quote:
People like tradition. I get it. And we are all hesitant to embrace change of something we love. But I think by the end of this season many will see the new 12 playoff is great and will soon find it absurd that we used to rest on pins and needles hoping to see our 8-4 team play another 8-4 in an irrelevant bowl game in Florida, with an ever-changing name, a month after the end of the season.

I grew up in a different time in college football.

The 1982 LSU-Alabama game still gets talked about today. As does the 1982 LSU Florida State game, where it rained Oranges because “we were going to some irrelevant bowl” in Florida if we won. (And I’m sure that for a lot of Tulane fans, the 1982 LSU-Tulane game still matters too…damn Reginelli)

The “National Championship” in those days really was an afterthought…no doubt it meant something, but it wasn’t the be all to end all. And the game way better for it.

quote:
As a season ticket holder I have ZERO desire to waste an entire Saturday to attend a game between LSU and UAB, or Southern, or New Mexico. In fact, I generally don't. But I have to pay for that ticket anyway. Now, if instead of those teams I can see games vs. other power conf. opponents I'm probably more willing to spend more money because I feel I'm getting more value for my dollar. That's going to be the same for those folks watching on TV, which will make the TV contracts more valuable.

It sounds like college football to you is more about “entertainment”. Following your logic, why limit your game attendance to a single
team? Skip LSU-Wake Forest to see Oklahoma-Texas? As you mention, it’s even easier to do with TV.

As I get older, I’m starting to embrace the grumpy old man “get off my lawn” thing a little bit more. Your opinion is yours, and it’s all well and good if it works for you.

But I just think college football is definitely headed in the wrong direction. Obviously we have seen the problems with people leaving at halftime - not just against the Georgia States of the world but against SEC competition.

As you point out, these decisions are all truly about money. And there not about getting the money from the true alumni and fans of schools, but about some guy living up in Queens who will watch LSU-NC State cause he has “heard of them” and has $100 in prop bets on fandool that he hopes come thru so he can celebrate with Dr Pepper and a new Nissan, insured by All State.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Alt26

Member since Mar 2010

28463 posts

Posted on 5/8/24 at 2:46 pm to lsusa

quote:
The 1982 LSU-Alabama game still gets talked about today. As does the 1982 LSU Florida State game, where it rained Oranges because “we were going to some irrelevant bowl” in Florida if we won. (And I’m sure that for a lot of Tulane fans, the 1982 LSU-Tulane game still matters too…damn Reginelli)

That's because there was no defined National Championship game then. And there were less than 1/2 the amount of bowl games as there are now. Meaning, reaching a bowl game was still considered a significant accomplishment. Last year there were 39 bowl games (NOT counting the two that served as the CFP playoff semi-finals). When 82 out of 133 teams make a bowl game, several teams without a winning record, those games become less and less meaningful. So while the Orange Bowl absolutely was a big deal 42 years ago. It's not now. And there is no greater proof of that fact than LAST YEAR'S Orange Bowl where seemingly every key player for FSU chose to not play in the game. It's hard to convince someone the games have significant relevance when the players themselves clearly don't think it does.

In short, you thought it was great because there was no alternative. I did too. I remember sitting in a chilly Tiger Stadium in 1993 watching LSU play Arkansas, two weeks after LSU shocked the world by beating #3 Alabama, pulling for a win to get LSU to 6-5 and the Carquest Bowl. Now we've seen what it looks like to have a true playoff/national championship game. Would you rather watch LSU play Oklahoma for a share of the NC? Or LSU play Clemson where the winner is unequivocally crowned the NC?

In no other major sport do fans desire to see 90+% of the postseason games be ultimately irrelevant to deciding a champion. CFB was just slow to recognize that reality.

quote:
It sounds like college football to you is more about “entertainment”.

I don't play. I don't coach. I don't work for the team. So what else would college football be for the fans except entertainment? No different than any other sport.

quote:
But I just think college football is definitely headed in the wrong direction.

I'd say a "different" direction is more accurate. Whether that is the "right" or "wrong" direction is wholly subjective. Although it's hard to argue that college football isn't more lucrative and more popular than it has ever been. Multi-billion dollar media rights deals seem to suggest that.

quote:
Obviously we have seen the problems with people leaving at halftime - not just against the Georgia States of the world but against SEC competition.

I don't think that is indicative of the popularity of the sport as much as it is a result of the INCREASE in popularity over the decades. Prior to the advent of cable TV there were relatively few college football games broadcast. So if you wanted to see the game you very likely had to be there. Cable came along (along with PPV) and more games were accessible to those who couldn't/didn't want to attend. But even as late as the early 2000's not every game was on TV. Now they are. And many people have decided the ever increasing expense and time investment of attending the games are no longer worth it when you don't have to be present to actually watch the game.

More and more games were shown on TV and the media rights deals have become MASSIVE all because the popularity has increased over the decades. Otherwise, the TV networks wouldn't make such a huge investment. Unfortunately, a byproduct of that is a decrease in in-person attendance. But that doesn't mean the game is less popular. It's just that the fans are consuming it in a different way.

quote:
As you point out, these decisions are all truly about money.

That train left the station a LONG time ago. Decades. Initially college football was a scholastic extracurricular activity. Then more and more people were willing to pay money to attend the games. And over the years they were willing to pay more and more money to attend those games. Likewise, more and more people wanted to view the games on TV and the networks found they had a lucrative ENTERTAINMENT business. The conferences did too. That's why they began selling their media rights to the highest bidders. First those were valued in the millions. Now they are valued in the billions. And do you know who wasn't complaining about that? The schools!!! They were taking in millions in revenue all for their "scholastic extracurriculars".

College football became a lucrative business long before 2024. We can long for the good old days of throwing oranges in the fog on a fall night in 1982. But the business changed and that time has been long gone. And I think once fans get their first taste of watching LSU v. Penn St., Oklahoma v. Michigan, Notre Dame v. Ohio St. playing on that first/second week in December in win-or-go-home games they will start to ask themselves "why didn't this happen much sooner?"

0 ...

Report Post