OT: BCS screwing top 10 teams

[DaBruinz]

How is it that there are teams that are ranked in the TOP 10 in the country getting so royally screwed money wise?

Bowl Game Payouts Map: Money Earned In 2011-2012 BCS And Other Football Bowls (INFOGRAPHIC)

And they claim that the BCS isn't fixed??? I gotta call BS..

 

[BTTA]

Yes, there are problems with it. But keep in mind that the major conferences have revenue sharing in place so that the individual schools don't keep the cash. And the second team from any conference that goes to a BCS bowl gets paid about 1/4 of the amount.

The losers are the teams that go to bowl games that pay so little that the school loses money. Generally, the cut off is a around a million bucks. The conferences don't share in the losses.

 

[DarrylS]

Yes, there are problems with it. But keep in mind that the major conferences have revenue sharing in place so that the individual schools don't keep the cash. And the second team from any conference that goes to a BCS bowl gets paid about 1/4 of the amount.

The losers are the teams that go to bowl games that pay so little that the school loses money. Generally, the cut off is a around a million bucks. The conferences don't share in the losses.

I am an unabashed Notre Dame fan, and they do not have to share, so when they get the $3.2 million it is their cash.

Which puts them in the #2 position of money earned..

Never understood how ND gets a bowl game year after year, the only thing that makes sense is that they draw a huge fan base when televised.

 

[BTTA]

I am an unabashed Notre Dame fan, and they do not have to share, so when they get the $3.2 million it is there cash.

Which puts them in the #2 position of money earned..

Never understood how ND gets a bowl game year after year, the only thing that makes sense is that they draw a huge fan base when televised.

Yup, they are the exception, year after year. But as an independent, they don't get money from other team's that attend bowls. Some of the really lousy teams in the Big East, ACC, and SEC will take in millions this year from bowl games without leaving their couches.

The bowls are independent businesses, so their formula is very clear: sell advertisements and tickets. They couldn't care less about what team deserves to go to their bowl. That's why ND is usually a great team for them to pick.

 

[upstater1]

I am an unabashed Notre Dame fan, and they do not have to share, so when they get the $3.2 million it is their cash.

Which puts them in the #2 position of money earned..

Never understood how ND gets a bowl game year after year, the only thing that makes sense is that they draw a huge fan base when televised.

I don't like the BCS or the bowl system, but Boise St. does not play a tough schedule so it's ranking is questionable in the first place. But as for the bowl money earned by the top teams, they split it between 12 teams in conference. Put it this way. UConn got $20 million last year and ended up LOSING money by going to a BCS bowl. That's because all that money went to the BE who skimmed off the top, then returned shares to each member. But after accounting for travel and weeks of hotel and having to buy up a bunch of tickets, they lost money.

 

[DaBruinz]

Yes, there are problems with it. But keep in mind that the major conferences have revenue sharing in place so that the individual schools don't keep the cash. And the second team from any conference that goes to a BCS bowl gets paid about 1/4 of the amount.

The losers are the teams that go to bowl games that pay so little that the school loses money. Generally, the cut off is a around a million bucks. The conferences don't share in the losses.

Look at the numbers posted.. Those are what the payouts are per school for the Bowl game they are going to. Even taking into consideration that the money is divided amongst the conference that the school is in, it's still clear that some teams/conferences are being given favorable treatment.

 

[DaBruinz]

I don't like the BCS or the bowl system, but Boise St. does not play a tough schedule so it's ranking is questionable in the first place. But as for the bowl money earned by the top teams, they split it between 12 teams in conference. Put it this way. UConn got $20 million last year and ended up LOSING money by going to a BCS bowl. That's because all that money went to the BE who skimmed off the top, then returned shares to each member. But after accounting for travel and weeks of hotel and having to buy up a bunch of tickets, they lost money.

The BCS equation is supposed to take the strength of schedule into consideration. And I know, in the past, it's caused controversy because of one team being percentage points over another. That should eliminate the idea that Boise St's 7th ranking is "questionable".

The other thing is how do they not end up at a big bowl game? How is it that a crappy team like Michigan gets picked over them and Boise St. ends up at a low end Bowl game against an unranked team?

It just screams that the system is broken and that a play-off system is needed. And use the lower Bowl games as feeders to the Bigger stage.

 

[ahmed]

I don't follow College Football so I don't know... who owns the BCS? Who profits from the BCS bowls?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

How is it that there are teams that are ranked in the TOP 10 in the country getting so royally screwed money wise?

Bowl Game Payouts Map: Money Earned In 2011-2012 BCS And Other Football Bowls (INFOGRAPHIC)

And they claim that the BCS isn't fixed??? I gotta call BS..

I'm with you Db.
College football is an absolute joke nowadays.
It's a shame I remember my days in undergrad nothing compared to the atmosphere of a rivalry game home or away.

 

[alvinnf]

While I plan on enjoying the title game as much as the next guy. The first LSU vs. Alabama games was one of the best football games I saw this year. It is time to have a playoff. The corruption and special treatment of the upper tier universities has gone on long enough. Settle it on the field, that's what football was intended to do. Settle it like it or not. Not devolve into some back room politicical negotiation. Enough already!

 

[patchick]

The bowls are independent businesses, so their formula is very clear: sell advertisements and tickets. They couldn't care less about what team deserves to go to their bowl.

Absolutely true, and absolutely bizarre. With the exception of the title game, bowls should be considered football themed made-for-tv specials. I can't bring myself to care about the outcomes.

 

[juny]

The BCS is nonsense. You can throw out the argument that the regular season is like a "playoff" when you have a rematch in the championship game. I can't really get into college football until they get rid of the current system.

 

[upstater1]

The BCS equation is supposed to take the strength of schedule into consideration. And I know, in the past, it's caused controversy because of one team being percentage points over another. That should eliminate the idea that Boise St's 7th ranking is "questionable".

The other thing is how do they not end up at a big bowl game? How is it that a crappy team like Michigan gets picked over them and Boise St. ends up at a low end Bowl game against an unranked team?

It just screams that the system is broken and that a play-off system is needed. And use the lower Bowl games as feeders to the Bigger stage.

Strength of schedule is meaningless when there are 125 teams who don't play each other. You could schedule lesser teams to play against all of whom will play lesser competition in their leagues. It all evens out in the end because you only have 3 or 4 OOC games. All league competition ends at .500 for your opponents. In other words, it's not like the NFL where 1/2 your games are out of the division. Only 25-33% are out of conference in college. So Boise scheduled Georgia, Toledo and Tulsa, all of whom were at or near the top of their conferences.

It's the same in basketball, you improve SOS and RPI by beating mid-majors teams who will finish at the top of their conference, but those same mid-majors would probably finish at the bottom of the strong conferences.

 

[Ron Sellers]

The reality is that college football, the BCS, and all of the bowl games all have next to nothing to do with rewarding the best team or whatever else they claim to be doing. It is big business, no different than a fortune 500 company: revenues and profits. Anyone believing otherwise is naive. Always has been that way (even before the BCS) and always will be that way.

 

[upstater1]

The reality is that college football, the BCS, and all of the bowl games all have next to nothing to do with rewarding the best team or whatever else they claim to be doing. It is big business, no different than a fortune 500 company: revenues and profits. Anyone believing otherwise is naive. Always has been that way (even before the BCS) and always will be that way.

I disagree.

Profits? What profits? This is a spectacle and a moneysink for the schools. I've seen several budgets internally at some of the biggest schools. They make no money, they lose bigtime $$. The reason why they don't put a stop to it is political pressure and alumni pressure. These programs are sacred cows. A President wouldn't dare go against the pols and alumni.

The reason for the BCS is that giving way to a playoff now prior to the enforcement of new rules for D1 would allow the NCAA to get their mitts on the playoffs. By allowing these so-called non-profits to host the bowls, it's out of the NCAAs hands. The NCAA takes $300 million of the $700 million that the basketball tournament takes from TV revenues, and distributes the remaining $400 million among the more than 400 schools. Average take is just under a million per school from that tournament. So the big football schools fear that turning over the football playoff to the NCAA would result in a similar skimming off the top. As I see it, the plan is to install new rules into D1 ($2,000 per player in "salary," stadium seating capacity rules, etc.), simply to outspend the competition until lesser schools bleed so much red that only 60 or 70 schools will remain.

Then the football schools will break off from the NCAA and form their own megaconference football playoff. The problem is going to be, what to do with their other sports. They're going to find that a lot of the money the NCAA is currently taking from the basketball tourney is used to host playoffs and championships in all the other sports, AND without the basketball tourney bringing in as much revenue in future years (because all the BCS schools will opt out of the NCAA) they'll have to dig the money out of football revs, and it will be substantial.

So, any gains made by going to a playoff and hording that money among 4 or 5 big conferences will be somewhat offset by a loss of revenue from the NCAA basketball tournament and having to host championships for the other sports.

 

[BTTA]

The assumption that underlies most of these complaints about college football not having a good system for determining a hierarchy of team superiority at the end of the season is that someone, somewhere has this responsibility, and that the fans deserve such a thing.

There is no institution that has it as their mission to provide a process through which a definitive college football ranking will be determined. This has never existed, in reality or intent. There has always been fragmentation and confusion at the end of the college football season.

We may as well complain that all chicken eggs that you find in the grocery store are not exactly the same color. There's nobody who is responsible for this, and no one has taken it on as their mission. The issue isn't with the chickens, or with the eggs, or with the egg farms, or with the grocery stores. We have the right to complain that the eggs aren't the way we'd like them to be, with an insinuation that somebody, somewhere should be responsible for fixing this. But that's entirely a statement about our sense of entitlement, and nothing about eggs.

 

[upstater1]

The assumption that underlies most of these complaints about college football not having a good system for determining a hierarchy of team superiority at the end of the season is that someone, somewhere has this responsibility, and that the fans deserve such a thing.

There is no institution that has it as their mission to provide a process through which a definitive college football ranking will be determined. This has never existed, in reality or intent. There has always been fragmentation and confusion at the end of the college football season.

We may as well complain that all chicken eggs that you find in the grocery store are not exactly the same color. There's nobody who is responsible for this, and no one has taken it on as their mission. The issue isn't with the chickens, or with the eggs, or with the egg farms, or with the grocery stores. We have the right to complain that the eggs aren't the way we'd like them to be, with an insinuation that somebody, somewhere should be responsible for fixing this. But that's entirely a statement about our sense of entitlement, and nothing about eggs.

But, the NCAA is charged with exactly this mission in all the other sports.

Why not football? Actually they do it for all levels of football except D1.

The reason why is that the big schools are trying to cut the others out in order to keep the money for themselves.

 

[Dragda]

the system isn't perfect. Three teams deserved to play for the title this year. Only two will.

that said, with TIVO, I will watch all 37 bowl games.

It's about money. if the playoff system could somehow provide all these entities the same amount of money, they'd all switch to a playoff.

The universities and students like this format. The media doesn't. Most college football fans accept it unless you are a Ok St Cowboy fan. Casual fans hate the bowl system. I am a college football fan. I love the tradition and pagentry of the bowl games--particularly the Famous Potatoes or Car Care bowls.

 

[upstater1]

the system isn't perfect. Three teams deserved to play for the title this year. Only two will.

that said, with TIVO, I will watch all 37 bowl games.

It's about money. if the playoff system could somehow provide all these entities the same amount of money, they'd all switch to a playoff.

The universities and students like this format. The media doesn't. Most college football fans accept it unless you are a Ok St Cowboy fan. Casual fans hate the bowl system. I am a college football fan. I love the tradition and pagentry of the bowl games--particularly the Famous Potatoes or Car Care bowls.

The playoffs would make them more money. But they'd have to share it. That's the catch, it's why they don't do it.

Most students hate the format.