BCS. Why didn't they just do 1v4 and 2v3 and have a Final Championship game?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
76
Originally posted by: SammySon
IF IF IF...
people, the system worked the way it was setup to work.
Just get over it.

The system was supposed to avoid the possibility of having TWO teams that can claim they are national champions.

It hasn't worked yet.
 

gistech1978

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2002
5,047
0
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
and what about the fans?
i would say its alot harder on the fans?
do i not have a point there?
you cant reasonably expect your fan base to follow you around for 3 extra games to somewhere 2000 miles away every weekend.
I am from a state (Nebraska) where it is virtually impossible to get a ticket to a bowl game. There are just so many more fans than there are seats. With multiple games, there will finally be enough seats for all the fans that want to go. The same could be said about many of the historical powerhouse teams. I guess there are other teams (the up and coming teams) without that fan base and they will have some empty seats. But that is why the first playoff is in a minor bowl without many seats to begin with (and these are usually empty anyway on the bowl game as it is).

The diehard fan would try to go to as many as possible. Luckilly all will be on TV, so it isn't a big deal if the fan misses one.

A typical fan would go to the championship game (usually just a short drive), since that may be the team's last game of the year.Then there will be ~4 weeks until the national championship game. That fan can go to that too as a bonus if he/she chooses.

The less diehard fans can go any one of four games - whichever fits best in the work schedule, or is the closest, etc.

well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs.

Why are you assuming that only alumni would go to the games? A national semi-final/final would sell out in a heartbeat.

believe me, the alumni far outweighs the students in bowl games as it is.
they are ones with MONEY to travel across country. how many students do you know ( i sure as hell wasnt one of them) that could follow my team around in an RV or afford flights to here and there. there are students that can go, but they are also the ones having mommy and daddy buy their plane tickets and pay for their school and whatnot.
sorry, it cant work. there would have to be homefield for the top seeds for the first round.

 

Izzo

Senior member
May 30, 2003
714
0
0
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: Izzo
Teams are rewarded for losing early and penalized heavily for losing late.
That phrase always bothers me. It just simply isn't true. Case in point: 2003 - Oklahoma lost the last game of the year and is still #1 in the BCS. Example #2: Nebraska lost their last game of the year in 2001 and was #2 in the BCS. Both teams went to the national championship game. Losing late doesn't do any more harm than losing early.
It's a good thing the BCS system was in place for your two examples. Because if it relied on human polls (which was the target of the "penalized for losing late" statement), then those two teams would've be SOL. How else can you explain the fact that USC is ahead of LSU?

LSU is number 2 in the polls. They lost on October 11 to the No. 17 ranked Gators. They then rattled off quality wins against Alabama Mississippi, Arkansas, and No. 5 Georgia. The only close game was against a tough Mississippi team.

USC lost on Sept 27 to an average Cal team. The only ranked opponent they beat since is WSU.

OU lost to a strong, ranked KSU team. Previously, OU was unanimous No. 1. After that loss, 55 of the 63 Media voters and 63! out of the 65 AP writers dropped them from number 1. How in the world do they justify dropping them below USC?? Strength of Schedule? Nope, OU's is higher. Quality wins? Nope, OU has more. Better conference? ROFLMAO.

The only reason is the date they lost. It's simple, if you lose you drop. If you win you will not be passed by a lesser team.

Oklahoma and Nebraska should be thankful that the BCS has other factors besides the human polls.

BTW, if you could tell me what Nebraskas AP ranking was after the loss, I would appreciate it. Also, how many other undefeated, 1 loss or 2 loss teams that year.
 

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
76
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
and what about the fans?
i would say its alot harder on the fans?
do i not have a point there?
you cant reasonably expect your fan base to follow you around for 3 extra games to somewhere 2000 miles away every weekend.
I am from a state (Nebraska) where it is virtually impossible to get a ticket to a bowl game. There are just so many more fans than there are seats. With multiple games, there will finally be enough seats for all the fans that want to go. The same could be said about many of the historical powerhouse teams. I guess there are other teams (the up and coming teams) without that fan base and they will have some empty seats. But that is why the first playoff is in a minor bowl without many seats to begin with (and these are usually empty anyway on the bowl game as it is).

The diehard fan would try to go to as many as possible. Luckilly all will be on TV, so it isn't a big deal if the fan misses one.

A typical fan would go to the championship game (usually just a short drive), since that may be the team's last game of the year.Then there will be ~4 weeks until the national championship game. That fan can go to that too as a bonus if he/she chooses.

The less diehard fans can go any one of four games - whichever fits best in the work schedule, or is the closest, etc.

well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs.

Why are you assuming that only alumni would go to the games? A national semi-final/final would sell out in a heartbeat.

believe me, the alumni far outweighs the students in bowl games as it is.
they are ones with MONEY to travel across country. how many students do you know ( i sure as hell wasnt one of them) that could follow my team around in an RV or afford flights to here and there. there are students that can go, but they are also the ones having mommy and daddy buy their plane tickets and pay for their school and whatnot.
sorry, it cant work. there would have to be homefield for the top seeds for the first round.

Fine then, let there be homefield. That is how it is done in D 1-AA, II and III right?

And I wasn't referring to students. I was referring to the general public. The Super Bowl was here in Atlanta a few years ago. I am not a fan of the Rams or the Titans, but I went. You don't have to have a bunch of people travel across country to sell out a football game.
 

hdeck

Lifer
Sep 26, 2002
14,530
1
0
then it would cause controversy between the number 4 and 5 spots. no matter what, someone is going to get screwed over.
 

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
76
Originally posted by: hdeck
then it would cause controversy between the number 4 and 5 spots. no matter what, someone is going to get screwed over.

Actually, it would be #8 and #9. And I would feel a LOT better about leaving out #9 than #3, like we do now.

Teams get left out of the basketball tournament too.

Imagine if only the top 4 teams in college basketball got the chance to play for the national championship.
 

hdeck

Lifer
Sep 26, 2002
14,530
1
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: hdeck
then it would cause controversy between the number 4 and 5 spots. no matter what, someone is going to get screwed over.

Actually, it would be #8 and #9. And I would feel a LOT better about leaving out #9 than #3, like we do now.

Teams get left out of the basketball tournament too.

Imagine if only the top 4 teams in college basketball got the chance to play for the national championship.

i was just referring to his 1v3, 2v4 situation for the final game, where if you are #5 it's gotta suck to be you. but there does have to be some kind of playoff system implemented.
 

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
76
Originally posted by: hdeck
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: hdeck
then it would cause controversy between the number 4 and 5 spots. no matter what, someone is going to get screwed over.

Actually, it would be #8 and #9. And I would feel a LOT better about leaving out #9 than #3, like we do now.

Teams get left out of the basketball tournament too.

Imagine if only the top 4 teams in college basketball got the chance to play for the national championship.

i was just referring to his 1v3, 2v4 situation for the final game, where if you are #5 it's gotta suck to be you. but there does have to be some kind of playoff system implemented.

Gotcha. :D I thought you were referring to my posts about using the current BCS bowls as a platform for a playoff system.

:D
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: hdeck
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: hdeck
then it would cause controversy between the number 4 and 5 spots. no matter what, someone is going to get screwed over.

Actually, it would be #8 and #9. And I would feel a LOT better about leaving out #9 than #3, like we do now.

Teams get left out of the basketball tournament too.

Imagine if only the top 4 teams in college basketball got the chance to play for the national championship.

i was just referring to his 1v3, 2v4 situation for the final game, where if you are #5 it's gotta suck to be you. but there does have to be some kind of playoff system implemented.

Gotcha. :D I thought you were referring to my posts about using the current BCS bowls as a platform for a playoff system.

:D

there will always be a controversy, if we took in 100, then there would be the 100 vs 101 controversy. in the NCAA BBall tourney there is a 64 to 65 controversy every year, but how many people demand getting rid of the tourney because of that??
rolleye.gif


the point is, most of us could live with SOME kind of playoff. my idea works because it gives us SOME playoff indications without changing the status quo very much. even going 8 teams would increase the whole thing one week more than my idea would.
 

gistech1978

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2002
5,047
0
0
Originally posted by: hdeck
then it would cause controversy between the number 4 and 5 spots. no matter what, someone is going to get screwed over.

dude, its called life.
life isnt fair.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,133
3,536
126
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,133
3,536
126
Originally posted by: Izzo
It's a good thing the BCS system was in place for your two examples. Because if it relied on human polls (which was the target of the "penalized for losing late" statement), then those two teams would've be SOL. How else can you explain the fact that USC is ahead of LSU?

LSU is number 2 in the polls. They lost on October 11 to the No. 17 ranked Gators. They then rattled off quality wins against Alabama Mississippi, Arkansas, and No. 5 Georgia. The only close game was against a tough Mississippi team.

USC lost on Sept 27 to an average Cal team. The only ranked opponent they beat since is WSU.

OU lost to a strong, ranked KSU team. Previously, OU was unanimous No. 1. After that loss, 55 of the 63 Media voters and 63! out of the 65 AP writers dropped them from number 1. How in the world do they justify dropping them below USC?? Strength of Schedule? Nope, OU's is higher. Quality wins? Nope, OU has more. Better conference? ROFLMAO.

The only reason is the date they lost. It's simple, if you lose you drop. If you win you will not be passed by a lesser team.

Oklahoma and Nebraska should be thankful that the BCS has other factors besides the human polls.

BTW, if you could tell me what Nebraskas AP ranking was after the loss, I would appreciate it. Also, how many other undefeated, 1 loss or 2 loss teams that year.
LSU lost by 12, USC lost in tripple overtime. Oklahoma lost 35 to 7. Point margin has a major effect in the human polls. Getting absolutely blown away puts you behind the other 1 loss teams that barely lost that one game. If USC lost to Cal 35 to 7, I guarantee LSU would be #1 not #2. Date had nothing to do with it.
 

gistech1978

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2002
5,047
0
0
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?

lets talk ticketing now.
with no certainty of your team going to the next round...that would be a logistical nightmare for the athletic depts ticket offices.
that would have to be a massive effort getting 80,000 tickets distributed. doled out to the respective universities, the casual observers or whoever wanted to go the game.
im for playoffs, but...this isnt basketball where you have to deal with maybe 15,000 ppl at a game. it could be 100,000 ppl were a game held at the rosebowl. 100,000 tickets in a week. 20,000 a day. i dont know of a single ticket office that could handle demand like that.

EDIT: like i said, i dont disagree with you man on your ideas, im just being realistic here. you arent dealing with a perfect world, where it just falls into place without effort. this would be a major undertaking to do a complete overhaul.
 

Izzo

Senior member
May 30, 2003
714
0
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: Izzo
Originally posted by: amndouglas
When Michigan whoops the crap out of USC by taking out their deep ball with one of the best (and deepest) secondaries in the NCAA and gives them a good solid dose of Chris Perry, USC won't have any claim to #1 and this circus will all be over. Who did USC pay off to get to #1 in both polls anyway? USC lost to a barely over .500 team (7-6, 5-3 Cal) in the "weak" pac-10 conference, while LSU only lost to Florida (who beat Georgia and nearly beat Florida State.) Everyone's calling the BCS wrong, and I think it's the human polls that are f-ed up. The HOLLYWOOD HYPE MACHINE has too much power over the media. USC is mostly hollywood hype, and the Wolverines will prove it with Roses in Pasadena.

LOL. The hollywood hype machine and human polls are the only reason that Michigan is ranked number 4 in the first place. Let's say that UM beat Oregon and went into the OSU game and lost. Looking back that would seem like a good thing because it would throw out a loss to bad team and assign it to a good team. But that's not the case with the human polls. If you were to swap the Oregon loss with a OSU loss, UM would be no higher than 8th and that's a fact. Teams are rewarded for losing early and penalized heavily for losing late.

Uhm, OK. Which team with 2 losses is better than Michigan? And the last time I checked, it isn't just the human polls that have Michigan #4.

Where would you rank them?
I have no problem with them being number 4. But a lot of it has to do with where they were ranked at the beginning of the year ("hollywood hype machine") and the error in human polls due to losing late. The AP rankings for 2 loss teams are: UM, Texas, Tenn, OSU. UM lost on 10/04, Texas and Tenn lost on 10/11 and OSU lost on 11/22. That is not a coincidence. If UM had won that game vs. Iowa but lost a couple of weeks later, you would surely see a lower ranked UM team.

Besides, it wouldn't be unheard of to rank a team that UM beat, say OSU, ahead of them. It sounds stupid at first, but look at where FSU is in relation to Miami.
 

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
76
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?

lets talk ticketing now.
with no certainty of your team going to the next round...that would be a logistical nightmare for the athletic depts ticket offices.
that would have to be a massive effort getting 80,000 tickets distributed. doled out to the respective universities, the casual observers or whoever wanted to go the game.
im for playoffs, but...this isnt basketball where you have to deal with maybe 15,000 ppl at a game. it could be 100,000 ppl were a game held at the rosebowl. 100,000 tickets in a week. 20,000 a day. i dont know of a single ticket office that could handle demand like that.

How does the Super Bowl do it? They play the Super Bowl a week after the conference championship game.

Demand for those tickets begin the day a team gets into the playoffs (and even months before that), not the day they are in the Super Bowl.

How do conference championship games in college do it? Georgia didn't know they were going to be playing in the SEC championship game until 7 days before the game was played. There wasn't an unsold ticket for that game, and that dome holds more than 70K people.

You are looking at this in a very myopic way. It isn't just going to be people who live and went to Oklahoma that would buy tickets to a national semi-final/final tickets if OU was in an 8-team playoff.
 

C'DaleRider

Guest
Jan 13, 2000
3,048
0
0
I keep seeing people asying playoffs won't and can't work in college football. Yet, NCAA Div's I-AA, II, II all have playoffs for their nat'l championships......and there are LOTS of I-AA schools. Not every school in the country is I-A. And let's get serious about what big-time college football really is: just the minor leagues for the NFL. Most of the major colleges, notice I didn't say ALL of them because there are notable exceptions, but most have dismal graduation rates among players and even when they graduate, a good majority are not up to the level of their contemporaries they are "graduating" with.

I'd personally like to see the major bowls go back to being a reward for the conferences, like they used to be. We are seeing a Rose Bowl that unintentionally is a reflection of what the Rose Bowl used to be.
 

Izzo

Senior member
May 30, 2003
714
0
0
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: Izzo
edit for space
LSU lost by 12, USC lost in tripple overtime. Oklahoma lost 35 to 7. Point margin has a major effect in the human polls. Getting absolutely blown away puts you behind the other 1 loss teams that barely lost that one game. If USC lost to Cal 35 to 7, I guarantee LSU would be #1 not #2. Date had nothing to do with it.
Margin of victory/defeat does not account for OSU still receiving first place votes well into the season despite barely escaping 3 of its first 4 victories while OU mauled through it's opponents (see gistech's sig) and was not a unanimous pick until all other teams lost. How can you not agree with the fact that human polls show that if you lose, you drop and if you win you will not get leapfrogged? For every 3 examples where this is not the case, there are hundreds more that show it is.
 

gistech1978

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2002
5,047
0
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?

lets talk ticketing now.
with no certainty of your team going to the next round...that would be a logistical nightmare for the athletic depts ticket offices.
that would have to be a massive effort getting 80,000 tickets distributed. doled out to the respective universities, the casual observers or whoever wanted to go the game.
im for playoffs, but...this isnt basketball where you have to deal with maybe 15,000 ppl at a game. it could be 100,000 ppl were a game held at the rosebowl. 100,000 tickets in a week. 20,000 a day. i dont know of a single ticket office that could handle demand like that.

How does the Super Bowl do it? They play the Super Bowl a week after the conference championship game.

Demand for those tickets begin the day a team gets into the playoffs (and even months before that), not the day they are in the Super Bowl.

How do conference championship games in college do it? Georgia didn't know they were going to be playing in the SEC championship game until 7 days before the game was played. There wasn't an unsold ticket for that game, and that dome holds more than 70K people.

You are looking at this in a very myopic way. It isn't just going to be people who live and went to Oklahoma that would buy tickets to a national semi-final/final tickets if OU was in an 8-team playoff.

there are 2 weeks between the conf championship game and the SB in the NFL.
there were 2 weeks for the conf championship games, at least in the big 12. and in those cases they are known (not ALL the time) who's going or not going.
 

nitsuj3580

Platinum Member
Jun 13, 2001
2,667
13
81
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: Izzo
It's a good thing the BCS system was in place for your two examples. Because if it relied on human polls (which was the target of the "penalized for losing late" statement), then those two teams would've be SOL. How else can you explain the fact that USC is ahead of LSU?

LSU is number 2 in the polls. They lost on October 11 to the No. 17 ranked Gators. They then rattled off quality wins against Alabama Mississippi, Arkansas, and No. 5 Georgia. The only close game was against a tough Mississippi team.

USC lost on Sept 27 to an average Cal team. The only ranked opponent they beat since is WSU.

OU lost to a strong, ranked KSU team. Previously, OU was unanimous No. 1. After that loss, 55 of the 63 Media voters and 63! out of the 65 AP writers dropped them from number 1. How in the world do they justify dropping them below USC?? Strength of Schedule? Nope, OU's is higher. Quality wins? Nope, OU has more. Better conference? ROFLMAO.

The only reason is the date they lost. It's simple, if you lose you drop. If you win you will not be passed by a lesser team.

Oklahoma and Nebraska should be thankful that the BCS has other factors besides the human polls.

BTW, if you could tell me what Nebraskas AP ranking was after the loss, I would appreciate it. Also, how many other undefeated, 1 loss or 2 loss teams that year.
LSU lost by 12, USC lost in tripple overtime. Oklahoma lost 35 to 7. Point margin has a major effect in the human polls. Getting absolutely blown away puts you behind the other 1 loss teams that barely lost that one game. If USC lost to Cal 35 to 7, I guarantee LSU would be #1 not #2. Date had nothing to do with it.

OK, with that reasoning you're saying even if USC went into the game 11-0 and lost in triple overtime to Cal in the last game of the year to make their record 11-1 and Oklahoma lost 35-7 to KState earlier in the year to go maybe 1-1 then win the next 11 games to finish at their 12-1, USC would still be #1? If you really think that, you're just kidding yourself. Oklahoma would be the #1 team and USC would fall down to #3. Date matters big time.

Not to mention that Oklahoma was pretty much guaranteed to be in the BCS title game so a let down versus K State was inevitable IMHO. I know I predicted it but yet, they still went down in the polls.
 

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
76
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?

lets talk ticketing now.
with no certainty of your team going to the next round...that would be a logistical nightmare for the athletic depts ticket offices.
that would have to be a massive effort getting 80,000 tickets distributed. doled out to the respective universities, the casual observers or whoever wanted to go the game.
im for playoffs, but...this isnt basketball where you have to deal with maybe 15,000 ppl at a game. it could be 100,000 ppl were a game held at the rosebowl. 100,000 tickets in a week. 20,000 a day. i dont know of a single ticket office that could handle demand like that.

How does the Super Bowl do it? They play the Super Bowl a week after the conference championship game.

Demand for those tickets begin the day a team gets into the playoffs (and even months before that), not the day they are in the Super Bowl.

How do conference championship games in college do it? Georgia didn't know they were going to be playing in the SEC championship game until 7 days before the game was played. There wasn't an unsold ticket for that game, and that dome holds more than 70K people.

You are looking at this in a very myopic way. It isn't just going to be people who live and went to Oklahoma that would buy tickets to a national semi-final/final tickets if OU was in an 8-team playoff.

there are 2 weeks between the conf championship game and the SB in the NFL.
there were 2 weeks for the conf championship games, at least in the big 12. and in those cases they are known (not ALL the time) who's going or not going.

There are NOT two weeks between the conference championships and the Super Bowl. There USED to be, but not anymore.

There are times when people don't know who will be playing in a conference championship game until 7 days before it is played. It happens. It happened this year. Tickets are still sold. People still go to the game. People still watch on TV and advertisers still pay networks. Money is still made everywhere.
 

gistech1978

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2002
5,047
0
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?

lets talk ticketing now.
with no certainty of your team going to the next round...that would be a logistical nightmare for the athletic depts ticket offices.
that would have to be a massive effort getting 80,000 tickets distributed. doled out to the respective universities, the casual observers or whoever wanted to go the game.
im for playoffs, but...this isnt basketball where you have to deal with maybe 15,000 ppl at a game. it could be 100,000 ppl were a game held at the rosebowl. 100,000 tickets in a week. 20,000 a day. i dont know of a single ticket office that could handle demand like that.

How does the Super Bowl do it? They play the Super Bowl a week after the conference championship game.

Demand for those tickets begin the day a team gets into the playoffs (and even months before that), not the day they are in the Super Bowl.

How do conference championship games in college do it? Georgia didn't know they were going to be playing in the SEC championship game until 7 days before the game was played. There wasn't an unsold ticket for that game, and that dome holds more than 70K people.

You are looking at this in a very myopic way. It isn't just going to be people who live and went to Oklahoma that would buy tickets to a national semi-final/final tickets if OU was in an 8-team playoff.

there are 2 weeks between the conf championship game and the SB in the NFL.
there were 2 weeks for the conf championship games, at least in the big 12. and in those cases they are known (not ALL the time) who's going or not going.

There are NOT two weeks between the conference championships and the Super Bowl. There USED to be, but not anymore.

There are times when people don't know who will be playing in a conference championship game until 7 days before it is played. It happens. It happened this year. Tickets are still sold. People still go to the game. People still watch on TV and advertisers still pay networks. Money is still made everywhere.

okay, you are right
i stand corrected. sorry about that.
last year it was one week...i thought the only year they did that was in 2001 b/c of 9-11.
when did they change that?
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: gistech1978
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: gistech1978
well thats all good in theory.
but thats not real life.
say i wanted to go to new orleans this year. i would easily drop 700-1000 bucks minimum when its all said and done. those 'diehard' fans better be some rich alumni without jobs. and those same 'diehards' wouldnt ever want to miss a game if their team is playing, who cares if its on TV. im sure there are people in nebraska that havent missed a NU game in 30 years, are you going to be the one to tell them...oh just watch on TV.
You talk about fans which haven't missed a game in years. That would mean they go to all the games, home and away. Those fans are therefore travelling away every other week anyways during the regular season - what is a couple more trips during the offseason?

Or are you ignoring the away games - which those fans watch on TV?

lets talk ticketing now.
with no certainty of your team going to the next round...that would be a logistical nightmare for the athletic depts ticket offices.
that would have to be a massive effort getting 80,000 tickets distributed. doled out to the respective universities, the casual observers or whoever wanted to go the game.
im for playoffs, but...this isnt basketball where you have to deal with maybe 15,000 ppl at a game. it could be 100,000 ppl were a game held at the rosebowl. 100,000 tickets in a week. 20,000 a day. i dont know of a single ticket office that could handle demand like that.

How does the Super Bowl do it? They play the Super Bowl a week after the conference championship game.

Demand for those tickets begin the day a team gets into the playoffs (and even months before that), not the day they are in the Super Bowl.

How do conference championship games in college do it? Georgia didn't know they were going to be playing in the SEC championship game until 7 days before the game was played. There wasn't an unsold ticket for that game, and that dome holds more than 70K people.

You are looking at this in a very myopic way. It isn't just going to be people who live and went to Oklahoma that would buy tickets to a national semi-final/final tickets if OU was in an 8-team playoff.

there are 2 weeks between the conf championship game and the SB in the NFL.
there were 2 weeks for the conf championship games, at least in the big 12. and in those cases they are known (not ALL the time) who's going or not going.

There are NOT two weeks between the conference championships and the Super Bowl. There USED to be, but not anymore.

There are times when people don't know who will be playing in a conference championship game until 7 days before it is played. It happens. It happened this year. Tickets are still sold. People still go to the game. People still watch on TV and advertisers still pay networks. Money is still made everywhere.

okay, you are right
i stand corrected. sorry about that.
last year it was one week...i thought the only year they did that was in 2001 b/c of 9-11.
when did they change that?

they changed it when they went to the bye week.
 

amndouglas

Member
Aug 17, 2001
155
0
0
I am a U of M fan if it wasn't obvious enough before. Seriously though, before everyone knocks the system for being unfair (ie. USC not going to the championship game and TCU not potentially going to a BCS Bowl earlier in the season) shouldn't we see if it pans out that the computers were right and USC wasn't a strong enough team to play for the National Championship. If Michigan wins, there is no real argument other than that the "people's choice" wasn't sent to the championship. If USC wins, then talk about fixing this thing or getting rid of the BCS altogether because it obviously didn't do what it was intended to (eliminate co-national champs).
 

Sid59

Lifer
Sep 2, 2002
11,879
3
81
16 team or 8 team playoff would be good but there isn't enough time. the team that wins the most and goes to the 'college bowl' is out of school for so long. These are college atheletes. it's not really fair for them to be out of class.
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: Sid59
16 team or 8 team playoff would be good but there isn't enough time. the team that wins the most and goes to the 'college bowl' is out of school for so long. These are college atheletes. it's not really fair for them to be out of class.

once more. THAT'S WHY I PROPOSED A 4 TEAM PLAYOFF. it IS a playoff, the controversy would not be anywhere NEAR as strong as it is now. and VERY little would have to change.

you would take 2 bowl games to play the finals on jan 1, 2 and then play the final game in another bowl game on jan 8 or so.