Updated throughout the day with quick takes from staff.
You may read a column or two over the next few weeks about how March Madness for football would be CASH FOR GOLD awesome, if only we could get the evil robber barons who rule college football to stop torturing puppies and kittens for just one second and listen to the common man who cries out for a playoff. If you really believe a setup like basketball's NCAA Tournament would work, even in a 16 team bracket, you can go ahead and drop the family heirlooms into an envelope for a 70% loss. No amount of reason could stop you from thinking either is a good idea, because you're not that bright to begin with, and should be kept from all electrical sockets and sharp objects for your own safety.
The empty seats at first-round games should be your first clue that something would be amiss: getting people to clear schedules, purchase tickets, and fly to distant playoff locales is difficult to do in the best of times, and near impossible in a time of economic downturn. The first round of the NCAA tournament, thrilling as it can be, is usually played in front of mausoleum-quiet crowds with few actual school-loyal interested fans in attendance. If the ACC tournament couldn't sell more than 18,000 tickets three hours from Tobacco Road this weekend, the results could be worse for first-round games.
Now take the logistics into account, and the idea of "December Madness" gets even less tenable. Three games to play to get to the national title means college football fans would have to travel to three games on short notice to watch their teams, a series of expenses that would equal thousands for just one fan, much less an entire family. (In December, no less, when many families are blowing up credit cards for holiday expenses.) If the regionals are played on neutral sites, this means the onus for ticket purchases falls on the cities hosting those games, a dodgy bet at best thanks to college football loyalties and interest varying wildly from region to region. Those expenses are essential because putting on a football game requires far more in terms of logistical support than a basketball game: bigger anticipated crowds mean more security, and that means more costs for the sponsoring cities.
We're not even taking the costs to the programs into account here. Moving a basketball team from place to place is expensive, but moving a football team is less a matter of logistics than one of a small military maneuver: the equipment trucks, the team and coaches and staff needing flights and hotel and food, the total effort expended in making sure everything gets to one place once a week ... it's an immense amount of money, time and effort. Most schools lose money sending their teams to bowl games as is; now take the 16 best teams and tell them a playoff will work like that, but with a possible three additional travel dates on their schedule, and you'll have teams putting already swollen athletics budgets deep into the red.
As mundane as the details are, they're the dull truth of what kills the notion of instituting anything besides a plus one in college football. The existing product -- the Bowl System -- is subsidized by networks, is highly profitable for them, and can be tweaked without the creation of a sports endeavor whose logistics would be somewhere between the World Cup and Operation Desert Freedom. Given the choice, the market will do exactly what you would do: stay on the comfy couch of the BCS rather than get up for what remains a messy and difficult hypothetical vacation into playoffland; until further notice, the staycation remains the option of choice for NCAA football.
This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.
22 comments
1
May 24
3
May 24
1
May 21
23
May 19
2
May 18
12
May 18
7
May 16
Comments
You’re not as dumb as you look, Spencer. But you should go ahead and declare that ANY type of D1 play-off is not feasible. A one game binge is all a typical well heeled fan can afford after Christmas spending. Boone Pickens can jet anywhere any day, but he is not a typical booster.
by LadyVolsLover on Mar 16, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions
It’s the truth. College football’s popularity is too great in spite of a playoff. It will not change for the sake of fairness. Plus, did you hear Reece Davis and Bob Knight yesterday talking about expanding the field to EVERYONE simply because little-old St. Mary’s just missed the 65-team bracket? The best starting point in college football is 8 teams, but it wouldn’t last 2 years before people start clamoring that 8 isn’t enough.Oh yeah, and plus everything Spencer wrote above.Playoffs just aren’t happening.
by BuckeyeXB on Mar 16, 2009 6:07 PM EDT reply actions
Nonsense. Utter nonsense. You want to see college football playoff? Watch D1 Subdivision. There they do it right. Funny the #1 seed sometimes does not win the National Championship when they have to prove it on the field.
The BCS is a sham. It is no championship at all. Its just another bowl game.
The BCS cost the country the chance to see USC vs Florida, Texas vs Florida, USC vs Texas etc.
BCS champs: Florida.
Best team in the country: USC.
by SailorGabe on Mar 16, 2009 10:03 PM EDT reply actions
Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Bowls are too popular and financially profitable to even consider a playoff. In college, every game of the regular season is important (just ask USC). With a playoff you end up with a barely above .500 team in the Super Bowl. College football fans won’t stand for a meaningless regular season like the one just past in the NFL.A college football fan in Kansas City
by Mocary on Mar 16, 2009 11:09 PM EDT reply actions
I agree w/ sailorgabe, that it’s nonsense. There is onlu opinion to what he says, no fact. The ACC tourny still turned out millions in cash, so there goes that theory.
You should be careful who you call stupid, we are the people that pay your real salary and if enough of us make a stink, you would not be writing any longer.
by joeec7777 on Mar 17, 2009 8:20 AM EDT reply actions
"You should be careful who you call stupid, we are the people that pay
your real salary and if enough of us make a stink, you would not be
writing any longer."
Really, joeec? Have you been sending Spencer checks every other week? If so, how do I get in on that? I could’ve sworn our paychecks come from accounting down the hall.
by cmottram on Mar 17, 2009 9:13 AM EDT reply actions
Finally, a thoughtful and coherent article on why we shouldn’t see a D1 playoff in football.
by cpav12 on Mar 17, 2009 9:49 AM EDT reply actions
Joeec7777, if you would like to send me checks, please do c/o the Sporting News. Feel free to write "ur writing sux" in the subject line.
by shall.tsn on Mar 17, 2009 10:11 AM EDT reply actions
A well thought out argument, Spencer. However, there are people smarter than either of us and they could figure something out. Why not simply force all teams interested in a chance at the National Championship to join in 12-16 team conferences, ACC, SEC, Big East, PAC 10, WAC, Big 10, Big 12, and another with the loose end schools, you could have an 8 team playoff.
I don’t know, it seems like the nation that put men on the moon should have the brains to figure this out. It seems, however, that our country was smarter then so maybe not.
by mightyhokie on Mar 17, 2009 10:36 AM EDT reply actions
I usually don’t comment on this blog, but I have to say how ridiculous this line of thinking is. The "right" thing to do is determine the championship on the field. A very simple solution to the problem noted in the article would be for a 16 team playoff, have the higher seeds host the first round games, then incorporate 4 regional sites, spread across the southern states or domes(for weather purposes), in which the higher seeded teams in the final 8 would get the closest venue to allow for the most fans to travel the shortest distance. Then, like in basketball, have a rotating Final Four site.
That’s just me spit-balling it. I couls also come up with many arguments on why we won’t have a playoff. But ultimately, the goal needs to be getting a true national champion. And I believe this even though I am a Florida Gator alum, whose team has "taken advantage" of the BCS system 2 of the last 3 years to"win" the national championship. I would definitely be more proud and more satisfied had those been won via a playoff.
USC was not the best team in the country last year.
by azickert on Mar 17, 2009 11:29 AM EDT reply actions
Finally, someone who agrees with me. A playoff is not going to happen at this level. I don’t know what the rest of you guys do for a living, but I certainly can’t afford to fly to 4 football games in 4 consecutive weeks. Not sure I could get the time off to do that as well. A plus one is the only playoff I could buy into, but how long would it be before we start expanding that field. Once you open Pandora’s box, you can’t close it. Lets also be realistic, Cinderella isn’t going to happen in football. Especially not with a playoff. In hoops, a small school with a future NBA superstar can go out and pull off an upset in round 1. But Cinderella almost always wakes up in round #2. I mean has Cinderalla ever actually won the title? They have scored upsets, but then got beaten like a drum in the next round or some round after that. Lack of quality depth will catch up to you sooner or later. I think smaller schools actually have a better chance now. Look at a school like Troy. They play the Titans of the SEC every year and usually at least 2 sometimes 3 of them. What if they ran the table. Beat #3 Florida, #8 LSU, and #9 Georgia and Florida Atlantic also had a good season and was ranked in the top 15. I think they would have a better shot at getting to the title game in our current system than they would if they had to beat 4 top 16 teams in 4 consecutive weeks. If the little guy is willing to go out and schedule a beast of a schedule, they have a shot, probably better than if they were in a tournament. I also think that if they ever go to a tournament at the end of the year, it will probably grow and grow until it reaches 32 teams. That would be about what is needed in order to seed all confernece champions and have a reasonable amount of at large births without giving certain higher seeds a first round bye.
by Hendu1976 on Mar 17, 2009 12:20 PM EDT reply actions
Responding to smarta#@ comments with your own smarta#@ statements really don’t dissuade the readers from making their smarta#@ comments in the first place. Next time, I’d like to see Chris and Spencer take the high road as the professionals they otherwise seem to be.
by pbell19 on Mar 17, 2009 12:35 PM EDT reply actions
You’re exactly right azrickert. If the higher seeded teams hosted the first round it would be a huge bonus to those programs. You can’t tell me that tOSU wouldn’t love to be able to host one more game per year. It’s not like the stadiums would even need fans from other schools to be there. I’m sure tOSU, USC, Florida, Texas, etc. would love to be able to make another million of of revenue for at least a few more games a year.
by NevadaBlue on Mar 17, 2009 1:07 PM EDT reply actions
I’m glad someone other than Stuart Mandel has finally had the guts to say what anyone with any common sense would see. Any playoff system in college football would create a slippery slop that would ruin college football – and there would be no ability to recover.
I’d love to see a plus one – but it would only be good if those games all were played on January 1, as they used to be. And even then, I’d be for a plus one ONLY if it stopped there. But everyone knows what would happen. With the four main bcs games, there would be 4 BCS bowl winners clamoring for 2 spots, and there would still be controversy, and there would still be clamoring for a "playoff."
Why can’t people just enjoy what we have? It ain’t broke, and it don’t need fixin!
All the best,
X
by XofDallas on Mar 17, 2009 2:09 PM EDT reply actions
Sensitive little bunch of bloggers they hire here on TSN. Pull the strings and watch ’em dance!
by ChiAdam on Mar 17, 2009 2:27 PM EDT reply actions
WE’RE NOT SENSITIVE! Seriously, we’re not. At all. OK! Alright, buddy! GET IT STRAIGHT!
by cmottram on Mar 17, 2009 2:35 PM EDT reply actions
The high road? On the internet? It’s been closed for years.
by shall.tsn on Mar 17, 2009 2:44 PM EDT reply actions
I agree with azickert. Are you telling me the BCS schools would not want the chance to host a First round game in which they could hit their alumni up for a premium price on a non BCS tournament game?
Think of the TV networks beating the crap out of each other for the exclusive rights to these games. The money to be made would make the current bowl system revenue look like lunch money. Not only that, the ratings for all rounds would dwarf any ratings for the current slew of meaningless bowls. For instance, would you rather watch Michigan State play Virginia Tech in the Outback Bowl, or would you rather see those same two teams battle it out for the right to meet the winner of Texas vs. Georgia Tech. With my bracket filled out in hand, I am choosing the latter.
And for all of those teams not making the 16 team field, they could still play in the Liberty Bowl, Motor City Bowl, or any of the smaller bowls that would serve as the NIT of College Football.
This is too simple to draw up on paper, so I don’t understand why it is made out to be so difficult to execute.
by jonelson on Mar 17, 2009 3:50 PM EDT reply actions
for all those who pine for a d-1 football equivilant of the basketball tournament, let me shine a light on the 8000 pound, drunken, machete wielding elephant in the room. first, you must ask yourself why the basketball tourny is so big. for all the romanticized ideals of the upsets & buzzer beaters, the idea that anyone can win it that gets in etc., there is really only 1 factor that makes the tourny such a big deal. that factor is that this is the first real sporting event since the super bowl. and nothing else is competing with it. the tourny is in a buyers market for advertisers. it’s been 6 weeks since an even with national interest has come along. they get the spot light for 2 whole weeks. the only nudge of competition is opening day of baseball, and that is just for 1 day.
now, compare that with d-1 football’s season. if they were to go to a playoff system, they would be in direct competition with the ending of the nfl regular season, and may even push into the wild card round. the nfl has long been ok with ceding new year’s day to the bowls because it was just 1 day. they have grudgingly accepeted the conference championship games, if only because they all happen the same day. but do you think they would let someone else compete for attention for 4-6 weeks during the prime of their season? do you think they’d let coca-cola, mcdonalds, budweiser & miller split their ad money up? the nfl would make it impossible for whoever would run a d-1 tourny to run a d-1 tourny, or die trying.
by ocaseym on Mar 17, 2009 3:52 PM EDT reply actions
To say that we are stuck with the current system and say that it can’t or will not ever change is flat out ignorant.
The current system is a mess. filled with bias, curruption and deep pockets sucking the soul out of what is one of the great fan experiences sports have to offer.
We the fans deserve and demand better and to sit back and settle for a system with obvious flaws without at least trying to make improvements is Un-American and a dirct slap to the face of the dedicated fans that are the life force of the sport filling the stands to bloat the wallet of fat cat executives.
You would think with the lengths most fans are willing to go to support their teams the people at the top could do better than the good ol’ college try at improving the system.
I understand the tradition behind the bowls and the money tied to them but you can’t tell me we can’t get some smart and un-biased people in a room to figure out a way to make it work.
In fact I think the biggest part of the problem is not how it would work, but the willingness to make it work. You think if the people making money off the current sham were given a way to make more money with a new system the BCS would be around next year?
Im no expert but it seems to me everyone has an idea how to improve the system. Mine involves cutting one of the pointless games from every teams schedule and eliminate all conference championship games. At the end of the season the top 16 teams will play the first two rounds of the playoffs with home field advantage going towards seeding which will help in maintaining the importance of the regular season. The Last three games will be played on location and rotate between sites of current BCS bowl venues, This way networks and advertisers still get their cut. And as far as tradition is concerned all team that are bowl eligible or are eliminated form the playoff in the early rounds will all be able to play in the current and traditional bowls.
I know its not a perfect system and anyone can poke holes in any suggestion but if I can come up with that a group of "experts" should be able to come up with something.
To say nothing can be done is a joke. Just like the BCS.
by phialpha5 on Mar 18, 2009 2:07 PM EDT reply actions
I hate to say it, but you know he’s right. just imagine asking a city to prepare for say ohio state fans and hiring a solid 5,000 extra police and then all the sudden the city ends up with virginia tech…. if i was a mayor thats not a bet I want to make
by wmyers6 on Mar 23, 2009 4:58 PM EDT reply actions
I agree, don’t mess with present bowl system, encrease it, more money AD’s like that. Key is have 6 (SIX) BCS bowls, all completed NLT jan 2nd, then another BCS pool encluding computer geek portion and have your 4 or 8 team mini playoff. 6 BCS bowls would create 12 slots, 6 Big six and one Non big six auto matic tie in, leaving 5 slots. With the mini playoff starting week that now championship game is played. One must win to have a chance to move on probably, only add one or two weeks to season, Basketball goes from Nov to Mar. Have Sugar, Rose, Fiesta Orange now only add two more. 4 team play off 1-4, 2-3 and 8 tam be 1-8, 2-7 etc, Rotating bowl sites. With additional BCS bowls, creating more money for teams and schools should be good, plus always chance a one or 2 loss team could win it. Just a thought but don’t mess with bowls but add more to it with playoff after 6 BCS bowls. Of course if only 4 team playoff and 6 winners.. someone gonna hte BCS poll again, but if 8 team playoff, 6 winners and 2 other teams, possible not in BCS bowl ariginally make the 8th slot. Keep rule no conf can have more 2 teams in….
by kraal2004 on Mar 25, 2009 1:58 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed