CFB Playoffs

[Govbarney]

This whole process has reaffirmed my belief that Jim Delany must die.

Ockham's razor dictates that if you do a 4 team playoff , you hold the semi-final at the home field of the team of with the better record, and the Championship at a Neutral site. No excess travel/pressure for Students and fans, and it maintains that oh so important regular season (Two of the main arguments against a playoff for the last 100 yrs)

Now the SEC is against this because its cold up north and they are naturally a bunch of pussies. This does not surprise me in the least bit, and I would expect nothing less from those rednecks.

What gets to me is that Delany backs a plan which will essentially always have the Big10 play the PAC 12 in Rose Bowl in order to "Maintain the Tradition". I have fucking had it with the "tradition" of the Rose Bowl. I no longer give a rats ass about a meaningless football game that loads the coffers of the City of Pasadena. If Delany lives in a Fantasy world where he thinks backing this plan serves the best interests of the Student athlete's, and fans of Big10 football, how can any of the so called educated Presidents of the B10 universities still believe he is suitable to hold his position.

Am I alone here? Am I the only one who thinks this love affair with playing a game whose original purpose was to have something to do after a parade has gone on to long?

[Cerebral_DownTime]

They've already ruined the tradition of the Rose Bowl anyhow. It's not about tradition, it's about money.

[pup]

What do you do when TCU finishes 2nd and you have a semi final game in front of 42K?

Only rule should be no home games. If LSU is in, send them to Rose. If USC is in, send them to Orange....

[Govbarney]

So is you concern that a home team may not be able to sell out its stadium? Or is it that some schools have smaller stadiums? B/c I doubt selling out would be a issue for anyone especially when you factor in the visiting teams allotment, and as far as stadium size goes, so what? Wrigley and Fenway are smaller ballparks then most other MLB stadiums, and I don't think the playoff product is hurt any by playing there?

[pup]

So is you concern that a home team may not be able to sell out its stadium? Or is it that some schools have smaller stadiums? B/c I doubt selling out would be a issue for anyone especially when you factor in the visiting teams allotment, and as far as stadium size goes, so what? Wrigley and Fenway are smaller ballparks then most other MLB stadiums, and I don't think the playoff product is hurt any by playing there?

Stadium size.

The product is not hurt. The amount of money every makes is.

[Govbarney]

I imagine the cut of the TV money will more then make up for any loss by not having a 75000 seat stadium. Besides the biggest argument against neutral site semi's is travel cost for the fans and students.

[JCoz]

What do you do when TCU finishes 2nd and you have a semi final game in front of 42K?

Only rule should be no home games. If LSU is in, send them to Rose. If USC is in, send them to Orange....

Then so be it, the TV revenue will increase. In the case of TCU are they going to sell out a huge stadium?

I think ultimately you're talking mostly about the amount of money that Bowl committees and directors pocket as tax-free profit.

I'm not weeping for their loss. I'm really not.

[danwismar]

Stewart Mandel spells out the proposals...(and takes credit for having the idea three years ago...)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/w ... index.html

[Spin]

What do you do when TCU finishes 2nd and you have a semi final game in front of 42K?

Only rule should be no home games. If LSU is in, send them to Rose. If USC is in, send them to Orange....

Then so be it, the TV revenue will increase. In the case of TCU are they going to sell out a huge stadium?

I think ultimately you're talking mostly about the amount of money that Bowl committees and directors pocket as tax-free profit.

I'm not weeping for their loss. I'm really not.

+1 there's no reason they can't play at whatever stadium. Let the bowls have teams 5th through 100th if they want. Lt the tournament play out where it may.

Even if it's on blue turf.

[Govbarney]

Stewart Mandel spells out the proposals...(and takes credit for having the idea three years ago...)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/w ... index.html

If they go with that plan , and I where the B10 I'd say fine , w/ the caveot that any 1 or 2 ranked B10 team will play in a newly created bowl game in Indy. It's time to start a new tradition that doesn't involve the B10 playing its most important game in PAC10 country.
That being said I am still 100 % in support of home games for the top 2 teams, and from what Mandel states that's still very much in play. The thought of a SEC team having to travel to Columbus, or Madison in late December has me salivating.

[JCoz]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--potential-four-team-playoff-not-perfect--but-it-s-a-start.html;_ylt=Ak75LA1KSwiMAXCTntjfftU5nYcB

Wetzel is spot on here.

Home game semi's are a must. The bowls can go fuck themselves.

[furls]

I hate to be a Debbie Downer here, but I am not that optimistic. I am sure they will fuck this up somehow. There will be a playoff, but they will fuck it up... count on it.

Why is it that everyone can see that the semi's should be played on someone's home turf except these fucking dolts. The venues are fine, the revenue stays with the schools. The BCS can have the scraps (the teams that don't get it in). Welcome to the NIT bitches.

[pup]

You think anyone wants to split up money from a 45,000 seat stadium instead of 90,000?

Or are we back to hoping this isn't about $?

[Sea Foam Green]

I get your point, but how much money are we actually talking about for the gate. The TV money has to absolutely dwarf it, right? I can't see that being a big hold up.

Even if it was, would it be that hard to tell everyone that has a stadium under 50k that they have to have provisions in place that should they need to host a semi, they do it at a larger venue. Some maybe somone like Cincy, has an agreement with PBS or OSU.

It wouldn't be that hard, and realistically, the teams with small stadiums aren't ever going to host these things anyways. All the big boys have big stadiums.

[Govbarney]

I think the whole Stadium Size thing is pretty close to a non-issue. The odds of a team with a small stadium being 1 or 2 are low to begin with. In the entire BCS era the closest a school with a "smaller stadium" has been to being ranked #2 in the BCS standings prior to the Bowl games beginning was when TCU was #3 in 2010.
From everything I have seen they are going to use a BCS style system to decide 1-4 which ways heavy on Strength of Schedule, which may make it even less likely a small stadium school finds itself at 1 o 2.

So maybe once a decade or so you could possibly find yourself with a TCU in the top two, I say so what. I am sure the TV money will make up for lost gate.

The MLB would prefer to see the Yankees vs The Dodgers every year in the world series, and the NBA wants a Lakers v. Knicks match-up in the finals. But just b/c that doesn't happen they dont scrap the entire play-off format.

This "Stadium Size" Issue is simply the last gasp sorry ass excuse the Bowls are using to try to savage what little relevance they have. The end is near, their 100 yr old cash cow is about to die , and they know it.

(Sidenote: If a school like TCU , which is now in in a major conference, suddenly finds its self fighting for home field Advantage year after year in a College football playoff, you dont think eventually the Alumni are not going to cough up the money to build a bigger stadium.)

[motherscratcher]

You think anyone wants to split up money from a 45,000 seat stadium instead of 90,000?

Or are we back to hoping this isn't about $?

Ceck out Whetzels article that JCoz linked. It's great and addesses this very issue (or non issue as it were).

[JCoz]

You think anyone wants to split up money from a 45,000 seat stadium instead of 90,000?

Or are we back to hoping this isn't about $?

Again I think you are missing the money gaine by cutting out the leaches in the bowl committees, and do you actually think this is really about gate admissions cash? Pft....peanuts. The schools PAY THE BOWLS for tickets, for the teams family's and the band. Face fuckin value.

[furls]

I get your point, but how much money are we actually talking about for the gate. The TV money has to absolutely dwarf it, right? I can't see that being a big hold up.

Even if it was, would it be that hard to tell everyone that has a stadium under 50k that they have to have provisions in place that should they need to host a semi, they do it at a larger venue. Some maybe somone like Cincy, has an agreement with PBS or OSU.

It wouldn't be that hard, and realistically, the teams with small stadiums aren't ever going to host these things anyways. All the big boys have big stadiums.

Your right, the TV money does dwarf gate, but why compromise when you can demand both. The two are not mutually exclusive. Most of the time the games will be played in front of 80k as most of the time the top 2 seeds are heavy hitters. I can tell you that gate at tOSU is worth a shit ton, probably more than the TV money they would see from the game. The TV revenue goes to the NCAA (not tOSU) and then goes to furthering the cause of the student athlete (LOL!).

If OSU can get the gate (or 1/2 the gate on the home game) that is a huge coup. tOSU brings in about $7MM at the gate for each home game (regular season) and they could probably get $10MM for a playoff game. WHy should they have to give that up for the scraps that will be offered by the bowls? The BCS currently gives up $18MM per bowl game which gets split 12 ways by the B1G, so OSU's share is $1.5MM.

[JCoz]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/brett-mcmurphy/18938708

Delany Nailed it with this proposal, I think you are looking at the future playoff plan right here. Perfect comprimise.

Top ranked Conference champions within the top 6 get in, if there are not 4 champs in the top 6 the top ranked at large(s) get slotted in.

Allows conference champs to play a role which reduces dependance on the accuracy of the ranking system.

Home semi's would make it the perfect (as can be constructed in todays CFB) 4-team playoff IMO.

[JCoz]

I get your point, but how much money are we actually talking about for the gate. The TV money has to absolutely dwarf it, right? I can't see that being a big hold up.

Even if it was, would it be that hard to tell everyone that has a stadium under 50k that they have to have provisions in place that should they need to host a semi, they do it at a larger venue. Some maybe somone like Cincy, has an agreement with PBS or OSU.

It wouldn't be that hard, and realistically, the teams with small stadiums aren't ever going to host these things anyways. All the big boys have big stadiums.

Your right, the TV money does dwarf gate, but why compromise when you can demand both. The two are not mutually exclusive. Most of the time the games will be played in front of 80k as most of the time the top 2 seeds are heavy hitters. I can tell you that gate at tOSU is worth a shit ton, probably more than the TV money they would see from the game. The TV revenue goes to the NCAA (not tOSU) and then goes to furthering the cause of the student athlete (LOL!).

If OSU can get the gate (or 1/2 the gate on the home game) that is a huge coup. tOSU brings in about $7MM at the gate for each home game (regular season) and they could probably get $10MM for a playoff game. WHy should they have to give that up for the scraps that will be offered by the bowls? The BCS currently gives up $18MM per bowl game which gets split 12 ways by the B1G, so OSU's share is $1.5MM.

That money would be split with the B10 Furls.

And I think you are grossly underestimating the real TV value a college football playoff is going to bring. Dont forget there is still a huge segment of football fans in the US who think the CFB postseason is a joke and not worth watching. There is still alot of room for viewer growth for these semi's.

[pup]

If there was so much money to be made in a playoff, it would have been made years ago.

I just don't think a playoff (as much as I want one) makes all that much more money for the people involved than the bowls do.

And no way are some people signing off on something that could leave the #2 ranked team in the country out of a playoff.

[Govbarney]

That money would be split with the B10 Furls.

And I think you are grossly underestimating the real TV value a college football playoff is going to bring. Dont forget there is still a huge segment of football fans in the US who think the CFB postseason is a joke and not worth watching. There is still alot of room for viewer growth for these semi's.

A CFB Playoff consisting of 4 teams , and 3 games would probably have more viewers then the World Series, NBA Finals, and Stanley Cup Final combine. So for those four teams that make it , big payday. The ones who lose money are the 40 odd teams that play in the Bull Shit bowl games that now become even less relevant then they used to be (if that is even possible). That's why I feel it is inevitable for this 4 game play-off to expand. I predict before the end of this decade it is a 12 team playoff with the top four getting first week byes.

[JCoz]

All I can say is that I've found that "if it was more money it would have been done years ago" argument to be bullshit forever, pup, so on both counts I'll be waiting with a big ole I told you so in a few years. The money involved now is an entirely different deal from what was being gotten just 10-15 years ago with the advent of Conference run networks and massive major network tv deals. So we will see.

If I'm wrong I'll be eating crow.

[JCoz]

http://mgoblog.com/content/michigan-museday-fears-nippert

Here are some data points worth consideration.

[furls]

I get your point, but how much money are we actually talking about for the gate. The TV money has to absolutely dwarf it, right? I can't see that being a big hold up.

Even if it was, would it be that hard to tell everyone that has a stadium under 50k that they have to have provisions in place that should they need to host a semi, they do it at a larger venue. Some maybe somone like Cincy, has an agreement with PBS or OSU.

It wouldn't be that hard, and realistically, the teams with small stadiums aren't ever going to host these things anyways. All the big boys have big stadiums.

Your right, the TV money does dwarf gate, but why compromise when you can demand both. The two are not mutually exclusive. Most of the time the games will be played in front of 80k as most of the time the top 2 seeds are heavy hitters. I can tell you that gate at tOSU is worth a shit ton, probably more than the TV money they would see from the game. The TV revenue goes to the NCAA (not tOSU) and then goes to furthering the cause of the student athlete (LOL!).

If OSU can get the gate (or 1/2 the gate on the home game) that is a huge coup. tOSU brings in about $7MM at the gate for each home game (regular season) and they could probably get $10MM for a playoff game. WHy should they have to give that up for the scraps that will be offered by the bowls? The BCS currently gives up $18MM per bowl game which gets split 12 ways by the B1G, so OSU's share is $1.5MM.

That money would be split with the B10 Furls.

And I think you are grossly underestimating the real TV value a college football playoff is going to bring. Dont forget there is still a huge segment of football fans in the US who think the CFB postseason is a joke and not worth watching. There is still alot of room for viewer growth for these semi's.

Why would tOSU split that gate with the B1G? They dont split any other gate with the B1G.

[furls]

FWIW, TV revenue should be better under the 4 team system, but I am not sure that it will be lightyears better than the BCS bowls get now (Combined). Additionally, TV money is not linear and any money made in a TV contract will end up in the pockets of the NCAA.

How much money is the B1G/tOSU making off of the NCAA basketball playoffs? The tourney makes HUGE money, that goes to the NCAA and turns into food stamps for all the clingons around the anus of college sports.

I think people are overestimating the value of the other bowls.... the Buckeyes make more money off of a homegame than they would off all bowls except the BCS games (if they didn't have to split with the B1G). Most bowl games really don't pay that well (500K or so) and some schools lose money on the bowl game.

I tend to agree with the notion that if there was more money to be made, it would have been implemented. The BCS is already gigantic.... Personally I think a 4 team playoff is FUCKING stupid. It literally makes it so there are 3 NCAA tournament games and then the rest of the bowl season is the NIT. I think if we are going to relegate the rest of the bowls to NIT status we should open the playoff up to 8 teams, all BCS champs + 2 at large. That tournament would draw the same ratings (per game) as a 4 team playoff therefore dramatically increasing TV revenue.

I have no idea why there is even a discussion about this...

1. All conferences implement championship games.
2. 6 BCS champs get auto berths.
3. First 4 games (quarterfinals) are played as home games for seeds 1-4.
4. Bidded locations for the other games, could be detroit, could be New Orleans.

[JCoz]

If we were to expect a close translation of post season revenue sharing from BCS to Playoff, how would that work Furls?

[furls]

No idea on that one Jcoz.

I can tell you that there is no way the B1G will show up at tOSU's doorstep and demand the entire gate to split up over the entirety of the B1G.

I think it would end up where the 2 schools share the gross profits (somehow) and the B1G pockets the bowl revenue. I am sure that the "Tampax Semifinal Game" will have some $$$ associated with it too, say 15-20MM. The B1G will take that and probably leave the gate.

[JCoz]

FWIW, TV revenue should be better under the 4 team system, but I am not sure that it will be lightyears better than the BCS bowls get now (Combined). Additionally, TV money is not linear and any money made in a TV contract will end up in the pockets of the NCAA.

How much money is the B1G/tOSU making off of the NCAA basketball playoffs? The tourney makes HUGE money, that goes to the NCAA and turns into food stamps for all the clingons around the anus of college sports.

I think people are overestimating the value of the other bowls.... the Buckeyes make more money off of a homegame than they would off all bowls except the BCS games (if they didn't have to split with the B1G). Most bowl games really don't pay that well (500K or so) and some schools lose money on the bowl game.

I tend to agree with the notion that if there was more money to be made, it would have been implemented. The BCS is already gigantic.... Personally I think a 4 team playoff is FUCKING stupid. It literally makes it so there are 3 NCAA tournament games and then the rest of the bowl season is the NIT. I think if we are going to relegate the rest of the bowls to NIT status we should open the playoff up to 8 teams, all BCS champs + 2 at large. That tournament would draw the same ratings (per game) as a 4 team playoff therefore dramatically increasing TV revenue.

I have no idea why there is even a discussion about this...

1. All conferences implement championship games.
2. 6 BCS champs get auto berths.
3. First 4 games (quarterfinals) are played as home games for seeds 1-4.
4. Bidded locations for the other games, could be detroit, could be New Orleans.

The rest of the Bowl games are NIT status already.

And I think you are way off base on where this money is going. This is not and will never be a set up like the NCAA BBall tourney. In the same vein as the whole "if it made more money they'd have done it a long time ago" rhetoric, you are out of your goddamned mind if you think any of these big-boy conference commisioners are signing up for LESS money.

[JCoz]

If they are implementing it, there is more money to be made for the B1G and its universities.

There is LITERALLY no other motivation for them to be discussing this.

[furls]

FWIW, TV revenue should be better under the 4 team system, but I am not sure that it will be lightyears better than the BCS bowls get now (Combined). Additionally, TV money is not linear and any money made in a TV contract will end up in the pockets of the NCAA.

How much money is the B1G/tOSU making off of the NCAA basketball playoffs? The tourney makes HUGE money, that goes to the NCAA and turns into food stamps for all the clingons around the anus of college sports.

I think people are overestimating the value of the other bowls.... the Buckeyes make more money off of a homegame than they would off all bowls except the BCS games (if they didn't have to split with the B1G). Most bowl games really don't pay that well (500K or so) and some schools lose money on the bowl game.

I tend to agree with the notion that if there was more money to be made, it would have been implemented. The BCS is already gigantic.... Personally I think a 4 team playoff is FUCKING stupid. It literally makes it so there are 3 NCAA tournament games and then the rest of the bowl season is the NIT. I think if we are going to relegate the rest of the bowls to NIT status we should open the playoff up to 8 teams, all BCS champs + 2 at large. That tournament would draw the same ratings (per game) as a 4 team playoff therefore dramatically increasing TV revenue.

I have no idea why there is even a discussion about this...

1. All conferences implement championship games.
2. 6 BCS champs get auto berths.
3. First 4 games (quarterfinals) are played as home games for seeds 1-4.
4. Bidded locations for the other games, could be detroit, could be New Orleans.

The rest of the Bowl games are NIT status already.

And I think you are way off base on where this money is going. This is not and will never be a set up like the NCAA BBall tourney. In the same vein as the whole "if it made more money they'd have done it a long time ago" rhetoric, you are out of your goddamned mind if you think any of these big-boy conference commisioners are signing up for LESS money.

Who gets this mythical TV revenue from Bowl Games now? The schools don't directly get it now. It goes to the BCS D-Bags, who then cut the schools a bowl check. I don't think you are going to see the BCS Playoff Checks jump from 18MM to 30MM. There will probably be some increase but it is not some fucking astronomical number like you are implying. My guess is that you would see the revenues jump from 18MM to 21MM or so, with the vast majority of any increase going to the NCAA and the BCS.

I disagree completely with your take regarding the rest of the bowls being relegated to NIT status; they aren't there yet.. All the BCS Bowls (except the always jacked up Orange Bowl) pull pretty good ratings and some of the major non BCS bowls do very well also (Cap One, Outback, Alamo etc.). There were 21 bowl games last year that pulled ratings that were in the close (70%) or greater than an average weeks' Sunday NFL Primtime game. I would say that's pretty good. With a playoff, those ratings go down. Now that said, I am not arguing against a playoff, I am just saying that you are going to relegate those bowl games even further down and devalue the other major bowl games (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, etc.) so you should add more playoff games.

[JCoz]

I think the pool for those 3 games ends up much higher than 3 BCS bowls. Double? No, not year over year. Furls I can't for the life of me think of a reason that the NCAA in general would start to see a cut of the Cfb postseason now, can you? Is Emertt at any of these meetings discussing the NCAA's new lucrative revenue stream? The next time I hear the organizations name in connection with this will be the first.

The NIT stuff is just semantics. You are basically moving the bowls all down a big peg and gettin rid of the bottom level bowls no one cares about anyways. Not going to cry if the BCS bowls become a less grand pageantry event. I think if you host home games it would be as college football as anything. JMO.

[Madre Hill, Superstar]

If there was so much money to be made in a playoff, it would have been made years ago.

Years ago, programs weren't getting bent over on tickets, accommodations, and amenities. I can't remember if it was Wetzel or one of the SI guys, but they had a great article a couple weeks back about how the bowls and their host cities were taking the teams to the cleaners. They were charging them face value for the marching band's tickets, even if they were performing at half-time.

[JCoz]

Yah and the bowl committees were demanding kick-backs from the local hotels and restaurants. Fucking racket.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--bowls--extravagant-revenues-are-closely-examined-as-the-ncaa-mulls-a-playoff-system.html

[motherscratcher]

...There were 21 bowl games last year that pulled ratings that were in the close (70%) or greater than an average weeks' Sunday NFL Primtime game. I would say that's pretty good. With a playoff, those ratings go down...

Are we really sure of that?

I watch as many bowl games as I can. Meaning, if I'm at home and there isn't something else on that I'd rather watch, then I turn to the bowl game. And some bowls might have a matchup I find a little intriguing that I will carve out some time to make sure I can watch it.

They are already meaningless. We already have a 2 team "playoff" game for teh NC. What difference would it make if there was a 4 or 8 team playoff? I'm still a football fan. I'm still watching the other meaningless bowl games because I'ma football fan. They aren't MORE meaningless now.

For all you college football fans out there, raise your hand if you'd be less likely to watch Iowa vs Georgia in the Outback Bowl next season because there is a 4 team playoff. If it's on, people will watch. My guess is they will watch at pretty much the same rate as they did before.

[danwismar]

For all you college football fans out there, raise your hand if you'd be less likely to watch Iowa vs Georgia in the Outback Bowl next season because there is a 4 team playoff. If it's on, people will watch. My guess is they will watch at pretty much the same rate as they did before.

This sounds right to me. It would be hard to "devalue" the lesser (non-BCS) bowl games from where they stand right now.

[JCoz]

They are already meaningless. We already have a 2 team "playoff" game for teh NC. What difference would it make if there was a 4 or 8 team playoff? I'm still a football fan. I'm still watching the other meaningless bowl games because I'ma football fan. They aren't MORE meaningless now

I agree 100%. From a fans perspective most of the bowls were always meaningless beyond being an extra OOC game at the end of the season before you had to go another 9 months without. The only ones that werent meaningless, were the ones that gave you the best matchups you could get your hands on in the deeply flawed postseason of Major CFB.

Most bowls will continue to be what they have always been, the major ones will mean less than they have, because they are replaced by what many wanted all along, better matchups and a non-mythical champion.

[Govbarney]

Only meaning I ever saw in the 15 - 20 odd non-BCS bowls is they gave a 6-6 type team an extra few weeks of practice.

[furls]

Only meaning I ever saw in the 15 - 20 odd non-BCS bowls is they gave a 6-6 type team an extra few weeks of practice.

+1.

Notice that damn near every post on this thread starts with "I think..." because we really don't know. I don't profess to be an oracle of any sort. I am just speculating based on my interpretation of human nature. I THINK.... many of us here are guilty of faulty induction ("I would do this... therefore I think that is representative of the population.")

In this case, many of of us said, "I think most people would keep watching the games because I do." Remember, we are not representative of the general sports fan base, in general message board posters are much more invested/dedicated. We will watch the 2 shittiest teams in the NCAA play in the toilet bowl out of morbid curiosity regardless of a playoff.

What we are really looking at is the casual NCAA fan who tunes in for the big games and has a minor rooting interest in one team. We aren't talking about the SEC homer living in the trailer park in rural Alabama with Paul Finebaum on speed dial, he is going to watch any NCAAF on TV.

I have no love for the bowl system or NCAA as a whole. I love bowl season, because I love the match ups and the way it builds to crescendo (in general), but I could do without it in favor of a real playoff. Unfortunately, I don't think we will get a real playoff, we will get a 1/2 solution that is marginally better at determining a champion at the expense of the current system because the NCAA will try to preserve the current system.

They (the decision makers) have to realize that they cannot have it all, you have to pick and choose. In this case they should either go all in on a playoff (commit everyone to conference championship games toss in a couple of at larges and invite all conference champs) or step back until they are ready to do so. Trying to have your cake and eatit too will just result in a compromise that no one wins on.

They should commit to 8 teams or more.

[e0y2e3]

I could give two shits about this ridiculously stupid argument, but Wetzel's latest is real well done: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--big ... szGng5nYcB

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Jim Delaney is a fucking jabbering douche.

I don't even give a shit anymore, just have the playoff and STFU. The wrong people are still gonna pocket mountains of cash either way.

GO, LOBBYISTS, GO!

[Hikohadon]

I also see no way that expanding to a 4 or 8 team playoff makes meaningless bowl games any more meaningless.

The only reasons people watch these meaningless bowl games at all would be 1) scouting out talent for the draft, 2) one of the teams is a team you root for, or 3) you have a betting interest.

None of these factors will be at all changed by moving to a playoff system.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Or you could, you know, be a college football fan.

I'll watch Northern Illinois vs CAL in the Food City Metro Bowl.

[e0y2e3]

With the FSU to the Big 12 rumors getting extremely hot and the Big 12/SEC agreement to turn the Sugar Bowl into a version of the Rose Bowl with the conference Champions meeting every year we are getting extremely close to the four superconferences becoming a reality.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

I don't even care anymore. I'm a traditionalist, but they're going to what they want because they're lower than pigshit.

[fairvis]

I have to wonder whether or not this Big XII/SEC matchup is going to be at either the A)Sugar Bowl, B)Cotton Bowl or C)Fiesta Bowl.

I'd wager that they may even alternate between the Cotton Bowl and Sugar Bowl on a year-to-year basis. More money to Jerry World, whither John Junkers.

[Hikohadon]

Or you could, you know, be a college football fan.

I'll watch Northern Illinois vs CAL in the Food City Metro Bowl.

True, but also has no impact on how many people will watch the bowl games.

[Triple-S]

So when this all shakes out, what we could be left with is:

B1G
SEC
PAC 12
Big XII

So we're coming close to this:

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2011/s ... ball-2021/

Being a reality? (minus clemson in the SEC, who is rumored to go to the Big XII)

[Triple-S]

Notre Dame wants to join the Big XII now I guess.

I guess the chance to play Iowa St, and Kansas in football, over say, TOSU, TSUN, PSU, NEB was too much to pass up.

douche...bags.

[Govbarney]

Well after 100+ years the powers that be are showing some common sense. It is by no means perfect, but at least its a first step.

I am not going to complain about some notable issues with what will occur in 2014, instead I offer a prediction of changes I see happening down the line as a result of today's good news.

2015: They move the semifinals back to two weeks after the end of the conference championships and hold the championship game to closer to Jan 1.
2016: They move the Semi's to more regional sites as opposed to the current BCS bowls.
2020: They Expand the playoffs to 6 teams , w/ the 2 best teams receiving first round bye. The first round round will be held at Campus sites, second at regional sites, and the Championship game will be a rotated dome/warm weather neutral location.

After that I see about a decade of little change, and then maybe 20 or so years down the line they expand again.