You may be using a new whip, but the horse is still dead.

Both the Rose and the Fiesta Bowls, which are, after all, just
"exhibition games, beat any game of the NBA finals in TV ratings. Over
the five games the two sports were probably close in total ratings
given the fall-off of the Sugar and Orange Bowls, but what does that
mean when 4 of the 5 BCS games don't "mean anything"?

But the comparison is beside the point since all the BCS games,
including the Orange, finished in the top ten in the 18-49 Men
demographic.

Attendance at all the Bowl games still was around 1.7 million, an
average of 50,000 per, higher than the regular season. And there were
no repeat ticket buyers like you find in all playoff situations.

It is dubious, at best, to claim that calling games "play-offs"
results in increased viewership since most of the 119 teams represent
small TV markets. Va Tech versus Cincinnati will not automatically
turn on TV sets no matter what you call it.

But a playoff will lead to reduced attendance unless the games are
played at the higher seeds home stadia.

Which, of course, returns us to the original question. What is gained
by eliminating most of the Bowls to stage a playoff? Or more
important, what is lost?

It is pretty clear that the loss is much greater than the gain.





On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Jim Mengel<jmmengel@...> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:21 PM, reidomo<mitch.agana@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> System is doing fine if what you're after is profits for colleges.
>
> Was it also supposed to bail out GM and Chrysler?
>>
>> MA
>>
>> --- In collegebcs@yahoogroups.com, Jim Mengel <jmmengel@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> Your argument could use some explanation. What is it that needs to change?
>>>
>>> Under the system in place college football stages a 12 game regular
>>> season that demands championship contenders to play at the highest
>>> levels each week. There is little margin of error for performance
>>> whether the opponent is marginal or top shelf. Unlike any other major
>>> sport, college football stages a single championship game and 33
>>> "exhibition" games at the conclusion of the season. The BCS
>>> championship game is second only to the Super Bowl in TV ratings while
>>> a half dozen of the "exhibition games" outperform the NBA, MLB,and NHL
>>> championship telecasts.
>>>
>>> All of this has combined to sustain record levels of attendance and
>>> lucrative broadcast contracts in the regular season and proliferating
>>> Bowl games, er "exhibition games".
>>>
>>> And those football crowds pay the cost of most of the rest of the
>>> intercollegiate sports programs at the member schools, especially the
>>> unfunded federal mandates of Title IX.
>>>
>>> So are you suggesting to college presidents that this "old,
>>> antiquated and monopolistic" system needs to be changed just so a
>>> playoff can be instituted to determine the number one team in the
>>> country?
>>>
>>> Better come up with something better than "combine the playoffs and
>>> the Bowls, shorten the regular season, here is a 16 team playoff
>>> matrix,etc..."
>>>
>>> Those horses have been beaten to death.
>>>
>>> If you are going to change the present system you need to have an
>>> alternative that is better.
>>>
>>> jim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:49 AM, reidomo<mitch.agana@...> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > You guys all crack me up. Everybody's caving on a playoff system using
>>> > the
>>> > same shopworn assertion that "every week is a playoff in college
>>> > footie".
>>> > Please, spare me your regressive thinking. I disagree with the claim
>>> > that
>>> > they are doing a good job, quite the contrary. Not picking on you Jason,
>>> > just finally responding to all of this mamby pamby NCAA Company Line
>>> > stuff
>>> > about how the system is fine like it is. It is not fine, in fact it is
>>> > old,
>>> > antiquated and monopolistic and it needs to be changed. It would be
>>> > complicated but it could be done. Do I have all the answers? No. But
>>> > neither
>>> > does anyone else, most especially those in control of this system we
>>> > have
>>> > now.
>>> >
>>> > Okay, rant is over now. Carry on. :)
>>> >
>>> > --- In collegebcs@yahoogroups.com, "Jason O'Mahony" <jayoshanks@> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> --- In collegebcs@yahoogroups.com, Alan Milnes <bcs@> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > 2009/6/10 Emmet O'Brien <obrienemmet@> wrote
>>> >> >
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > >I agreed they should have a playoff system, like they do in others
>>> >> > > > sports
>>> >> > >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > So you would be happy to be like the NFL and have 32 teams playing
>>> >> > the
>>> >> > regular season then contesting a play-off??
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Alan
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Thankfully, I don't think we will ever see a playoff system in NCAA
>>> >> Football as long as the Bowl Committee are around.......and besides
>>> >> this
>>> >> ain't baseball or basketball...it's a wee bit more physical than that.
>>> >>
>>> >> The BCS aint doing that bad a job in my opinion, it's by far a better
>>> >> way
>>> >> of ranking the teams over the course of the season than deciding the
>>> >> championship on 2 or 3 major polls!
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>