Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Posted on: February 2, 2010 3:30 pm
 

One playoff plan may end up in the hands of the Justice Department. Another new one is a heartbeat away.

The difference between the college football and basketball postseasons are being played out at the same time. Football, of course, doesn’t have a playoff. Basketball has the perfect playoff.

The BCS is protected by a cadre of lawyers who believe that the maddening system is not in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. That protection is being challenged by Sen. Orrin Hatch who has asked the Justice Department to look into the legality of the system.

Meanwhile, March Madness is perceived as the best, fairest way to decide a national champion.

In both cases, the keepers of both postseasons are willling to do anything financially to prop up their systems. The BCS had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on lobbyists and PR flacks to promote their system. The NCAA is considering expanding the 65-team basketball tournament to 96.

The irony is dripping from the headlines. Never mind that BCS executive director Bill Hancock is hawking football’s flawed postseason after spending 13 years running the NCAA Tournament. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Texas AD DeLoss Dodds questioned the wisdom of expanding the bracket Tuesday in USA Today.

One is the head of a BCS conference getting BCS money. The other is the AD of the richest athletic department in the country -- also getting BCS money.

Expansion is bad? Getting a mixed message here, guys. Delany’s own conference apparently is aggressively pursuing expansion, perhaps by as many as three schools. Texas leads the world in post-secondary athletic facilities and is paying its coach $5 million a year.

Scratch that mixed message. We’re getting a headache. The keepers of the flame are also the bloaters of the flame. Both men say the process for “bracket creep” should be more transparent.

Texas didn’t canvas public opinion when it paid Mack Brown that $5 million. The Rose Bowl, Pac-10 and Big Ten don’t let us in on their contract negotiations. The Big Ten isn’t going to hold a press conference when officials are on campus examining expansion candidates.

At issue is whether the NCAA will opt out early this year from the 11-year, $6 billion tournament contract with CBS.

Dodds and Delany are both rightly worried about revenue split after adding 31 teams. In other words, does expansion make financial sense? There is no expansion without the money to back it up.  These two guys know money. Ask Big Ten schools which make $16 million per year off conference contracts. Ask Texas which, in the uneven Big 12 revenue split, makes at least $4 million per season than Baylor.

As for the expansion itself, it seems to me that the NCAA is about to ruin a good thing, a perfect thing by opting out and expanding the tournament. (Full disclosure: I work for CBS which stands to lose the contract but what the heck. This is my blog.) Ninety-six seems like too many teams. That’s the equivalent of a 34-team playoff in football.

That would go a long way toward making both postseasons even. They would both stink.

Category: NCAAF
Comments

Since: Aug 21, 2006
Posted on: February 4, 2010 2:49 am
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

And of course, I mean your attacks on those who are in favor of a playoff. College football needs one badly, just like CBS needs an edit button badly.



Since: Aug 21, 2006
Posted on: February 3, 2010 6:51 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

IQs can't get lower than zero. You seem determined to challenge that fact with your pro-playoff nonsense.



Since: Dec 4, 2007
Posted on: February 3, 2010 5:03 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Your argument is bogus - let's penalize teams for winning the big games when it really counts? ...  Shame on Dallas for not winning when it mattered   .


Thanks for making my point. Regular season games in sports with playoffs are MEANINGLESS. YOU said it, the playoffs are "when it really counts" and "when it mattered." YOU said it.

Are you saying just because the Cowboys beat the Giants during the regular season, only to choke against them in the playoffs means that we should penalize the Giants?


No what I'm saying is IF the NFL regular season games MEANT anything beyond glorified scrimmages, the Giants would have been ELIMINATED from title contention.  TWICE, not once, but twice the Giants lost to the Cowboys.  ANSWER THIS QUESTION: What did those games mean?

Post-season tournaments do not make a farce of the regular season. 
The larger the bracket, the more of a farce it is.  I'm in favor of a Plus-One for CFB. That's it. Anything more and ... KANSAS would have played for the NC in 2007, a team that played MOST of its schedule against high school caliber teams.

And I know all the blah blah blah about seeding etc.  But you'd admit that the most important aspect of a playoff IS GETTING IN, right?  Once you're in, all it takes is a little luck, getting hot, well-timed injuries in your opponents' ranks, etc., and what do you know, you have a putrid SIX-LOSS Giants team taking home the Lombardi Trophy. LMAO !!!  My point is that the Giants did not EARN the right to play for any title based on its REGULAR SEASON PERFORMANCE.  In a league like the NFL, even the most putrid team during the regular season that just barely makes the cut can win the title. Just plain stupid ...

CFB is currently denying teams like Boise State, TCU, Utah, or whoever (there's a different team making headlines each year) a chance to prove that they do belong


COLLEGE FOOTBALL does no such thing. Boise, TCU, Utah and "whoever" deny themselves the "chance to prove that they do belong." Boise, for instance, plays ONE (sometimes two) good teams AN ENTIRE SEASON. Their conference sked is a joke. Most of the Big 6 conference teams could walk through the WAC unbeaten or close to it EVERY YEAR.  No competition? You haven't earned the right to play for all the marbles.



Since: Dec 21, 2007
Posted on: February 3, 2010 4:22 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Your argument is bogus - let's penalize teams for winning the big games when it really counts?  Are you saying just because the Cowboys beat the Giants during the regular season, only to choke against them in the playoffs means that we should penalize the Giants?  Shame on Dallas for not winning when it mattered, not shame on the Giants for blowing the two regular season games.

Post-season tournaments do not make a farce of the regular season.  For example, in college basketball, how you perform in the regular season (and conference tourneys) has a major impact on seeding, which in turn as an impact on what region you play in (for #1 seeds), and - in a perfect system - the caliber of teams you will play in the first couple of rounds.  Post-season tournaments give more of an equal opportunity for teams to prove their mettle, and end the arguments of "my conference is better than your conference because it has a 'Big' in front of it."  In basketball, all those teams from mid-major conferences have to opportunity to show that they can (or cannot) play with the "big boys."  CFB is currently denying teams like Boise State, TCU, Utah, or whoever (there's a different team making headlines each year) a chance to prove that they do belong, and deserve a cut, rather than just being automatically shafted for being a "non-BCS" school.



Since: Mar 7, 2009
Posted on: February 2, 2010 11:50 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

We'll make an exception for you.



Since: Nov 28, 2009
Posted on: February 2, 2010 10:50 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Well said Pirate.  But you wont see to many fans of Ohio Sate, LSU, USC, Florida, etc, etc, agreeing with you and I.  Hmmm I wonder why.  Imagine the outcry if unbeaten Ohio State were left out of the BCS title game.  What a shame for teams like Utah a few years back and the Boise St teams that were given no shot.  Seriously it is a joke.

 Listen football isn't a beauty paegent, although the BCS makes it as so.  It is about team chemistry and playing well together.  Yes teams in the SEC get the most talented recruits acording to the analysts.  And yes they are very good teams with those very good recruits.  But maybe just maybe not the best.  But with this system you will never know.



Since: Nov 28, 2009
Posted on: February 2, 2010 10:50 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Well said Pirate.  But you wont see to many fans of Ohio Sate, LSU, USC, Florida, etc, etc, agreeing with you and I.  Hmmm I wonder why.  Imagine the outcry if unbeaten Ohio State were left out of the BCS title game.  What a shame for teams like Utah a few years back and the Boise St teams that were given no shot.  Seriously it is a joke.

 Listen football isn't a beauty paegent, although the BCS makes it as so.  It is about team chemistry and playing well together.  Yes teams in the SEC get the most talented recruits acording to the analysts.  And yes they are very good teams with those very good recruits.  But maybe just maybe not the best.  But with this system you will never know.



Since: Aug 29, 2006
Posted on: February 2, 2010 10:32 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

College football does something mentally to some people's brains that it doesn't do to any other sport fan.  Some reputable university needs to do a serious medical evaluation of this phenomena; i.e. conduct cat-scans, elector pulsar and thermal sensor imaging measuring brain activity (the lack of) while being questioned on the subject of college football playoffs.  Maybe this syndrome is an early symptom or precondition of Parkinson's disease?

I'm hopeful adult stem cell research may provide a cure for anti FBS college football (Div 1) playoff syndrome.  There needs to be a medical term for this.



Since: Feb 2, 2010
Posted on: February 2, 2010 9:50 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Nothing like an SEC-lite nonconference football slate.  Too bad the Sunbelt doesn't have more teams.  THose are really great scrimmages.   13 of 48 non-cons against BCS schools.  Of course they might have the huevos to schedule somebody if they weren't so worried about a second loss knocking them from a possbile NC game.  Bring on La-Monroe!!!!  Wouldn't want to give that up for a football tournament.



Since: May 9, 2009
Posted on: February 2, 2010 8:55 pm
 

NCAA Tournament vs. BCS

Wow. That's about all I can say about the "cajuninca" and his comments. I find it hardly surprising that an LSU supporter isn't giddy about the BCS. After all, in 2007 his 2 LOSS team sueaked its way right into the "title game." 2 losses in the precious regular season, and LSU gets to play in the title game over one undefeated team and 3 other 2 loss teams because of a subjective vote and a computer that is owned and operated by the BCS. Brilliant. College Football is the single greatest sport in America, yet it is held hostage by corporations and an entity that wants to control all money. It is a cartel, plain and simple. The "best regular season in sports" argument is worthless when UNDEFEATED seasons and Head-to-Head wins are trumped by a poll. A playoff would be the single biggest spectacle in American sport, without question. It would make billions, and fund many sports and programs at Universities who are struggling mightily right now.


I find it hilarious that you say that College Football would become a corporate sponsored ticket if we have a playoff. Sorry bud, but that has already happened. The BCS title game is about 80 percent corporate tickets already.

Playoffs will happen. You are in the minority, like it or not. The people will not stand for this charade any longer.



The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com