- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The college football regular season needs to be de-valued.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:24 am to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:24 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
yes, that's why it will happen, the top 60-70 teams will most likely break off. The great irony is the "have nots" that wanted a playoff will probably we cut all the way out.
well i mean even with only 60-70 teams, Bama would have like 2-3 extra home games the last 2 years. that's like $10-15M extra profit at the least
3
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:38 am to SlowFlowPro
They'd have to find a way to split those profits, probably with their opponent.
Similar to how it's done in high school playoffs.
Similar to how it's done in high school playoffs.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:43 am to BayouBengals03
If you go four super conferences and 2 divisions in each you get this same result. Here's the issue, ND, Navy, Army, BYU aren't included. So you can't punish them for not joining a conference if they're good enough.
I say leave it alone, it works as it is.
ETA: I also liked the idea of knowing which bowl your Champ went to, even for smaller guys.
I say leave it alone, it works as it is.
ETA: I also liked the idea of knowing which bowl your Champ went to, even for smaller guys.
This post was edited on 12/2/12 at 12:46 am
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:45 am to BayouBengals03
quote:
They'd have to find a way to split those profits, probably with their opponent.
why would Alabama (and the SEC) ever agree to that?
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:47 am to BayouBengals03
For all the "i want every regular season game to matter" contingent.
Have you considered that under the current system, a loss early or mid-season for most teams essentially means that the rest of their games aren't valuable. in the grand scheme of games played, many more games are played AFTER a team loses than before a team loses, so you actually have a LESS exciting regular season than you would under an 8 team playoff model.
Case in point this year - Oregon and K-State. Nobody gave 2 shits about their games after they lost because they were out of it, and i'm sure the TV ratings will support that claim. if they still had something to play for, now you've got a lot of attractive end-of season games to pick from. Even the Florida/florida state game was much less appealing because we all knew Alabama was gonna roll Auburn and so neither team had a realistic shot of making the title game.
Have you considered that under the current system, a loss early or mid-season for most teams essentially means that the rest of their games aren't valuable. in the grand scheme of games played, many more games are played AFTER a team loses than before a team loses, so you actually have a LESS exciting regular season than you would under an 8 team playoff model.
Case in point this year - Oregon and K-State. Nobody gave 2 shits about their games after they lost because they were out of it, and i'm sure the TV ratings will support that claim. if they still had something to play for, now you've got a lot of attractive end-of season games to pick from. Even the Florida/florida state game was much less appealing because we all knew Alabama was gonna roll Auburn and so neither team had a realistic shot of making the title game.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:48 am to SlowFlowPro
Well then let them keep all the money.
But none of the other conferences would agree to that.
They'd have to agree on something. Some kind of split, even if it's not 50-50.
But none of the other conferences would agree to that.
They'd have to agree on something. Some kind of split, even if it's not 50-50.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 1:44 am to Big L
bump
Posted on 12/3/12 at 6:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Bama would have like 2-3 extra home games the last 2 years. that's like $10-15M extra profit at the least
1 I doubt that much, 2, so?
It's really not that hard to figure out ways to share the revenue, they manage it for regular season games.
quote:
why would Alabama (and the SEC) ever agree to that?
Why wouldn't they? Why did they agree to only 2 teams per conference in a BCS bowl? You are not making any sense. The agreements would be made before the playoff begin. The big money is from the TV deals. They would decided before hand how in game revenue from any home playoff games would be split. 60-40, 65-35 between the teams in it, all extra revenue in the pot split amongst the conference with the conferences that host getting a bigger share. It's not that hard.
This post was edited on 12/3/12 at 6:46 am
Posted on 12/3/12 at 6:53 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
well i mean even with only 60-70 teams, Bama would have like 2-3 extra home games the last 2 years. that's like $10-15M extra profit at the least
What about years when teams who aren't traditional powers finish in the top 4? They get at least one automatic home game.
At the end of the day, ALL coaches can honestly say that they have a goal of winning a championship when recruiting in a playoff environment. Right now you don't have that.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 7:38 am to Big L
quote:
Have you considered that under the current system, a loss early or mid-season for most teams essentially means that the rest of their games aren't valuable. in the grand scheme of games played, many more games are played AFTER a team loses than before a team loses, so you actually have a LESS exciting regular season than you would under an 8 team playoff model.
Exactly what I was trying to say
Posted on 12/3/12 at 8:42 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
It's really not that hard to figure out ways to share the revenue, they manage it for regular season games.
the vast majority of the time it's either (1) a team paying a smaller team, so no sharing is necessary or (2) determined by conference
quote:
They would decided before hand how in game revenue from any home playoff games would be split. 60-40, 65-35 between the teams in it, all extra revenue in the pot split amongst the conference with the conferences that host getting a bigger share. It's not that hard.
you have conferences fricking each over in a major way (which has been going on for about 3 years) to expand their conferences. i just don't see conferences like the ACC saying, "ok you've completely fricked up our conference, but we're going to agree to a system where you get even more money to separate yourself from us"
Posted on 12/3/12 at 8:44 am to BayouBengals03
quote:
The college football regular season needs to be de-valued.
Go die in a fire.
I hate the NFL and the fact that a team barely over .500 can get a shot at the Super Bowl
Posted on 12/3/12 at 8:49 am to sms151t
quote:
Here's the issue, ND, Navy, Army, BYU aren't included. So you can't punish them for not joining a conference if they're good enough.
Why the hell not ?
Posted on 12/3/12 at 9:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the vast majority of the time it's either (1) a team paying a smaller team, so no sharing is necessary
The payments to so called rent a wins has climbed to over $1M in recent years, so yes there is sharing. I'm not sure how the TV revenue is split for those game or if that's included in the payout. But now we are talking about extra games. Games they would not normally play. Either all revenue goes into the pool or you split it between the teams in the game. The big money would be from TV anyway.
quote:
ok you've completely fricked up our conference, but we're going to agree to a system where you get even more money to separate yourself from us"
The ACC and SEC were in favor of a playoff before the others. Me thinks you think this because YOU don't want to see a playoff. The reality is the only chance for survivial for a conference like the ACC could be with extra playoff revenue.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 10:12 am to Bench McElroy
"Hell no. 13 weeks of do-or-die football >>>>> 3 weeks of do-or-die football."
This is, to me, a very poor argument against a playoff because it ISN'T TRUE. Was it do or die in T-Town last year when LSU played Bama? Was it do or die for the Tide in T-Town when the Tide played the Ags? No, it wasn't. For every game that might be diminished in importance, other games will take on immense importance. For example, do think LSU sleepwalks against State, Ole Miss, or Arky if they are playing to stay in consideration for a 8 or (my preference) 16 team playoff. Embrace it! Once we get to a real playoff situation, you will never want to go back!
This is, to me, a very poor argument against a playoff because it ISN'T TRUE. Was it do or die in T-Town last year when LSU played Bama? Was it do or die for the Tide in T-Town when the Tide played the Ags? No, it wasn't. For every game that might be diminished in importance, other games will take on immense importance. For example, do think LSU sleepwalks against State, Ole Miss, or Arky if they are playing to stay in consideration for a 8 or (my preference) 16 team playoff. Embrace it! Once we get to a real playoff situation, you will never want to go back!
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News