• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Bowl Games on their way out?

B

Blgs Griz Fan

Well-known member
Interesting read.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--bowls--extravagant-revenues-are-closely-examined-as-the-ncaa-mulls-a-playoff-system.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
While financial numbers from this year aren't publicly available, the last time the Sugar Bowl "double hosted" – it's namesake game and the BCS title game – it did $34.1 million in revenue and turned an $11.6 million profit. Since the game enjoys a 501 (c) (3) non-profit status, that was all tax free.
Click to expand...

:roll: :roll:
 
A lot of talk that the MWC and CUSA will have a playoff of some type and the championship matchup will be hosted in a conference stadium. The conference will keep the revenue and not go to the bowl game
 
billings_poke said:
A lot of talk that the MWC and CUSA will have a playoff of some type and the championship matchup will be hosted in a conference stadium. The conference will keep the revenue and not go to the bowl game
Click to expand...
how long is the sickle and hammer of the soviet ncaa going to let that happen I bet they get the shit fined out of them
 
dupuyer griz said:
billings_poke said:
A lot of talk that the MWC and CUSA will have a playoff of some type and the championship matchup will be hosted in a conference stadium. The conference will keep the revenue and not go to the bowl game
Click to expand...
how long is the sickle and hammer of the soviet ncaa going to let that happen I bet they get the shit fined out of them
Click to expand...

not a problem with the NCAA
 
Wow, talk about greed and gluttony. $182,000 just to get the band into the game to perform is obscene. It doesn't take a crystal ball and a deck of Tarot cards to predict that some major changes are on the horizon. When the FCS teams participate in the playoffs, doesn't the NCAA cover travel costs, etc.? I know the NCAA takes a significant portion of the gate, but at least the teams aren't digging into their own pockets to get to the stadium.
 
Check out today's NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/sports/ncaafootball/key-issues-in-deciding-college-footballs-new-postseason.html?pagewanted=1&ref=sports" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
So, a four-team "playoff" that they're not going to call a "playoff." I suppose they'll just reserve two spots for the SEC.
 
Typical BS in the BCS. Interestingly, the only reason they appear to want to go to a 4 team "playoff" system is due to finances. They still have no concept about how a national champion should be crowned.
 
I don't quite understand their opposition to having teams host on their home field. They make it seem like Oregon hosting a game in a 54,000 capacity stadium would be an embarrassment.

If they host semifinals one place and the NC somewhere else, are there going to be tons of people wanting to travel to LA one weekend and New Orleans the next, in the middle of the holidays? If they host all three games at the same location are fanbases going to want to spend a whole week or more in one place to see both games?

I can see the draw of the bowls, having a month to plan for a little 3 day vacation somewhere warm. But this final 4 on a neutral field might present more logistical challenges than just hosting at home.
 
ranco said:
Typical BS in the BCS. Interestingly, the only reason they appear to want to go to a 4 team "playoff" system is due to finances. They still have no concept about how a national champion should be crowned.
Click to expand...
Obviously, it's all about the money. From their point of view, four teams is probably about right: Enough to look like they're giving the "very best" (however that's decided) teams a shot at a so-called NC, but small enough so the scheduling and hosting doesn't get too crazy. The good news -- for them -- is they don't actually have to get it right the first time. People bitch about the (non)-system they have now, but they watch anyway. The BCS biggies can try something and then tweak it without necessarily hurting the payday.

Think about this too: A playoff system means that every team that makes it into the playoffs, except one, ends the season on a loss. So, while the coaches and team members, may think they can make a run in a playoff, the AD and publicity folks may see it differently. Unless the team truly has a chance to go all the way, why take a chance that the fans will have a bad taste in their mouths from a season-ending loss? Better to go off and try to win just one (bowl) game to close the season with a happy ending.

As for the bowls, I believe most will survive. I just think, with all the terrible publicity they've gotten, some of the most egregious rip-offs will get toned down. (Not because of goody-goody idealism, sadly, but because the money should attract new hogs to the trough, at the expense of the bowl oinks.)

:twocents:
 
GrizDDS said:
I don't quite understand their opposition to having teams host on their home field. They make it seem like Oregon hosting a game in a 54,000 capacity stadium would be an embarrassment.

If they host semifinals one place and the NC somewhere else, are there going to be tons of people wanting to travel to LA one weekend and New Orleans the next, in the middle of the holidays? If they host all three games at the same location are fanbases going to want to spend a whole week or more in one place to see both games?

I can see the draw of the bowls, having a month to plan for a little 3 day vacation somewhere warm. But this final 4 on a neutral field might present more logistical challenges than just hosting at home.
Click to expand...


Well, luckily for everyone, bowl season is 8 months long so they can play the semi's early in bowl season and the championship at the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top