BCS Source: Playoff 'gets done' in near future

• SportsAndLady

  

  jordo212000;1052385 wrote:How do you know Oklahoma State wasn't better than Alabama?
  
  How do you know Utah wasn't the best team in the country 3-4 years ago? What about TCU last year?

  
  That's why I said rarely..because most of the time its the two best teams. Not all the time.
• Sykotyk

  

  sherm03;1053489 wrote:To the people pointing to the ratings and saying that it is proof that the system needs changed...
  
  Let's assume everything is the same: Alabama and LSU played earlier in the season and the results were the exact same. The whole season progresses the same. Same end rankings, etc. The difference is, there is a playoff. No specific format, it doesn't matter. The bottom line, Alabama and LSU end up winning whatever format and play in the National Championship game.
  
  Do you honestly think the ratings would have been any different for that game?

  Yes, to a small extent. Part of it is pure perception. That being, they proved it on the field. There's too much unknown in this setup to say they really proved it. If Alabama beat Okie state, and LSU beat Stanford (for instance), you can't really have anyone arguing that, 'hey, the Cowboys are really better and deserve to play LSU'. It would've been settled. Sure, there may still be a bit of a downturn simply because it was a rematch (and part of the desire of bowls, playoffs, etc is to see the games that we generally DON'T get to see all year. But, would be minimal.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  sherm03;1053489 wrote:To the people pointing to the ratings and saying that it is proof that the system needs changed...
  
  Let's assume everything is the same: Alabama and LSU played earlier in the season and the results were the exact same. The whole season progresses the same. Same end rankings, etc. The difference is, there is a playoff. No specific format, it doesn't matter. The bottom line, Alabama and LSU end up winning whatever format and play in the National Championship game.
  
  Do you honestly think the ratings would have been any different for that game?

  I think it would, it would give fans from other regions the opportunity to watch both teams and appreciate the teams' accomplishments in getting there (again, assuming your scenario), thus they may have more interest in the game.
  
  Again, we got a turd of a game from two teams in an incestuous conference that barely plays outside the region. Do you blame any Oklahoma St. fan for not giving a rat's butt about an ESPN/Gary Danielson/SEC lovefest? Or anyone else outside the southeast?
• sherm03

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;1054352 wrote:Do you blame any Oklahoma St. fan for not giving a rat's butt about an ESPN/Gary Danielson/SEC lovefest? Or anyone else outside the southeast?

  No, I don't blame anyone outside of Oklahoma State. But that's my point. If Bama beats Oklahoma State and then goes on to play LSU, I still don't expect those Oklahoma State fans to give a shit about the LSU/Bama National Championship.
  
  I think sykotyk is right that there would have been a small (and I mean REALLY SMALL) percentage of people that would have tuned in had the matchup came as a result of a playoff. But I think most people would still be anticipating a boring game and wouldn't tune in.
• enigmaax

  Didn't catch this article when it came out, but found a few quotes interesting about the continued opposition to a play-off (although most talk continues to be pointing toward at least a +1). It is just one guy talking, but kind of highlights the perspective that those in charge don't necessarily see the "undisputed national champion" as a top priority for the sport.
  
  http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34358799
  

  "I'm still not enamored with expanding the number of BCS games," said Nebraska channcellor Harvey Perlman. "I'm not in favor of a playoff, I have yet to hear a good reason why we would want one. I've spent a lot of time over the last several years as to why a playoff is bad. I'd like to hear one why it would be good and what it would accomplish. The only one I ever hear is that it would give us an undisputed national champion."

  "I think (a playoff) would undermine the regular season or add games or undermine the bowls," Perlman said. "We don't need it. We have a regular season that is as much of a playoff as anything that could be constructed artificially. Why would you want it? Football isn't basketball."

  There has been talk that the Cotton Bowl, thanks to Jerry Jones' money and the largess of Cowboys Stadium, would be in play as a fifth BCS bowl come 2014. Perlman doesn't believe that will be the case, with a more likely scenario of the BCS evolving into a #1 vs. #2 matchup and the rest of the bowls reverting back to conference tie-ins. That scenario is one that many think Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany would be supportive of.

  I still believe that the +1 under that circumstance isn't going to please the general fanbase. One of the driving arguments is that teams like TCU and Boise have previously been left out and I don't think that will change. We've already seen votes sway late in the season away from those teams that essentially ensured they wouldn't end up in the top two. I would expect the same thing to happen if there were four teams involved - voters would vote accordingly to bump those types of teams down to the fifth spot while a 1-loss SEC team (for example) locks up a second spot in the top four.
  
  Aside from that, the whole idea of going back to conference tie-ins for the major (BCS) bowls is a huge step backward for those same mid-major teams, including Boise State despite their move to a "BCS" conference. I highly doubt the Big East is going to lock up a tie-in to a big enough bowl that would ever help its champion gain consideration for a title game. There won't be a Boise-Oklahoma or TCU-Wisconsin opportunity to give voters/computers one last push for the underdog. Boise will end up playing the new Conference USA/MWC champion in a crappy bowl for $15 million less than what they've been playing BCS bowls and still be no closer to playing for a national title.
  
  Careful what you wish for, guys.
• jordo212000

  

  I'm generally somebody who posts in these types of threads, but it just makes my brain want to explode now. A playoff of some sort must happen. The current system is dog crap and I'd prefer the old system over this.
• Zombaypirate

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1048229 wrote:I know many don't like the guy and YES he is a prick, but Colin is very smart and usually right about what he says. And I think he is right with this one as well.
  
  What's the problem RIGHT NOW? Answer: Some people think OK State should have been in the title game over Alabama.
  
  What WILL BE the problem in a playoff? Answer: #5 and #6 are going to cry that they should have been in the +1 or that there should have been an 8 team playoff.
  
  Then you have an 8-team playoff. What's the problem? Answer: Teams #9 and #10 complain that they deserved a shot at the title.
  
  Etc.

  The only opinion that counts are the viewers which = $
  
  There will be many more happy viewers = $ by having fewer fans complain about 5 and 6.
  
  In other words we already have that problem so allow more teams to play and make more viewers = $ pleased.