Chicago Tribune: Big Ten idea: a college football playoff with home games

Donate To GopherHole

YES. I can see the SEC and PAC schools disagreeing, becuase a team like LSU would be nowhere near as fast playing Ohio State in the shoe in December. (cry me a river).
 

The bowl games are what is killing playoffs. Look at all the other divisions, they all have playoffs. But the big money form the bowls make it unreasonable to change. But change they must.
 

The idea that the money would not be comparable in a playoff vs. BCS is a cannard. At one time the NCAA Basketball Tournament was a second thought to the National Invitational Tournament. Invitation vs. March Madness. BCS vs. a Tournament. A chance for a team to earn a National Title in Division 1. The television rights to a one and done over 3 or 4 weeks would dwarf the majority of the Bowls. Let the Big Hitters bid on the Championship Site if they choose. The Bowls will be a secondary arena if they choose a playoff.
 

Would we have to install heating coils?
 




Goddamnit there goes the dream of seeing the Gophers play in Pasadena
 

Just some random banter, under this setup, the Big Ten would've had three home games (Georgia at Ohio State 2002, LSU at Ohio State 2007, Oklahoma at Ohio State 2008) and four away games (Ohio State at Tennessee 1999, Michigan at Oklahoma 2004, Ohio State at USC 2006, Michigan at Florida, 2007) in the past fourteen years.
 



gophergrad said:
Goddamnit there goes the dream of seeing the Gophers play in Pasadena
Click to expand...
No, the B1G will protect the Rose Bowl (Delaney has said as much multiple times). This just means the Gophers wouldn't end up there if they were in the Top 4 teams in the BCS.
 

One thing that would have to be worked out is how to handle payouts, if any. In the current system, teams get payouts from BCS bowls for participating, and in the case of the Big Ten at least, some of that money is distributed across conference members. With home games, would the same payouts be in play? Or would it act as a home game for the home team, with the school taking in revenues, with no expectation of redistribution?
 

GoAUpher said:
No, the B1G will protect the Rose Bowl (Delaney has said as much multiple times). This just means the Gophers wouldn't end up there if they were in the Top 4 teams in the BCS.
Click to expand...

I was working off the line "That would do away with the facade of “neutral” sites such as New Orleans, Miami and Pasadena, Calif., and ease travel concern for fans."

I assumed it would eliminate the B1G affiliation with the Rose Bowl. You're scenario makes a lot more sense now that I think about it. I can't imagine anyone in the conference wanting to give up that game. Although downgrading it seems queer. .

So for the Gophers to get to the Rose Bowl it first has to become a fringe bowl? Boy I don't know.
 

gophergrad said:
I was working off the line "That would do away with the facade of “neutral” sites such as New Orleans, Miami and Pasadena, Calif., and ease travel concern for fans."

I assumed it would eliminate the B1G affiliation with the Rose Bowl. You're scenario makes a lot more sense now that I think about it. I can't imagine anyone in the conference wanting to give up that game. Although downgrading it seems queer. .

So for the Gophers to get to the Rose Bowl it first has to become a fringe bowl? Boy I don't know.
Click to expand...

Since 2007 (when they added the add'l national championship game), four of the six Rose Bowl games would be unchanged with this new setup (#7 USC vs #13 Illinois, #5 USC vs #8 Penn State, #7 Ohio State vs #8 Oregon, #5 Oregon vs #10 Wisconsin). So, I'd imagine in the new system you'd still have to be pretty damn good to make it to the Rose Bowl. Just not TOO good :)
 



Gopher07 said:
Since 2007 (when they added the add'l national championship game), four of the six Rose Bowl games would be unchanged with this new setup (#7 USC vs #13 Illinois, #5 USC vs #8 Penn State, #7 Ohio State vs #8 Oregon, #5 Oregon vs #10 Wisconsin). So, I'd imagine in the new system you'd still have to be pretty damn good to make it to the Rose Bowl. Just not TOO good :)
Click to expand...

Fair point. I said fringe bowl more because I wanted to use the phrase. Still would be weird.
 

gophergrad said:
I was working off the line "That would do away with the facade of “neutral” sites such as New Orleans, Miami and Pasadena, Calif., and ease travel concern for fans."
Click to expand...
The point of that phrase was to differentiate from previous 4 team "plus one" playoff proposals that typically suggested using the existing bowls as the play in games to the title game. This proposal does away with that entirely. The other bowls would exist as they do currently, with the same tie-ins.
 

They get to keep the Rose Bowl and make the regular season mean something. Sounds like a good idea. This might even mean that Florida would finally have to leave their home turf.

the Chicago Tribune:

Sources told the Tribune that a Big Ten plan would remove the top four teams from the BCS bowl pool and have semifinal games played on the college campus of the higher seed. That would do away with the facade of "neutral" sites such as New Orleans, Miami and Pasadena, Calif., and ease travel concern for fans.
The championship game then could be bid out, like the Super Bowl. ...
"We have to listen to the fans; we cannot be tone-deaf," said Northwestern athletics director Jim Phillips, who chairs the Big Ten's Administrators Council. "The Big Ten is open and curious."
 

GoAUpher said:
The point of that phrase was to differentiate from previous 4 team "plus one" playoff proposals that typically suggested using the existing bowls as the play in games to the title game. This proposal does away with that entirely. The other bowls would exist as they do currently, with the same tie-ins.
Click to expand...

I gotcha thanks for the clarification.
 



Very simple solution. 8-team playoff using the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowls. The "final 4" and championship game could be bid out much like basketball does it. This would protect these bowls which is important to the NCAA and would make them a ton of money. Plus, it would give us a true national champ which is the desire of fans.
 

But think of the travel costs from, say, penn st. to the orange bowl and then to Dallas for the national title.

Screw the bowls.
 

MNGoldenGophers1 said:
Very simple solution. 8-team playoff using the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowls. The "final 4" and championship game could be bid out much like basketball does it. This would protect these bowls which is important to the NCAA and would make them a ton of money. Plus, it would give us a true national champ which is the desire of fans.
Click to expand...

It doesn't really protect the bowls (well, specifically the Rose Bowl) because it would be difficult in many seasons to get the preferred conference matchups and still guarantee a properly seeded playoff structure. Thus, the bowls are less likely to support such a plan. The NCAA doesn't care about the bowls much in the end because they are run outside of the NCAA. The NCAA would prefer to get to a full regular playoff if they could.
 

MNGoldenGophers1 said:
Very simple solution. 8-team playoff using the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowls. The "final 4" and championship game could be bid out much like basketball does it. This would protect these bowls which is important to the NCAA and would make them a ton of money. Plus, it would give us a true national champ which is the desire of fans.
Click to expand...


And the kids could potentially add another two games of wear/tear/injuries to their bodies? The big bowl games are usually played right around Jan 1, does this mean the Champ game would extend to the middle of January and further conflict with the NFL playoffs?
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom