[Lefty Noob]

Insurance company AllState has purchased sponsorship right to the Sugar Bowl, formerly sponsored by Nokia. Of course, this comes at a time where insurance companies are, in the words of the AP, "under heavy criticism for [their] slow and often contentious dealings with Hurricane Katrina victims." AllState has all the right in the world to do whatever they want with their money, but... something about this just doesn't sit right with me. What do you guys think?

[cjg11582]

Once again college football exposes its hypocrisy. They neglect us of a playoff under the very thinly veiled excuse of "tradition", yet they ignore it when it comes to the corporate dollar. which is neither here nor there anymore. Just enforce a 16 team playoff already.
To all the University presidents: Trust me, there is plenty of money to be made with a college football tournament. If you need a case study, just take a gander at how much money march madness generates.

[wvuauthor]

I cannot see college football ever going to a playoff; at least not anytime soon. They would never make more money with a tournament than they do with the bowl games...

The difference between the basketball tournament and the bowl games is that the bowl games are a week long affair. They have parades, etc. During the bball tournament there is not a lot of this, and the main attraction is the game-which is the way it should be.

Bowl games attract a lot of people who spend a lot of money on hotels, food, etc.

[cjg11582]

That is all speculation. If a sixteen team playoff (Five at-large bids, 11 conference champions) Were to take place the contracts would skyrocket from corporations because the games would be so much more significant. They would be televised and attended in much higher frequencies. They would also encompass every conference for a chance to win a national title. And it would certainly be applicable to have legions of tedious bowl games (College football's version of the NIT) despite the fact every conference would be profiting off of a playoff. I think it is the exact opposite, we would see economic growth as the result of a playoff, not depreciation.
If you recall in 2004 when the owner of Gateway offered twenty million to both LSU and USC to play a national title game (A real national title game) and an additional 10 million to the winner, if that were actually a sanctioned event by The NCAA, both those schools would have made at least twenty million for them and their conference. And that was just one game. So why couldn't a profit be derived from a playoff?

[wvuauthor]

There would definitely be a chance at a profit, but not like there is now. Again, bowl games are week long events and make the cities a lot of money.

Of course, this could happen with a playoff system if set up correctly, but I dont believe it is the way to go.

[cjg11582]

I have to disagree. The popularity of college football can support any post-season format if it can support the BCS. Do you think there is another sport on the face of the earth that would thrive like college football does with this ludicrious mathematical equation that determines who plays for a national title? A playoff would instill even more popularity, and where there is popularity there is also money. The notion of bowl games being week long events is still applicable to a playoff format, as every major sporting event in this country is drawn out over the course of a minimum of one week.

[wvuauthor]

I understand where you are coming from saying that sporting events are drawn out, but not like they are in college football. They have parades, etc. which really draw people in.

If you are an average Duke basketball fan with a day job you will not be able to follow your team in person as they go through the tournament due to site changes, etc. The same would hold true with football...

If you are a USC football fan you may be able to make one bowl game, but saying that a fan would be able to make three or four straight games, likely in different parts of the country is not correct in my opinion. This will in turn lower the tourism profits for participating cities, which means that it will not happen...

[cjg11582]

Are you inferring that these hypothetical playoff games wouldn't fill stadiums? If USC is playing Georgia in the second round, the game could be an Iceland and there would be a line to get in.
Also, I think you are placing to much emphasis on parades and things that generate revenue for the cities that hold these games. Corporate contracts dictate the terms and persuade Universities. The University presidents simply lack the foresight to realize how much money can be gained from this deal. Those contracts would soar along with the ratings. Just look at the three non-championship BCS games that took place this past year. Do you know how much more casual fan interest is included if OSU-ND, FSU-PSU and WVU-UGA are all playing to advance another round? Where the fans go the money follows. There is a reason the students on the women's pistol team at OSU do not receive the same financial (speaking strictly of scholarships, of course) or public recognition that those on the football team do.

[wvuauthor]

We are going to have to agree to disagree, because I cannot ever see a way that a playoff system is going to be better..

I definitely see where you are coming from, but I do not think that it is better as far as finances are concerned.

With that being said, it SHOULD not be about money, but it always is which is why a playoff will never happen. I would love to see a cut and dry way of determining a true champion, but I am not sure what system would work.