, that can hardly be disputed. Everyone would get a bigger cut under that system including teams from lessor conferences. Not to mention instead of buying tickets to their own game the NCAA would be selling them. Giving away profits to a unnecessary third party is something that no other business on the up and up would do.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/spo...1-million.html

FYI the vast majority of bowls are now owned by ESPN who uses them as cheap program filler knowing they will draw good ratings because college football is popular.

[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.