BCS Playoffs? Not on your life...

#1
Noah.Dreams

Noah.Dreams

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Messages
83
Likes
0
#1
There is one major problem with organizing a formal BCS playoff system in college football. The money raised would end up in the coffers of the NCAA and so would the power.

Once upon a time, the NIT tournament awarded college basketball championships. Today, the Final Four tournament contributes to the vast majority of the NCAA's $549 million revenue.

Do you really want to increase the power of the NCAA? SEC Presidents wouldn't even discuss the possibility of BCS playoff at this summer's convention and now you know why.
 
#2
#2
What makes you such an authority on where the power and money would go? I know what the SEC Presidents decided, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. If the bowls can be run without the NCAA having the "power," then a playoff can be run without the NCAA too.
 
#3
#3
This isn't rocket science. To know the truth, just follow the money. If you're not afraid of a little homework, then conduct your own research and get back to me on what you find, ok?

To start your journey, just mash here... NCAA - National Collegiate Athletic Association
ukvols said:
What makes you such an authority on where the power and money would go? I know what the SEC Presidents decided, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. If the bowls can be run without the NCAA having the "power," then a playoff can be run without the NCAA too.
Click to expand...
 
#4
#4
Noah.Dreams said:
There is one major problem with organizing a formal BCS playoff system in college football. The money raised would end up in the coffers of the NCAA and so would the power.
Click to expand...

Precisely . . . The bowl system and the court decision in the 1980s that gave the CFA the power to negotiate TV deals definitely swung the power in college football over to the schools.
 
#5
#5
Yeah, so I don't see why the creation of a playoff would swing the power and money back to the NCAA.
 
#6
#6
Noah.Dreams said:
This isn't rocket science. To know the truth, just follow the money. If you're not afraid of a little homework, then conduct your own research and get back to me on what you find, ok?

To start your journey, just mash here... NCAA - National Collegiate Athletic Association
Click to expand...

Reading my post shouldn't be rocket science either. So, BCS revenues go to the schools. Brilliant finding! What about that fact indicates that the NCAA would get the money from a playoff?
 
#7
#7
isnt this the guy who came up with the idea of the SEC breaking off from the NCAA to show how powerful we are that we could play 11 SEC games. I would think that playoff funding would be splt up much like BCS funding. Most BCS funds go back to the schools.
 
#8
#8
You found a clue!

Brilliant.

Now that I have your attention, answer me this batman.

Why would the NCAA post the BCS distribution of funds?

Because they are the middle man... and as the middle man, you take your cut off the top for administration purposes and then you control the distribution. So if the NCAA decides how many pieces to cut the pie then they have the power. And it is better to have a 119 clients, than 33 very powerful clients. Correct?

And why would the BCS oppose a playoff?

Because they don't want to divide playoff funds with 119 D1 colleges. If the truth be known, half of D1 football teams lose money. Another 20% of D1 teams break even.

That means that about a third of D1 football teams are making a killing. And they will negotiate for nothing less than a lion's share of a playoff distribution.
 
#9
#9
I believe you have me confused with someone else. I do believe that playing 12 conference games would be a great way to lock up TV revenue during the regular season. But breaking away from the NCAA was never part of my plan.
mattvols said:
isnt this the guy who came up with the idea of the SEC breaking off from the NCAA to show how powerful we are that we could play 11 SEC games. I would think that playoff funding would be splt up much like BCS funding. Most BCS funds go back to the schools.
Click to expand...
 
#10
#10
The NCAA is composed of the nation's universities and colleges. Why shouldn't it manage a playoff? SEC athletic department officials, including the commissioner, have been supportive of a playoff--tho the presidents of most colleges are not because they don't want the sport to get bigger than it already is. The Big 10 doesn't support a playoff because it has this stupid attachment to the Rose Bowl--and because, I suspect, it knows that the conference gets favorable treatment from the media, led by that demonic monopoly named espn, which of broadcasts big 10 games (via its owner, abc) and therefore has a vested economic interest in the big 10 doing well.

And here's the real point: Every damn college sport in America has a playoff to determine the national champion...except div. 1 football. Nobody who is against a playoff can explain away that fact. Anti-playoff people are not the sharpest tacts in the drawer--as one reason that keeps being trotted out is that a playoff would make the regular season less important, which is completely, totally insane. You can't lose more than 1 game and qualify for, say, an 8 or 4-team playoff, so tell me how that fact makes the regular seaon less important? Also, SEC teams get screwed by the current system, which favors conferences that are less strong, which is everybody else in the country. That's why we see travesties like oklahoma, from the mediocre big 12, getting to play in the title game three or four years ago while an undefeated--and outstanding auburn team--sat home! Talk about a screw job. Usc is the same--pansy pac 10 conference, which never has more than 2 decent teams.
 
#11
#11
mattvols said:
isnt this the guy who came up with the idea of the SEC breaking off from the NCAA to show how powerful we are that we could play 11 SEC games. I would think that playoff funding would be splt up much like BCS funding. Most BCS funds go back to the schools.
Click to expand...
He just copied and pasted the exact post from the "playoff sec style" thread that he also created. No one gave creedence to it in that thread so he started a new one.:no:
 
#12
#12
The powerbrokers could actually care less about deciding a champion.

The issue isn't about games, it is only about MONEY.

College football has a 60% profit margin in the top 10 schools. When you're clearing $20 million per year, the least of your concern is keeping the sport from getting bigger. The primary thing on their mind is protecting this cash cow.

armchairvol said:
....-tho the presidents of most colleges are not because they don't want the sport to get bigger than it already is....

... Anti-playoff people are not the sharpest tacts in the drawer--as one reason that keeps being trotted out is that a playoff would make the regular season less important, which is completely, totally insane.
Click to expand...
 
#13
#13
armchairvol said:
Anti-playoff people are not the sharpest tacts in the drawer--as one reason that keeps being trotted out is that a playoff would make the regular season less important, which is completely, totally insane.
Click to expand...

That's not even close to being true.
 
#14
#14
armchairvol said:
Anti-playoff people are not the sharpest tacts in the drawer
Click to expand...
If you're going to rip someone's intelligence at least use the right cliche.

Not the sharpest KNIFE in the drawer.
Sharp as a TACK.

Either way I'm still anti-playoff.
 
#15
#15
GAVol said:
If you're going to rip someone's intelligence at least use the right cliche.

Not the sharpest KNIFE in the drawer.
Sharp as a TACK.

Either way I'm still anti-playoff.
Click to expand...

GAVol, you're not the brightest crayon in the shed.
 
#17
#17
Now that we've corrected the grammatical errors, let's get back on topic.

The real obstacle to a playoff system is how do we divide the money, right?
 
#18
#18
This whole argument is just silly. The BcS is sanctioned by the NCAA to arrive at a mythical national champion via computers, media voters and public concern. The wildcard is the CFA and brings leverage against college presidents and athletic departments. If athletic departments wish to cecede from the NCAA it is totally within their purview and possible. Thus the conundrum...
 
#19
#19
Besides all that, the best cliche is "the sharpest knife in the drawer"... :p
 
#20
#20
Noah.Dreams said:
Congratulations on your search techniques, however, you have failed the reading and comprehension portion of this test.

While the topics have some similarities, they are opposite ends of the spectrum.

This thread is about what is the real reason conference presidents won't discuss a BCS playoff.
Click to expand...
While the topics have "some similarities", your post in each is WORD FOR WORD, the EXACT SAME.:ermm:
But at least you're giving it "110%"
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top