6 teams would be perfect. Saying the process was "perfect" is ridiculous. They didn't screw the pooch since Clemson and Bama were there.... other than that, you can't say anything else.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Three years in a row, the CFP got it right.
- Thread starter sackman
- Start date
going back to @MtnBuff 's post, it comes down to what you want in "champion". if rewarding the team who played the best overall season is your goal, then smaller playoffs make sense ==> the more teams that in the playoffs, the more likely an upset is. That's what we have in the NFL and lots of people like it, but the "best team of the NFL season" wins the SuperBowl just over 50% of the time. if that's what you want in college football, keep advocating for a larger playoff.
if the goal is to select a champion who had the best overall season (vs getting hot at the end of season when playoffs start), keep the post-season small.
if the goal is to select a champion who had the best overall season (vs getting hot at the end of season when playoffs start), keep the post-season small.
The goal is to make the most possible money.
Regardless of what we might think is best for fans, players or competitive balance.
I think there's a reason we have a "New Year's Six" structure. It anticipates an 8-team playoff in the future.
4 of those 6 bowls will be the quarterfinal game. 2 will be the semi-final games. They'll rotate that so that each bowl gets to host a semi-final every third year. And the championship, like it is now, will be some other city/site that's the highest bidder.
The question is whether the other bowl games survive that or how. Probably so and they'll all end up being owned by ESPN or other networks like the smallest made-for-tv-hardly-any-live-crowd bowls currently are.
And get the damn games on free TV. It's a travesty that low income households and cord cutters who have decided that cable just isn't worth it can't watch the CFP on over the air TV. Why the hell are these games on ESPN instead of ABC?
I think you answered your own question.
Okay, let me rephrase my question. Why the hell would the CFB conferences and NCAA agree to limit exposure for the CFP by having it on pay TV? Over the air TV = a lot more viewers.
P.S. I could also see a situation where to make this happen the Rose Bowl and probably the Sugar Bowl negotiation to be the fixed sites for the semi-final games. That would have quite a lot of benefit for improving attendance and planning for people if there was some consistency.
Because Disney bid the most and most fans are going to find a way to watch it even if it means going to a bar or a friend's house.
Agreed. Using that logic, CU has no business in the Pac 12 championship game or Alamo Bowl. Getting blown out doesn't mean you didn't deserve to be there.
You also have to consider how much fans of the various programs are willing and capable of paying to go watch their team for three weeks straight.
A single bowl game each year can be budgeted for. We won our bowl and get to the national championship can be absorbed as an "only happens a few times in your lifetime" splurge on top of that one game/year commitment.
Two additional games? And appearances in the second set of games (the semi-final) are going to occur twice as often over your lifetime than an appearance in the championship?
Three round trip plane tickets, three hotel rooms, tickets to three games, plus the time off work all that entails seems to me to be a recipe to drive down attendance at your "playoff" games.
A single bowl game each year can be budgeted for. We won our bowl and get to the national championship can be absorbed as an "only happens a few times in your lifetime" splurge on top of that one game/year commitment.
Two additional games? And appearances in the second set of games (the semi-final) are going to occur twice as often over your lifetime than an appearance in the championship?
Three round trip plane tickets, three hotel rooms, tickets to three games, plus the time off work all that entails seems to me to be a recipe to drive down attendance at your "playoff" games.
branding your product as a premium not available to the commoners is a valid, long-term marketing strategy. open debate whether it's appropriate for this product, but a valid strategy to consider nevertheless.
Good point. NCAA Tourney isn't packed houses with fans of the individual teams for that reason.
If attendance is the priority, the thing to do would be to have the higher seed host the game and then only the championship is at a neutral site. I don't see that happening, though. Less money in that versus having bowls/cities guarantee money. That's why the Pac-12 went away from "higher seed hosts" in its championship game. Attendance wasn't the driver.
True for the first two rounds, but the Final 4 is typically mostly fans of the participating teams, and I think that's a better comparison to what we're talking about here.
Yeah - I'm just pretty sure that the crowd is what helps make college games more compelling television. Seeing the stadium splits in color, singing the fight songs is something that I think you would start to lose if you expanded the playoff.
What's really interesting to think about though is what happens to all of this if the P5 becomes the P4 and splits from the rest of the NCAA. The conference championship games would become the first round of the playoff, and how awesome would it be to have the Rose Bowl be the Pac/B1G winner and the Sugar the SEC/ACC winner, seeding be damned? And then the winner of those playing for it all in a rotating National Championship game.
So, fans of the teams would skip the first two rounds of playoffs, and only show up to the final? (this would be the time/resources equivalent of showing up the final four).
That would suck.
BuffLuke80
Well-Known Member
Whenever they've had the Ncaa tourney at the Pit, it gets packed as hell. That's men's or women's, been to both. The women's was actually better, UNM was in it. They played Duke when Alana Beard was there, loud mofo up in there.
not at all, for the last three years I believe we've seen all the playoffs game seats filled largely by fans of the involved teams, just like the Final 4 tends to be
We're also talking about more team fanbases filling the crowd and fewer than 20k seats when we talk about hoops. It's relatively easy to fill a basketball arena and relatively difficult to fill a football stadium.
And I'm saying that going to 3 cities in 3 weeks is a much bigger commitment, and fewer people will make it. Especially because, by definition you're asking them to make that commitment more often.
The final 4 is one city, in one week - and it's only 25,000 people or so.
ehhhhhh. not sure the numbers back you up. Hoops on the left, Football on the right
| year | site | CG attendance | year | site | CG attendance |
| 2017 | U of P Stadium | TBD | 2018 | Mercedes-Benz Superdome | TBD |
| 2016 | NRG Stadium | 74340 | 2017 | Raymond James Stadium | 74512 |
| 2015 | Locas Oil Stadium | 71149 | 2016 | U of P Stadium | 75765 |
| 2014 | AT&T Stadium | 79238 | 2015 | AT&T Stadium | 85788 |
| 2013 | Georgia Dome | 74326 | |||
| 2012 | Mercedes-Benz Superdome | 70913 | |||
| 2011 | Reliant Stadium | 70376 |
They've held the Final 4 in some big stadiums because the demand could support it, but if they held the first two weekends' games in a 75,000 person stadium it would be pretty darn empty in there.
agree. first couple rounds of the tourney are generally poorly attended. even in hoops-crazy-Raleigh, unless Duke or Carolina is playing, 1st/2nd round tickets went for a song and you could sit where-ever you wanted
somebody
Well-Known Member
Lol, works for Ferrari, not CFP.
These are all very valid points. I had no issues going to San Antonio. I didn't go to the CCG, though. Had there been another game this week, I wouldn't have gone to that, either.
Wait a second.... who are we kidding? These things are set up for folks in the Southeast. You know, the unemployeds.
Here's what the 8-team playoff would have looked like if the 5 champs were auto-bids for the Top 5 seeds and the next 3 teams got slotted by rank (based on CFB rankings). Strange year when the B1G would have gotten all 3 at-large bids.
1. Alabama 13-0 (SEC) vs. 8. Wisconsin 9-3 (At Large)
2. Clemson 12-1 (ACC) vs. 7 Michigan 10-2 (At Large)
3. Washington 12-1 (Pac 12) vs. 6 Ohio State 11-1 (At Large)
4. Penn State 11-2 (B1G) vs. 5 Oklahoma 10-2 (B12)
Edit: going back to an earlier discussion, I don't know how this would be feasible for attendance unless the top 4 seeds got to play the 1st round at home.
JCOLE12010
Well-Known Member
You seem to be forgetting that the Final was a blowout in year 1.
JCOLE12010
Well-Known Member
Start the season 1-2 weeks earlier, so all games, even the CCGs are done by 11/30.
December is for finals, family, relaxation, game prep, etc
Jan 1 is for the Big Bowls, the Rose, Sugar, etc and they are included in the CFP
January is a 4 week 16 team extravaganza
Student-Athletes might have to choose one and only one sport, and they will choose CFB
The Student-Athletes will have to manage their time in the second semester the way they did in the first.
this is the perfect balance between the $$ and what the NCAA claims to believe in.
December is for finals, family, relaxation, game prep, etc
Jan 1 is for the Big Bowls, the Rose, Sugar, etc and they are included in the CFP
January is a 4 week 16 team extravaganza
Student-Athletes might have to choose one and only one sport, and they will choose CFB
The Student-Athletes will have to manage their time in the second semester the way they did in the first.
this is the perfect balance between the $$ and what the NCAA claims to believe in.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
Wrong, you make the Rose a playoff game.
Oklahoma pointless? There's plenty of Oklahoma fans out there who think they would have fared better in the semi final than the two losers.