The Official 2011 NCAA College Football Thread

[Alan92RTTT]

Its not the payout to the schools its the income from tickets, merchandise and tv rights.

MI vs VT will be a popular game to watch, it will draw more advertising that MSU VS VT or Boise VS Kansas. A playoff system will not necessarily drive revenue the way the current system does. The description for the at-large BCS spots even says that popularity is a factor in determining which schools get the spots.

[TonyM]

Its not the payout to the schools its the income from tickets, merchandise and tv rights.

MI vs VT will be a popular game to watch, it will draw more advertising that MSU VS VT or Boise VS Kansas. A playoff system will not necessarily drive revenue the way the current system does. The description for the at-large BCS spots even says that popularity is a factor in determining which schools get the spots.

EXACTLY, and that's the fact of the matter.

A playoff system also wouldn't bring the same parity to conference revenues that the BCS does. Hate the BCS all you want, but two teams max from each conference are eligible for that BCS money which gets spread around the conference.

So even though MSU lost their shot at a BCS game (they didn't "get shafted", if they beat Wisc they go to a BCS bowl, simple) they'll still get some B1G money courtesy of Michigan.

[TonyM]

Woah, really? Beating up on Georgia wasn't enough to convince you they're legit? TCU isn't exactly a bad team.

And what exactly did Michigan do this year that has you so confident? Didn't play Wisconsin. Didn't play Penn State. Barely beat a very down Ohio State team. Nebraska was your only quality win and we all know Texas would have beaten them You lost to a bad Iowa team who lost to Iowa State. #42 SOS vs Boise's #69... Texas' was #4.

Seriously, with a month to prepare, I like Boise's chances against damn near any team. OU in the 2006 Fiesta Bowl. Oregon to start 2009. TCU in the 2009 Fiesta Bowl. VTech to start 2010. Georgia to start 2011... They're a well coached, well designed team that plays better than the sum of its parts.

Boise lost to TCU this year, so how does that make your point? One game here and there against a Georgia type team doesn't make the point. I'm with Tyler on this, they can't compete continuously with good teams.

[aaronatstate]

EXACTLY, and that's the fact of the matter.

A playoff system also wouldn't bring the same parity to conference revenues that the BCS does. Hate the BCS all you want, but two teams max from each conference are eligible for that BCS money which gets spread around the conference.

So even though MSU lost their shot at a BCS game (they didn't "get shafted", if they beat Wisc they go to a BCS bowl, simple) they'll still get some B1G money courtesy of Michigan.

I don't think MSU got shafted as much as Kansas State and Boise State. Or Ok State for that matter.

Boise lost to TCU this year, so how does that make your point? One game here and there against a Georgia type team doesn't make the point. I'm with Tyler on this, they can't compete continuously with good teams.

They lost because their kicker missed a FG. Hardly a reason to leave them out, when they are ranked as high as they are. Obviously the voters, and the computers think they should be up that high....

And I'd bet the Michigan/Va Tech game will be the least watched BCS game. And I'd be willing to bet the NC game has the lowest numbers to date of any BCS NC game.

[BigTyla]

They lost because their kicker missed a FG. Hardly a reason to leave them out, when they are ranked as high as they are. Obviously the voters, and the computers think they should be up that high....

That game should never have been that close. Boise has only themselves to blame for choking. Same can be said for OSU. Both of those loses are to mediocre teams they should have crushed.

[TonyM]

That game should never have been that close. Boise has only themselves to blame for choking. Same can be said for OSU. Both of those loses are to mediocre teams they should have crushed.

Exactly. A loss is a loss. Bottom line, just like MSU's loss or any other close loss this season.

That's sometimes the fallacy of placing so much on that stats instead of just W-L record. A "close" loss is STILL a loss, and teams should be penalized as such.

[stealthee]

You guys do realize the BCS itself has NOTHING to do with the at-large teams picked other than figuring out who is eligible right?

Everyone bitched when Boise played TCU a few years ago, and that was no fault of the BCS, the Fiesta Bowl itself PICKED those teams. The only bowl game the BCS itself is responsible for creating the matchup is the National Championship game itself. The other games are set either by conference champions, or the bowl selection committee of each respective bowl.

[HilbillyHomeboy]

Yep, that's exactly why WV is in the Orange. We have an auto, at large, bid, and we were the last one of those left, so the Orange had no choice since they are tied in with the ACC champ.

Jeremy

[TonyM]

You guys do realize the BCS itself has NOTHING to do with the at-large teams picked other than figuring out who is eligible right?

Everyone bitched when Boise played TCU a few years ago, and that was no fault of the BCS, the Fiesta Bowl itself PICKED those teams. The only bowl game the BCS itself is responsible for creating the matchup is the National Championship game itself. The other games are set either by conference champions, or the bowl selection committee of each respective bowl.

Yes, as myself and Alan have BOTH mentioned: It's all about the benjamins for the organizers of said bowl. Certainly explains the Sugar Bowl, anyway.

BCS parameters determine elgibility only, not bids.

[stealthee]

Exactly. So saying that the BCS screwed MSU or any other eligible at large is ridiculous. The only school the BCS screwed was Ok State. And ther coaches poll screwed them. They need to take all human polls out of the BCS equation.