PDA

View Full Version : The BCS Devalues Regular Season...A Playoff Would Increase the Value



BaltimoreTerp
09-18-2010, 12:59 AM
http://www.arentfox.com/email/media-alert/pdf/bcs-docs20100915.pdf


Moreover, as the attached chart shows, last year under the BCS scheme only 26 of the 120 FBS teams played in any games that impacted that team’s chances to win the national title. Therefore, 94 of the 120 teams – close to 80% of the FBS teams -- played in no games that impacted that team’s chances of winning the national title last season.

...

The BCS likes to tout that the regular season is one big playoff. As described above, that simply isn’t accurate. In fact, if the BCS was correct, then who was Boise State University’s playoff game against last year when they were again denied an opportunity to compete for the national title despite being undefeated? Or who was the University of Utah’s playoff game against the
prior year when they suffered from the same fate? The list goes on and on, and what never stops is how the BCS deprives these Non-Automatic Qualifying Conference teams and their fans of any real opportunity to win the national title.

...

The BCS nevertheless claims that a college football playoff would diminish the value of the regular season because (i) every game counts under its system according to the BCS; (ii) the NCAA Men’s basketball tournament, in the BCS’ view, diminishes the value of the regular season in college basketball; and (iii) the BCS claims that the bowl system would end if a playoff was established. As to the “every game counts” slogan and argument, this statement and the attached chart completely undermine the BCS’ assertion. With respect to the comparison to college basketball, the BCS’ argument doesn’t pass the straight face test. Even a cursory analysis would tell you that a college football playoff would not be similar to the college basketball tournament with respect to impact on the regular season. The difficulty of qualifying for a 16 team college football playoff (where there are only five at-large berths) would be far greater than qualifying for the college basketball tournament, as only a few second place teams would even make the playoffs in college football. In contrast, in college basketball, where more than 30 at-large teams qualify, 6th and 7th place teams from a conference can make the playoffs, and 2nd, 3rd and 4th place teams from a number of conferences are almost always a lock for the tournament.

The BCS’ claim that the bowl system would end if a playoff was established also is without any merit. First, for bowls to exist you need teams that want to play in them, bowls that want to hold the events, television networks that want to show the games, and advertisers that want to sponsor the games. All of those conditions would still exist if a playoff was established for the top teams. Second, even though there are far more teams in the NCAA Men’s basketball tournament, other postseason play continues to exist in basketball, and, in fact, additional postseason tournaments recently have been added. Third, many of the bowl games are, in effect, subsidized by the universities who play in them (because the universities are compelled to buy a tremendous number of tickets to such games, regardless of whether they are sold). With these universities receiving far more revenue under a playoff (as they generally will share the revenues earned by other teams from their conference who reach the playoffs), they will have even more money to ensure that they can continue to, in effect, subsidize such bowls.

Now a disclaimer. Arent Fox is a DC-based law firm/lobbying group, so chances are they were brought it by BCS opponents. Just the way that reads, you can tell it was made to persuade (the "not eliminated by a team, but by a scheme" is a nice Cochran-esque touch :laughlol:)

But those numbers seem to pass the smell test. I don't know how anyone can sit with a straight face and say that the present system in any way enhances the regular season. Any system where a bona fide member of the association can start a season with no chance to win the association's championship is truly dysfunctional, especially when the basic argument ("Every week is a playoff game!") only counts for certain schools.

Anyone else have any thoughts?

brooksie05
09-18-2010, 05:29 PM
I agree with the points quoted above. However, I think an 8 team playoff is far more reasonable.

YardBirds13
09-18-2010, 05:56 PM
I agree with the points quoted above. However, I think an 8 team playoff is far more reasonable.

Every single team in FBS should begin the season with a chance to win the National Championship. A 16 team playoff lets the winner of each conference get in, with 5 at-large bids given out. The MAC or Sun Belt champ should get a chance to win the title. They would be the 15 or 16 seed to Alabama or Ohio State's #1 or #2 seed.

It's so simple. And College Football is so stupid it will never happen.

At least FBS. I'm happy my team plays in the FCS and gets the chance to compete in the playoffs.

ledzepp8
09-19-2010, 05:51 PM
"Every week is a playoff game"

Yeah I guess that's true if you're in the SEC or Big 12 or you're Ohio State, USC or Notre Dame. Since those are the teams that the writers and coaches always want to pimp for the MNC.

College Football is great but it's a travesty that we still have a group of people that pick who they want to play for the "championship".

BaltimoreTerp
09-19-2010, 08:40 PM
"Every week is a playoff game"

Yeah I guess that's true if you're in the SEC or Big 12 or you're Ohio State, USC or Notre Dame. Since those are the teams that the writers and coaches always want to pimp for the MNC.

College Football is great but it's a travesty that we still have a group of people that pick who they want to play for the "championship".

Actually, that's where I think that statement is most irrelevant. Those teams can lose a game and still have a chance at a national championship. So unless the season is double-elimination in some conferences, that whole argument fails.

ledzepp8
09-19-2010, 11:35 PM
Actually, that's where I think that statement is most irrelevant. Those teams can lose a game and still have a chance at a national championship. So unless the season is double-elimination in some conferences, that whole argument fails.

Well yeah that too.:D Bottom line is that it's all BS.

BaltimoreTerp
10-09-2010, 01:11 PM
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2010/10/college_football_playoff_propo.html


Allow me to tell you about the playoff proposal written in a compelling new book I'm reading now, "Death to the BCS," by Yahoo! reporters Dan Wetzel, Josh Peter and Jeff Passan. It's a good read for any college football fan. They say first you have to identify the non-starters for any playoff: dropping regular-season games, eliminating conference championship games, realigning leagues, or using bowl games as host sites for playoff games. Their plan: A 16-team playoff that provides automatic bids for all 11 conference champions and at-large slots for five remaining teams.

...

The book's panel of experts concluded that even after serious cuts to TV revenue, the bowl system could still pay out 50 percent of its current rate, or $110 million.

...

The experts' estimated value on a playoff: $750 million. Each of the 15 first-round games would pay out $25 million per team, meaning a first-round game would net conferences 40 percent more than the current BCS Championship Game.

In full disclosure, I should point out that I've had this book on request at my library ever since I heard it was coming out :laughlol:

So tell me again, why does this not work?

Birds of B'more
10-09-2010, 05:40 PM
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2010/10/college_football_playoff_propo.html



In full disclosure, I should point out that I've had this book on request at my library ever since I heard it was coming out :laughlol:

So tell me again, why does this not work?

Everyone knows it will make money. The problem is that it requires forward-thinking out of a cartel made up of individuals who prefer to live in the past.

BaltimoreTerp
10-09-2010, 07:11 PM
Everyone knows it will make money. The problem is that it requires forward-thinking out of a cartel made up of individuals who prefer to live in the past.

Yeah, but it basically confirms that far too many of those in charge of our institutions of higher learning, or at least large departments within the schools, are truly deficient in intelligence.

Birds of B'more
10-10-2010, 01:36 AM
Yeah, but it basically confirms that far too many of those in charge of our institutions of higher learning, or at least large departments within the schools, are truly deficient in intelligence.

It's like the old saying....common sense is anything but common.