we cant have a playoff system b/c we care about the "student athletes" | Page 2 | TigerFan.com

bhelmLSU · Dec 29, 2006

cadillacattack said: ↑

you're correct that it is about "the money," but IMO it has little to do with attendence or the money spent by traveling fans.

Currently, bowl moneys and tv revenues are divided only among the BCS programs. If the NCAA presidents were to support a playoff, they would then run two risks.

The first risk would be in jeopardizing their status as a tax-exempt entertainment business, which in reality it really is.

The second is that the pool of money would, by charter, be divided by all NCAA member institutions, not just those that are current members of the BCS. In other words, there would be more overall money to divide, but it would be divided among a greater number of recipients, thus resulting in a net decline to those BCS schools.

Click to expand...

Exactly and if they had a large playoff every regular season game wouldnt be as important= decline in attendence and tv ratings. All equals a huge loss to the NCAA and University Presidents. Not going to happen.

The only type of playoff would be a BCS Final Four or BCS Elite 8. Now that could bring even more money. IMO they will start with a plus one a gradually increase the amount of teams if they see a need to.

Also the controversy the BCS system brings is a huge plus for ratings. Even though the fans complain about every aspect of the BCS this is the reason we will have a BCS for many years to come.

mctiger · Dec 29, 2006

Obadiah said: ↑

The main reason there won't be a play off is because of money. It would cost the fans too much money and their would be poor attendance. The majority of people would stay home and go to the championship game and not the playoff games.

If it takes 3 games to get to the championship game, then that means that the fans have to buy 3 separate tickets to each game. If it is at 3 different locations, then factor in 3 plane tickets per person and hotel rooms.
Click to expand...

That is not a concern during March Madness. The teams who make it to the Final Four play at 3 different sites over 3 weekends. Same financial predicament applies, yet no one suggests that the tournament is bad for the fans. Quite the contrary. Nope, that reason doesn't fly. Neither does the argument about too many games cutting into class time for the "student athlete." The teams who make it to the D1-AA finals will have played 15 games. If they can play 15, why can't the D1 guys?

TigerzTigah · Dec 30, 2006

Hey, tirk!

Nice avatar, I saw it and "Oh, my God" until I realized there was a single "string" attached. Since we're talking about clams, lol, there was a time when New Orleans only saw a Sugar Bowl. Then they added a New Orleans Bowl.

Eventually, there will be a playoff system. It's almost a foregone conclusion now. Problem is, you cannot get anyone to agree "how". But since it's all about money as you clearly show on your list, it's going to happen.

It would be un-American if it didn't.

It seems to me, two additional weekends of play could be accomodated and would result in a nice profit for some of these host cities. They could even float the host city around like they do in the Olympics, not just a BCS town.

:geauxtige Sugar Bowl :champs:

NoLimitMD · Dec 30, 2006

NCAA only cares about football student athletes. Basketball players, for example, travel exponentially more than football players. The whole assertion is laughable.

BostonBengal · Dec 30, 2006

Oh, it's never been viewed as "its because we care about the student athletes"...or at least as far as any diehard college football fan is concerned.

Money talks and B.S. walks.

I guess the NCAA only cares about football student athletes because basketball players and baseball/softball players play more games and miss more class time (since they play weekday games) than any other sport