Fixed game

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Not as bad because the best two teams will presumably be in the playoff.

Agree.

There is no way a playoff system could be as unfair as what we got now. Even if a child puts it together.

OK..Can't argue with that.

There isn't another sport's evaluation/ranking/standings that depends more on a non-participant's opinion that college football. Well, that I know of. We all know what really matters to University Chancellors, ADs, etc...$$$.. and to have most teams inactive for 4-6 weeks..ie..not playing in a game that can generate revenue, is pretty hypocritical to those who whine about their team's ranking

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

OK..Can't argue with that.

There isn't another sport's evaluation/ranking/standings that depends more on a non-participant's opinion that college football. Well, that I know of. We all know what really matters to University Chancellors, ADs, etc...$$$.. and to have most teams inactive for 4-6 weeks..ie..not playing in a game that can generate revenue, is pretty hypocritical to those who whine about their team's ranking

It is hard to believe that a 16 team playoff using existing bowls for the preliminary games wouldn't generate a whole lot more money than the current system.

[Danzig]

i used to think that as well, that a playoff system could work. but then you look at the number of bowls out there.
guy was on mike and mike, talking about the current system vs a playoff system. i don't think it'll ever change. there is just too much money involved, and it would not be comparable to the lesser schools who go to the lesser bowls to switch systems. yes, the top eight might still end up ok--but there are over 60 teams who go to bowls. title ix was also mentioned as a factor.
for many schools, their football program funds practically all of their other sports at the school. lose the current money making system, then what?

besides, look at how much interest is generated, the debate. still pretty exciting stuff.

after hearing all this talk lately, i'm convinced the current system will not change. i guess the bcs title game is the best they can do regarding settling who is #1. the trick remains getting the top two in that game to play for #1!!

in other words, you may as well snuggle up and get comfy with the bowl system, instead of going nuts waiting for a change that will never come.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i used to think that as well, that a playoff system could work. but then you look at the number of bowls out there.
guy was on mike and mike, talking about the current system vs a playoff system. i don't think it'll ever change. there is just too much money involved, and it would not be comparable to the lesser schools who go to the lesser bowls to switch systems. yes, the top eight might still end up ok--but there are over 60 teams who go to bowls. title ix was also mentioned as a factor.
for many schools, their football program funds practically all of their other sports at the school. lose the current money making system, then what?

besides, look at how much interest is generated, the debate. still pretty exciting stuff.

after hearing all this talk lately, i'm convinced the current system will not change. i guess the bcs title game is the best they can do regarding settling who is #1. the trick remains getting the top two in that game to play for #1!!

in other words, you may as well snuggle up and get comfy with the bowl system, instead of going nuts waiting for a change that will never come.

No one said the **** sack bowls had to go. The fact is that the teams that play in the lower level games dont really make much money from them anyway. A 16 team playoff would generate WAY more money than the current system which could be disrtibuted among all division 1 teams so that everyone benefits. The propaganda is sickening.
Check this out
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_...yhoo&type=lgns

[Danzig]

but a 16 team playoff leaves about 50 teams out of the equation--and many are worred that a playoff system would essentially kill those other small bowls.

hey, i'd love to see a change and a playoff system. i just don't think it'll happen, regardless of what the fans want. until the powers that be want it, it will not happen--and i'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the schools to leap at the idea. they have it too good now.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

but a 16 team playoff leaves about 50 teams out of the equation--and many are worred that a playoff system would essentially kill those other small bowls.

hey, i'd love to see a change and a playoff system. i just don't think it'll happen, regardless of what the fans want. until the powers that be want it, it will not happen--and i'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the schools to leap at the idea. they have it too good now.

How would it kill those other bowls? You have 6-6 teams playing each other in places like El Paso, Texas. Many, if not most of them are played on weekday nights. It would be similar to the NIT in college basketball. It makes money or it would have faded away.

I think that the playoff system will come up when a Senator from a jilted state starts an inquiry into how a few individuals are monetarily benefitting from public institutions and college kids. When the names are dragged out of the shadows and the secret payments are brought to light, things will change. Jim Delany is as crooked as any politician.

[Danzig]

how would it? because it would make those bowls meaningless. some already are to some, but not to the teams playing it, those sponsoring it, those who buy ad space. i think it would be a hard sell that they would do as well under a new system.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It is hard to believe that a 16 team playoff using existing bowls for the preliminary games wouldn't generate a whole lot more money than the current system.

Agreed...