College Football Thread

[CSP]

12 minutes ago, RoadRage said:

With all due respect, the NCAA can easily do away with on-campus games in the first round if they want to, and there is nothing these elite colleges can do to stop it. They make the rules and if a football program doesn't like the rules they can choose to not participate!

I think that is all pretty evident. Doesn't have a lot to do with them getting rid of on-campus, 1st rd games. 

[RoadRage]

2 minutes ago, Dave from Dayton said:

Those 'elite colleges' referred to are the very ones that control the NCAA. 

I wonder why they don't get a first round bye in the NCAA basketball tournament, I'm sure they would prefer one?

[CSP]

12 minutes ago, RoadRage said:

I wonder why they don't get a first round bye in the NCAA basketball tournament, I'm sure they would prefer one?

I'm not sure why anyone would prefer neutral over on-campus, though. 

[RoadRage]

9 minutes ago, Certified Sunshine Pumper said:

I'm not sure why anyone would prefer neutral over on-campus, though. 

Especially if they are the home team. 

I would rather play Notre Dame at Lucas Oil or Ford Field in Detroit for example. You may be right, I just think the neutral sites work really well for the NCAA Basketball tournament, I always assumed the NIT did it the way they do for simplicity and because those tickets would be difficult to sell, I don't think that would be a problem for the CFP, but I might be wrong? Anyway, just my opinion on the current process maybe it is perfect just the way it is?

[Brass Cannon]

Neutral courts for the first round would be impossible to set up for the region.  Obviously Lucas oil would work for IU and Notre Dame but you can’t set it up that quickly. Neutral sites have to be selected months if not years in advance. 
 

Imagine that same matchup scheduled in say Houston.  

[Class of '66 Old Fart]

IMO neutral fields won't draw the same number of people in the seats.  Watch the upcoming bowl games and notice how many of them are pretty empty.   A few schools travel well; many of them don't.

[go iu bb]

14 minutes ago, RoadRage said:

Especially if they are the home team. 

I would rather play Notre Dame at Lucas Oil or Ford Field in Detroit for example. You may be right, I just think the neutral sites work really well for the NCAA Basketball tournament, I always assumed the NIT did it the way they do for simplicity and because those tickets would be difficult to sell, I don't think that would be a problem for the CFP, but I might be wrong? Anyway, just my opinion on the current process maybe it is perfect just the way it is?

Do you think the schools can get 40k+ fans to travel up to 4 times? Most of the fans of any school aren't rich. They can't be spending several thousands of dollars on travel plus tickets that many times. Many won't, especially since the games are on TV. Some of the schools that get to the playoff have large, passionate fanbases but I guess we'll see how well they travel that much in a short period of time. 

In your example, those neutral stadiums work because they're close to both schools. What if the neutral site was in California or Florida?

If anything, when they make changes they may make the second round games as on-campus instead of bowl games.

The NCAAT can fill the seats because they have more than 1 game/2 teams at each site and quite a bit fewer seats to fill. They also have multiple rounds within a few days at the same site. More bang for the buck for those that go.

[DChoosier]

I am ok with the conference champions that jumped some teams to make the playoff but at that point all teams should be seeded according to their ranking etc.

Expansion to 16 would be fine but I don’t have a strong opinion between 12 or 16.

Other than that, the playoff has generated a ton of interest in a number of late season games, that would have had limited appeal in the past, and the ratings for the playoff games will be through the roof. 

[Brass Cannon]

11 minutes ago, DChoosier said:

I am ok with the conference champions that jumped some teams to make the playoff but at that point all teams should be seeded according to their ranking etc.

Expansion to 16 would be fine but I don’t have a strong opinion between 12 or 16.

Other than that, the playoff has generated a ton of interest in a number of late season games, that would have had limited appeal in the past, and the ratings for the playoff games will be through the roof. 

I’d rather they just guarantee certain conference champions a spot regardless of their ranking.  Worst case scenario a 12th team gets bumped. 
 

 

[cybergates]

1 hour ago, RoadRage said:

With all due respect, the NCAA can easily do away with on-campus games in the first round if they want to, and there is nothing these elite colleges can do to stop it. They make the rules and if a football program doesn't like the rules they can choose to not participate!

Pretty sure the NCAA has no control over the CFP whereas it runs the NCAA basketball tournament entirely.

[Lebowski]

I've already mentioned my desire to expand the FBS playoffs to more than 12 teams. I'd prefer the FCS model of a 24 team but wouldn't complain if it went to 16. 

Folks are pushing for neutral sites and a possible solution would be to designate existing bowl games regionally closest to the higher seed. This would also create new bowls as well. It would keep the traditionalist happy. Basically, every round would be a bowl game.

Here is what a FCS style playoff would look like this year. Take note the discussion for us IUFB faithful would be about getting a first round bye. 

 

[RoadRage]

26 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

Do you think the schools can get 40k+ fans to travel up to 4 times? Most of the fans of any school aren't rich. They can't be spending several thousands of dollars on travel plus tickets that many times. Many won't, especially since the games are on TV. Some of the schools that get to the playoff have large, passionate fanbases but I guess we'll see how well they travel that much in a short period of time. 

In your example, those neutral stadiums work because they're close to both schools. What if the neutral site was in California or Florida?

If anything, when they make changes they may make the second round games as on-campus instead of bowl games.

The NCAAT can fill the seats because they have more than 1 game/2 teams at each site and quite a bit fewer seats to fill. They also have multiple rounds within a few days at the same site. More bang for the buck for those that go.

You make some valid points, I still prefer 16 teams and no byes in the first round, then you go to the bowls for the rest of the tournament. TV revenue is where the money is, but I agree, poorly attended games would not be a desirable outcome!

[DChoosier]

11 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

I’d rather they just guarantee certain conference champions a spot regardless of their ranking.  Worst case scenario a 12th team gets bumped. 
 

 

That’s what I’m saying.

The conference champ gets-in, even if they jump over a higher ranked team, but once-in everyone is slotted by ranking (ie Arizona State would still have made the playoff, for winning their conference, but there is no way they should be seeded 4th and get a bye. They should be seeded 12th).

[RoadRage]

34 minutes ago, cybergates said:

Pretty sure the NCAA has no control over the CFP whereas it runs the NCAA basketball tournament entirely.

You are correct, I just assumed wrong...

The committee members include one current athletic director from each of the four "major" conferences—ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, and SEC—also known as the Power conferences. Other members are former coaches, players, athletic directors, and administrators, plus a retired member of the media.

My apologies to Sunshine Pumper and Dayton, looks like the elites pretty much control this thing!

[go iu bb]

11 minutes ago, DChoosier said:

That’s what I’m saying.

The conference champ gets-in, even if they jump over a higher ranked team, but once-in everyone is slotted by ranking (ie Arizona State would still have made the playoff, for winning their conference, but there is no way they should be seeded 4th and get a bye. They should be seeded 12th).

Slight correction: ASU should have been seeded 11th since Clemson is properly seeded 12th.

I think that is one of the first corrections we'll see. The byes will no longer go the top 4 conference champions, but instead the top 4 ranked teams. We'll see the seeding match the rankings.

I wonder if they'll also go away from weekly updates before the announcements. That kind of locks the committee in to certain rankings for teams. If they hadn't done that, Alabama might have gotten in instead of SMU. I think they got it right but I bet they wanted to put Bama in but just couldn't because of rankings from before the conference championship.

[DChoosier]

I realize everyone is aware of the ridiculous Stubhub fees but here is a real life example.

IU at ND, section 125, row 4 seats  are $1,166 each.

 Including fees, however, they are $1,576 each.

$410 in fees to electronically issue a ticket !!!!

 

[go iu bb]

1 minute ago, DChoosier said:

I realize everyone is aware of the ridiculous Stubhub fees but here is a real life example.

IU at ND, section 125, row 4 seats  are $1,166 each.

 Including fees, however, they are $1,576 each.

$410 in fees to electronically issue a ticket !!!!

 

The fees for ticker services have long been ridiculous. I've gotten "cheap" tickets from ticketmaster and paid as much or more in fees making them no longer cheap. $410 in fees is taking it to a whole new level, though.

[RoadRage]

2 minutes ago, DChoosier said:

I realize everyone is aware of the ridiculous Stubhub fees but here is a real life example.

IU at ND, section 125, row 4 seats  are $1,166 each.

 Including fees, however, they are $1,576 each.

$410 in fees to electronically issue a ticket !!!!

 

That is one of the reasons I was thinking neutral sites would be better, I would think you would see somewhat affordable ticket prices, but there you have the problem with attendance. Maybe there needs to be some sort of cap on ticket prices for these playoff games?

[Stuhoo]

5 minutes ago, DChoosier said:

I realize everyone is aware of the ridiculous Stubhub fees but here is a real life example.

IU at ND, section 125, row 4 seats  are $1,166 each.

 Including fees, however, they are $1,576 each.

$410 in fees to electronically issue a ticket !!!!

 

The fees are simply a percentage of the ticket price. I bought row 19 SeatGeek tix for IUBB vs Eastern Illinois. Because the tix were so cheap, the fees were about $7.00.

[CSP]

4 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

The fees are simply a percentage of the ticket price. I bought row 19 SeatGeek tix for IUBB vs Eastern Illinois. Because the tix were so cheap, the fees were about $7.00.

Kudos to you for being willing to spend money on that game.