Ok.. so come up with a playoff system...

[TexasLidig8r]

It's off-season and everyone is about to be bored (after signing day).

The usual posts about how the BCS inhales with great force and we need a playoff in college football are inevitable.

Soooooooo...

My challenge to you hillibillies is... come up with a college football playoff system that improves upon the current system.

Now.. there are conditions and provisos of course.

First.. I am the ultimate SOB University president concerned about academic standing while still bringing money into my school.

That means...

(1). exams are scheduled generally between December 5 - 20 so you can't interfere with that!

(2). The monetary amount my school receives from a playoff would have to be greater than what I currently get from bowl revenues.

(3). My alumni and fan base needs would have to be taken into account... i.e., travel on 3 consecutive weekends to out of town locations for playoff games would be cost prohibitive.

(4). Other schools in my conference would also have to receive more revenue than that under the current system.

What do you have?

[pappy]

If they move to a playoff system they should take the top 12 teams in the final regular season poll regardless of if they were a bcs conference champ or not aka if you won your bcs conference and you're ranked 13 in the final reg poll then you don't get in and you go to a normal bowl game. the teams outside the top 12 go to bowl games as usual. the top 4 teams get a bye in round 1. The playoffs run just like the nfl and when it gets down to 2 teams there is bye between the final 4 and the title game weekends. Playoffs start dec 28th unless that falls on a sunday (because of nfl games) the college playoffs would then start monday 29th.

The further you go in the playoffs the more money you and your conference stand to make.

[KantoSooner]

Starting on the 20th, the top 64 teams play in a manner like hoops. In fact, just follow the hoops format. Whoever survived THAT would be a team of MEN.

Seriously, can you imagine how salty the last two teams would be? Gawdallmighty!

[fadada1]

-Top 8 teams (BCS rankings) regardless of conference finish.
-1 v. 8, 2 v. 7, 3 v. 6, 4 v. 5.
-Higher seed gets a home game for round 1.
-Re-seed after round 1.
-Higher seed gets home game for National Semi-Final (done only because of fans traveling)
-OR - national semi-final rotates among major bowl sites.
-National Championship Game rotates between Orange, Fiesta, Rose, Sugar, Cotton

missing class is a moot point. football players miss the LEAST amount of classes for any NCAA sport. get over it.

[TexasLidig8r]

-Top 8 teams (BCS rankings) regardless of conference finish.
-1 v. 8, 2 v. 7, 3 v. 6, 4 v. 5.
-Higher seed gets a home game for round 1.
-Re-seed after round 1.
-Higher seed gets home game for National Semi-Final (done only because of fans traveling)
-OR - national semi-final rotates among major bowl sites.
-National Championship Game rotates between Orange, Fiesta, Rose, Sugar, Cotton

missing class is a moot point. football players miss the LEAST amount of classes for any NCAA sport. get over it.

Epic fail.

As Chancellor at the University, your system does not guarantee that my university and my conference get increased revenue. This increased revenue is essential since it goes to fund the non-revenue producing sports which must stay in place to comply with Title IX. The funds I receive as a result of our conference champion going to a BCS bowl funds other sports... and that revenue is guaranteed every year.

Further missing class is NEVER a moot point. We are talking preparing for exams... the item upon which the vast majority of your grade is based. Most football players do not flourish in pro careers so their education is incredibly important.

They system proposed is short on specifics, cannot guarantee additional revenue and imposes upon the academic requirements of my university.

[Clever Trevor]

I say we fire the ****ing president.

[Collier11]

If they move to a playoff system they should take the top 12 teams in the final regular season poll regardless of if they were a bcs conference champ or not aka if you won your bcs conference and you're ranked 13 in the final reg poll then you don't get in and you go to a normal bowl game. the teams outside the top 12 go to bowl games as usual. the top 4 teams get a bye in round 1. The playoffs run just like the nfl and when it gets down to 2 teams there is bye between the final 4 and the title game weekends. Playoffs start dec 28th unless that falls on a sunday (because of nfl games) the college playoffs would then start monday 29th.

The further you go in the playoffs the more money you and your conference stand to make.

Ive posted my plan on here recently Lid, im not sure where it is and I dont feel like looking for it but this is pretty close. If I find it ill post it later

[Leroy Lizard]

Further missing class is NEVER a moot point. We are talking preparing for exams... the item upon which the vast majority of your grade is based. Most football players do not flourish in pro careers so their education is incredibly important.

Lid, playoff proponents don't care.


I say we fire the ****ing president.

Why? He's looking after his university's revenues, academics, and fan base. He's doing his job.

[Collier11]

I think he meant THE POTUS

[SoonerAtKU]

How do the other divisions manage around exam schedules? Do it like that, maybe?

[silverwheels]

Lid, playoff proponents don't care.

The other divisions seem to be able to get by just fine with having a real tournament at the end of the season, and way, way, way fewer of those kids will see an NFL field.

[Leroy Lizard]

Great idea. First, we will get rid of the conference championship games and then we'll scale back the regular season by one game.

Happy?

Well, athletic departments won't be.

FBS is not FCS. You cannot compare the two divisions.

[soonervegas]

16 teams
Round 1 - 1 game
Round 2 - best of 3
Round 3 - best of 5
Finals - best of 7

You could run college football well into May

Your welcome.

[silverwheels]

Great idea. First, we will get rid of the conference championship games and then we'll scale back the regular season by one game.

Happy?

Well, athletic departments won't be.

FBS is not FCS. You cannot compare the two divisions.

Well, ideally, for a playoff to work in college football, you'd need to balance out the conferences and schedules so that when automatic bids are given to the conference champions, they all had an equal and fair shot.

Or we could just go back to the old bowl system with no national championship at the end, because neither that way nor the current way are a legit method of determining a champion.

[Leroy Lizard]

Well, ideally, for a playoff to work in college football, you'd need to balance out the conferences and schedules so that when automatic bids are given to the conference champions, they all had an equal and fair shot.

Which means a pure computer poll, because if you include human polls then the argument remains: We were not allowed to participate because of who we are, not our record.

If the BCS violates the Sherman Anti-trust Law, then a playoff system that chooses its participants in a similar manner as the current BCS system will be in violation as well.


Or we could just go back to the old bowl system with no national championship at the end...

What's that old saying? Be careful what you wish for.

[silverwheels]

Which means a pure computer poll, because if you include human polls then the argument remains: We were not allowed to participate because of who we are, not our record.

If the BCS violates the Sherman Anti-trust Law, then a playoff system that chooses its participants in a similar manner as the current BCS system will be in violation as well.

Or it could mean restructuring the conferences. Either way, for a playoff system to be implemented (properly), it would be a lot of work. That's why I said we might as well go back to the old bowl system since no one would want basically 60 whole years of tradition to go out the window.

And that way everyone can declare themselves national champions every year, just like it used to be!

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm okay with the old bowl tie-ins. Sounds like a plan.

[TMcGee86]

Six team playoff b/w top six teams in BCS.* Top two teams get a first round bye.

Eliminate one OOC game and move the Conference Championship games up one week.

The first round (#3 vs. #6 and #4 vs. #5) is held the week the first week of December.

The Final Four (#1 vs. lower ranked winner and #2 vs. higher ranked winner) is held on New Years Day. Bringing back the glory to Jan 1.

The True National Championship Game is held, just like it is now, a week later, ala Jan 7th this year.

Add the Cotton Bowl to the current BCS Bowl rotation those are the five game sites, rotated yearly.

It keeps the regular season meaningful, as there is still major incentive to stay undefeated to obtain a first round bye.

It keeps strength of schedule meaningful as you still need to be ranked in the top 6.*

It adds NO more weeks to the schedule, does not play through finals, does not bleed into two semesters, and does not require massive travel.

It all but eliminates anyone without a legitimate claim to the NC game.

And it makes Jan 1 relevant again.

Plus it only adds one game max to anyone's schedule.

Bingo.


* In years where the top six teams are not all undefeated, and another team in the top 10 was undefeated, the lower ranked team that was undefeated would get the sixth round seed over the higher ranked team with a loss.

[Leroy Lizard]

Eliminate one OOC game and move the Conference Championship games up one week.

This will work once you find an alternate universe where money means nothing.

[TMcGee86]

This will work once you find an alternate universe where money means nothing.

We just added the new game last year, I highly doubt teams are all that sore over something they havent had.

And if it makes them that mad they can always add a week at the end of December.

[OUinFLA]

Im ok with things the way they were in pre-BCS.

But, then again, Im ok with almost all things the way they were back when I wasn't too concerned with my Social Security check.

You get that way when you're old.

[Leroy Lizard]

They wouldn't have added the game unless they felt it was in their best interests. So why would they give it up?

And the conference championship games are lucrative, with the money guaranteed. In fact, the Big 10 is probably trying to add another team so they can have a game as well. Good luck convincing conferences to get rid of their conference championship games.

[fadada1]

The other divisions seem to be able to get by just fine with having a real tournament at the end of the season, and way, way, way fewer of those kids will see an NFL field.

don't show this to Lid.

this whole "missing class" is total BS. seriously. football players, in theory, should only miss 4-5 days of class... EACH YEAR!!!! that's the friday before any away game for travel. as an example, golfers miss 10-12 class days each SEMESTER. football players missing class is the biggest joke of an excuse school presidents have.

[Collier11]

They wouldn't have added the game unless they felt it was in their best interests. So why would they give it up?

And the conference championship games are lucrative, with the money guaranteed. In fact, the Big 10 is probably trying to add another team so they can have a game as well. Good luck convincing conferences to get rid of their conference championship games.

See thats the one thing I think you are truly missing Leroy, you keep saying in thread after thread that the ADs and presidents have the best interest of the schools/athletes in mind and I honestly dont believe that

[Leroy Lizard]

When do golfers play their championship matches? Gee, it isn't during final exams, is it?

You think that is by accident?

Scheduling high-stakes games close to final exams is a bad idea, and no reasonable person can support it.

[silverwheels]

See thats the one thing I think you are truly missing Leroy, you keep saying in thread after thread that the ADs and presidents have the best interest of the schools/athletes in mind and I honestly dont believe that

They don't, and neither does the NCAA.

[Leroy Lizard]

See thats the one thing I think you are truly missing Leroy, you keep saying in thread after thread that the ADs and presidents have the best interest of the schools/athletes in mind and I honestly dont believe that

You dont think ADs and presidents don't have the university's bottom line ($$$$) in mind?

Wow.

[Collier11]

Of course the bottom line, but dont act like the majority truly care about the student athlete like you seem to think they do...plus look at the article, look at the likely money a playoff would bring into the ncaa

[Leroy Lizard]

Of course the bottom line, but dont act like the majority truly care about the student athlete like you seem to think they do...plus look at the article, look at the likely money a playoff would bring into the ncaa

Likely? Conference championship money is guaranteed. No matter how bad your conference is, your teams are guaranteed to play in your own championship game.

[Collier11]

Then why dont all conferences have one? Im certain that if they wanted a playoff with conf title games it could be worked out

[TexasLidig8r]

Six team playoff b/w top six teams in BCS.* Top two teams get a first round bye.

Eliminate one OOC game and move the Conference Championship games up one week.

The first round (#3 vs. #6 and #4 vs. #5) is held the week the first week of December.

The Final Four (#1 vs. lower ranked winner and #2 vs. higher ranked winner) is held on New Years Day. Bringing back the glory to Jan 1.

The True National Championship Game is held, just like it is now, a week later, ala Jan 7th this year.

Add the Cotton Bowl to the current BCS Bowl rotation those are the five game sites, rotated yearly.

It keeps the regular season meaningful, as there is still major incentive to stay undefeated to obtain a first round bye.

It keeps strength of schedule meaningful as you still need to be ranked in the top 6.*

It adds NO more weeks to the schedule, does not play through finals, does not bleed into two semesters, and does not require massive travel.

It all but eliminates anyone without a legitimate claim to the NC game.

And it makes Jan 1 relevant again.

Plus it only adds one game max to anyone's schedule.

Bingo.


* In years where the top six teams are not all undefeated, and another team in the top 10 was undefeated, the lower ranked team that was undefeated would get the sixth round seed over the higher ranked team with a loss.

Point of Order...

If we eliminated one OOC, in all likelihood, that would mean one fewer home game every year. The average price of a ticket is $70.00. My stadium seats 100,000. Ticket revenue alone, you are asking me to give up $7,000,000.00. Then, there is the added revenue to the city in which I live in hotels, restaurants, rental cars, taxicabs, alumni fundraising.

As a result of BCS games played this year, the Big XII received $17.7 million. Ordinarily, we have 2 teams going to BCS games so the payout for our conference goes up to $22.2 million. Therefore, each school gets approximately, $1.85 million dollars.

Therefore, under the current system, you are asking me to give up a guaranteed $8.85 million in the hopes that my school will be one of the top 6 teams. What if no one from our conference is in the top 6? Then, my conference and school get ZERO dollars and we lose $8.85 million in revenue we would get now.

With this shortfall, what non-revenue sports should be cut? And it won't just be men's sports, but an equal number of female athletes as well under Title IX.

Giving up guaranteed money for future, additional speculative amounts is very unwise.

How do you compensate for this amount in revenue that is being lost?

[Leroy Lizard]

Im certain ... it could be worked out.

Aaaaah, the Holy Mantra of the playoff-proponent. No matter what difficulties arise, "I'm sure they'll find a way," or "something will take care of it."

Only two days between the game and a final exam? "I'm sure they will find some way to study."

Collier, what you really need to say is, "I hope they can find a way, because my playoff idea demands it."

[Leroy Lizard]

How do you compensate for this amount in revenue that is being lost?

But... but Lid, I'm sure they will find a way. (Bake sale, I suppose.)

[silverwheels]

You could still have all the bowl games with their little participation ribbons even with a playoff.

[TMcGee86]

Point of Order...

If we eliminated one OOC, in all likelihood, that would mean one fewer home game every year. The average price of a ticket is $70.00. My stadium seats 100,000. Ticket revenue alone, you are asking me to give up $7,000,000.00. Then, there is the added revenue to the city in which I live in hotels, restaurants, rental cars, taxicabs, alumni fundraising.

As a result of BCS games played this year, the Big XII received $17.7 million. Ordinarily, we have 2 teams going to BCS games so the payout for our conference goes up to $22.2 million. Therefore, each school gets approximately, $1.85 million dollars.

Therefore, under the current system, you are asking me to give up a guaranteed $8.85 million in the hopes that my school will be one of the top 6 teams. What if no one from our conference is in the top 6? Then, my conference and school get ZERO dollars and we lose $8.85 million in revenue we would get now.

With this shortfall, what non-revenue sports should be cut? And it won't just be men's sports, but an equal number of female athletes as well under Title IX.

Giving up guaranteed money for future, additional speculative amounts is very unwise.

How do you compensate for this amount in revenue that is being lost?

One of three ways.

Either (A) keep the OOC game and eliminate the bye week.

or (B) play the first round game either the week after the CCG's or the week before the semi's.

or (C) though it's based on complete speculation at this point, assuming a playoff could garner enough money, you compensate the conferences for any loss in revenue that the OOC game would have generated.

Remember, usually you are paying small schools upwards of a few mil to get those cushy home games. So while saying that 7 mil comes through the gate on OOC games, a figure of 5 mil may be more along the lines of actual revenue. And relatively few programs have 100k capacity.

Therefore, if the playoffs generated an additional 100mil I think it would be realistic to assume you could put together a package that would compensate teams for the loss in revenue. Make it based on seating capacity and I would think 100 mil could cover it.

[TMcGee86]

Scheduling high-stakes games close to final exams is a bad idea, and no reasonable person can support it.

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/icons/bob.gif BIG 12 CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES ARE BIG GAMES DAMMIT!!!!1

[Leroy Lizard]

An eight team playoff would generate seven games, which sounds great. But the bowl system already incorporates five of those games, which gives only two additional games to make up the difference.

So where is all this big money coming from?


BIG 12 CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES ARE BIG GAMES DAMMIT!!!!1

Yeah, and?

[TMcGee86]

Yeah, and?

Are not finals held at the first of December?

I thought no one would support such an idea.

[MamaMia]

Make everyone join a conference or else they are not Bowl eligible. Even out the number of teams in each conference. Cut out all the non conference games. Make all the conferences play a conference championship game and then have the winners compete.

[Leroy Lizard]

Are not finals held at the first of December?

No.

At least, I am not aware of any finals scheduled during that time. Usually they take place over a week later.


Make everyone join a conference or else they are not Bowl eligible. Even out the number of teams in each conference. Cut out all the non conference games. Make all the conferences play a conference championship game and then have the winners compete.

And while we're at it, we can cure cancer and eliminate war.

[TMcGee86]

No.

At least, I am not aware of any finals scheduled during that time. Usually they take place over a week later.

I didn't mean the first week, I just meant at the beginning. I'm just saying they play games pretty close to finals now, so I'm not sure that is all that great of a concern.

[Leroy Lizard]

Please tell me that you're not using the old "It's a little bit bad now, so I see no harm it making really bad."

Right now, players have time after the conference championship game to refocus on academics, seek tutoring, and discuss their performance with their professors.

Could they use more? Maybe.

That is a far cry from playing a game in Miami on Saturday night and then taking a final exam on Monday morning. When would a player study?

[Dan Thompson]

Play the normal conference schedule as part of the playoff, if you lose your out of the final game. The undefeated teams would be in the playoff. When there is an odd number of teams the best teams would get a bye.

[Leroy Lizard]

This sounds like nothing more than a playoff where conference winners get an automatic bid. Is there more to it?

[TMcGee86]

Please tell me that you're not using the old "It's a little bit bad now, so I see no harm it making really bad."

Right now, players have time after the conference championship game to refocus on academics, seek tutoring, and discuss their performance with their professors.

Could they use more? Maybe.

That is a far cry from playing a game in Miami on Saturday night and then taking a final exam on Monday morning. When would a player study?

I totally agree with you. I was just making a joke about Bob's thoughts on big games.

I specifically factored this into my playoff solution. I'm with you, I don't think you ever win a playoff debate with a solution that involves playing the second and third weeks of December.

[Leroy Lizard]

Okay, sorry for doing you wrong.

[yankee]

pit the winners of the BCS bowls against each other. i think that's the +1 system or something...

[OUinFLA]

And while we're at it, we can cure cancer and eliminate war.


The BCS committee can do that?

after deciding a playoff system, you mean?

Priorities, you know.

[Collier11]

Aaaaah, the Holy Mantra of the playoff-proponent. No matter what difficulties arise, "I'm sure they'll find a way," or "something will take care of it."

Only two days between the game and a final exam? "I'm sure they will find some way to study."

Collier, what you really need to say is, "I hope they can find a way, because my playoff idea demands it."

Ive explained it to you plenty of times, I dont have the time if you are too dense to understand

[Leroy Lizard]

I think the existing system is pretty safe.

[sooner59]

No.

At least, I am not aware of any finals scheduled during that time. Usually they take place over a week later.

Speaking from experience, in undergrad at OU, the week after the Big 12 CG is normally dead week. The next week is finals week. Professors are supposedly not allowed to assign anything worth over 15% (somewhere in that range) to be due during dead week, including the final.

However, in reality, professors do not obey this rule. Every year anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of my final exams were during dead week. If not, then our final "assignments" were due that week. Their reasoning was that since everybody else is having final exams during finals week, we could get that class out of the way early to focus on other classes. That and the professor gets to cut the class short a week. I never complained, it was one less week I had to show up.

So starting the Monday after the conference championship game, people are finishing final assignments and taking finals. It isn't supposed to happen, but it does. So, IMO, there is not much difference between having a final two days after the conference championship game and having it two days after a playoff game.

And if a team got a home game in a playoff game, that would generate quite a bit of revenue for the university. If they had two home playoff games....even more. Plus a national title game? More $$$!!! Yes, this is looking good.

But wait..... We can't do that, because it rewards teams, their universities, and their conferences based on merit. The highest seeds get home games which means more money. The NCAA can't do that. It makes too much sense.

[OU_Sooners75]

Not sure if this one meets all your conditions and provisos but here goes.

Leading up to the playoff:
Conference re-alignment. All schools must join a conference. Each conference will be 10 teams strong, creating 12 conferences.
Each team must play all conference members. (9 games).
Three non-conference games will be allowed (To create a 12 game regular season).Play-off system Set-Up:

The playoff would start the Saturday after Christmas. This would give the Student-Athletes time to prepare for and take all final exams and Students would not be missing any class time in the Fall Semester. It would also aid in athletes more time to heal from any injuries. And finally, it would give ample time for each team to prepare for the four week stretch against the best of the best in college football.
There are 16 available slots in this playoff. Meaning a four week tournament. Only automatic bids are champions of each conference (12 teams). The other four slots will be determined by ranking, with the top 4 ranked teams that are not conference champs included (regardless of Conference affiliation) thus creating a 16 team field.
Seeding of all 16 teams is a must. Splitting the playoff into four brackets. Seeds 1-4 will be given. This can be determined by a committee or by a ranking system of some type. Seeds are not based off of conference championship status (do not have to be a conference champ to be a #1 seed).
First and Second Rounds will be a home game for the Higher seeded teams. E.G, Round One all 1 and 2 seeds get home games.
Semi-Finals and Finals will be located at predetermined neutral locations.
Using a rotation between the Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta, and Cotton bowls as the hosts.The Champsionship game will rotate through these five locations. The Semi Finals will also rotate through these five bowls. See below for an example of how this would work.Play-off Payouts:
Pay out for the first two rounds. Each school represented at the game would receive 50% of the ticket sales to share with conference schools. Host schools would receive all concessions and other revenues generated at the game to keep for themselves. NCAA will pay for all traveling team expenses for the team, coaches, and staff of team. Yes, this lowers what the home team would receive in a regular season game, but the home does not have to pay for the expenses of the traveling team.
Pay out for the Semi-Finals round. Each conference represented in this round will receive $17.5 Million to split among its members. $1.5 for non-participants and $4 million for the participant. If more than one school is represented than the conference will only received $4 million per participant school and 1.5 for non-participants.
Payout for the Championship Round. Each conference represented in this round will receive $24 Million to split among its members. $2 Million for non-participants and $6 million for the participant. If both schools represent one conference than the Conference will receive $6 million each to the participants and $2 million to the non-participants.Example of Rotation:
Five Bowl would share the rotation for Semi-Final and Championship Rounds.
(Rose, Orange, Cotton, Sugar, Fiesta)
2010: Rose = Championship Host; Orange and Cotton would be hosts of Semi-Final Games.
2011: Orange = Championship Host; Cotton and Sugar would be hosts of the Semi-Final Games.
2012: Cotton = Championship Host; Sugar and Fiesta would be hosts of the Semi-Final Games.
2013: Sugar = Championship Host; Fiesta and Rose would be hosts of the Semi-Final Games.
2014: Fiesta = Championship Host; Rose and Orange would be hosts of the Semi-Final Games.

In other words, each host site would Host the Championship Game every fifth year.


Outside of this playoff, if the Bowl system wants to continue, then go for it.

[OU_Sooners75]

Let me add this:

In case of a tie in conference standings: (This goes for all conferences)

Two way tie the head to head match-up determines champion.
Three way tie:
1. Points Differential (PD) between the three tied teams. The team with the better PD is crowned the champion. If still tied go to #2
2. PD between all other conference games determines the winner. If still tied go to #3
3. Overall record determines conference champion. if still tied go to #4
4. Strength of Schedule (from the NCAA Stats website) determines conference champion.

Points Differtial (PD) is capped at 28 points/game and is determined the following way:
PD only counts for conference games.
For each game a team wins, add the Margin of Victory to their PD. This is capped at 28 points/game. So if a team wins a game by 29 points and 55 points, that team only gets 28 points for each game or 56 total toward to the PD amount.
For each game a team loses, subtract the Margin of Defeat from their PD. This is capped at 28 points/game. So if a team loses by 35 points and 49 points, they only lose 28 points per game or 56 points total toward the PD amount.

[TexasLidig8r]

Not sure if this one meets all your conditions and provisos but here goes.

Leading up to the playoff:

Conference re-alignment. All schools must join a conference. Each conference will be 10 teams strong, creating 12 conferences.
Each team must play all conference members. (9 games).
Three non-conference games will be allowed (To create a 12 game regular season).If you are the Big 10/11 why would you go for this? As is, each Big 10/11 school gets approximately $22million per year from television rights alone... even spares like Indiana and Illinois. In addition, the Big 10/11 along with the University of Chicago are in the CIC, which shares research grants and facilities resulting in millions more to the schools. As a conference, the Big 10/11 would veto this in a heart beat.

Same argument apply to the SEC.. too much television revenue guaranteed.


.

However, the rest of your plan shows potential. Just need to come up with accurate figures which shows that guaranteed money going to schools exceed that which they currently receive.

[OU_Sooners75]

However, the rest of your plan shows potential. Just need to come up with accurate figures which shows that guaranteed money going to schools exceed that which they currently receive.

If the NCAA takes full control of a playoff, then they should mandate conferences to play on an even field as well. Either make it where are conferences play a championship game with 12 teams in the conference, or all teams play each other.

1. This is not about TV deals. All television deals are for the regular season, not for the bowl games. Bowl Games themselves have the TV deals.

2. 12 teams in one conference, and they receive 17.5 Million for a BCS bid. 10 teams in one conference and they receive 17.5 million for a Semi-Final game.

You do the math.

Are these numbers totally accurate? No, I am not a marketing guru nor will I pretend that I am.

However, with all the money that gets poured into the Bowl System, the Playoff would most likely generate just as much if not more!

[TexasLidig8r]

If the NCAA takes full control of a playoff, then they should mandate conferences to play on an even field as well. Either make it where are conferences play a championship game with 12 teams in the conference, or all teams play each other.

1. This is not about TV deals. All television deals are for the regular season, not for the bowl games. Bowl Games themselves have the TV deals.

2. 12 teams in one conference, and they receive 17.5 Million for a BCS bid. 10 teams in one conference and they receive 17.5 million for a Semi-Final game.

You do the math.

Are these numbers totally accurate? No, I am not a marketing guru nor will I pretend that I am.

However, with all the money that gets poured into the Bowl System, the Playoff would most likely generate just as much if not more!

So you have two television deals.

Take the Big 10/11 by way of example. Each Big 10/11 team is now paid approximately $22 million annually through their TV contract... Yes, each school, no matter how wretched their football team is... gets $22 million for just being in the conference.

If you mandate that they bring another university into the Big 10/11, this TV revenue is then split 12 ways instead of 11. Why would the conference do this unless the 12th school brings new markets or more of a national following? They have no financial incentive.

As for the bowls, the Big 10/11 will NET.. approximately $24 million or about $2.2 million for each school.

Therefore, from the regular season and bowl payouts, wretched Indiana.. will receive approximately $24.2 million!

Find a way for the playoffs to have a pay out that exceeds this number.. and you may be on to something.

[Leroy Lizard]

Speaking from experience, in undergrad at OU, the week after the Big 12 CG is normally dead week. The next week is finals week. Professors are supposedly not allowed to assign anything worth over 15% (somewhere in that range) to be due during dead week, including the final.

However, in reality, professors do not obey this rule. Every year anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of my final exams were during dead week. If not, then our final "assignments" were due that week. Their reasoning was that since everybody else is having final exams during finals week, we could get that class out of the way early to focus on other classes. That and the professor gets to cut the class short a week. I never complained, it was one less week I had to show up.

Okay... so 1/3 to 1/2 of your classes featured a premature final exam... and the reason for having a premature final exam was that the other classes were having their final exams during the designated week.

Excuse me, but that makes zero ****'in sense.

I have never worked at a university that allowed faculty members to force students to take a final exam early, or even allowed it to be put up to a vote. If a student-athlete needs the extra study time, he can simply tell the professor that he will show up at the regularly scheduled time unless the professor has been granted permission by the dean to change the exam schedule.

[Collier11]

Leroy dont act so ignorant, this happens all the time. Most of the time it is made an option by the professor, that was my experience

[Leroy Lizard]

Leroy dont act so ignorant, this happens all the time. Most of the time it is made an option by the professor, that was my experience

Where I teach now, professors cannot even put it up as an option. But, if it is an option than sooner59's argument goes out the window.

How is this arrogant? As a prof, I'm sticking up for the students here. I thought arrogant profs were all about themselves.

[sooner59]

Hey you can call me a liar if you want, but I am just telling you what I experienced. The profs never gave a solid reason for finishing class a week early, but they normally told us, "At least you have extra study time for your other finals." Nobody argued. We all like it. It was nothing out of the ordinary. It happened every semester. I don't know how profs do it where you teach, but at OU, they have been doing it for years. Maybe it doesn't make sense, but I wasn't teaching the damn class, so it wasn't up to me. Plus, I preferred it.

[Leroy Lizard]

Hey you can call me a liar if you want, but I am just telling you what I experienced. The profs never gave a solid reason for finishing class a week early, but they normally told us, "At least you have extra study time for your other finals." Nobody argued. We all like it. It was nothing out of the ordinary. It happened every semester. I don't know how profs do it where you teach, but at OU, they have been doing it for years. Maybe it doesn't make sense, but I wasn't teaching the damn class, so it wasn't up to me. Plus, I preferred it.

I never said you were a liar, but only that the excuse the profs gave made no sense.

The question really is, "Do student-athletes have sufficient time between the conference championship game and final exams?"

Yes, I think they do.

Even in cases where an irresponsible prof has changed the final exam, a student-athlete can still take the exam at the regularly scheduled time.

If profs are breaking the rule, then someone should report him or her to the dean. Totally inexcusable. (My colleagues sometimes embarrass me with their irresponsibility and self-centeredness.)

[OU_Sooners75]

So you have two television deals.

Take the Big 10/11 by way of example. Each Big 10/11 team is now paid approximately $22 million annually through their TV contract... Yes, each school, no matter how wretched their football team is... gets $22 million for just being in the conference.

If you mandate that they bring another university into the Big 10/11, this TV revenue is then split 12 ways instead of 11. Why would the conference do this unless the 12th school brings new markets or more of a national following? They have no financial incentive.

As for the bowls, the Big 10/11 will NET.. approximately $24 million or about $2.2 million for each school.

Therefore, from the regular season and bowl payouts, wretched Indiana.. will receive approximately $24.2 million!

Find a way for the playoffs to have a pay out that exceeds this number.. and you may be on to something.


Or if you mandate that all conferences go to ten teams, then each team would get more.

The TV deals will come and go. That part will not change.

[sooner59]

Some profs probably get around it because, like I said earlier, some don't give final exams, but instead have a "final assignment" worth the same amount as a final exam that is just due during dead week. But yeah, still some have given finals during dead week. And yes, some profs have put it to a vote amongst the students at the beginning of the semester. Everyone always votes to finish during dead week. The only way I know to truly get around finals would be to start a playoff after finals. A three week playoff with 8 teams, maybe. Or maybe like they said, cut a nonconference game and move back the conference champ. games a week. Then play a first round where the conference champ. games are now. Then wait until after finals to have a final four type of thing, maybe after Christmas, so it finishes around the same time as it does now. Not sure if that would work, just throwing things out there.

[OU_Sooners75]

How is this arrogant? As a prof, I'm sticking up for the students here. I thought arrogant profs were all about themselves.

You a professor?

:eek:

Feel sorry for your students. :P

[Leroy Lizard]

Assoc. Professor. I use "prof" loosely to mean "college teacher."

My teaching evaluations are quite strong. Staying out of office politics has been a little tough, especially since I am such a redneck that I make Rush look like Rosie O'Donnell.


Some profs probably get around it because, like I said earlier, some don't give final exams, but instead have a "final assignment" worth the same amount as a final exam that is just due during dead week.

That was against university policy when I was at OU. Has it changed?


But yeah, still some have given finals during dead week. And yes, some profs have put it to a vote amongst the students at the beginning of the semester. Everyone always votes to finish during dead week. The only way I know to truly get around finals would be to start a playoff after finals. A three week playoff with 8 teams, maybe. Or maybe like they said, cut a nonconference game and move back the conference champ. games a week. Then play a first round where the conference champ. games are now. Then wait until after finals to have a final four type of thing, maybe after Christmas, so it finishes around the same time as it does now. Not sure if that would work, just throwing things out there.

We've been through those scenarios many times, and they typically don't fare very well. The problem is simply a lack of weeks. With the CCGs taking place during the first week of December, there simply aren't enough weeks left to host three weeks of college football without playing the games near final exams or well past the start of the following semester. The only solution then is to somehow play the CCGs earlier, which either necessitates cutting a game or starting earlier in the year. Neither have much support.

A four-game playoff would work logistically, but fan disgruntlement would be immense.

[sooner59]

I honestly don't know the specific rules today, but I was under the impression that there were not supposed to be finals or large assignments due during dead week, like you say it was when you were there. I wish I could tell you with confidence, but I can't. I bet the athletic department would make sure the student athletes were not subjected to that if it was against university policy, so I wouldn't worry too much about them being subjected to unfair treatment. I can't recall athletes every being mistreated in my classes, lol.

[SoonerMachine]

8-team Playoff Formula (utilizing the BCS):


1. After the season ends, select the six highest ranked D-1A conference champions (regardless of conference)

2. Select the two highest ranked at-large teams (conference or independent)

3. Regular season and CCGs will be moved back two weeks (earlier start and/or eliminate bye weeks)


1st Round (Last Saturday in November):

Highest ranked conference champion hosts lowest ranked conference champion

Second highest ranked conference champion hosts fifth lowest ranked conference champion

Third highest ranked conference champion hosts forth lowest ranked conference champion

Highest ranked at-large team hosts second highest ranked at-large team*



2nd Round (the following Saturday):


Highest rank hosts lowest rank

Second highest hosts third lowest



3rd Round:

Winners play for the National Championship on New Year’s Day


*In the event an at-large team is an independent, then the 1st round will proceed as follows:

1st Round:


Highest rank hosts lowest rank

Second highest hosts seventh lowest

Third highest hosts sixth lowest

Forth highest hosts fifth lowest



Advantages:

· Allows for independents to participate (e.g., Navy)
· High potential for a ‘Cinderella season’ (e.g., ’98 – Tulane, ’99 – Marshall, ’00 – TCU, ’04 – Utah & Boise St., ’05 – TCU, ’06 – Boise St., ’08 – Utah & Boise St., '09 - texas ;))
· Retains all conference championship games
· Retains all bowl games, including invitations to the six teams eliminated from the playoffs
· Reduces lag between regular season and championship game
· Increases revenue for teams and conferences participating
· Reduces travel time for fans (no bowl hopping)







Historical Examples

1998

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Tennessee (12-0) - SEC
#2 - Florida State (11-1) - ACC
#5 - UCLA (10-1) - Pacific 10
#6 - Texas A&M (11-2) - Big 12
#9 - Wisconsin (10-1) - Big 10
#10 - Tulane (11-0) - Conference USA

At-Large Teams

#3 - Kansas State (11-1) - Big 12
#4 - Ohio State (10-1) - Big 10

1st Round:

#1 Tennessee hosts #10 Tulane

#2 Florida State hosts #9 Wisconsin

#5 UCLA hosts #6 Texas A&M

At-Large Elimination Game:

#3 Kansas State hosts #4 Ohio State


1999

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Florida State (11-0) - ACC
#2 - Virginia Tech (11-0) - Big East
#3 - Nebraska (11-1) - Big 12
#4 - Alabama (10-2) - SEC
#7 - Wisconsin (9-2) - Big 10
#12 - Marshall (12-0) - MAC

At-Large Teams

#5 - Tennessee (9-2) - SEC
#6 - Kansas State (10-1) - Big 12

1st Round:

#1 Florida State hosts #12 Marshall

#2 Virginia Tech hosts #7 Wisconsin

#3 Nebraska hosts #4 Alabama

At-Large Elimination Game:

#5 Tennessee hosts #6 Kansas State


2000

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - OU (12-0) - Big 12
#2 - Florida State (11-1) - ACC
#3 - Miami (10-1) - Big East
#4 - Washington (10-1) - Pacific 10
#7 - Florida (10-2) - SEC
#14 - TCU (10-1) - WAC

At-Large Teams

#5 - Virginia Tech (10-1) - Big East
#6 - Oregon State (10-1) - Pacific 10

1st Round:

#1 OU hosts #14 TCU

#2 Florida State hosts #7 Florida

#3 Miami hosts #4 Washington

At-Large Elimination Game:

#5 Virginia Tech hosts #6 Oregon State


2001

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Miami (11-0) - Big East
#3 - Colorado (10-2) - Big 12
#4 - Oregon (10-1) - Pacific 10
#8 - Illinois (10-1) - Big 10
#10 - Maryland (10-1) - ACC
#13 - LSU (9-3) - SEC

At-Large Teams

#2 - Nebraska (11-1) - Big 12
#5 - Florida (9-2) - SEC

1st Round:

#1 Miami hosts #13 LSU

#3 Colorado hosts #10 Maryland

#4 Oregon hosts #8 Illinois

At-Large Elimination Game:

#2 Nebraska hosts #5 Florida


2002

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Miami (12-0) - Big East
#2 - Ohio State (13-0) - Big 10
#3 - Georgia (12-1) - SEC
#6 - Washington State (10-2) - Pacific 10
#7 - Oklahoma (11-2) - Big 12
#14 - Florida State (9-4) - ACC

At-Large Teams

#4 - USC (10-2) - Pacific 10
#5 - Iowa (11-1) - Big 10

1st Round:

#1 Miami hosts #14 Florida State

#2 Ohio State hosts #7 Oklahoma

#3 Georgia hosts #6 Washington State

At-Large Elimination Game:

#4 USC hosts #5 Iowa


2003

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#2 - LSU (12-1) - SEC
#3 - USC (11-1) - ACC
#4 - Michigan (10-2) - Big 10
#7 - Florida State (10-2) - ACC
#9 - Miami (10-2) - Big East
#10 - Kansas State (11-3) - Big 12

At-Large Teams

#1 - OU (12-1) - Big 12
#5 - Ohio State (10-2) - Big 10

1st Round:

#2 LSU hosts #10 Kansas State

#3 USC hosts #9 Miami

#4 Michigan hosts #7 Florida State

At-Large Elimination Game:

#1 OU hosts #5 Ohio State


2004

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - USC (12-0) - Pacific 10
#2 - OU (12-0) - Big 12
#3 - Auburn (12-0) - SEC
#6 - Utah (11-0) - Mountain West
#8 - Virginia Tech (10-2) - ACC
#9 - Boise State (11-0) - WAC

At-Large Teams

#4 - Texas (10-1) - Big 12
#5 - California (10-1) - Pacific 10

1st Round:

#1 USC hosts #9 Boise State

#2 OU hosts #8 Virginia Tech

#3 Auburn hosts #6 Utah

At-Large Elimination Game:

#4 Texas hosts #5 California


2005

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - USC (12-0) - Pacific 10
#2 - Texas (12-0) - Big 12
#3 - Penn State (10-1) - Big 10
#7 - Georgia (10-2) - SEC
#11 - West Virginia (10-1) - Big East
#14 - TCU (10-1) - Mountain West

At-Large Teams

#4 - Ohio State (9-2) - Big 10
#5 - Oregon (10-1) - Pacific 10

1st Round:

#1 USC hosts #14 TCU

#2 Texas hosts #11 West Virginia

#3 Penn State hosts #7 Georgia

At-Large Elimination Game:

#4 Ohio hosts #5 Oregon


2006

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Ohio State (12-0) - Big 10
#2 - Florida (12-1) - SEC
#5 - USC (10-2) - Pacific 10
#6 - Louisville (11-1) - Big East
#8 - Boise State (12-0) - WAC
#10 - OU (11-2) - Big 12

At-Large Teams

#3 - Michigan (11-1) - Big 10
#4 - LSU (10-2) - SEC

1st Round:

#1 Ohio State hosts #10 OU

#2 Florida hosts #8 Boise State

#5 USC hosts #6 Louisville

At-Large Elimination Game:

#3 Michigan hosts #4 LSU


2007

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Ohio State (11-1) - Big 10
#2 - LSU (11-2) - SEC
#3 - Virginia Tech (11-2) - ACC
#4 - OU (11-2) - Big 12
#7 - USC (10-2) - Pacific 10
#9 - West Virginia (10-2) - Big East

At-Large Teams

#5 - Georgia (10-2) - SEC
#6 - Missouri (11-2) - Big 12

1st Round:

#1 Ohio State hosts #9 West Virginia

#2 LSU hosts #7 USC

#3 Virginia Tech hosts #4 OU

At-Large Elimination Game:

#5 Georgia hosts #6 Missouri


2008

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - OU (12-1) - Big 12
#2 - Florida (12-1) - SEC
#5 - USC (11-1) - Pacific 10
#6 - Utah (12-0) - Mountain West
#8 - Penn St. (11-1) - Big 10
#9 - Boise St. (12-1) - WAC

At-Large Teams

#3 - Texas (11-1) - Big 10
#4 - Alabama (12-1) - SEC

1st Round:

#1 OU hosts #9 Boise St.

#2 Florida hosts #8 Penn St.

#5 USC hosts #6 Utah

At-Large Elimination Game:

#3 Texas #4 Alabama


2009

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 - Alabama (13-0) - SEC
#2 - Texas (13-0) - Big 12
#3 - Cincinnati (12-0) - Big East
#4 - TCU (12-0) - Mountain West
#6 - Boise St. (13-0) - WAC
#7 - Oregon (10-2) - Pacific 10

At-Large Teams

#5 - Florida (12-1) - SEC
#8 - Ohio St. (10-2) - Big 10

1st Round:

#1 Alabama hosts #7 Oregon

#2 Texas hosts #6 Boise St.

#3 Cincinnati hosts #4 TCU

At-Large Elimination Game:

#5 Florida hosts #8 Ohio St.

[Clever Trevor]

Why? He's looking after his university's revenues, academics, and fan base. He's doing his job.

Jeebus, you are dense.:rolleyes:

[Leroy Lizard]

C'mon Trevor, pay attention. Lid specifically spelled out a scenario where the university president based his decisions on revenues, academics, and the fan base's problems with travel.

I wish they would teach reading comprehension a little better in our pubic schools. We have too many Trevors in our society.

[OU_Sooners75]

C'mon Trevor, pay attention. Lid specifically spelled out a scenario where the university president based his decisions on revenues, academics, and the fan base's problems with travel.

I wish they would teach reading comprehension a little better in our pubic schools. We have too many Trevors in our society.


You're a professor, get to teaching!

[goingoneight]

This will work once you find an alternate universe where money means nothing.

Name 5 schools that aren't dishing out millions to at least one yard bird directional school.

I would think there should be no problem.

[texaspokieokie]

main thing here is, don't get the federal government involved !!!!

they couldn't even run (they tried) successfully ; a whorehouse in NV !!!!

[SoonerMachine]

main thing here is, don't get the federal government involved !!!!

they couldn't even run (they tried) successfully ; a whorehouse in NV !!!!

That's odd, they're usually pretty good at screwing people!

[JLEW1818]

I got one... 3 polls.... Coaches, Harris, BCS computers = BCS System

the top 2 BCS Ranked Teams play in the National title

this system has only put us in the National Title 4 times last decade... only 4

[westbrooke]

To be clear, I think the current system is flawed but I'm not convinced a playoff would satisfy everyone either. But I do like a good hypothetical. :D If I'm going to play the game, I should point out that I think some of the basic ideas of fadada's plan actually work, once specifics are supplied or tweaked to satisfy the terms of the hypothetical, so credit him for those elements.


Take 8 teams as determined by BCS conference winners and at-large selections - in other words, the same selection system used prior to expanding the slate to 10 teams. Seed them according to BCS rankings and have four first-round games in the home stadiums of the higher seeds. These games would occur December 24th/25th, depending on how jumpy people get about holding games on Christmas. They would be sponsored just like any other bowl, providing similar payouts to both teams while providing the ancillary economic boost to the hosting university through fundraising, hotel and restaurant sales, etc.

The four winners advance to New Year's Day semifinal games in two of the current BCS bowls determined by rotation. The 9th and 10th BCS teams, as currently determined, will play in a third BCS bowl.

The final game will be held in the fourth BCS bowl on January 8th, again determined by rotation.


To Lid's requirements:


This system meets Lid's 1st requirement because games begin after December 20th. Games usually begin on the 19th or 20th in the current system anyway.

This system meets Lid's 2nd requirement because the expectation over time should be better than the current system. At worst (meaning your team plays only one game, on the road), this system looks slightly inferior to the existing system with the same bowl payout but lower ticket revenue. Anything better than worst (your team plays one home game or in multiple rounds), you do significantly better financially with multiple bowl payouts or one bowl payout + ancillary revenue as described above.

The 3rd requirement is the stickiest point, but I believe this system still effectively satisfies the spirit of the requirement if not the letter of it. Only four teams (the lower seeds) have the potential to play three straight road games, and of them, only two could possibly do so. Realistically, due to favored seeding and home-field advantage, those lower seeds will play three games less frequently than the higher seeds. But, of course, every team will believe they can run the table; even if they do play three road games, the relative scarcity of visitors' seats available for first-round games and the excitement of playing for a championship in the final round should be sufficient to ensure fan attendance without financial fatigue.

This system meets Lid's 4th requirement. See point 2 about this system offering no worse and potentially much better payouts than the existing system.


Assumptions made:

Lid is president of a BCS school. A president of a non-BCS school would have the same objections that they have to the current system regarding lack of access. No change there. And if they could get a team like Boise State, TCU, or Utah into the mix and win a game or two, the potential benefit for all mid-majors could be tremendous in future prestige, scheduling, ranking, television deals, etc.

Presidents will agree to a system that could pay out slightly lower than they receive now with the potential for much higher gains. The gambler's expectation on this should be a net gain given that, over time, appearances as a higher vs. lower seed should even out.

BCS bowls will agree to this because it looks very similar to the current system with the added buzz generated from tournament play. Bowls and sponsors that wish to hedge their bets against poor matchups generated by the semifinal round or 9-10 matchup could affiliate themselves with the first-round games for additional exposure. Sometimes they hit an Iowa-Ga Tech matchup in the current system and hedging against this would be attractive anyway. The Rose Bowl has always been and will always be a stick in the mud about this. **** 'em. Satisfying the Rose Bowl was not a requirement of the hypothetical.

There would be no shortage of sponsors for first round games to ensure satisfactory payouts. See previous point.

Fans will attend a Christmas Eve or Christmas Day game if it's a home game. There will be sufficient numbers of die-hard and wealthy fans who will attend a road game on the same day to fill visitors' allotments. If not... re-sell them to the home fans like any other game.

Television deals should be no worse than the current system and potentially much better with March Madness-style buzz surrounding a playoff and repeated appearances of better and more marketable (on average) teams.


Okay, so what did I miss?

[oudivesherpa]

Basically a plus two system, except that the top 8 eights teams would have to meet in a BCS bowl game,(orange, rose,fiesta and sugar) the four winners would meet the next week, and the NC game a week after that.
That might be the easiest sell to the college presidents and it extends the season by only one week. Plus it keeps the bowl games intact, and if you eliminate the bowl system you are not going to get anything done.

[Collier11]

I got one... 3 polls.... Coaches, Harris, BCS computers = BCS System

the top 2 BCS Ranked Teams play in the National title

this system has only put us in the National Title 4 times last decade... only 4

Yea and 3 of those times were strongly disputed, obviously I didnt mind but if it was flipped the other way we wouldnt have been happy

[OU_Sooners75]

I got one... 3 polls.... Coaches, Harris, BCS computers = BCS System

the top 2 BCS Ranked Teams play in the National title

this system has only put us in the National Title 4 times last decade... only 4

And the system as a whole is a fail.

It merely pits two teams and says they are the only two viable for a national title.
2003: USC got screwed out of the picture
2004: Auburn, undefeated
2006: Boise State the only undefeated team
2007: Utah was the only undefeated team. Not to mention an OU team that just beat a #1 ranked team and did not even get mentioned.

Hell, lets mention 2000. Miami, some people said was the best team in the Nation. They lost to Washington early, beat Florida State. Then that brings in Washington. They beat Miami.

See how this works? The BCS if far from a perfect system. Has OU benefited from it more than naught? Sure. But until we get a system in place that ensures fairness, and allows the NCAA to actually call one team a National Champion, everything else is just Mythical!

But until then, lets let human bias and opinions decide who should be playing for a national title!

[JLEW1818]

2003 USC lost to an unranked team. We lost in a "conference championship" game, something the pac 10 has never heard of. and at least we lost to a ranked team. Why the **** do people always give USC the benefit of the doubt that year?

In 2003 USC shutout Auburn 23-0, in Auburn.... I know its a year before the 2004 controversy, but still an interesting stat.

a playoff could be better, but I'm not complaining. We had no business even going in 2007. LSU would have killed us. I'm sure we could have beat Ohio St tho :D

I like the BCS

[OU_Sooners75]

2003 USC lost to an unranked team. We lost in a "conference championship" game, something the pac 10 has never heard of. and at least we lost to a ranked team. Why the **** do people always give USC the benefit of the doubt that year?

In 2003 USC shutout Auburn 23-0, in Auburn.... I know its a year before the 2004 controversy, but still an interesting stat.

a playoff could be better, but I'm not complaining. We had no business even going in 2007. LSU would have killed us. I'm sure we could have beat Ohio St tho :D

I like the BCS

I am not saying how anyone lost or who they lost too.

I am simply stating that teams that are deserving to play for a national championship are getting screwed because of this flawed system known as the Bull**** Championship Series....errr....Bowl Championship Series.

The only fair way about this is to implement a playoff system.

Sure some teams will bitch and moan...but if you would have won your conference, that one extra game, you would be in the playoff. Has nothing to do with anyone but the team that got left out in the first place!

And what makes you like the BCS? The fact that Humans are in control over the destiny to be know as the Crystal Ball? Or the fact that it is heavily laden with human bias and opinion?

[silverwheels]

I don't think a playoff could be successfully implemented with Div. 1-A in its current state. And by "successfully implemented", I mean no polls involved, even computers. The conferences right now are too irregular in size and strength. You'd have to realign, booting some teams down to 1-AA; eight conferences of let's say 10 teams each, all of relatively equal strength, would mean you could give automatic bids to the eight conference winners. Home field advantage for the higher seed in the first two rounds, and the championship at a rotating neutral site.

Not saying it would or could happen, but that's the only way a playoff could happen with the selection of teams being entirely objective.

[Leroy Lizard]

One thing that many are forgetting: Playing a "bowl game" at one of the team's own stadiums is not lucrative. Cities like Miami pay up to host bowl games because they know fans from both teams will pour in and spend money.

If Lincoln hosts a game, the playoff system will not collect anything from the city. The city won't benefit much, because nearly the entire stadium population is local.

[silverwheels]

Also, I have a question for anti-playoff people: if Div. 1-A had had a playoff since the 50s, would anyone be clamoring for a bowl system instead?

[JLEW1818]

I am not saying how anyone lost or who they lost too.

I am simply stating that teams that are deserving to play for a national championship are getting screwed because of this flawed system known as the Bull**** Championship Series....errr....Bowl Championship Series.

The only fair way about this is to implement a playoff system.

Sure some teams will bitch and moan...but if you would have won your conference, that one extra game, you would be in the playoff. Has nothing to do with anyone but the team that got left out in the first place!

And what makes you like the BCS? The fact that Humans are in control over the destiny to be know as the Crystal Ball? Or the fact that it is heavily laden with human bias and opinion?

The fact that most people don't like it! I'll claim it.. lol

It will never be perfect. and I'll agree that it could be made better. But I'm honestly fine with how it is now.

[Leroy Lizard]

Also, I have a question for anti-playoff people: if Div. 1-A had had a playoff since the 50s, would anyone be clamoring for a bowl system instead?

Your logic fails. If Div 1A had a playoff in the 1950s, then there would be no doubt that a playoff system is viable. But the viability of a playoff is what we are arguing over.

In other words, you are basing your question on a false premise.

[JLEW1818]

Also, I have a question for anti-playoff people: if Div. 1-A had had a playoff since the 50s, would anyone be clamoring for a bowl system instead?

That's impossible to answer.

[Leroy Lizard]

And what makes you like the BCS?

I don't necessarily like the BCS, but I'm satisfied with it for two reasons (1) the alternative playoff system is worse and (2) fans won't be satisfied with a playoff system until it grows to include at least 16 teams, which will kill the regular season.

I've said it a million times: If you are arguing for a four-team playoff, you are also arguing for a 16-team playoff, because a four-team playoff will become a 16-team playoff. Fewer things in life are more certain.

[silverwheels]

Your logic fails. If Div 1A had a playoff in the 1950s, then there would be no doubt that a playoff system is viable. But the viability of a playoff is what we are arguing over.

In other words, you are basing your question on a false premise.

It wasn't a logical question. Just asking for an opinion.

[OU_Sooners75]

The fact that most people don't like it! I'll claim it.. lol

It will never be perfect. and I'll agree that it could be made better. But I'm honestly fine with how it is now.


How can it be made better? Almost every year they have tweaked it to try to make it better.

Let's face it, there is no way to make it better because it allows human opinions and biases to run the way they determine the #1 and #2 teams.

Do fans like March Madness? Yeah they do. Do all fans like it that their team got skipped and did not make it? No.

But NO ONE EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER debates the outcome of the tournament! The champion is the champion and not one person can say otherwise!

It would be wonderful to have that in D-1A football!
You win a championship by playing on the field, not by some human poll or system saying you get it!

[OU_Sooners75]

I don't necessarily like the BCS, but I'm satisfied with it for two reasons (1) the alternative playoff system is worse and (2) fans won't be satisfied with a playoff system until it grows to include at least 16 teams, which will kill the regular season.

I've said it a million times: If you are arguing for a four-team playoff, you are also arguing for a 16-team playoff, because a four-team playoff will become a 16-team playoff. Fewer things in life are more certain.


And if I recall, I was not asking that of you. So you just wasted the last 5 minutes of our lives!

[Leroy Lizard]

You weren't just asking for opinions. You offered a question geared to produce a certain answer, which you would then offer as evidence against a playoff. But your method is based on a false premise.

Consider a bunch of people arguing over whether man should fly to mars. One wants to do it, another says that doing so is cost prohibitive. To come in and ask, "Well, if we have already been doing it, would you want to stop" employs a false premise: that going to mars is not cost prohibitive.

[silverwheels]

You weren't just asking for opinions. You offered a question geared to produce a certain answer, which you would then offer as evidence against a playoff. But your method is based on a false premise.

Consider a bunch of people arguing over whether man should fly to mars. One wants to do it, another says that doing so is cost prohibitive. To come in and ask, "Well, if we have already been doing it, would you want to stop" employs a false premise: that going to mars is not cost prohibitive.

I'm sorry, are you in my brain right now? Do you know my reason for asking that question? No. Drop the superiority complex already, Mr. College Professor.

[JLEW1818]

How can it be made better? Almost every year they have tweaked it to try to make it better.

Let's face it, there is no way to make it better because it allows human opinions and biases to run the way they determine the #1 and #2 teams.

Do fans like March Madness? Yeah they do. Do all fans like it that their team got skipped and did not make it? No.

But NO ONE EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER debates the outcome of the tournament! The champion is the champion and not one person can say otherwise!

It would be wonderful to have that in D-1A football!
You win a championship by playing on the field, not by some human poll or system saying you get it!



are you saying college football should have a 64 team tourney?

how many teams are you saying??

should a team with 3 losses really have a chance at the national title? 8 teams would be the max in my opinion...

[OU_Sooners75]

You weren't just asking for opinions. You offered a question geared to produce a certain answer, which you would then offer as evidence against a playoff. But your method is based on a false premise.

Consider a bunch of people arguing over whether man should fly to mars. One wants to do it, another says that doing so is cost prohibitive. To come in and ask, "Well, if we have already been doing it, would you want to stop" employs a false premise: that going to mars is not cost prohibitive.


Well, the BCS has not been around very long, since 1998.

What makes you think that this country's top universities are incapable of creating a system that actually works and that all fans can be proud of?

The Bowl System is outdated...especially when they continue to add bowl games.

It is suppose to be an award for a great season to play in a Bowl game. Now we are seeing a bunch of 6-6 teams playing.

The Bowl System was once fun to watch, but that when there were only 11 Bowl games, not 100!

[OU_Sooners75]

are you saying college football should have a 64 team tourney?

how many teams are you saying??

should a team with 3 losses really have a chance at the national title? 8 teams would be the max in my opinion...


Maybe you should actually take the time to read my first post on this thread.

It details what I think you are looking for!

[Leroy Lizard]

And if I recall, I was not asking that of you. So you just wasted the last 5 minutes of our lives!

I know you want a playoff really bad, but you need to keep your cool. No need in getting nasty about it.

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm sorry, are you in my brain right now? Do you know my reason for asking that question? No.

Okay. But your question is still illogical. As jlew said, your question is impossble to answer because it assumes that a playoff system is viable (how else could the playoff system be up and running in the 1950s?).

[OU_Sooners75]

I know you want a playoff really bad, but you need to keep your cool. No need in getting nasty about it.


Im cool, you just think that every post is directed to you.

If I do not quote YOU, do not reply. God knows I cannot stand having a conversation with you since you think you are a know-it-all.

And to curb your assumption.

I could really careless if there was a playoff. I am just very anti-BCS!

This thread is about if one came up with a playoff, how would you do it? How would the conferences get paid? and stuff like that.

You have yet came up with anything that even supports the OP and what this thread is about. All you have done is disagree with any playoff suggestions while not making a case to make the BCS better.

Starting to be the norm for you Leroy.

[JLEW1818]

Maybe you should actually take the time to read my first post on this thread.

It details what I think you are looking for!

I did read it. It has the same likelihood of me being the coach at OU.

make 12 conferences of 10 teams. no chance that would ever work.

why should people not be allowed to vote? we vote for the President of the US... are people bias? yes

[silverwheels]

Okay. But your question is still illogical. As jlew said, your question is impossble to answer because it assumes that a playoff system is viable (how else could the playoff system be up and running in the 1950s?).

That's all you had to say instead of getting uppity.

[Leroy Lizard]

What makes you think that this country's top universities are incapable of creating a system that actually works and that all fans can be proud of?

They haven't so far, in 100+ years of college football.

There can only be a few reasons for their "failure."

1. They don't want to topple tradition
2. Implementing a playoff sytem is harder than most people think.
3. The existing system provides all that is needed (after all, fans still go to the games).

Other than the fans' need to satisfy the debate over which team is the best, university presidents probably don't see any need for a playoff. College presidents are happy as long as the football team brings in money, the alumni base is happy, academics are doing okay, and there are no scandals.

Radio callers to The Sports Animal? Pfffft, who cares about them?


It is suppose to be an award for a great season to play in a Bowl game. Now we are seeing a bunch of 6-6 teams playing.

That is a problem easy to solve if people wanted to solve it. Again, fans may complain, but as long as host cities are willing to host the game, college presidents don't care.


The Bowl System was once fun to watch, but that when there were only 11 Bowl games, not 100!

Get everyone to quit watching and your point would be more valid.

[JLEW1818]

They haven't so far, in 100+ years of college football.

There can only be a few reasons for their "failure."

1. They don't want to topple tradition
2. Implementing a playoff sytem is harder than most people think.
3. The existing system provides all that is needed (after all, fans still go to the games).

Other than the fans' need to satisfy the debate over which team is the best, university presidents probably don't see any need for a playoff. College presidents are happy as long as the football team brings in money, the alumni base is happy, academics are doing okay, and there are no scandals.

Radio callers to The Sports Animal? Pfffft, who cares about them?



That is a problem easy to solve if people wanted to solve it. Again, fans may complain, but as long as host cities are willing to host the game, college presidents don't care.



Get everyone to quit watching and your point would be more valid.


no, fans think it's soooo easy!! :rolleyes:

[Leroy Lizard]

If I do not quote YOU, do not reply.

Use PM if you want to carry on a private conversation. Other than that, posters are free here to respond to any point you make or question you ask.


This thread is about if one came up with a playoff, how would you do it?

Am I allowed to answer, or was this question aimed at a particular poster who is the only one allowed to respond?

[silverwheels]

no, fans think it's soooo easy!! :rolleyes:

It is easy to come up with a system. The hard part is coming up with one that everyone likes (impossible) and getting the people in charge to go with it.

[OU_Sooners75]

1. It has nothing to do with tradition as much as money. They think that since the most lucrative bowls give out a lot of money to be shared between the conference, that a playoff will not be able to do so.
Reality, a playoff would generate so much more money! It generates a mess load for D-1AA, and for basketball. Not sure why it wouldn't for the most popular sport in college sports!

2. The playoff implementation would not be as hard as you think.
They NCAA has the models already in place, thanks to D-1AA, DII, DIII all having 16 team play offs!

3. Fans would go regardless. In fact, the playoffs would generate more of a following than just a couple of bowl games would!

[JLEW1818]

yah i know. 75 your way would be the most fair for all teams.. just would be really hard to get it agreed on

[OU_Sooners75]

yah i know. 75 your way would be the most fair for all teams.. just would be really hard to get it agreed on

Not really, more and more ADs, Coaches, and Presidents are starting to get disgusted with the Monopoly that the BCS has on D-1A football and would like to see a real push for a true National Champion.

Would everyone be happy with a playoff? No. but like I said, if their team would have won their conference they would be in. If they would have won that one game they lost, they may be in.

The only draw back would be tie breakers from conference ties. Then fans of those that might have gotten left out would have a gripe.

But no fan would object to the winner of the playoff! They won it on the field against 15 other teams that deserved a shot too!

[westbrooke]

One thing that many are forgetting: Playing a "bowl game" at one of the team's own stadiums is not lucrative. Cities like Miami pay up to host bowl games because they know fans from both teams will pour in and spend money.

If Lincoln hosts a game, the playoff system will not collect anything from the city. The city won't benefit much, because nearly the entire stadium population is local.

It was my understanding that most of the money from the BCS system comes from the television contract to broadcast these games. With additional games added to that slate, the contract should be more lucrative, and more than proportionately so given the quality of matchups and teams in the later rounds.

Can you elaborate on why you think Lincoln would not benefit from hosting an additional game? The one reason you listed would also seem to apply to any home game. Lid has something to say about the value of a home game (http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2828782&postcount=31). I suspect the average cost of tickets for a game of the magnitude implied by the scenario would be greater than in his example.

[JLEW1818]

Not really, more and more ADs, Coaches, and Presidents are starting to get disgusted with the Monopoly that the BCS has on D-1A football and would like to see a real push for a true National Champion.

Would everyone be happy with a playoff? No. but like I said, if their team would have won their conference they would be in. If they would have won that one game they lost, they may be in.

The only draw back would be tie breakers from conference ties. Then fans of those that might have gotten left out would have a gripe.

But no fan would object to the winner of the playoff! They won it on the field against 15 other teams that deserved a shot too!

but do you honestly believe that 16 teams deserve a shot at the national title?

[OU_Sooners75]

but do you honestly believe that 16 teams deserve a shot at the national title?


I honestly think all teams in D-1A football should be given equal shot at winning a national championship.

The BCS does not do that.

Does the Sun Belt champion deserve the right to play for the NC? Yeah. Though their chances of winning one is slim to none.

Does the champion of the Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference (MAAC) deserve the right to play for the NC in Basketball? Yeah. Though their chanced of winning it are slim to none.

One sport does allow the weaker teams to have that chance. While one only give that chance to 55% of the division in which they play!

A playoff would also make parity greater, though it may take more time to do so than scholarship limitations.

[Leroy Lizard]

1. It has nothing to do with tradition as much as money. They think that since the most lucrative bowls give out a lot of money to be shared between the conference, that a playoff will not be able to do so.
Reality, a playoff would generate so much more money! It generates a mess load for D-1AA, and for basketball. Not sure why it wouldn't for the most popular sport in college sports!

Then according to your logic the presidents would have adopted a playoff a long time ago.

Or, college presidents don't understand education finance as well as the average fan, which is ridiculous. These guys handle multi-million dollar budgets. Nothing about school finance that we know has escaped their attention.




2. The playoff implementation would not be as hard as you think.
They NCAA has the models already in place, thanks to D-1AA, DII, DIII all having 16 team play offs!

Okay, let me spell this out again.

The lower divisions do not have conference championship games that interfere with the postseason. Conference championship games are huge money makers in Div 1A.

Furthermore, scaling back games in the lower divisions probably saves the schools money, but in Div 1A that would amount to a large loss in revenue.

As Lid pointed out, one home game in Austin is worth millions of dollars in revenue, plus all the money from fans flying in to watch their teams play. In FCS, a typical home game may only bring in 10,000 fans and almost no visiting fans. The money raised by a home game most likely barely pays expenses. How much does a home game ticket at UT cost? How much does it cost at Southwestern Oklahoma?

Do the math.

The two divisions are simply not comparable. And playoff proponents are simply unable to comprehend that no matter how clearly it is explained


3. Fans would go regardless. In fact, the playoffs would generate more of a following than just a couple of bowl games would!

That depends on the system that is implemented.

[JLEW1818]

socialist

:D

[Leroy Lizard]

It was my understanding that most of the money from the BCS system comes from the television contract to broadcast these games. With additional games added to that slate, the contract should be more lucrative, and more than proportionately so given the quality of matchups and teams in the later rounds.

To even host a game a city needs to bid on it. I am not sure how much this is, but it's considerable. (In fact, playoff proponents claim that it is so large that it is what prevents a playoff system from occurring.)


Can you elaborate on why you think Lincoln would not benefit from hosting an additional game?

It would benefit, no doubt. But Miami benefits much more by hosting the game with two visiting teams. So the overall financial gain for the playoff system is much greater if games are played in neutral sites.

So, on one hand you have a smaller city making some extra cash from hosting the game, with none of it going to the other teams. On the other hand, you have a city making a lot of cash by hosting the game, with a good portion going to the other teams.

[OU_Sooners75]

Then according to your logic the presidents would have adopted a playoff a long time ago.

Or, college presidents don't understand education finance as well as the average fan, which is ridiculous. These guys handle multi-million dollar budgets. Nothing about school finance that we know has escaped their attention.


No, because there has not been a fan cry out for a playoff until the last few years.
Have you noticed that the support from School officials have grown every since the fan outcry for a system change has grown louder?


Okay, let me spell this out again.

The lower divisions do not have conference championship games that interfere with the postseason. Conference championship games are huge money makers in Div 1A.

Let me spell this out for you....TRY READING MY FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD. Maybe instead of just jumping head first into a thread, take the time to actually read the damn thing!

Since you are too smart to actually read the entire thread, I'll sum up what I stated: The NCAA need to realign all conferences and all teams must join a conference to be eligible. Make it where all conferences play by the same rules.

Furthermore, scaling back games in the lower divisions probably saves the schools money, but in Div 1A that would amount to a large loss in revenue.

As Lid pointed out, one home game in Austin is worth millions of dollars in revenue, plus all the money from fans flying in to watch their teams play. In FCS, a typical home game may only bring in 10,000 fans and almost no visiting fans. The money raised by a home game most likely barely pays expenses. How much does a home game ticket at UT cost? How much does it cost at Southwestern Oklahoma?

What in the **** are you talking about? Apparently your know-it-all *** does not know what you are talking about! In 2009, the FCS playoff averaged 11, 991 in attendance for 15 play off games. That is along the lines of the regular season numbers (actually a little higher) of almost 10,000/game.

There is a reason the division is split. D-1A a team must average over 30,000 per game to be considered a member of the division. FCS has no limits that I am aware of.

Do the math.

The two divisions are simply not comparable. And playoff proponents are simply unable to comprehend that no matter how clearly it is explained

That depends on the system that is implemented.

They are not comparable, that I agree. However, judging on attendance, the playoffs generate, They gain more at the games than in regular season. Which I would almost state would be the norm the for D-1A teams that do not sell out their stadiums every game.

There ya go.

[OU_Sooners75]

To even host a game a city needs to bid on it. I am not sure how much this is, but it's considerable. (In fact, playoff proponents claim that it is so large that it is what prevents a playoff system from occurring.)



It would benefit, no doubt. But Miami benefits much more by hosting the game with two visiting teams. So the overall financial gain for the playoff system is much greater if games are played in neutral sites.

So, on one hand you have a smaller city making some extra cash from hosting the game, with none of it going to the other teams. On the other hand, you have a city making a lot of cash by hosting the game, with a good portion going to the other teams.

I could careless about the towns. This sport is not about conceding to the towns. It is about trying to produce a national champion in the most fair way possible.

[OU_Sooners75]

socialist

:D


Fascist!

[fadada1]

i really only have 2 major items i'd like to see:

1 - all conferences that want in - 12+ teams and a championship game.

2 - whether it 8/10/16 teams, take THOSE teams regardless of where they finished in the conference play - i.e., in 2008 you;d have OU, *, and tech all in an 8 team playoff. FINE. THAT'S WHAT WE WANT!!! THE TOP TEAMS AT THE END OF THE SEASON!!!!

[Leroy Lizard]

I could careless about the towns. This sport is not about conceding to the towns.

But it's an issue, because most of the playoffs I have seen involve having teams play in the higher-seeded stadiums. Those that propose such ideas never consider the lost revenue I pointed out.

[Leroy Lizard]

Let me spell this out for you....TRY READING MY FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD. Maybe instead of just jumping head first into a thread, take the time to actually read the damn thing!

Since you are too smart to actually read the entire thread, I'll sum up what I stated: The NCAA need to realign all conferences and all teams must join a conference to be eligible. Make it where all conferences play by the same rules.

First of all, that has nothing to do with my point about conference championship games being lucrative, and it is a pipe dream anyway. Of what possible value is a playoff idea that has zero chance of being implemented?

You're not even being cogent at this point.

FACT: FBS has conference championship games that are lucrative and take place near the beginning of December.

FACT: FCS does not.

CONCLUSION: FBS is not the same as FCS. You cannot compare the two divisions and reasonably state that, because FCS has a playoff, then FBS should be able to implement one as well.

Now can stomp your feet and snort all you want, but those are the basic facts.



What in the **** are you talking about? Apparently your know-it-all *** does not know what you are talking about! In 2009, the FCS playoff averaged 11, 991 in attendance for 15 play off games. That is along the lines of the regular season numbers (actually a little higher) of almost 10,000/game.

Yeah, so what? All you are saying is that FCS's playoff games don't make much money either, which is probably true.

FACT: Teams in FCS have very low attendance figures, with few out-of-town visitors.

FACT: FBS does not. Even for teams that typically do not do well, extra games are played on the road and the school receives a handsome check.

CONCLUSION: Scaling back the regular season is cheaper in FCS than FBS. Therefore, FCS is not equivalent to FBS and, therefore, there is no reason to think that because a playoff works in FCS, that it will necessarily work in FBS.


There is a reason the division is split. D-1A a team must average over 30,000 per game to be considered a member of the division. FCS has no limits that I am aware of.

So how can one reasonably compare FCS to FBS when considering the viability of a playoff? You proved my point.

[Leroy Lizard]

FINE. THAT'S WHAT WE WANT!!! THE TOP TEAMS AT THE END OF THE SEASON!!!!

Who's WE, Kemo Sabe?

[TexasLidig8r]

I could careless about the towns. .

Now.. if you could care less why don't you?

Does that mean you actually care a little bit? :cool:

[JLEW1818]

Lid, whats for dinner

[Collier11]

Aw, you fellas have a date?

[JLEW1818]

Lid is sexy

[Leroy Lizard]

Now.. if you could care less why don't you?

You misunderstood. He is using "careless" like a verb. To "careless about the town" is akin to painting the town red.

[gotpoi73]

Please tell me that you're not using the old "It's a little bit bad now, so I see no harm it making really bad."

Right now, players have time after the conference championship game to refocus on academics, seek tutoring, and discuss their performance with their professors.

Could they use more? Maybe.

That is a far cry from playing a game in Miami on Saturday night and then taking a final exam on Monday morning. When would a player study?

because graduation rates of football players at most of the big time football program schools are so high

[Leroy Lizard]

because graduation rates of football players at most of the big time football program schools are so high

I just got done talking about using the "It's a little bit bad now, so I see no harm it making really bad" argument, and not only does he post my quote but then goes on to use it. Hooboy.

Okay, in response:

College football players do not have high graduation rates. We all know that they struggle in school.

All the more reason to keep playoffs away from final exams.

If football players were geniuses, we wouldn't have to worry about the academic problems associated with playing games near final exams. But they're not, so we do.

C'mon, just think about the situation a little more and you could have anticipated my response, because it's so obvious.

[gotpoi73]

I just got done talking about using the "It's a little bit bad now, so I see no harm it making really bad" argument, and not only does he post my quote but then goes on to use it. Hooboy.

Okay, in response:

College football players do not have high graduation rates. We all know that they struggle in school.

All the more reason to keep playoffs away from final exams.

If football players were geniuses, we wouldn't have to worry about the academic problems associated with playing games near final exams. But they're not, so we do.

C'mon, just think about the situation a little more and you could have anticipated my response, because it's so obvious.

no. the players that go to school to get an education, get an education. it doesn't matter how many classes they miss, they find a way to get the job done in the classroom....

however, anybody that watches college football knows that most of these guys don't go to college to get an education, they go to school to play for an elite program that puts them in the best position to make it to the NFL.

and how are exam schedules so different in D1, D2 etc...that their presidents aren't screaming about how the payoffs hurt the players academic progress?

[westbrooke]

To even host a game a city needs to bid on it. I am not sure how much this is, but it's considerable. (In fact, playoff proponents claim that it is so large that it is what prevents a playoff system from occurring.)

It would benefit, no doubt. But Miami benefits much more by hosting the game with two visiting teams. So the overall financial gain for the playoff system is much greater if games are played in neutral sites.

So, on one hand you have a smaller city making some extra cash from hosting the game, with none of it going to the other teams. On the other hand, you have a city making a lot of cash by hosting the game, with a good portion going to the other teams.

I've been looking for some statistics to better understand the contribution that does not come directly from the TV contract with little success. But what I did find (http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/64647) is this: The BCS collected and paid out $142.5 million, of which $82.5 million comes from the TV contract. That leaves $60 million kicked in by "revenue" generated by the five BCS bowl games ($12 mil apiece), though what constitutes that revenue, and what portion of that might be the bids in question, isn't specified.

I had a similarly hard time finding information on current sponsorship deals, but this article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20001228/ai_n10141137/) asserts that the corporate sponsors of the BCS bowls were paying more than $5 million a pop ten years ago. That has surely gone up since then, but to be on the safe side, let's assume it's an even $5 million. I think it's a safe assumption that the first round games could draw similar numbers in sponsorship. Further assuming that those sponsorship dollars would be all that those games contribute to the BCS absent a bid, that puts the value of a neutral site to the BCS at $7 million.

So, under the system I proposed, we have four bowls at $12 million apiece and four first round games at $5 million apiece. That's $68 million into the BCS system generated by the games themselves. We're already ahead of the current system ($60 million) with conservative sponsorship estimates.

How high do we need to go? Well, under the current system, each BCS conference is guaranteed $17.7 million for its conference winner and can grab $22.2 million if it gets a second team through the door. The terms of the hypothetical were to increase the money, so let's make the target number a nice round $25 million per conference. That's $150 million. To account for what's payed out to the other conferences and independents, we'll assume that 150 is 80% of the total, as it was this year. That means we need to get to $187.5 million in total BCS money.

With $68M coming from the games, we need an additional $119.5M coming from TV. The existing contract is only $82.5M, but ESPN has already ponied up $125M for the next BCS contract. I think it's an easy leap to see that TV can in fact make up the difference, especially when we consider two additional games and the potential for added marketability in a tournament. Could that go even higher if we made them all neutral site games? Sure, but that violates Lid's rule #3, and we can see that we don't need that to raise the financial bar.

I'm sure I'm missing something else in all of this, though, so tear it apart.

[Collier11]

I playoff would draw substantially higher ratings as a whole than the 32 bowl games combined would IMO

[Leroy Lizard]

the players that go to school to get an education, get an education. it doesn't matter how many classes they miss, they find a way to get the job done in the classroom....

What an utterly worthless statement.

We can wipe out all education reform in this country with such simplistic reasoning.

"We need more money for schools!" (No we don't... those kids that want to learn will just learn anyway.)


however, anybody that watches college football knows that most of these guys don't go to college to get an education, they go to school to play for an elite program that puts them in the best position to make it to the NFL.

A lot of students, not just football players, are on campus for reasons other than to get an education. Many are there to party, find a mate, avoid working, what have you.

But when formulating university policy, we cannot let those students dominate the conversation. When the university instituted the dead week for final exams, it operated under the assumption that students needed the week to prepare for final exams, regardless of the slackers in their midst.

Read the official mission statement of the NCAA:


Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount.

The mission does not say anything about excluding athletes that don't care about academics.


and how are exam schedules so different in D1, D2 etc...that their presidents aren't screaming about how the payoffs hurt the players academic progress?

Apples and oranges. There is no need to think that FCS and FBS players face the same academic struggles, and the media pressure to win is far higher in FBS. If an FBS player is in Miami to play a bowl game, there is no chance in Hell he will be able to study. He will have to attend every parade, visit every sick kid, and meet with every esteemed official throughout his stay.

If we set aside time for him to study, there goes the enjoyment in playing in the postseason.

It doesn't matter anyway. If a player has to play a game in Miami on Saturday night and take a final exam on Monday morning, he's in trouble. When would he study? During the week leading up to the game he is bombarded with media inquiries and attending functions. After the game he's going to arrive in his hometown on Sunday jet-lagged.

If a struggling student asked me if he could travel to Miami on Wednesday to play a game on the Saturday before a Monday final exam, I would tell him he was nuts. Yet, here we are even considering mandating such activities for all players on the team.

It's absolutely crazy what playoff proponents are advocating. And for what? To settle an argument over who's #1? It's not worth it.

[Leroy Lizard]

I playoff would draw substantially higher ratings as a whole than the 32 bowl games combined would IMO

You may be right.

But many of the playoff ideas have conferences giving up their conference championship games and scaling back the regular season by one game.

Not so lucrative anymore, is it?

[Collier11]

so are you saying that a D1 school is held to different academic standards than a D2, 3, NAIA, etc...?

[Collier11]

You may be right.

But many of the playoff ideas have conferences giving up their conference championship games and scaling back the regular season by one game.

Not so lucrative anymore, is it?

I dont want to get into the playoff or no playoff argument again but you do remember Leroy, the plan I presented to you a few months ago allowed for a full reg season with a conf title game without interfering with finals and you didnt like it because it went 1 week into the spring semester

[Leroy Lizard]

so are you saying that a D1 school is held to different academic standards than a D2, 3, NAIA, etc...?

Possibly.

Lower divisions don't have conference championship games and (I think) their regular season is shorter by one game. So I don't know if the study time problem exists to the same extent as Div. 1A.

Keep in mind that the playoff games may well adversely affect lower division players. If they do, we'll never hear about it. How often does the academic failure of a second-string FCA linebacker make the news?


I dont want to get into the playoff or no playoff argument again but you do remember Leroy, the plan I presented to you a few months ago allowed for a full reg season with a conf title game without interfering with finals and you didnt like it because it went 1 week into the spring semester

You also had them playing in August, so it was just more than playing in the spring semester.

We can always have players playing in August, or playing into the spring semester. We could employ a 64-team playoff if we want games in July. But that doesn't make it a good idea.

Again, it comes down to how much we are willing to concede to settle a debate? To me, the issue over settling which team is #1 with certainty is of little consequence. And I have over 100 years of college football success on my side.

Now, if college football was struggling, with dwindling gate receipts, and a playoff could fix things, then I would understand the pro-playoff minions' arguments. But college football is doing very well. The fans are excited. Why institute drastic changes to a game that relies so heavily on tradition? It makes no sense to me.

[Collier11]

The only reason I dont see it as a feasible issue with the teams possibly playing into the spring semester (keep in mind it would only be 2 teams) is that CFB used to be done on Jan 1st. Now it is Jan 8th, its not like it cant be done


and the one thing I would def disagree with you on is when you say the Fans are excited, look at the opinion polls Leroy, the fans are pissed off. I cant give you an exact quote but I think the last poll I saw said that 68% of fans wanted a playoff, im sure there are more up to date polls though....look at the tv ratings and attendance for the majority of bowl games

[Collier11]

btw, tradition only means it is an old, outdated idea, doesnt mean it is always right

[Leroy Lizard]

The only reason I dont see it as a feasible issue with the teams possibly playing into the spring semester (keep in mind it would only be 2 teams) is that CFB used to be done on Jan 1st. Now it is Jan 8th, its not like it cant be done

Oh, it can be done. We can play games in July. Some players might die from heat stroke, but we can play the games.

You can race cars in the rain. Drivers have died, but you can still hold the races.

The question is, "Is it worth it?"


and the one thing I would def disagree with you on is when you say the Fans are excited, look at the opinion polls Leroy, the fans are pissed off. I cant give you an exact quote but I think the last poll I saw said that 68% of fans wanted a playoff, im sure there are more up to date polls though....look at the tv ratings and attendance for the majority of bowl games

68% want a playoff. Now, describe the exact playoff that will be implemented and watch the numbers drop like a rock.

College football is uber-popular, and the Nielsen's prove it. Why is it that all the super large stadiums in this country host college football games? The last time I looked, college football stadiums were expanding. How do you explain that if you think the fans are not excited to watch the games?

College football's popularity is rising, hardly the sign of a sport that is losing fan interest.

[Collier11]

They are excited to watch their team, they arent excited about the way their teams postseason is handled. Like it or not Leroy, from grade school to college, athletes play to win championships and fans cheer for the possibility of those.

Tell me this, if you were a Boise fan, would you be more excited about being 12-0 and playing TCU in a Fiesta Bowl or watching Boise play Alabama in a national quarterfinal?

Think about it from a fan standpoint, what would you be more excited about 10 years from now? Winning the Fiesta Bowl or that magical run to the national title game?

[gotpoi73]

What an utterly worthless statement.

We can wipe out all education reform in this country with such simplistic reasoning.

"We need more money for schools!" (No we don't... those kids that want to learn will just learn anyway.)



A lot of students, not just football players, are on campus for reasons other than to get an education. Many are there to party, find a mate, avoid working, what have you.

But when formulating university policy, we cannot let those students dominate the conversation. When the university instituted the dead week for final exams, it operated under the assumption that students needed the week to prepare for final exams, regardless of the slackers in their midst.

Read the official mission statement of the NCAA:



The mission does not say anything about excluding athletes that don't care about academics.



Apples and oranges. There is no need to think that FCS and FBS players face the same academic struggles, and the media pressure to win is far higher in FBS. If an FBS player is in Miami to play a bowl game, there is no chance in Hell he will be able to study. He will have to attend every parade, visit every sick kid, and meet with every esteemed official throughout his stay.

If we set aside time for him to study, there goes the enjoyment in playing in the postseason.

It doesn't matter anyway. If a player has to play a game in Miami on Saturday night and take a final exam on Monday morning, he's in trouble. When would he study? During the week leading up to the game he is bombarded with media inquiries and attending functions. After the game he's going to arrive in his hometown on Sunday jet-lagged.

If a struggling student asked me if he could travel to Miami on Wednesday to play a game on the Saturday before a Monday final exam, I would tell him he was nuts. Yet, here we are even considering mandating such activities for all players on the team.

It's absolutely crazy what playoff proponents are advocating. And for what? To settle an argument over who's #1? It's not worth it.

brother, you are so out of touch with reality, that there is no point trying to reason with you. good luck with the world you live in

[Leroy Lizard]

They are excited to watch their team, they arent excited about the way their teams postseason is handled. Like it or not Leroy, from grade school to college, athletes play to win championships and fans cheer for the possibility of those.

Then you have a large number of players out there that need therapy, because college football doesn't have a true national championship and these guys are still bothering to take the field. And fans are still going to the games.

Gee, there must be more to college football than settling which team is #1.


Tell me this, if you were a Boise fan, would you be more excited about being 12-0 and playing TCU in a Fiesta Bowl or watching Boise play Alabama in a national quarterfinal?

Think about it from a fan standpoint, what would you be more excited about 10 years from now? Winning the Fiesta Bowl or that magical run to the national title game?

If you had the players fight gladiator style with real maces and swords I would find it absolutely exhilarating. It's not about what *I* want. It's about what is best for the sport.


brother, you are so out of touch with reality, that there is no point trying to reason with you.

Aaaaah, the swan song of very beaten playoff proponent.

[Collier11]

and the sport is about finding the best team, unfortunately the BCS doesnt do that fairly

[gotpoi73]

Aaaaah, the swan song of very beaten playoff proponent.

you are right, in leroy land your argument about wiping out education reform totally convinced me that there is no need for a playoff and i no longer have the desire to see college playoffs, you are that convincing. kudos to you sir!

if in leroy land the notion that education reform has anything to do with pampered scholarship athletes or that fbs athletes are held to a higher standard than fcs athletes than i am a beaten playoff proponent.

now i see the light, you should be a teacher, being so wise and all.

[Leroy Lizard]

Here is what you said:


no. the players that go to school to get an education, get an education. it doesn't matter how many classes they miss, they find a way to get the job done in the classroom....

however, anybody that watches college football knows that most of these guys don't go to college to get an education, they go to school to play for an elite program that puts them in the best position to make it to the NFL.

If you go around talking like that, you will alienate everyone involved at the university level, so have at it. Your statements would be my best weapon for shooting down a playoff idea.

If you want your arguments to be effective, avoid the ridiculously simplistic ("oh, they'll learn anyway)" and overly cynical ("athletes don't care about academics").

[Leroy Lizard]

deleted

[Clever Trevor]

C'mon Trevor, pay attention. Lid specifically spelled out a scenario where the university president based his decisions on revenues, academics, and the fan base's problems with travel.

I wish they would teach reading comprehension a little better in our pubic schools. We have too many Trevors in our society.

NO, you're the idiot here. It is obviously lost on you that I was wanting the president fired based upon who the president was in this scenario. That person, being lid. Gah!:rolleyes:

Seriously, I know that you proclaim to be highly intelligent, but your ability to read between the lines is that of the book smart kid (which could only test well) that has never had the propensity to actually figure people out for themselves. It's really sad. We called a guy that was similar to you, socially retarded back when I was in school. It might fit. Please look in the mirror tonight and decide if it does. You could always do this board a service and learn to temper your posts in a way that don't seem idiotic OR condescending.

[Clever Trevor]

C'mon Trevor, pay attention. Lid specifically spelled out a scenario where the university president based his decisions on revenues, academics, and the fan base's problems with travel.

I wish they would teach reading comprehension a little better in our pubic schools. We have too many Trevors in our society.

NO, you're the idiot here. It is obviously lost on you that I was wanting the president fired based upon who the president was in this scenario. That person, being lid. Gah!:rolleyes:

Seriously, I know that you proclaim to be highly intelligent, but your ability to read between the lines is that of the book smart kid (which could only test well) that has never had the propensity to actually figure people out for themselves. It's really sad. We called a guy that was similar to you, socially retarded back when I was in school. It might fit. Please look in the mirror tonight and decide if it does. You could always do this board a service and learn to temper your posts in a way that don't seem idiotic OR condescending.

[Leroy Lizard]

and the sport is about finding the best team, unfortunately the BCS doesnt do that fairly

Is it about finding the best team during a given game? Sure.
Is it about finding the best team in the country? Not necessarily.

You keep ignoring an obvious point: We have no true national championship, and we have never had one. Yet, for over 100 years the game has flourished. Players sign up to play in droves. Millions of fans go to the game. Even more fans watch the games on tv.

So there must be more to college football than settling the debate over who's #1.

[Leroy Lizard]

NO, you're the idiot here. It is obviously lost on you that I was wanting the president fired based upon who the president was in this scenario. That person, being lid.

And I kindly pointed out that Lid was doing the job entrusted of all college presidents. I didn't attack you. But for some reason you came unglued. (Sounds like someone who is socially retarded.)


Seriously, I know that you proclaim to be highly intelligent, but your ability to read between the lines is that of the book smart kid (which could only test well) that has never had the propensity to actually figure people out for themselves. It's really sad.

Oh, puh-leeze! "It's so sad..." Good grief.


We called a guy that was similar to you, socially retarded back when I was in school. It might fit. Please look in the mirror tonight and decide if it does.

I will, if you ask yourself if you are just plain retarded. You game?

[Clever Trevor]

You call that unglued? Ok.
Actually, your sad little life wrapped within an enigma stashed away inside your parent's basement doesn't really merit a reply to all of your "talking points" which are highly weak.

buh bye

[Leroy Lizard]

Whatever.

[OU_Sooners75]

Is it about finding the best team during a given game? Sure.
Is it about finding the best team in the country? Not necessarily.

You keep ignoring an obvious point: We have no true national championship, and we have never had one. Yet, for over 100 years the game has flourished. Players sign up to play in droves. Millions of fans go to the game. Even more fans watch the games on tv.

So there must be more to college football than settling the debate over who's #1.

Wow, and I never thought you could get more retarded. But somehow you continue to amaze me.

I played this sport, in college. In the division I played, we had a playoff. It worked just fine.

Entering every season...we, as a team, got together with the coaches. We put together a list of goals to accomplish.

Want to know what those goals were every year?

1. Win the first game of the season! No better way to start a season than with a win.
2. Win every game. (doesnt always happen, especially when playing teams from higher divisions).
3. Beat our arch-rival.
4. Win our conference (which we did 3 consecutive seasons)
5. Make the national playoffs (this goes with #3, you win conference, you make playoffs).
6. Win the National Championship (came up short 3 years in a row. Made it to the Semi Finals those three years losing the the eventual NC).

So yes, this game is very much about being the best in the Nation and being the best every game!

Ask any player or coach. Would they rather beat a team or end the season #1. You will be amazed that most will say both, but most importantly they will say finish the season #1.

Anything else in this or any other sport is a fail!

[Collier11]

Is it about finding the best team during a given game? Sure.
Is it about finding the best team in the country? Not necessarily.

You keep ignoring an obvious point: We have no true national championship, and we have never had one. Yet, for over 100 years the game has flourished. Players sign up to play in droves. Millions of fans go to the game. Even more fans watch the games on tv.

So there must be more to college football than settling the debate over who's #1.

The BCS was created to find the best team...surely you get that?!

[OU_Sooners75]

The BCS was created to find the best team...surely you get that?!


We are talking about Liztard, the self proclaimed professor!

[Collier11]

True, I try to give everyone enough credit that they can think intelligently but if he doesnt even realize that is why the BCS was created or why sports are played, im not sure what to say. This is big time athletics, you dont just play for the spirit of competition

[OU_Sooners75]

Collier. I have tried to give that man credit. I have tried to have civil conversations with him.

It is almost impossible to do so, even if you agree with him.

The guy thinks he is a walking encyclopedia. When in fact, he knows very little about anything he posts about.

It is truly sad when people must compensate for whatever reason!

Lizard, I really mean no disrespect toward you or your character. It is just how you have presented yourself since joining this board.

[Collier11]

LL is online so im sure he will post soon, I dont get him most of the time but atleast he is online alot, arguing and debating. Ill give that to him, he is either far too entrenched in the idea of tradition or he just doesnt get it?

[Leroy Lizard]

Wow, and I never thought you could get more retarded. But somehow you continue to amaze me.

I played this sport, in college. In the division I played, we had a playoff. It worked just fine.

Entering every season...we, as a team, got together with the coaches. We put together a list of goals to accomplish.

Want to know what those goals were every year?

1. Win the first game of the season! No better way to start a season than with a win.
2. Win every game. (doesnt always happen, especially when playing teams from higher divisions).
3. Beat our arch-rival.
4. Win our conference (which we did 3 consecutive seasons)
5. Make the national playoffs (this goes with #3, you win conference, you make playoffs).
6. Win the National Championship (came up short 3 years in a row. Made it to the Semi Finals those three years losing the the eventual NC).

So yes, this game is very much about being the best in the Nation and being the best every game!

Okay, now suppose you had played Div 1A (which is the division I thought we were talking about). There are no playoffs in Div 1A and there is no true national championship. So your goals 5 and 6 don't even apply. Yet the players at the Div 1A level still play the game.

So whatever goals Div 1A college football players have, the existing system must be capable of providing them.


The BCS was created to find the best team...surely you get that?!

Does the BCS anoint its winner "national champion"?

BTW, I'm not a self-proclaimed professor. I am an associate professor.

[Collier11]

Actually Leroy, there is a national title game as of the last two years and the entire time weve had the BCS, the BCS has crowned a true national champion by their rankings...where have you been?

[Leroy Lizard]

Actually Leroy, there is a national title game as of the last two years and the entire time weve had the BCS, the BCS has crowned a true national champion by their rankings...where have you been?

I asked you a simple question, "Does the BCS anoint the winner of its title game the 'national champion'?"

C'mon, answer the question.

[Collier11]

YES, in agreement with the coaches, they do

[Leroy Lizard]

From the Orlando Sentinel:


When the Division I-A head coaches met at the AFCA convention Tuesday, they discussed several important issues facing the sport.

There was talk about academic reform. There was talk about dealing with agents and their influence on athletes. There was talk of player safety and concussions. And of course, there was some talk about the controversial Bowl Championship Series.

American Football Coaches Association executive director Grant Teaff presented the results of a survey of all 120 Division I-A coaches during the meeting. What was found was not surprising: a majority of coaches want to keep the system the way it is.

"Right now, we have a good system," said Ohio State coach Jim Tressel, whose team has played in three BCS championship games. "That's not to say we won't improve it. How it will improve over time we'll find out, but I wouldn't be in favor of scraping what we do. There are too many things to keep in mind, bowls, student athlete welfare, all the rest. I wouldn't start over."

Teaff said 73 percent of the coaches want to keep the current BCS system the way it is. He also said that 96 of the 120 coaches voted to keep transparency in the final regular-season coaches poll. And 95.7 want to maintain the final coaches poll voting the BCS champion No. 1.

TCU coach Gary Patterson and Boise State coach Chris Petersen are also in favor of the BCS, even though their teams finished the regular-season undefeated and got left out of the national championship game in favor of Texas and Alabama.

Boise State beat TCU in the Fiesta Bowl to finish 14-0 and finish fourth in both major polls. Alabama beat Texas in the BCS championship game to win the crown.

"The biggest thing as far as TCU or Boise State or Utah, what's to say that if you went to a playoff it would be any easier for us?" Patterson said. "The other thing I brought up is injury. Say you've got a guy who has a chance to be a first-round draft choice like Colt McCoy. What happens if those guys have a chance to make millions of dollars? Well, I helped you get to 12-0, but I'm going to bow out of this playoff because I have to think of my future. What's going to be the answer to that one?"

A Quinnipiac poll released last month showed 63 percent of those surveyed want to get rid of the BCS, while 26 percent want to keep it. But a majority of fans don't want to see the government get involved. Congress has held hearings looking into whether the BCS violates anti-trust laws.

The BCS has taken steps to promote itself and the benefits of its system, hiring an executive director and setting up a Web site called playoffproblem.com. Bill Hancock was hired as the executive director and said before the national championship game, "I believe it is in the best interest of the universities. College football has never been better and I believe the BCS is part of that."

"I like the bowl system," Oregon State coach Mike Riley said. "I like the opportunity for a lot of teams to have a successful season and to get a chance to go to a bowl game. We don't need to limit that to whatever the playoff deal is. I've been involved in small college playoff systems. It was fun, it was great but it wasn't perfect. The system we have now is as close as we can get to a national championship."

Gee, it sounds like the coaches don't understand the meaning of college football as well as the rest of you. You need to call them and tell them what it's like to play college football, and what the goals of their team should be.

[OU_Sooners75]

Okay, now suppose you had played Div 1A (which is the division I thought we were talking about). There are no playoffs in Div 1A and there is no true national championship. So your goals 5 and 6 don't even apply. Yet the players at the Div 1A level still play the game.

So whatever goals Div 1A college football players have, the existing system must be capable of providing them.



Does the BCS anoint its winner "national champion"?

BTW, I'm not a self-proclaimed professor. I am an associate professor.

Werent you trying to blast or bash someone earlier on this thread for hypotheticals?

But to play along, since I do not mind.

5. Would to be to make the BCS Championship Game.
6. Would be to win the Crystal Ball.

#6 is what all the kids in D-1A wish for the chance to play and win!

Every week the goal is to win that game. But the ultimate goal is to be #1 at the end of the season. D-1A that happens to be obtained by playing in and winning the BCS Championship game.

[Collier11]

From the Orlando Sentinel:



Gee, it sounds like the coaches don't understand the meaning of college football as well as the rest of you. You need to call them and tell them what it's like to play college football, and what the goals of their team should be.

and we all know that Pac 10 and Big 10 coaches are just mouth pieces because their presidents despise going away from bowl games

[OU_Sooners75]

Nice article.

But when they say 73% of the coaches want to keep the BCS. How many of those coaches were from Mid-Major schools?

And Tressell in that article said it the best. "That's not to say we won't improve it. How it will improve over time we'll find out"

Tressell is one of the coaches that have benefitted from a **** poor conference and getting to play in the BCS championship 3 times.

Yeah he doesnt want to change it because he knows his teams will not get past the second round.

[Collier11]

and that 73% is skewed because coaches get pressure from their presidents, Stoops often said he wanted a playoff and then all of the sudden he changed his tune. Gotta go with your boss even when you dont agree. There was an article posted here about 2 years ago that said that well over 60 or 70% of coaches actually wanted a playoff when they were asked anonymously

[Leroy Lizard]

But when they say 73% of the coaches want to keep the BCS. How many of those coaches were from Mid-Major schools?


Doesn't matter. You said that the goal of college football teams was to prove they were the best, and that the current system does not allow it.

That 73% figure is a problem for you, because you tried to make it sound as if anyone that opposes a true national championship must not understand competitive sports and why players play the game.

[Leroy Lizard]

and that 73% is skewed because coaches get pressure from their presidents, Stoops often said he wanted a playoff and then all of the sudden he changed his tune. Gotta go with your boss even when you dont agree. There was an article posted here about 2 years ago that said that well over 60 or 70% of coaches actually wanted a playoff when they were asked anonymously

LOL! I love to see the stammering that takes place when playoff proponents have to face the facts.

But... but... uhhhh, college presidents probably make them say it. Yeah, that's it! And uhhhh, and some of those coaches are maybe from the Pac-10.

Ha, ha, ha! I love it!

I would highly suggest that the two of you get together through PM and try to come up with a good response.

This oughta' be good!

[Collier11]

LOL! I love to see the stammering that takes place when playoff proponents have to face the facts.

Dont be so naive and arrogant Leroy, facts are facts, face them

But... but... uhhhh, college presidents probably make them say it. Yeah, that's it! And uhhhh, and some of those coaches are maybe from the Pac-10.

Ha, ha, ha! I love it!

I would highly suggest that the two of you get together through PM and try to come up with a good response.

This oughta' be good!

So explain why such a high number of coaches wanted a playoff 2-3 years ago and now all of the sudden they dont?

[Leroy Lizard]

"Terrence Cody, the Alabama nose guard, was asked by the Associated Press about a playoff earlier in the week. His reply was as follows:

"That's stupid. I don't think there should be any playoff. Why should there be a playoff?"

I guess Terrence Cody just doesn't have enough experience playing college football to understand what true competition is all about. You can tell him, can't you?


So explain why such a high number of coaches wanted a playoff 2-3 years ago and now all of the sudden they dont?

They came to their senses? (Besides, you haven't shown any evidence that these coaches really wanted a playoff 2-3 years ago.)


Dont be so naive and arrogant Leroy, facts are facts, face them

Unlike me, you didn't present any facts. All you presented was a rationalization built on nothing but conjecture. What next? Aliens sent messages into their brains causing them to become anti-playoff?

[Collier11]

Actually there are polls that show that a majority of players want a playoff as well, so quoting one prominent player does nothing for me.

As for the poll about coaches, it is on this board somewhere, look it up. I know it isnt just made up so I dont care if you believe it or not

[Collier11]

This story tells the true story, cus we all know its about the student athletes, pfffttt

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ed-berliner/scream-all-you-want-for-a_b_440470.html

[Collier11]

I guess this guy doesnt know anything about what is good for football

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3408761

[OU_Sooners75]

LOL! I love to see the stammering that takes place when playoff proponents have to face the facts.

But... but... uhhhh, college presidents probably make them say it. Yeah, that's it! And uhhhh, and some of those coaches are maybe from the Pac-10.

Ha, ha, ha! I love it!

I would highly suggest that the two of you get together through PM and try to come up with a good response.

This oughta' be good!

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2010-01-13-ncaa-finances_N.htm


"This has to be decided by our (school) presidents," he said, "but I think the presidents have been pretty clear about the football playoff. And that is that it's a direction we're not going to go."

hmmmm....dont think they are backing what their bosses are telling them? Think again.

Legendary coach, a coach in the NCAA for over 50 years pro-playoffs:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3408761

Leach, Brown, Carroll, among others in favor of a Playoff:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/article/116968

There are others that are for the playoffs, and Stoops himself is for a playoff. However, since Boren is against it, Stoops has since recanted his pro-playoff stance and pretty much will not talk about it anymore.

[Collier11]

The fact that Leroy thinks it is funny that coaches would bow to their Presidents is laughable

[Leroy Lizard]

Too bad Paterno is in the minority. THE MINORITY!

How can that possibly be? I thought it was sooooo obvious to anyone that played college football that we need a playoff system.

I guess 73% of the college coaches in this country just don't understand. (Yeah, right.)

[Collier11]

Too bad Paterno is in the minority. THE MINORITY!

How can that possibly be? I thought it was sooooo obvious to anyone that played college football that we need a playoff system.


First of all I never said this although the majority of players do want a playoff ^

I guess 73% of the college coaches in this country just don't understand. (Yeah, right.)

Again, if you believe this you are just being ignorant for ignorance sake

[Leroy Lizard]

First of all I never said this although the majority of players do want a playoff ^

I see a lot of links, but not a lot of substance. One link you provided is nothing more than an editorial. Another is from an economist. And while it is nice that you found some coaches who agreed with you, we already knew that 27% did. It's the 73% that is the problem for you.

[Collier11]

Silly azz, goofy rabbit

[OU_Sooners75]

Too bad Paterno is in the minority. THE MINORITY!

How can that possibly be? I thought it was sooooo obvious to anyone that played college football that we need a playoff system.

I guess 73% of the college coaches in this country just don't understand. (Yeah, right.)


First of all, since you want to be condescending ******* once again. No one has stated that the majority of coaches want a playoff.

Now then, It is SOOOOOOOOOOO obvious that we need a playoff system. Something that will create a true national champion.

And that 73%, I wonder how many just go along with something that they have absolutely NO CONTROL over? Meaning the presidents and ADs, you know those coaches bosses, are the ones that get to vote if there is a playoff or not.

Coaches have very little pull or say when it comes to this matter.

[OU_Sooners75]

I see a lot of links, but not a lot of substance. One link you provided is nothing more than an editorial. Another is from an economist. And while it is nice that you found some coaches who agreed with you, we already knew that 27% did. It's the 73% that is the problem for you.


That is because you are so ****ing bullheaded that it wears thin on people.

Why not actually read something that differs from your opinion?

Why not actually do something worth while?

You know what influences the decision making the most at the NCAA?

Wallets of fans! Without the fans and their wallets, the NCAA would be nothing.

http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2009-12-29/poll-americans-favor-college-football-playoff

But HEY...lets discredit those that make that money for the colleges and the NCAA!

[Collier11]

Leroy is probably the same guy that takes that tuition money and book money to line his pockets then fails a student if they miss class more than 3 times. Some people just dont get it

[Leroy Lizard]

First of all, since you want to be condescending ******* once again. No one has stated that the majority of coaches want a playoff.

Now then, It is SOOOOOOOOOOO obvious that we need a playoff system. Something that will create a true national champion.

You're the one that made these grandiose claims about what competition is all about. Well, almost all of these coaches are former players, yet they obviously didn't play on the same team you played on.


And that 73%, I wonder how many just go along with something that they have absolutely NO CONTROL over? Meaning the presidents and ADs, you know those coaches bosses, are the ones that get to vote if there is a playoff or not.

You're reaching. If the coaches really want a playoff, the last thing they would want to do is vote against one.

You can try all you like, but the 73% figure is not going to go away.

Let me give you an example of how your arguments are going. You dismissed Tressel's viewpoint because he obviously benefited from the current system. His statement doesn't mean anything.

But then, one of you provides a link to Paterno's pro-playoff stance. More than anyone in the country, Paterno thinks that his teams have been denied national championships that they deserve.

Both Tressel and Paterno have reasons for their claims, but Tressel's views are cast aside by the playoff proponents while Paterno's are held as true evidence for the need of a playoff. And that is what we call bias.

[Leroy Lizard]

That is because you are so ****ing bullheaded that it wears thin on people.

Why not actually read something that differs from your opinion?

Why not actually do something worth while?

You know what influences the decision making the most at the NCAA?

Wallets of fans! Without the fans and their wallets, the NCAA would be nothing.

Gee, could you make your diversion any more obvious? ("Nice weather we are having, isn't it?")

If you don't want to discuss the fact that the majority of college coaches agree with me, just say so.


Leroy is probably the same guy that takes that tuition money and book money to line his pockets then fails a student if they miss class more than 3 times.

Ye olde ad hominem swan song. When all else fails, complain about his teaching.

[OU_Sooners75]

You're the one that made these grandiose claims about what competition is all about. Well, almost all of these coaches are former players, yet they obviously didn't play on the same team you played on.



You're reaching. If the coaches really want a playoff, the last thing they would want to do is vote against one.

You can try all you like, but the 73% figure is not going to go away.

Let me give you an example of how your arguments are going. You dismissed Tressel's viewpoint because he obviously benefited from the current system. His statement doesn't mean anything.

But then, one of you provides a link to Paterno's pro-playoff stance. More than anyone in the country, Paterno thinks that his teams have been denied national championships that they deserve.

Both Tressel and Paterno have reasons for their claims, but Tressel's views are cast aside by the playoff proponents while Paterno's are held as true evidence for the need of a playoff. And that is what we call bias.


For a Professor, you sure are phucking stupid!

Competition is about being the best, period!

And competitors want to be the best in the nation, world, or whatever. They want to be #1!

Seeing as the sport of football is a team sport, and we are talking about college football, particularly D-1A football, every team sets out to finish the season #1.

That does not change if there is a crappy BCS system or a playoff, or neither.

Stop being such a phucking dousher and come back to reality, Mr. Professor.

And by all means, stop trying to be a troll.

If you cannot try to carry a civil conversation, meaning stop with the condescending attitude, then I guess this place will get boring considering I am damn close to putting you on ignore.

[OU_Sooners75]

Gee, could you make your diversion any more obvious? ("Nice weather we are having, isn't it?")

If you don't want to discuss the fact that the majority of college coaches agree with me, just say so.



Ye olde ad hominem swan song. When all else fails, complain about his teaching.


And yet, you fill the need to omit the fact that I produced.

Most college coaches will go along with their bosses decisions. They may not like it, and it may not be their own, but they go along with it.

But lets not click on that link, or read that article.

Great job, Mr. Professor!

[OU_Sooners75]

Leroy is probably the same guy that takes that tuition money and book money to line his pockets then fails a student if they miss class more than 3 times. Some people just dont get it


I am beginning to think he has pulled one over on us.

There is no way in hell a professor is as stupid as he is!

[Leroy Lizard]

For a Professor, you sure are phucking stupid!

Competition is about being the best, period!

[later on]


Stop being such a phucking ******r and come back to reality, Mr. Professor.

And by all means, stop trying to be a troll.

Now, get ready for this.


If you cannot try to carry a civil conversation,...

Oh, I love the Internet.

BTW, it's Dr. Professor to you, pal. :D

[Leroy Lizard]

And yet, you fill the need to omit the fact that I produced.

Most college coaches will go along with their bosses decisions. They may not like it, and it may not be their own, but they go along with it.

But lets not click on that link, or read that article.

Great job, Mr. Professor!

Which article are you talking about? Mostly what I saw were mere editorials. Do you have a quote you can pull?

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm turning in.

Since name calling factors so heavily into your debate tactics, I have provided a direct link to an online thesaurus entry for "stupid." Try to use a different word from time to time.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/stupid

[OU_Sooners75]

Which article are you talking about? Mostly what I saw were mere editorials. Do you have a quote you can pull?


I already did quote it.

But thanks for actually proving my suspicions, that you do not actually read the entire posts of people.

go back and read...maybe you will find it!

[OU_Sooners75]

Here Ill be nice.



Jim Isch, the NCAA's interim president, called Zimbalist's plan "a stretch (plan about a playoff)."

"This has to be decided by our (school) presidents," he said, "but I think the presidents have been pretty clear about the football playoff. And that is that it's a direction we're not going to go."This article talks about different things, but mainly how D-1A would better benefit from a playoff financially speaking.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2010-01-13-ncaa-finances_N.htm

Leading into these two paragraphs, they talk about your article:


The BCS figures to distribute about $150 million in revenues this year to all 11 FBS conferences — the bulk to the marquee Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pacific 10 and Southeastern — plus a handful of independents and a half-dozen leagues in the NCAA's lower championship subdivision.


Major-college football coaches also largely stand by the BCS. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of those responding to a recent survey by the American Football Coaches Association (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Sports+Leagues/NCAA/American+Football+Coaches+Association) said they favor the current system.

[OU_Sooners75]

I'm turning in.

Since name calling factors so heavily into your debate tactics, I have provided a direct link to an online thesaurus entry for "stupid." Try to use a different word from time to time.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/stupid


No need in using a new word if it is so fitting.

No run along Mr. Professor.

[OU_Sooners75]

Now, get ready for this.



Oh, I love the Internet.

BTW, it's Dr. Professor to you, pal. :D


Actually, didnt you say you were a mere Teacher or associate Professor?

Nice try though.

Mr. Professor!

[Leroy Lizard]

Here Ill be nice.

Quote:
Jim Isch, the NCAA's interim president, called Zimbalist's plan "a stretch (plan about a playoff)."

"This has to be decided by our (school) presidents," he said, "but I think the presidents have been pretty clear about the football playoff. And that is that it's a direction we're not going to go."

Okay, so college presidents are against a playoff, which we already knew and I had stated many times in other threads.

So far, so good.


This article talks about different things, but mainly how D-1A would better benefit from a playoff financially speaking.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...finances_N.htm

I don't think anyone knows for sure about the finances. But we're not even arguing that point. Regardless, that article is worthless because it provides no clue as to how Zimbalist arrived at his figures. It isn't even clear if Zimbalist is using four, eight, or sixteen teams as the playoff scheme. To go one step further, Zimbalist' plan to save college football involves more than a playoff; it also includes slashing coach's salaries and limiting scholarships to 60 per team.


The BCS figures to distribute about $150 million in revenues this year to all 11 FBS conferences — the bulk to the marquee Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pacific 10 and Southeastern — plus a handful of independents and a half-dozen leagues in the NCAA's lower championship subdivision.

Major-college football coaches also largely stand by the BCS. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of those responding to a recent survey by the American Football Coaches Association said they favor the current system.

Okay, so college presidents are against a playoff, and so are college coaches.

Gee, my position is looking pretty good.

[OU_Sooners75]

Okay, so college presidents are against a playoff, which we already knew and I had stated many times in other threads.

So far, so good.



I don't think anyone knows for sure about the finances. But we're not even arguing that point. Regardless, that article is worthless because it provides no clue as to how Zimbalist arrived at his figures. It isn't even clear if Zimbalist is using four, eight, or sixteen teams as the playoff scheme. To go one step further, Zimbalist' plan to save college football involves more than a playoff; it also includes slashing coach's salaries and limiting scholarships to 60 per team.



Okay, so college presidents are against a playoff, and so are college coaches.

Gee, my position is looking pretty good.

And in the mean time, no one has actually disagreed with you.

My post shows that coaches tend to follow what their bosses think. Maybe if you took the time and read it entirely, you would understand the point of my post. Also, if you would stop snipping bits and pieces from posts to try to make yourself look good, people would probably respect you a little more.

Run along son, run along!

[olevetonahill]

Tim , Why ya wanta keep arguing with the Fence post ?

All yer doing and all the others are doing is entertaining Lid :confused:

[OU_Sooners75]

Tim , Why ya wanta keep arguing with the Fence post ?

All yer doing and all the others are doing is entertaining Lid :confused:


Its fun! :P

Love how Liztard has taken this thread and turned it away from its original post.

I just play my part in all of this. That is all. :pop:

[olevetonahill]

Its fun! :P

Love how Liztard has taken this thread and turned it away from its original post.

I just play my part in all of this. That is all. :pop:

While that :texan: LHAO at being able to get Sooners to argue. **** him.:rolleyes:

[OU_Sooners75]

While that :texan: LHAO at being able to get Sooners to argue. **** him.:rolleyes:


You actually think Liztard is a Sooner?

[Leroy Lizard]

My post shows that coaches tend to follow what their bosses think.

In other words, they both agree with me.

Spin it however you wish, they polled the coaches, and they agree with me.

So do the college presidents.

Oh, check this article out:

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2008/05/05/cfb_what_now.ART_ART_05-05-08_C1_7TA45I3.html



Ohio State president E. Gordon Gee calls the issue of a college football playoff his Maginot Line -- a final, heels-in-the-dirt resistance to what he views as the ruination of the sport.

The reference is to the line of fortifications France built on its border with Germany in the 1930s.

"We will not cross that line and get onto the slippery slope -- the professional-ization of college football and a furthering of the arms race," he said. "We simply have to say no. If we don't say no to this, the horse has left the barn totally. I will vote against it under any circumstance."

If people get upset with Gee for that, he is only vocalizing the dominant opinion of those within the system. It's not just one man who is opposed to a playoff: It's almost everyone associated with the game, from his fellow presidents on down to coaches, athletic directors and conference commissioners.

Last week, Bowl Championship Series commissioners breezily dismissed a four-team playoff proposal almost before it was proposed.

It sounds hard-hearted for Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany to say the pressure for a playoff system is coming only from "external forces."

In this case, "external forces" represent the millions of fans who pine for a more definitive way of deciding the nation's best team.

But after listening to Delany, Gee, Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith and OSU football coach Jim Tressel, it's clear a playoff system is not going to happen any time soon. The vast majority of people who run college football like the way it's working. They like the bowl revenue, they like the television revenue and they like the pageantry and tradition. They don't buy the notion that there is a crying need for an overhaul.

In their view, things are humming along smoothly.

Not only are the movers and shakers not looking to dismantle the bowl system, they added two bowls the other day. Last year, 1.6 million people attended bowl games, and conferences and bowl teams split $222 million.

Add that up, and it equals zero momentum for a playoff.

"I just can't think of anything that jumps out at me that says, 'Well, you have to do this,' " Tressel said of going to a playoff. "I don't know what that is. And there's a whole boatload of things about it that you can say, 'I don't know if you can do this.' "

In some ways, Ohio State is a perfect microcosm of why playoffs remain a pipe dream. As one of the biggest and richest athletic departments, it would stand to gain a lot by the influx of additional money that certainly would come from a playoff system. OSU officials, therefore, should be in favor of it.

And as Tressel pointed out, he has no reason to oppose a playoff on philosophical grounds, having won four national championships in a best-of-16 playoff system at Youngstown State.

"I wouldn't be (at OSU) today if it weren't for playoffs," he said.

Gee has proved he's not afraid to be a maverick, to blow up a system he views as broken. Look at his radical restructuring of the athletic department when he was chancellor at Vanderbilt.

So a case can be made that Tressel and Gee might be more open than most to the playoff possibilities.

Instead, they shoot down the idea, for the following reasons:

* Adding more games is bad for the players' welfare, particularly those who plan to try their hand at pro football.

* Shortening the regular season to make room for playoff games in December won't work, because schools need all the home-game revenue they can get.

* You can't ask fans to travel to neutral-site playoff games two or three weeks in a row.

* If you have home-site playoff hosts, you crush the bowl system. And bowls are worth preserving.

"The bowls are around the holidays," Tressel said, "and the communities and the travel and the tourism, and the 6-5 team that finally got bowl eligible. . . . "

And that leads to the final reason for the opposition to a playoff system, perhaps the one most galling to fans:

They don't see the necessity to clear up the "Who's really the best team?" debate that seems to pop up annually.


"I don't buy this notion of a 'winner take all' mentality," Gee said. "I'm very old fashioned, I'd rather go back to the old bowl system we had. It was lovely."

Tressel said he heard a radio talk-show host recently say the world has changed, and the only thing that's important is being No. 1.

"I don't know if I want to add to that change, because I don't know that that's a healthy change," Tressel said.

In the bowl system, outside of the title game there are 31 (soon to be 33) winners. Four of those are winners of BCS bowls. Those all are worthy outcomes to a season, in Tressel's view.

Maybe Gee's Maginot Line reference offers some hope to playoff proponents: The Germans outflanked it, and France fell in six weeks.

For now, though, Gee and his cohorts are snug in their bunkers.

Evidently, I'm not the only one that thinks your arguments are crap.

[olevetonahill]

You actually think Liztard is a Sooner?

I think hes about as Much Sooner as he is a Prof.:rolleyes:

[Leroy Lizard]

You actually think Liztard is a Sooner?

Oh, so now we are questioning my fan loyalty. What next in the old bag of tricks?

You already called me names, and that didn't work. Then you cried about me being condescending... no dice. One of you tried the old "Youre mean to your students" argument.

Hmmm... you haven't complained yet about my posting too many times in a week. That is usually a good one to try out once in awhile.

[olevetonahill]

Hey Leapin gecko. It mite help if when ya quote someone ya include their name.
jes sayin

[Leroy Lizard]

Drats! I forgot all about the "complain about the way I post" argument.

[OU_Sooners75]

Oh, so now we are questioning my fan loyalty. What next in the old bag of tricks?

You already called me names, and that didn't work. Then you cried about me being condescending... no dice. One of you tried the old "Youre mean to your students" argument.

Hmmm... you haven't complained yet about my posting too many times in a week. That is usually a good one to try out once in awhile.


You know, I only question those tools that think they know it all.

I wouldnt say anything like, "You're mean to your students," because I honestly doubt you are a Professor, let alone a teacher!

Look dude, I could careless who you are or what you do. But if you are going to set yourself up as the village idiot, at least be willing to live with the title.

Have a great one, Mr. Professor.

[Leroy Lizard]

Questioning whether I am actually a teacher... that has been used before. But it has been awhile.


I wouldnt say anything like, "You're mean to your students," because I honestly doubt you are a Professor, let alone a teacher!

And I doubt you have played a down of college football, at any level.

Two can play at that game.

On second thought... naaaaah! I don't want to stoop to that level. You say you played the game; I believe you.

[OU_Sooners75]

Questioning whether I am actually a teacher... that has been used before. But it has been awhile.



And I doubt you have played a down of college football, at any level.

Two can play at that game.

On second thought... naaaaah! I don't want to stoop to that level. You say you played the game; I believe you.


See this is where you and I differ.

I do not care if some fictional dill weed believes me or not.

[Leroy Lizard]

I love this quote:


They don't see the necessity to clear up the "Who's really the best team?" debate that seems to pop up annually.

[OU_Sooners75]

One question for you Leroy. Please answer this honestly.

Is Football a competitive sport?

[Leroy Lizard]

Absolutely.

[OU_Sooners75]

Do you understand what competition is about? If So, could you give me your definition?

The reason I ask this is because I, not trying to harass you or anything, just want try to prove my point.

[Leroy Lizard]

If you're going to try and pull off the "ask questions to lead the responder to an illogical conclusion" method it will not work.

[olevetonahill]

Drats! I forgot all about the "complain about the way I post" argument.

I dont really care how ya post cause usually I just Iggy ya.
I was jes sayin If ya gonna quote someone it mite help.

[Leroy Lizard]

You interrupted our conversation to tell me that? :D

[OU_Sooners75]

If you're going to try and pull off the "ask questions to lead the responder to an illogical conclusion" method it will not work.

Not at all.

I want to know what your definition of "competition" is.

[Leroy Lizard]

Here's one definition I found on the web: an event in which a winner is selected between two contestants

I guess that will do for now. I may go back and modify it if I find it lacking.

[olevetonahill]

Oh And I'm sure yer a teacher, Of what i dont know. But you led everyone here to believe you were a Prof. which you finally admited that you wernt .

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm not sure why I should bother to ask, but what the Hell are you talking about?

[OU_Sooners75]

Here's one definition I found on the web: an event in which a winner is selected between two contestants

I guess that will do for now. I may go back and modify it if I find it lacking.


So apparently you have to find a definition of competition online? You cannot form one of your own?

Fine. We will use yours, even though it is omitting parts of the actual definition.

Competition (and this is off the top of my head) is between two people or groups that compete against each other to find out who is the better in a sport or even nature.

Competition occurs naturally.

It does not stop with one game. In organized sports leagues, that competition does not stop until the season is over. Therefore, why would one person or team stop after just one game? The idea is to find out which is the best, not just in one game at a time, but in that entire league.

And if any person believes otherwise has not really participated in organized competition (or sport).

[Leroy Lizard]

So apparently you have to find a definition of competition online? You cannot form one of your own?

It's easier to look it up online. But thanks for asking.


Fine. We will use yours, even though it is omitting parts of the actual definition.

Competition (and this is off the top of my head) is between two people or groups that compete against each other to find out who is the better in a sport or even nature.

You said you will use mine, but then you proceed to use yours.

I feel cheated.

[olevetonahill]

You interrupted our conversation to tell me that? :D

Naw I just like to dik wit ya :D

[OU_Sooners75]

NCAA D-1A College Football, which is a league is no different.

So why even have a system in place that does not produce a true definition of the best?

[olevetonahill]

Let me guess LL ya teach "Debate" ?

I've got a friend who used to work as a DJ at a radio Station.
They had a call in show , What ever the topic was He had to debate the opposite side of the 1st caller.
Dint matter what he thot .

Is yer Real name Al?

[Leroy Lizard]

NCAA D-1A College Football, which is a league is no different.

So why even have a system in place that does not produce a true definition of the best?

What happened to my definition of competition?

[OU_Sooners75]

It's easier to look it up online. But thanks for asking.



You said you will use mine, but then you proceed to use yours.

I feel cheated.


We did use yours....to show how you like to omit things.

I dont know. I am through with this conversation because, like everything else you post in, it is going in circles.

You are too dense to see other perspectives. And you are too self-absorbed that you pick and choose what you want to read and reply to instead of replying to the entire statements.

It seems that your perception of reality is, well, gone.


Oh well. Have fun entertaining yourself.

[Leroy Lizard]

I've got a friend who used to work as a DJ at a radio Station.
They had a call in show , What ever the topic was He had to debate the opposite side of the 1st caller.
Dint matter what he thot .

Is yer Real name Al?

As in Al Eschbach? You're kidding me, right?

So what's this I hear about my admitting I wasn't a prof? I still haven't figured that one out.

[olevetonahill]

I'm not sure why I should bother to ask, but what the Hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure why I should bother to ask,but who the Hell are you talking to?

[olevetonahill]

As in Al Eschbach? You're kidding me, right?

So what's this I hear about my admitting I wasn't a prof? I still haven't figured that one out.

Ya said ya was an associate er sompun.

Not a Full bore

well ya are kinda a boor

[OU_Sooners75]

What happened to my definition of competition?


Your definition, which was not your own....stated just a fragment of the true definition.


Competition is a contest between individuals, groups, nations, animals, etc. for territory, a niche, or a location of resources... It arises whenever two or more parties strive for a goal which cannot be shared.


While some sports (such as fishing or hiking) have been viewed as primarily recreational, most sports are considered competitive. The majority involve competition between two or more persons (or animals and/or mechanical devices typically controlled by humans, as in horse racing or auto racing). For example, in a game of basketball, two teams compete against one another to determine who can score the most points. While there is no set reward for the winning team, many players gain an internal sense of pride. In addition, extrinsic rewards may also be given. Athletes, besides competing against other humans, also compete against nature in sports such as whitewater kayaking or mountaineering, where the goal is to reach a destination, with only natural barriers impeding the process. A regularly scheduled (for instance annual) competition meant to determine the "best" competitor of that cycle is called a championship.



Championship is a term used in sport to refer to various forms of competition in which the aim is to decide which individual or team is the champion.


A champion (identical to the French, from the late Latin campio) is the victor in a challenge or contest.
More broadly, and particularly in American English, a champion is one who has repeatedly come out first among contestants in challenges (especially the winner of a tournament) or other test, one who is outstandingly skilled in their field.

I added the rest past competition in hopes you will understand where my point of view lies.

[Leroy Lizard]

We did use yours....to show how you like to omit things.

You asked for my definition, and I gave it to you. You said you would use it, but then immediately switched to your definition. Then, when I asked what happened to my definition, you mumble something about "omitting things."

(I wonder if he realizes yet what I did to his attempt to corner me logically. I don't think he's caught on.)

Okay, I gotta' let him in on it...

Sooners75, I saw immediately your tactic and threw a monkey wrench in it by using a definition of competition that referred to a single event, not competition in general.

I had you so fouled up that for a few minutes there I was wondering if you were going to respond at all.

Oh man, that was funny.

I tried to warn you.

And now let the insults fly...


You are too dense to see other perspectives. And you are too self-absorbed that you pick and choose what you want to read and reply to instead of replying to the entire statements.

It seems that your perception of reality is, well, gone.

Oh well. Have fun entertaining yourself.

:D

[Leroy Lizard]

Ya said ya was an associate er sompun.

prof (someone who is a member of the faculty at a college or university)

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=prof

When capitalized, the word Professor refers to a title. The word prof is slang for any member of a college faculty. I am a prof.

[OU_Sooners75]

My wording was incorrect and imprecise.

What I mean when I said we will use yours, is that it will have to do as your definition.

Apologies for any mix up.

And as far as insults, Insults are innuendos and false.

That said, not really insulting you when it is truthful. ;)

[OU_Sooners75]

prof (someone who is a member of the faculty at a college or university)

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=prof

When capitalized, the word Professor refers to a title. The word prof is slang for any member of a college faculty. I am a prof.


That is not what you said. Or at least presented it.

You said you were a prof. Then you recanted and stated you were an Associate professor/teacher.

Which is it?

[Leroy Lizard]

BTW, Sooners75, I am more than willing to talk about competition if you wish. Just don't try to pull that Socratic crap on me. I can sniff it out a mile away and I will not be taken in by it.

So if you want a serious discussion about competition, consider the following:

Anyone that saw Arizona celebrate their Copper Bowl win two years ago will see that winning that national championship is not all there is to college football. The fans rushed the field, yet the team didn't win the national championship.

If you can explain why the fans of Arizona would be so excited to win a game in which the national championship was not even at stake, you will go a long way towards understanding the role competition plays in college football.

[Leroy Lizard]

You said you were a prof. Then you recanted and stated you were an Associate professor/teacher.

Both. The terms are not mutually exclusive.

I can be an executive and President. I can also be a prof and an Associate Professor.

[olevetonahill]

Both. The terms are not mutually exclusive.

I can be an executive and President. I can also be a prof and a professional doosh.

:D

[Leroy Lizard]

Glad to make you smile, although you should do something about those cavities.

[olevetonahill]

At least I have enough teeth to have Plural Cavities, unlike yer one tooth mouth :P

[Leroy Lizard]

Have you been talking to my friends?

[olevetonahill]

Have you been talking to my friends?

You say that with a str8 face?:rolleyes:

[Leroy Lizard]

No, not really.

[TexasLidig8r]

Sweet Blue Jebus... hillbillies arguing with themselves and NOW. .breaking out the "one tooth" insults.

Before this thread got derailed, the point of the little exercise was to demonstrate that taking into account the realities of college football today, a playoff system that addresses the major issues of guaranteeing an increase in financial revenue, while at the same time, increasing the prestige and "name brand" of schools and universities all the while, not disrupting academic progress is problematic at best.

The true powers that be... the university presidents, chancellors, regents and the legislatures that appoint them, see the current system as workable.

[Leroy Lizard]

I would also add that implementing a small-scale system (four teams) to get around the problems is a rotten solution because fan disgruntlement will only worsen. If we adopt any playoff system at all, it will become a 16-team playoff. And then the regular season will nosedive.

That is why I oppose all playoff ideas. Not for what the are, but for what they will become. Sometimes it pays to be a little farsighted.

[MeMyself&Me]

Sweet Blue Jebus... hillbillies arguing with themselves and NOW. .breaking out the "one tooth" insults.

Before this thread got derailed, the point of the little exercise was to demonstrate that taking into account the realities of college football today, a playoff system that addresses the major issues of guaranteeing an increase in financial revenue, while at the same time, increasing the prestige and "name brand" of schools and universities all the while, not disrupting academic progress is problematic at best.

The true powers that be... the university presidents, chancellors, regents and the legislatures that appoint them, see the current system as workable.

And this is why I keep saying that if the government comes in and forces its hand on the BCS, all that's going to happen is a fall back to the days of just independent bowl games. Most of the decision makers would rather 'allow' that to happen than create a playoff.

If you're a playoff proponent, that's the last thing you want to happen. The BCS pushes you closer to a playoff than not having it at all.

[Leroy Lizard]

Or the government will create its own playoff idea and force all the schools to adopt it, regardless of its merit. And there are playoff proponents that want a playoff no matter much trouble it causes, because to them a university only exists to provide sports entertainment.