Statistical Analysis: The BCS is Terrible
College Football, Numbers May 13th. 2008, 2:00pm
The long and winding intern search has introduced us to some awfully bright folks, and that includes Max Wasserman, a college student at Cornell. He pitched us the idea that, using margin of victory – the most quantifiable indicator – the BCS bowl games have been less competitive than the pre-BCS Big Four bowl games. And before you argue that the BCS has brought us closer to finding a National Champion, Wasserman found this: If you compare the Division I-AA championship games (beginning in 1978) to the BCS championship games (beginning in 1998), the margin of victory is closer for I-AA title games. Further proof we need a tournament. Max’s analysis and charts after the jump.
I found the margin of victory of every Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange Bowl from the past 30 seasons, the last 10 of which have been under the BCS system. (Just so it’s clear, the margin of victory is the number of points between the winning score and the losing score. So for this season, the margin of victory for the Orange Bowl was three (Kansas 24, Va.
Tech 21).) Once all these values were entered, I found the average margin of victory for the past 10 or BCS years (1998-2007) and the average margin of victory for the 20 years before the BCS (1978-1997).
The idea is to use margin of victory as a measurement of the quality of the bowl game, with a lesser margin of victory implying a more exciting game. As such, I treated all overtime games (like the Boise State-Oklahoma Fiesta Bowl) as having a margin of victory of 0. This also served to keep things consistent with the tie games from before the overtime era. Obviously, margin of victory isn’t an absolute indicator of the quality of a game, as there can be close but boring games due to low scoring, or games that were exciting and only became blowouts towards the end. However, without re-watching and ranking the quality of every bowl game of the past 30 years, a true indicator of game quality cannot be quantified. As such, margin of victory remains the most quantifiable indicator.
As you can see from the results, the average margin of victory increased by at least a couple points each from the pre-BCS to the BCS era for the Rose, Sugar, and Orange Bowls. The Fiesta Bowl’s average margin of victory stayed the same, although it was greater than the averages for all the other Bowls in the pre-BCS era. This may be in part to the Fiesta not being a “top-tier” bowl game until the mid-80s. I also took the opportunity to average all the margins of victory for all the bowls in the pre-BCS and BCS categories (even factoring in the two National Championship games from the last two years into the BCS category) and found a two-point increase in the average margin of victory.
The purpose of the data is to show that the although BCS system may spark controversy nearly every year and may be loathed by college football fans, it’s not creating better games either. You could argue that before the BCS, the major bowl games were better when the organizers weren’t locked into their competitors. Do you think the Sugar Bowl would have taken Hawaii if the BCS didn’t mandate that the Warriors be selected? And what about the Rose Bowl being forced to select the Big Ten runner-up the past two years, resulting in USC winning games by 14 and 32 points?
Of course, then you get into the argument that before the BCS, the bowls would not always result in a consensus national champion. That’s when the playoff argument comes into play. Which is why I took the liberty of averaging the margins of victory for the Division I-A national championship games of the last 10 (BCS) years and comparing it to the average of the margins of victory of all the Division I-AA national championship games (from 1978). The results: Average margin of victory for D I-A championship games: 14.50 points. Average margin of victory for D I-AA championship games: 12.87 points. Just goes to show that if you want the best chance of having the truly best teams play for the championship, have a playoff. It’s better for everyone and everything. Except the Rose Bowl.
91 Responses to “Statistical Analysis: The BCS is Terrible”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:01 PM
This was…interesting. And well done. And factual.
And this is a blog.
/head asplode
May 13th, 2008 at 2:03 PM
Excellent post…for me to poop on
/Jim Delaney
May 13th, 2008 at 2:04 PM
Also, quibbles: Before the BCS, there were Bowl Alliances and Coalitions that tried to lock certain high-ranked teams in, right? Does that factor in?
And a 12.87 AVERAGE margin of victory in championship games just points to the lopsidedness of some seasons; the App States of the world in D-2 make grist of everyone for three years, then go away, much like mid-90s Nebraska or the mini-Miami and USC dynasties of this decade, which both produced 30-point victories in title games.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:06 PM
The Rose Bowl wasn’t and isn’t forced to pick the Big Ten runner up, they choose to.
I am in the minority but I like the system as it is, makes every single week mean something, a playoff would render most of the regular season meaningless.
Like this year, Ohio State/USC is a huge game and despite lost year, most likely the loser has very little chance of winning the national title, add a playoff and it’s just another game.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:06 PM
I like these # crunching posts … there’s another one coming later today
May 13th, 2008 at 2:07 PM
while your analysis was thorough and detailed, you neglected to factor in how much freaking money these blue-bloods make off the current system.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:09 PM
I’m willing to bet that both those average scores are within one standard deviation of each other, and that all this statistical analysis is completely and utterly meaningless.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:09 PM
i disagree. both play in incredibly weak conferences, and you figure both of these teams will run the table outside of that. if it’s close, and it’s their only loss, either could easily get in over a 2 loss SEC team (cough*Georgia*cough).
May 13th, 2008 at 2:09 PM
well, you also must remember that since the advent of the bcs 10 years ago, in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and likely 2007 would have left the college football landscape with a split national title.
in that respect, the bcs has worked.
my biggest problem with the bcs is twofold:
1) in the rare case of two teams still standing with undefeated records, there still should be a plus-one.
2) teams that cannot win their own division (nebraska 2002) can still qualify for the bcs title game. that is beyond wrong.
fix the aforementioned two items, and i can live with the bcs.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:10 PM
there is no chance that I am going to read that thing
May 13th, 2008 at 2:11 PM
TBL prefers good and thoughtful analysis as opposed to dick jokes and swearing. GAY!!!
May 13th, 2008 at 2:11 PM
PLUS ONE!! PLUS ONE!! I don’t see why this can’t work. It satisfies the “a playoff would take too much emphasis off the regular season” crowd, while also making it more likely that the two best teams in the land will face off in the final game.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:11 PM
great post TBL. I am a big fan of the playoff system in college football. Only NCAA sport that does not do that type of system
I liked this post, but not well enough to look forward to another number crunching post. If i wanted to look at numbers all day, i would actually work
May 13th, 2008 at 2:12 PM
the biggest problem with the BCS is that the SEC will bitch and moan no matter what.
im fucking sick and god damned tired of hearing, “wah, we cannibalize each other, wah…” SHUT THE FUCK UP. i pray to god that either USC, Texas, Oklahoma or OSU makes it to the title game against Georgia or Florida and beats the ever loving snot out of them just to get the SEC to shut the FUCK UP.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:13 PM
ATL, I think the plus one could work and I agree would keep the meaning of the regular season hight.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:13 PM
Is there a statstical analysis on how many people understand these posts?
I say 6.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:14 PM
id have no problem with a plus-one…actually, id welcome it.
but a playoff? no thanks.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Thanks Bill Nye! What’s next on this learning adventure voyage?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Although there will always be controversy, even with a playoff, how do you determine the playoff teams? Some team’s school will bitch about how they belong if they don’t get in.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Yeah, spencer, because the Big 10 never whines. Last week, when the plus one was ruled out, wasn’t it widely reported that it was the Big 10 and Pac 10 that were against it???
May 13th, 2008 at 2:15 PM
atl…yea, but what wasn’t widely reported was that the Big East and Big 12 were also unanimously against it.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:17 PM
conference champion only.
the rest go to the outback bowls, gator bowls and cotton bowls of the world.
as stated above, ensure that two teams don’t end up with undefeated records and that non-division winners advancing to the title game and i can live with the bcs.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:17 PM
So Spence, why is the SEC the big problem?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:18 PM
So Jimmy, you want the MAC champion getting in over a second place SEC team, or the Sun Belt champion getting in over a second place Big 12 team?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:19 PM
I’m from a little school names Cornell. Maybe you’ve heard of it?
/Andy Bernard.
Ok, I’m going to actually read the post now.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:20 PM
@ CBH: I do. It’s like how the MAC champ gets in in basketball. Conferences get auto bids in every other sport, why should football be different?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:20 PM
i mean, i know this is a blog, but can i get some simple standard deviations or t-tests? some of the margins don’t seem large enough to be statisically significant.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:20 PM
August…because I’m a buckeye fan and am supposed to hate the SEC no matter how irrationally.
plus the only conferences that want a playoff are the SEC and the ACC, and im not about to insult such ACC football powerhouses like NC State and Wake Forest.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:20 PM
“You could argue that before the BCS, the major bowl games were better when the organizers weren’t locked into their competitors. Do you think the Sugar Bowl would have taken Hawaii if the BCS didn’t mandate that the Warriors be selected? And what about the Rose Bowl being forced to select the Big Ten runner-up the past two years, resulting in USC winning games by 14 and 32 points?”
This paragraph makes it clear that said person does not have any clue about college football. Not only were many bowl games locked into their choices due to conference affiliations before the BCS, but the Rose Bowl (as already mentioned) chose to take the big 10 runner up in order to preserve the traditional Big10/PAC10 matchup (I have no arguments against Michigan getting picked…Illinois on the other hand was a joke). Yeah, the Sugar didn’t want Hawaii, but part of the reason people clammor for a playoff is because of the supposed lack of access for the minor league teams to get a shot at a championship. You can’t argue that the playoffs are needed to get Boise State a shot, then turn around and use Hawaii to show that the BCS is terrible.
Bottom line: college football will never have a controversy free champion…but it has done without for a century, why screw it up now? You add a 16 team playoff, you destroy something special to appease the people who only tune into college football when the BCS starts (notice how almost every anti-BCS column is almost always written by some writer who doesn’t exclusively cover college football. Gene Wojciechowski probably saw all of 3 college football games last year-OSU/Michigan, ND/USC and the national championship game, yet he supposedly knows better than the people who actually live and breath college football? yeah, right)
Spencer, playoffs would make loads more money that the BCS, however, most teams make a huge slice of their money off of home ticket sales. Those ticket sales are the main reason the conferences are loathe to even think about a playoffs, because no one wants to screw up the only regular season that actually matters.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Guys, it’s obvious this guy put a lot of time and effort into this post (although reliance on a 10 year sample is a bit too frisky in my book). The point is we owe it to him to veer this as far off-topic as possible and as quick as possible, in true TBL commenter fashion.
So which fallen child star is hotter: Judy Winslow or Stephanie Tanner?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:21 PM
there is no chance that I am going to read that thing
+1 Blazers. If I wanted thoughtful reading, I would read Playboy.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Anndy Bernard started the frisbee gold team at Cornell… we live to Frolf.
/still sure Cornell kids NEVER hear these jokes.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:23 PM
@CBH – I can see his logic…that would at least eliminate the chances of a team that didn’t win their conference winning the playoff overall.
But again, I’m still against a playoff. I think a Plus One is the way to go, and I don’t see why it wasn’t accepted by the NCAA, or the conferences, or whoever. There’s no rational argument against it. The bowls say that their games will lose emphasis because they’ll no longer have the chance of being the de facto title game, but it’s not like everyone in the world wouldn’t still watch.
@Spencer – As an SEC fan, I don’t hate Big 10…why the hate for us? I think most SEC fans are too busy hating the other schools in their conference.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:24 PM
I wonder if he’s in Here Comes Treble?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Judy Winslow did porn right?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:25 PM
@Hef: Yes. It was meh. I mean someone told me it was.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:26 PM
@Hef – yes, but Stephanie Tanner did meth…I’d have to go with Steph. Watching someone do porn is great…watching someone do meth – not so much
May 13th, 2008 at 2:26 PM
This post would be more meaningful if standard deviation was taken into account. 10 years or roughly 40 games is a pretty small sample size from which to draw conclusions.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:26 PM
i got sidetracked when i saw this guy went to cornell, which reminded me of my second favorite “office” exchange/quote of all time.
dwight: what is the capital of maine?
andy: the capital of maine is montpelier, vermont, which is near ithaca, new york, where i went to cornell.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Okay, so I’m going to have to out myself here. I’m Max Wasserman, this was my post. I did the NFL Draft GPA thing as well.
Since I don’t have time to respond to every comment (I’ve got a final in less than 5 hours), I’m only going to respond to one comment that stuck out.
@Nick: Yeah, I know I didn’t need to explain it, but it’s a habit from being forced to write excruciatingly detailed lab reports where nothing can be left to assumption. And nice job picking Bill Nye, a Cornell alum. He frequently comes back to Ithaca to guest lecture certain courses for a day. He also swears a lot.
Thanks for all the feedback. I’ll work on making the numbers a bit more fun should I get the chance to do it again.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:28 PM
because we dont have that problem. who are we going to hate, Michigan? fuck, we feel bad for them after the shit kicking we’ve been giving them lately and the fact theyre stuck with Rich Rod for at least 3 years.
so, instead, we hate the conference we wish we were a part of. trust me, the bucks and their fans would fit right in. we’re crazy, irrational, hate everything that isn’t scarlet and gray and will travel in convoy fashion to wherever they suit up. come on…talk to slive. put in a good word for us.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Since when was Cornell in the BCS.
Atl, I agree, plus one could work, many reasons why have been stated above. But I do somewhat agree with what some of the commissioners said, that once you get 4, then the #5 team complains that they want 6, then 8, then 16. Look at the basketball tournament, some morons (Boeheim) want 120 freaking teams and in a few years we’ll probably be there.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:30 PM
Yeah, meth is gross. And so are the ads. NSFW
May 13th, 2008 at 2:30 PM
Here’s the montana meth site and it is SFW.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:30 PM
really, i dont see this happening. you start holding games at home teams’ sites, and the school sees the money, not the conference. by doing it this way, every team from OSU to Northwestern gets a slice of the pie. you really think that OSU or LSU or Texas would let a game happen at their place if they knew they had to share the lion’s share of that cash with the rest of the conference?
not only that, but theyd lose out on the guaranteed big bucks. what if there’s a huge upset? all the sudden, a big school loses out on a lot of their coffers because they wont get the big pay days the later rounds would have…why give up a guaranteed $14+ mil just for showing up?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:31 PM
Spence, you forgot barely literate, enjoy sex with relatives, scared of knowledge, and rarely shower.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:32 PM
@spencer096
We’ll trade KY FB and BB to the Big-10 straight up
May 13th, 2008 at 2:33 PM
ah, darn. i messed up the timestamp on the next post, so i pushed it back 15 minutes. but i wanted to leave this up a bit longer.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:33 PM
coop…you lost me at barely literate. literally, i couldnt read what you wrote after that. something about sects of relatives or something.
why shower when you can just use Axe body spray?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Hef – I prefer these college football applicable versions of those meth ads.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Will my commet disappear to? You know how much I like posting first!
Where’s 412?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:34 PM
spencer, the tv rights alone would double the current money that the BCS brings in. Add in the gates from potential home games at an SEC school or OSU/Michigan (which would be go to the conference), and you’re talking real money.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:35 PM
412 got fired. He told everyone on Friday
May 13th, 2008 at 2:36 PM
@iggy: Nice post. I’m sure Bill Nye has his hands in the coffers (read: feisty co-eds) when he comes back to campus.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:36 PM
seriously, irish? which post was that on?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Okay, fine a few more responses:
1) I’ll admit, the difference between the averages was not statistically significant from a two-sample t-test. But I wasn’t necessarily seeking statistical significance. The purpose of this was just looking for trends and noticing a difference that could be discussed. If I had found statistical significance, it would have been great. But even though there was none, I still found the results interesting. It does suggest that limiting the teams the Bowls can choose could possibly make for more lopsided games.
2) Yeah, we all know about the Cornell jokes on The Office up here. Not that we’re thrilled about it. We still watch the show though.
3) Stephanie Tanner
May 13th, 2008 at 2:36 PM
@Coop – whatever, dude. I just showered with my sister THIS MORNING! In your face!
May 13th, 2008 at 2:37 PM
I agree with goosht – I really don’t think less than FG difference in margin of victory is that significant given the number of the sample size.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:37 PM
@roeth: those are fantastic.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:37 PM
@clown- we wish lol
May 13th, 2008 at 2:38 PM
TBL is going to lose his bet.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:39 PM
yea, but if it’s being held at a school’s stadium, why would they WANT to be forced to share that revenue? say LSU and USC are facing off in the first round in Baton Rouge…why would LSU want to share revenue with the SEC AND USC when the stadium is full of LSU fans supporting LSU?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Holy crap Hef, that ad was disturbing, it was like watching a scene from Requiem for a Dream
May 13th, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Spencer, because they’d have no choice. I’m sure LSU doesn’t like sharing their bowl payout with Vanderbilt, but they’re forced to…same deal. LSU wouldn’t mind too much, they’d get all the concession money to themselves…plus merchandise sales would be very lucrative.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:46 PM
You should watch the TV ads, beard.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:46 PM
And this folks, is how to come up with your doctoral thesis topic in statistics without even trying.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:50 PM
@tallguy
We Vanderbilt fans don’t like sharing all of the bowl revenue we maker with LSU either.
/wanted to see if I could type that with a straight face. fail.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:50 PM
This was borderline pointless. Those average margins, as someone pointed out, are likely statistically equivalent. The BCS is better than the old system, a playoff is better than the BCS. I don’t need to look at margin of victory in bowl games to know that.
Playoff > BCS > Old System
May 13th, 2008 at 2:51 PM
@jibble: I knew I should have minored in stats.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:51 PM
That sucks that 412 got fired. I bet it was for reading Major League Asshole.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:52 PM
are you guys serious? 412 got fired? i totally missed that. damn economy!
May 13th, 2008 at 2:53 PM
@Ben: Damn, so close. I was really trying for completely pointless.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:56 PM
412 being fired was a joke.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:59 PM
@August West
funny, we Duke fans love diving in the bowl revenues we had no control over getting. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:01 PM
yea, im sure all the big schools arent that big of fans of doing that…but they also aren’t footing the bill for hosting that party like they would under a playoff system.
its one thing to have to share, it’s another to have to do the work by yourself and then share it with someone who sat on their ass and did nothing.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:03 PM
What happened to thinking a trend may exist, looking at the numbers, finding that said trend doesn’t exist, and NOT discussing the results as if the trend did exist, but ‘just can’t be seen in the numbers?’
May 13th, 2008 at 3:05 PM
I’m not sure why 412 was needed, Pitt sure as hell isn’t in any kind of Nat Champ discussion.
/pitt sucks
May 13th, 2008 at 3:09 PM
In a serious note Average tells you nothing without Standard Deviation.
For example the BCS Rosebowl Standard Deviation is 9.58, which means that the difference between Rose Bowl Pre-BCS and Post BCS is, in reality, nothing. The Pre-BCS Rosebowl St. Dev is 8.99.
Those giant standard Deviations mean that this analysis proves: nothing.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:10 PM
missing the point Spencer. LSU would make money off the concessions/merchandise, be reimbursed for their expenses, and the main thing, have homefield advantage for a playoff game. You think they’d say, “no guys, I don’t want the hassle unless we get all the moeny, let’s play at USC instead.” If a playoff did happen, it would have to be at the home sites until the championship game…the whole “Use the bowl system as a playoff” is stupid because let’s face it…not many fans can afford to travel and take off work for 3-4 games. 1 Bowl game, yes, that’s doable…but 3-4? Not possible.
Besides, rewarding people for sitting on their asses is the college football way. Hell, ND got a nice slice of money from the BCS this year, and so did all the non BCS conferences. Basically, the SEC, USC, OSU, Michigan end up supporting 100+ football teams. God bless revenue sharing.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:18 PM
As I said before, I know it’s not statistically significant, but I wasn’t trying to prove anything here. I was just sharing some numbers that I found interesting. I’m not submitting this to a national journal or anything. But just because something does not have a P-value less than or equal to 0.05 does not mean you cannot look at the numbers and notice something intriguing, and even a possible trend. Maybe we should try this again in the year 2525. If humanity can survive. And if the BCS is still alive.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Wait, four months of this argument from October to January and TBL brings it back in May? I refuse to participate.
OK, I want a four team playoff, there I said it.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Sure sounds like you’re trying to prove something.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:31 PM
tallguy, please don’t be insulted by this buy anyone who argues that we should have a playoff at home sites really has no clue about college football. Football games don’t just happen in Athens/State College/Lincoln, these are small towns that need months of preparation to pull off a football game, it is a logistical nightmare with time to plan, try doing it on a few days notice. Hotels/bars/restaurants hire more people, buy more food, it’s literally months of planning. College teams travel with hundreds of people, players, coaches, band members, cheerleaders, getting that many people in and out of these small towns on a weeks notice is impossible.
Besides, it would be a cold day in hell before any southern team plays north of the Mason-Dixon in December.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Besides, it would be a cold day in hell before any southern team plays north of the Mason-Dixon in December.
Hell, northern teams don’t WANT to play up above the Mason-Dixon in January! I bet if they could pack the place with their fans they’d play in the south any day.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:39 PM
aint this the truth.
LSU has no problem playing in the Super Dome, but god forbid they hold any cold-weather bowl games (which i don’t really blame them for, but it would be pretty cool to see USC, Florida or Texas play in Columbus or Ann Arbor in January).
May 13th, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Also, i’m guessing these games are taking place betweenn Dec 15 and Jan 10. Ever been to a college town during that time, ghost towns. Bars literally shut down for that entire month because they have no employees and no patrons. Good luck hosting a football game with no students and no cheap employees. The entire town of State College couldn’t fill Beaver stadium on Dec 20th. It just makes you sound stupid if you honestly try to argue for home playoff games in december, again, I’m not trying to be a dick, it just frustrates me.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:52 PM
coop…agreed.
why not just make the Fiesta and Sugar Bowls the “Final Four” and the Grandaddy of them all, the Rose be for the Natl. Champ each year (+1 system)? who would complain about the NC being at the Rose Bowl each year? good weather, good location, historic venue…makes too much sense.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:55 PM
I was just saying the numbers are so close, compared to the standard deviation, that even implying that a payoff would produce better games is misleading.
There’s barely enough data points to indicate any kind of trend, and the best you can say is inconclusive.
May 13th, 2008 at 3:56 PM
Nola is a better location than Cali, IMO. It’s more central to the rest of the nation, more rowdy and less of a drive for whichever SEC team makes it that year.
/couldn’t resist that last little dig.
May 13th, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Coop, no offense taken.
However, any playoff would have to have home games (assuming a playoff would eventually end up being 16 teams, which it would). Fans will not travel for first round playoff games in numbers like they do for bowl games. It just won’t happen. In men’s basketball, you have 8 teams at a site and you still don’t sell out most of the time (it was a given that either Duke or UNC was going to be in Raleigh, and I still got tickets a week before from the official site). The conferences will have to choose between non-sellouts or colleges hosting the first round games. There won’t be many cities wanting to host first round games, because the economic benefit of a normal bowl game is lost (fans come in, watch the game, and leave instead of spending 4-5 days in the area…gotta get to the next game).
So basically, you’re saying that there’s no way possible for colleges to host first round games, and I’m saying that there’s no way to co-opt the current bowl system into hosting playoff games. That leaves us at…a playoff is stupid, and people that advocate for them have no clue what they’re talking about.
Spencer: that’ll never happen…no way the other bowls agree to let the Rose Bowl have the national championship every year, and the Rose Bowl quite frankly would rather all this silly playoff nonsense go away so it can have OSU/USC every year.
May 13th, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Which is why, going back to where this started, despite the fact that people will always want more, I think a plus one would work. The “play in” games would be your bowl game, fans can plan vacations, the players still get to enjoy the local festivities, all the normal trappings of a bowl game. Then the following week for the NC is simply business, if fans go, great, but that game is big enough that local fans could sell it out if necessary.