Jump to content

Bowl Games: A Thread


glduck
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 1/12/2021 at 2:28 PM, row Z said:

Its not good for the sport to have a few programs be this dominant. They should expand the playoff to 8 and allow each power 5 winner an auto entry. That would go a long way to balancing parity (recruiting, TV interest, revenue, coaching retention, etc.), and increasing overall interest.

This CFP was boring to the average viewer. They will kill the golden goose if they stay on the same path. 

This is nonsense at every level. Auto bids for an 8-5 team that upsets a 12-1 team that had their entire OL out with the flu? Get outta here. Expanding the playofs to 8 teams when most years there aren't even 3 that deserve it? People want reform but espouse ideas that do nothing to affect change. Playoff expansion isn't even kicking the can at this point, it's making the the whole broken system even worse.  Reform demands scheduling and conference equality, not doing more of the same. As long as we have 14 team conferences playing 8 conference games and 10 team conferences playing 9 conference games, and teams scheduling 2 FCS opponents a year and teams who have never scheduled an FCS opponent, and friggin "independent" teams milking the entire system, nothing positive will come from any tweaks to the current system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, dtd said:

This is nonsense at every level. Auto bids for an 8-5 team that upsets a 12-1 team that had their entire OL out with the flu? Get outta here. Expanding the playofs to 8 teams when most years there aren't even 3 that deserve it? People want reform but espouse ideas that do nothing to affect change. Playoff expansion isn't even kicking the can at this point, it's making the the whole broken system even worse.  Reform demands scheduling and conference equality, not doing more of the same. As long as we have 14 team conferences playing 8 conference games and 10 team conferences playing 9 conference games, and teams scheduling 2 FCS opponents a year and teams who have never scheduled an FCS opponent, and friggin "independent" teams milking the entire system, nothing positive will come from any tweaks to the current system. 

I agree with a lot of this, but I don't see a problem with an 8-5 team getting in if they go on a run.  That's what makes a Green Bay Packers Super Bowl win fun, and it's what made a Villanova tourney run enjoyable.  Win big during the big games, dude.

And I think expanding the playoff will make up for the fact that the SEC plays the Southern Kentucky Community College Klansmen in OOC, because you don't need an undefeated resume to win a championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, dtd said:

This is nonsense at every level. Auto bids for an 8-5 team that upsets a 12-1 team that had their entire OL out with the flu? Get outta here. Expanding the playofs to 8 teams when most years there aren't even 3 that deserve it? People want reform but espouse ideas that do nothing to affect change. Playoff expansion isn't even kicking the can at this point, it's making the the whole broken system even worse.  Reform demands scheduling and conference equality, not doing more of the same. As long as we have 14 team conferences playing 8 conference games and 10 team conferences playing 9 conference games, and teams scheduling 2 FCS opponents a year and teams who have never scheduled an FCS opponent, and friggin "independent" teams milking the entire system, nothing positive will come from any tweaks to the current system. 

ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No real defense of the SEC here, but there is a change in their scheduling, with them taking at least one of their four non-con games against a serious challenger, and soon for some to be moving to two.  That's better than none.

Examples:  Bama faces Miami (neutral) in 2021, Texas home-and-home in 2022 and 23; at Wisconsin in 2024; home with Wisconsin and away at FSU in 2025; at WVU and home with FSU in 2026; home with WVU and at Ohio St in 2027; and at Notre Dame and home with Ohio St in 2028.

Florida seems to be moving in the same direction (for example, in 2028, they play Arizona St, Colorado, and FSU).  Georgia, also is moving to multiple P5 opponents (e.g., in 2029 they play Texas, Clemson, and Ga Tech.)

The SEC has a long way to go, but they are at least edging to more competitive scheduling.  This probably isn't bravery on their part, it's likely vault-filling plans to reap huge payouts for these cross-conference games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I just heard Jon Wilner on a podcast say that the playoff will almost certainly go to 8 teams with 5 auto bids for power 5 conferences, 2 at large bids, and one bid for Group of 5. The current 4-team playoff agreement runs through 2026, so he anticipates the new structure will be negotiated in the next two years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

FCS has 24 teams in their playoffs with 10 autobids for conference championships.  With a smaller 16 team format this spring, there were five teams from the MVFC in the playoff field but none made it to the FCS championship game.

The new FBS playoffs very well could have just gone to eight instead of 12 and kept the six highest ranked autobids and six highest ranked at large bids.  Even if one conference championship team missed out on the autobid, there's still the at large bid so there could be seven maybe eight conference championship winning teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is looking more and more to be about money, not at all about competition.  The driving force isn't the right number of teams that have a reasonable chance to win it all -- it's about what vehicle can line the pockets of the P5 conferences with the greatest dollar windfall, especially with the likelihood that any expansion of the playoffs will further the current descent of the bowl games into a post-season coffin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can expect that the attempt will be to use multi-platforms for TV distribution of the expanded playoffs.  The NFL playoff model is highly lucrative.  Fox, EXPN/ABC, CBS, and NBC all likely will want a share, as well as the key streaming services.  The dead weight of the EXPN-centric bowl games will look utterly Neandrathal when the new media rights package is established.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bowl games work for TV  because they are spread out over the holidays & you get a lot of interest from mediocre programs & geographies that are “just happy to be here”.

the CFP won’t have that.  
 

the first round of 4-team playoffs have mostly been uninteresting/blowouts.  Now they are going to add 2 more rounds?

 

The NFL playoffs are apples & and oranges to this.  
 

Careful what you wish for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Scscsc89 said:

the first round of 4-team playoffs have mostly been uninteresting/blowouts.  Now they are going to add 2 more rounds?

 

 

The "uninteresting blowouts" have had mega-audiences and the dollars have been flowing.  An interesting point -- blowouts recently have more likely occurred in the championship game, not in the first round.  If you look at a blowout as a 17 point differential or more, all of the last three championships have been blowouts; while only four of the six first round games have been blowouts.

The people putting this together aren't concerned about great football or competitive games or the well-being of student athletes.  No, they're concerned about one thing (and the TV networks are closely in the discussions) -- money.  Cold hard cash.  Even more so than in the past, Covid-dollar shortfalls have athletic directors and school presidents laser-focused on windfall paydays.  They've tapped out their donors, filled their stadiums, and have nice conference media contracts coming up, but they see far greener pastures with the deep pockets of sponsors of playoff games.  Their plan is simple -- Pepsi, Nike, Apple, Anheuser-Busch, and a host of pharmaceutical and nacho chip companies will be paying the freight for women's volleyball, men's golf, and track and field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it’s about money.

but College Football has always made money off NOT giving people what they want.

it’s not clear this will generate any more interest/money after the excitement of the first year.

This makes any sponsorships LESS exclusive, so less valuable/lucrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Scscsc89 said:

 

"could"

"according to a firm specializing in college and professional sports rights valuations."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

They wouldn't be pushing it if they didn't already know the money would be there for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...