re: Best reason to have a playoff?

They do it in basketball (and other sports) and they can do it in football. There are a number of ways to schedule and split the money, and can be structured to be equitable.

Now people are just making up BS reasons to explain why we can't have a playoff.

quote:

---

your posts show you know nothing about how a college athletic department works

---

Absolutely irrelevant to my post. The point of my post is that there are fair and equitable ways to set up a playoff. Your post shows you know much less than you think you do.

quote:

---

what do you propose that makes all parties happy

and by all parties, i mean the ncaa, the member institutions, AS WELL AS the bowl commities and their sponsors?

---

You're confusing fair and equitable with happy. If you break up a monopoly (or oligopoly), clearly at least one party will be less happy in the revised structure.

But yes, you could use the current bowl structure (if you wanted to). The lesser bowls continue as is (see NIT in college basketball) and they bigger bowls host the playoff games (in some rotating manner).

Right now there are 5 BCS bowl games, and with an 8 team playoff the number goes up to 7 major games. I'm sure Orlando and Dallas would love to become a part of a playoff structure.

quote:

---

and thats all fine and dandy, but what do you do about bowl revenur sharing

say lsu is the 1 seed and they win it all. that means in an 8 team format, they play three games, and they get three bowl shares.

what happens if say lsu, uf, and bama all win their first round game, and we have an all sec final. that means 8 bowl shares just for the sec alone

is that fair?

---

What do they do for the NCAA basketball tournament? Where is it written in stone that the winner/runner-up gets three bowl payouts?

My general response is that there is now more money to go around (two extra big games with TV revenue), so I'm sure there is way to make sure all concerned parties gets to participate in the up side.

I don't think the technical details should be part of this argument because every different playoff format has their own logistical difficulties to overcome, but these can be worked out.

The facts are very simple. Most people want a playoff. The additional games mean more money is being pumped into the system. It should be a win-win situation, but the powers that be have cold feet.

quote:

---

I know one day I'll run into a foreign sports fan who will ask me to explain college football

I will then explain all of it and I worry that he will laugh at me. A lot.

---

When I was in Ireland, it was impossible to explain to my relatives the rankings. We were excited about LSU being pre-season #2 before the 2007 season. They just laughed every time I started to talk. They thought we were mentally ill for liking a sport that decides a champion like that. Funny enough, we were discussing this across the water from the largest insane asylum in the world (in Cork, Ireland).

quote:

---

What do they do for the NCAA basketball tournament? Where is it written in stone that the winner/runner-up gets three bowl payouts?

---

No college sport has attendance like football, the stadiums just aren't built to hold that many people. Even events like the Final Four don't use the entire arena (at least not when LSU was in Indy in 2006, because at least 1/3 of the stadium was closed off because you couldn't see shite if you had to sit there).

Then you have to remember how much easier it is to send 15-20 guys across the country instead of 100s involved with football. Plus how many LSU fans even made the trip to Indy for the Final Four? 5k? 10k? Plus all of the basketball games were in places like Atlanta and Indianapolis, not Athens and Urbana-Champagne.