College Football Playoff Looking At Expanded Field Options

[billybud]

Don’t disagree with that but the current system is bad for the game and fans aren’t watching in droves. Bringing in more teams and more fans is the way to go

Just not true....

People watch college ball....lots of pepole.. Using 2019-20 (since last season was covid)..

College Football TV

• The 392 regular season telecasts on ABC, the Big Ten Network, BTN, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNEWS, ESPNU, FOX, FS1, NBC and the NFL Network during the 2019 season averaged 1,839,000 viewers per game (a 2% increase from 2018) while reaching more than 145 million unique fans
  
  
• The 38 postseason bowl games on ABC, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, FOX and FS1 at the conclusion of the 2019-20 season averaged 5,037,000 viewers per game (a 1% increase from last season) while reaching 90 million unique fans† on television. (The figures do not include the FBC Mortgage Cure Bowl or the NOVA Home Loans Arizona Bowl, both telecast on CBSSN, which is not rated by Nielsen Media.)
• 
  ESPN's networks averaged an audience of 5,736,000 viewers for all its bowl games(36 games), up from last year's average of 5,728,000, an increase of 8,000 viewers per game.
  
  
• The CFP Semifinals averaged 21,487,000 viewers (two games), setting a new high for non-New Year's Day Semifinals and an increase of 8% from last year's final CFP Semifinal audience.
• CBS Sports scored the Network's best college football viewership in 29 years, averaging 7,147,000 million viewers, a 25% increase from 2018.
• College Football on FOX had its most-watched regular season ever, bringing in an average audience of 3,729,000, representing a 12% increase over 2018.
• ESPN's networks increased their audience year-over-year in every category: the regular season, bowl season, the CFP Semifinals, the CFP National Championship and "College GameDay Built by The Home Depot," which delivered its most-watched season since 2015.

 

[billybud]

.....I do feel that our collective need to define a #1 team has driven us to the post season play off emphasis..

Money drove the process and will continue to do so increasingly. The goal of a fair and competitive process to define a national champion was a very low priority if it even existed as a goal at all.

There has never been a drive to have a tournament style defining of a football champion...for years, it was the AP and UPI polls....and split champions.

The number one and number two teams were not often matched in a bowl....the BCS was then established to match the #1 & #2 team to determine a Champion...that's all they did.

That expanded to the #1-#4 playoff format of the CFP...

By having relatively few teams play off...the regular season and conference championships have remained meaningful.

I don't know about "fair and equitable"....When there is such a disparity between teams/conferences...it is always equitable to have the best play for it. It is that determining of the "best" that may be the rub....but we seed in basketball and can do so in football.

 

[Husky25]

Committee members aren't necessarily controlled by TV. They are, OTOH, influenced by money. This is why their direct influence in the CFP should be minimized.

The Basketball Tournament didn't expand because the NCAA thinks 4 more teams have a shot at the title. Absolute not. The main purpose is to attract casual eyeballs. Pure and simple.

 

[CL82]

It's not basketball where you can throw 64 teams in, so it doesn't matter that you put up half the playoff that has zero chance of winning (seeds #9-16)....making the basketball season fairly meaningless until March.

You say this repeatedly. Has anyone, other than you, actually suggested that a 64 team football playoff would be a good idea?

Let me ask again, because you seem to be pointlessly obsessing about it, do you realize that this would be logistically impossible?

 

[kingdobbs]

Oh good grief...back to the conspiracy theory that these committee members are all controlled by TV.

As I said, college ball isn't the NFL with a draft system and thus the talent and power of college teams is much more disparate than the NFL.

The top four may occasionally have a bad play off game...but usually have a body of work to get there....Sure, Ohio State got waxed by 0-31 by Clemson...

But they beat in the regular season...11 win Oklahoma, 11 win Wisconsin, 11 win Penn State, 10 win Tulsa....a body of work.

Would you have put in the CUSA Champ, Western Kentucky over them, or the MAC Champ, Ohio, or the AAC champ, Temple, or the MWC champ, San Diego State....

It's not basketball where you can throw 64 teams in, so it doesn't matter that you put up half the playoff that has zero chance of winning (seeds #9-16)....making the basketball season fairly meaningless until March.

But basketball still seeds.....and darn near 90% of the championships are won by #1-3.

Great, if you want to seed 16 teams...let the bottom 8 duke it out and the winner gets to move to seed #8...to play in the top 8.

But in a smaller tourney, like football would require, placing a conference champ in the CFP without seeding based on strength is silly...

Seed based on RPI/net/computers/committee....it doesn't matter...basketball does it...and football would need to also seed on strength.

Basketball also sees enough cross-conference competition to make RPI/NET rankings reasonably functional (but not even close to perfect) statistical measures.

There just isn’t the same depth of cross-conference competition in football. UConn hoops in 2019-20 played 13 teams from 10 conferences out of league. In the same year, UConn football played 4 teams from 3 leagues.

Any such football system is thus going to be plagued by the fact that it is trying to base its rankings on a literal handful of actual meaningful cross conference games and a giant shit pile of games like Alabama-NMSU and Clemson-Wofford.

But since no one in the Ancient Elect is going to change their situation unless forced to by a more powerful entity, we are going to continue to be stuck with a system where the aristocracy is invite-only and the rest of the citizens will be judged according to what they consider meritorious (and will only ever consider their own accomplishments the baseline for merit).

 

[uconndogs]

There has never been a drive to have a tournament style defining of a football champion...for years, it was the AP and UPI polls....and split champions.

The number one and number two teams were not often matched in a bowl....the BCS was then established to match the #1 & #2 team to determine a Champion...that's all they did.

That expanded to the #1-#4 playoff format of the CFP...

By having relatively few teams play off...the regular season and conference championships have remained meaningful.

I don't know about "fair and equitable"....When there is such a disparity between teams/conferences...it is always equitable to have the best play for it. It is that determining of the "best" that may be the rub....but we seed in basketball and can do so in football.

I don't see the relevance of your response to my post............and I never stated "fair and equitable" and would respectfully ask that you not misquote me.

 

[Drew]

 

[billybud]

I don't see the relevance of your response to my post............and I never stated "fair and equitable" and would respectfully ask that you not misquote me.

Oh...Excuse me..."fair and competitive" .....I like that much better....

I like competitive...thus having the best teams play...no AQ.

 

[BlueDogs]

Playoffs work in FCS, D2 and D3, so this isn’t rocket science. The handwringing and angst is more about controlling money and making sure the prized pigs are fed rather than fairness. This is about how you create just enough slop to keep the rest on the farm.

 

[Husky25]

Playoffs work in FCS, D2 and D3, so this isn’t rocket science. The handwringing and angst is more about controlling money and making sure the prized pigs are fed rather than fairness. This is about how you create just enough slop to keep the rest on the farm.

It's classic take-a-bigger-piece-of-a-smaller-pie, when the goal should be to increase the size of the pie.

Eventually, 100% of nothing is nothing.

 

[hank970]

A sixteen-team CFP series means that the last two contenders in the final championship game will have played four post-season games in addition to their regular scheduled ones. That's a lot of exposure to potential injury, and represents a lot of academic disruption (assuming there's still such a thing as a "student athlete"). Networks and streaming services may relish the idea of increased revenues, but folks who worry about the welfare of athletes and liability issues may feel differently.

 

[billybud]

Playoffs work in FCS, D2 and D3, so this isn’t rocket science. The handwringing and angst is more about controlling money and making sure the prized pigs are fed rather than fairness. This is about how you create just enough slop to keep the rest on the farm.

Sure...quick, without googling, who are the Final Four in FCS, playing this coming Saturday? Be honest...do you know?

Most don't know or care.

 

[kingdobbs]

Sure...quick, without googling, who are the Final Four in FCS, playing this coming Saturday? Be honest...do you know?

Most don't know or care.

The expanded playoff isn’t the reason people don’t know or don’t care. It’s disingenuous to suggest as much.

 

[CL82]

..I dread the day when college football becomes like basketball when the regular season is just a warm up for the real season in March.

I know, right? College basketball fans don’t watch any games before March. I mean what’s the point. An inclusive tournament has totally destroyed college basketball.

 

[uconndogs]

Oh...Excuse me..."fair and competitive" .....I like that much better....

I like competitive...thus having the best teams play...no AQ.

Well, I'm glad you like that.........I'm also happy not to be misquoted. Thank you.

 

[billybud]

I know, right? College basketball fans don’t watch any games before March. I mean what’s the point. An inclusive tournament has totally destroyed college basketball.

The basketball numbers of watchers in regular season are small numbers...compared to college football...,where last year 10 million watched the regular season match of Clemson-Notre Dame, 7 million watched Georgia-Florida, etc.

 

[billybud]

Last call for college hoops ratings

Ratings for the final games of the truncated 2019-20 college basketball season. CBS ended its slate with one of the top audiences of the season.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Every week of football season, there were three or four games that topped the 10 most watched basketball matches of the year (four of which involved Duke).

 

[CL82]

The basketball numbers of watchers in regular season are small numbers...compared to college football...,where last year 10 million watched the regular season match of Clemson-Notre Dame, 7 million watched Georgia-Florida, etc.

And you attribute that to the playoff structure?

Here are some of the higher rated national championship games:

 

[billybud]

I attribute that to the fact that basketball doesn't really count until March....and football's regular season, in contrast, is wildly followed.

 

[CL82]

I attribute that to the fact that basketball doesn't really count until March....and football's regular season, in contrast, is wildly followed.

Lol, I'm sure you do.

FWIW here's last year's football numbers:

Feel free to compare these to the BB rating above. I will just note that the highest rated game was the football national championship game.

 

[billybud]

LOL....I am talking the regular seasons between basketball and football...and you want to move the goal posts to Championship Games...because , AS I POSTED...basketball doesn't rate in regular season...



The year before...2019-20 football viewing

• The 392 regular season telecasts on ABC, the Big Ten Network, BTN, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNEWS, ESPNU, FOX, FS1, NBC and the NFL Network during the 2019 season averaged 1,839,000 viewers per game (a 2% increase from 2018) while reaching more than 145 million unique fans
• 
  The 38 postseason bowl games on ABC, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, FOX and FS1 at the conclusion of the 2019-20 season averaged 5,037,000 viewers per game (a 1% increase from last season) while reaching 90 million unique fans† on television. (The figures do not include the FBC Mortgage Cure Bowl or the NOVA Home Loans Arizona Bowl, both telecast on CBSSN, which is not rated by Nielsen Media.)

Yes...for two games a year, in the post season, basketball puts up big numbers...

Football, during regular season...averages 1.8 milliuon per game over 392 games....and, over 38 bowl games, averaged 5 million viewers...no freaking comparison.

 

[billybud]

In 2018 and in 2019, as in many seasons...the regular season match up between Duke-UNC was the most watched regular BB season game...

IN 2019, there were 9 regular season football games that doubled the number of watchers of the highest rated regular season basketball game....

Basketball is about March.

Nothing is wrong with that...it is how the seasons are designed.

 

[shizzle787]

I don't think it is going to be expanded to 12 right away. I feel eight is a better number anyway. If it is 8, I hope that it is a straight top 8, not automatic qualifiers but I don't see that happening. The 5 P5 conferences will likely get auto bids. A lot of people think that the top G5 conference winner will get one too but I don't buy it. An 12-1 UCF or Houston doesn't belong in the playoff. A G5 team should only be in the playoff IF they go undefeated and play at least two P5 schools.

 

[CL82]

LOL....I am talking the regular seasons between basketball and football...and you want to move the goal posts to Championship Games...because , AS I POSTED...basketball doesn't rate in regular season...



The year before...2019-20 football viewing

• The 392 regular season telecasts on ABC, the Big Ten Network, BTN, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNEWS, ESPNU, FOX, FS1, NBC and the NFL Network during the 2019 season averaged 1,839,000 viewers per game (a 2% increase from 2018) while reaching more than 145 million unique fans
• 
  The 38 postseason bowl games on ABC, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, FOX and FS1 at the conclusion of the 2019-20 season averaged 5,037,000 viewers per game (a 1% increase from last season) while reaching 90 million unique fans† on television. (The figures do not include the FBC Mortgage Cure Bowl or the NOVA Home Loans Arizona Bowl, both telecast on CBSSN, which is not rated by Nielsen Media.)

Yes...for two games a year, in the post season, basketball puts up big numbers...

Football, during regular season...averages 1.8 milliuon per game over 392 games....and, over 38 bowl games, averaged 5 million viewers...no freaking comparison.

So you’re saying the playoff system is already meaningless for football. So a more inclusive system has the opportunity to improve it. I think we can find some agreement there.

 

[billybud]

What I am saying is that the current system and regular season for football is massively profitable.

Folks have voted with their eyeballs and the media pays for those eyeballs.

The basketball regular season much less so.... if it is as sweet, the media bees don't know it.

The basketball post season is mainly the attraction...

The main problem with the basketball post season is that the NCAA gets their hands on the money....if, like football, the schools separated the NCAA from the golden goose, things would be different. Programs would have more of the money. IN 2019 the NCAA took $1.05 billion from the tournament (about 90% of their administrative funding).

Football regular season money goes mainly to the P5's from the networks and the NCAA has nothing to do with the football post season....basketball regular season money is not as valued by the networks.

 

[billybud]

So you’re saying the playoff system is already meaningless for football. So a more inclusive system has the opportunity to improve it. I think we can find some agreement there.

and please abandon your gaming tactic of saying that I am saying something that I am not....it is a passive aggressive tactic...just state your beliefs and we converse from there.

 

[CL82]

and please abandon your gaming tactic of saying that I am saying something that I am not....it is a passive aggressive tactic...just state your beliefs and we converse from there.

I’m just trying to understand your points, because your reasoning seems to be random. The NCAA men’s basketball format is bad for basketball, yet we have millions of viewers tuning into the games, but that’s only because no one cares about the regular season because of the format, and yet people buy gear and watch the games.

I just don’t understand why you’re so emotionally rooted to an outdated non-inclusive formula. I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from and I read your long rambling posts but in the end there a series of discordant and inconsistent themes.

 

[CL82]

What I am saying is that the current system and regular season for football is massively profitable.

For some schools, absolutely but do even a majority of the schools play football turn a material profit?

Folks have voted with their eyeballs and the media pays for those eyeballs

Also agree somewhat. Basketball games are shorter in duration and have more competition so that the dilutes the viewers on any one game. It is indisputable though of that the media values football far more than basketball. They do that for a reason.

The main problem with the basketball post season is that the NCAA gets their hands on the money....if, like football, the schools separated the NCAA from the golden goose, things would be different. Programs would have more of the money. IN 2019 the NCAA took $1.05 billion from the tournament (about 90% of their administrative funding).

Fully aware of this. That’s an indication of value, no? Basketball funds all the Olympic sports for the NCAA.

 

[billybud]

And I don't understand your need to force fit a basketball style tourney on a sport so completely different...

One sport has 30 games a year, the other 12....one sport has a valuable regular season, the other does not....One's regular season is also part of the playoff..the other, not really.

The national championship has never been a major driving force in football...only recently did we identify the top four teams to play...most teams are playing for conference championships, victories over rivals

And I don't understand the blindness of those who do not see that, even in basketball, the best teams win (87% of championships won by seeds #1-3)....the rest of the tourney is just window dressing.

"But oh, anyone can win it"....yeah...Like the old saw..."I wouldn't marry you if you sere the last man on earth." "So, I have a chance ?"

 

[billybud]

"Fully aware of this. That’s an indication of value, no? Basketball funds all the Olympic sports for the NCAA."

Sure...but as I have said, the value is in the tourney, not the regular season...If there was value in the regular season, the media isn't paying for it...and because of the relatively few eyeballs...