Georgia President Proposes 8-team Football Playoff

[NT80]

I don't think he knows lower level college divisions already have playoffs and have never heard them be concerned about it being too "demanding" for them.....

Georgia president proposes 8-team football playoff

January 8, 2008

ATHENS, Ga. (AP) -- The president of the University of Georgia proposed an eight-team playoff system to determine the NCAA's national football champion.

Michael Adams, chairman of the NCAA executive committee, has opposed a playoff for 20 years but said Tuesday the current BCS system is "undercutting the sportsmanship and integrity of the game."

Adams wants the NCAA to seed eight teams into the four bowls. If one of the major bowls declines to participate, then another bowl could fill the void.

"I believe the season is already too long and demands too much of athletes and the universities that serve them," Adams said at a news conference. "But this year's experience with the BCS forces me to the conclusion that the current system has lost public confidence and simply does not work."

Adams would like a special NCAA committee to work out the particulars, but the plan calls for the winners of the four major bowls -- Rose, Sugar, Orange and Fiesta -- to play semifinals at least one week later, with the championship game the following week.

Georgia was ranked fourth in the BCS entering the last week of the season, behind Missouri, West Virginia and Ohio State. When Missouri and West Virginia lost, Georgia did not rise to second behind Ohio State but dropped to fifth in the BCS. Southeastern Conference champion LSU vaulted from seventh to second.

LSU defeated Ohio State 38-24 Monday night to win the BCS title. Georgia routed previously undefeated Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl, 41-10.

Adams insisted he was prepared to advance the proposal even if Georgia had played in the title game.

"It is a matter of fairness and equity," he said.

Adams said he was influenced by players and coaches. He added that he would let Mark Richt speak for himself, but the Georgia coach had been "positive" in discussions about a playoff.

Adams is frustrated by the power of the television networks, particularly ESPN, and of the commissioners of the bowls and conferences.

"The television networks -- particularly the one that controls the majority of regular season and postseason games -- have grown powerful in deciding who plays and when they play, and, indeed, whom they hire to coach," Adams wrote in a letter to NCAA president Myles Brand.

"The Bowl Championship Series has become a beauty contest largely stage-managed by the networks, which in turn protect the interests of their own partner conferences."

He said the commissioners of the conferences and the bowls are guilty of "closed-circle decision-making based on traditional contract alliances. It is time to take the ultimate power out of their hands and give it to the student-athletes on the field."

"The most visible element of our most visible sport has almost no presidential involvement," Adams added.

Adams said he understood the consequences of an extended the season.

"This would involve only four schools, and only two into the second week," he said. "To answer concerns about the wear-and-tear on the student-athletes, I would consider returning the regular season to an 11-game schedule."

[FirefightnRick]

It's hard to mention "Fairness" and an "8 Team Playoff" in the same breath. But isn't it great to see those who have supported the BCS whine about it now when they don't get part of the pie they feel they deserve?

Rick

[untbowler]

It's hard to mention "Fairness" and an "8 Team Playoff" in the same breath. But isn't it great to see those who have supported the BCS whine about it now when they don't get part of the pie they feel they deserve?

Rick

BINGO!!

If UGA had made it to the Sugar bowl the president would not be complaining, any news of this type only comes up when one of the spoiled brats of the BCS feel they have been wronged.

The following quote cracks me up also: "The Bowl Championship Series has become a beauty contest largely stage-managed by the networks, which in turn protect the interests of their own partner conferences."

He said the commissioners of the conferences and the bowls are guilty of "closed-circle decision-making based on traditional contract alliances. It is time to take the ultimate power out of their hands and give it to the student-athletes on the field."

Gee why did nobody try and get an 8-4 Troy team over several 6-6 SEC teams and a few 6-6 Big 12 teams?

Edited January 10, 2008 by untbowler

[GoMeanGreen1999]

It's hard to mention "Fairness" and an "8 Team Playoff" in the same breath. But isn't it great to see those who have supported the BCS whine about it now when they don't get part of the pie they feel they deserve?

Rick

I have said now since the last "Split" champions when USC was number 1 in both polls but didn't play for the title, that eventually there would be enough schools "left out" of playing for the title, that the presidents would start making moves to a playoff.

[NorthTexan95]

What I love it that this guy wants the NCAA to take over and run a playoffs. Instead of trying to appease the bowls he's basically saying "Join us if you want but we don't need you". I'd say the same thing to the Pac 10 and Big 10 ... if you don't want to be part of the playoffs then so be it. You can have your champions play in the Rose Bowl every year but you'll never be a true National Champion.

[UNTflyer]

While an 8-team playoff still seems to exclude many worthy teams, I believe this is a step in the right direction. Once we have SOME type of playoff, the fans will push to include conference champions. My dream is to see a 16-team playoff, with all the conference champs and 4 at-large bids going to the highest ranked non-champions.

[untbowler]

one major roadblock would the loss of 2-3 games a year by most schools as I would not see the NCAA allowing 12-13 games plus an additional 3 games, that would in effect hurt the student athletes, if that is really what they care about

The playoff sounds good but there is way to much money being thrown around right now for it to be fiscally sound to most schools, particularly the mid-majors.

[Arkstfan]

WHY would anyone want the NCAA to run the event????

The NCAA only turns back about half of the revenue from the cash cow NCAA Basketball Tournament to Division I schools. The BCS turns back over 97%.

[greenminer]

WHY would anyone want the NCAA to run the event????

The NCAA only turns back about half of the revenue from the cash cow NCAA Basketball Tournament to Division I schools. The BCS turns back over 97%.

Good point. Is there a way to meet midway on this? Have the same return on the money, yet still give the NCAA the power to designate a true NCAA champion.

[yyz28]

16 Teams and ALL DI conferences have their Champ in the mix, or this is pointless. in fact, this would make the lower tiered DI conferences even MORE shut out.

The fact is this - Parity will come quickly if every school has a legitimate shot at the title every year. This is what is feared in the Big XII, Big 10 (it's 11 you friggin' liars... just be honest...) Pac 10, SEC & ACC.

...in the ever growing tide of demand for Playoffs, this is what you can expect from the power brokers as they are forced to accept a playoff - This lets them have a playoff, appear like they did what everyone wanted, and still keep their minority holding on to all the power and money.

[Arkstfan]

16 Teams and ALL DI conferences have their Champ in the mix, or this is pointless. in fact, this would make the lower tiered DI conferences even MORE shut out.

The fact is this - Parity will come quickly if every school has a legitimate shot at the title every year. This is what is feared in the Big XII, Big 10 (it's 11 you friggin' liars... just be honest...) Pac 10, SEC & ACC.

...in the ever growing tide of demand for Playoffs, this is what you can expect from the power brokers as they are forced to accept a playoff - This lets them have a playoff, appear like they did what everyone wanted, and still keep their minority holding on to all the power and money.

One of the Cajun fans has long touted 24 teams and auto bids for everyone.

It actually makes a lot of sense. First all conference champions are in. It still leaves 13 at-large spots open. The top 8 have the incentive of hosting and a first round bye. But what I like about the idea is this: In a 16 team playoff odds are against anyone from the MWC, Sun Belt, MAC, CUSA, or WAC hosting a game and unlikely that two would ever host. In a 24 team playoff teams seeded 9-16 will host a first round game.

Using the BCS standings, Hawaii would have hosted and BYU would have been very close to hosting this year. Last year Boise would have hosted and had a bye. 2004 Utah would have hosted and had a bye and Boise would have hosted. 2000 TCU would have hosted. 1999 Marshall would have hosted and 1998 Tulane would have hosted.

Imagine what it would do for a program to get a home playoff game even if this year for example it would have probably been FAU at Hawaii playing for the right to go to play USC. Last year you would have probably had Troy at Auburn playing for the right to go to Boise.

[NT80]

One of the Cajun fans has long touted 24 teams and auto bids for everyone.

It actually makes a lot of sense. First all conference champions are in. It still leaves 13 at-large spots open. The top 8 have the incentive of hosting and a first round bye. But what I like about the idea is this: In a 16 team playoff odds are against anyone from the MWC, Sun Belt, MAC, CUSA, or WAC hosting a game and unlikely that two would ever host. In a 24 team playoff teams seeded 9-16 will host a first round game.

Using the BCS standings, Hawaii would have hosted and BYU would have been very close to hosting this year. Last year Boise would have hosted and had a bye. 2004 Utah would have hosted and had a bye and Boise would have hosted. 2000 TCU would have hosted. 1999 Marshall would have hosted and 1998 Tulane would have hosted.

Imagine what it would do for a program to get a home playoff game even if this year for example it would have probably been FAU at Hawaii playing for the right to go to play USC. Last year you would have probably had Troy at Auburn playing for the right to go to Boise.

I like this 24-team idea. The elephant in the corner of this room however is the Bowls, Bowl cities, and TV contracts (in other words, the $$ part of the equation). How do we satisfy them?

[UNTflyer]

I like this 24-team idea. The elephant in the corner of this room however is the Bowls, Bowl cities, and TV contracts (in other words, the $ part of the equation). How do we satisfy them?

Make the Bowls the playoff games. Everyone satisfied.

[VideoEagle]

I like this 24-team idea. The elephant in the corner of this room however is the Bowls, Bowl cities, and TV contracts (in other words, the $$ part of the equation). How do we satisfy them?

It will take some work, but just look at the NCAA Basketball playoffs. One network having ALL of the college games! They would be bidding beyond belief. That could make up for loss of bowls, not in the minds of the bowl cities, but in the minds of the donors and supports of the colleges!

[Arkstfan]

Make the Bowls the playoff games. Everyone satisfied.

That won't work.

A typical NCAA first round site has roughly 18,000 seats. Each of the 8 schools get around 1,500 tickets so that leaves 6,000 tickets. The corporate folks get a cut and the local community gets a cut. It is not unheard of for a first round site to not sell out.

Now if many schools struggle to sell 1,500 tickets on short notice what happens with a football playoff?

Of the 79,000 seats at the Superdome for the Sugar Bowl 16,000 go to each of the two schools with a month or more to sell tickets.

We've seen consistently that many schools struggle to sell even 7,000 tickets with three to four weeks lead time. Most infamously UTEP sold less than 1,000 tickets to members of the public for the game in Boise with almost a full month lead time.

Why would you play Arizona State vs. Rutgers in Mobile with say a two week lead time you are going to have dreadful crowds and two teams paying travel expense. If Arizona State thinks they will win the game and the next week is in Las Vegas, maybe they hold off on the Mobile trip because its too much burden to make consecutive trips. The more logical option is play in Tempe and only Rutgers has travel cost and the tickets sell easily.

[NT80]

Why would you play Arizona State vs. Rutgers in Mobile with say a two week lead time you are going to have dreadful crowds and two teams paying travel expense. If Arizona State thinks they will win the game and the next week is in Las Vegas, maybe they hold off on the Mobile trip because its too much burden to make consecutive trips. The more logical option is play in Tempe and only Rutgers has travel cost and the tickets sell easily.

Exactly, which is why in that situation Mobile and the GMAC bowl people would be screaming foul, yet Tempe would be all for it. It will take a plan that settles the current $ situations with some added common sense on playoff locations.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

--I repeat my suggestion : Eight team* playoff with no more than one conference with two representatives. The remaining teams can go to the various Holiday Bowls as a reward for a good (not great) season..... After all not many bowls now have the slightest effect on who the top 3-4 teams are in the final standings. What changes ...not much.... except 4 teams play one extra game and 2 play two extra games more than the usual one bowl game. The first round could occur before Christmas break and the final two afterwards. That should not interfere with finals exams at all. Even then the season would not take any longer than it takes now. (Jan 7, this year) It is crazy to have teams playing a game 6 weeks after they played their last game. Ohio State had not played since Nov. 17, LSU last one was Dec. 1.

Location... let the two teams involved decide where to play much like Texas high schools or even like NFL does-- topseed is at home..... The final could be located at a specific place (like the Super Bowl)

No doubt some would argue that they should be one of the eight but it is unlikely the best team would ever be left out.

Edited January 11, 2008 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[TIgreen01]

One of the Cajun fans has long touted 24 teams and auto bids for everyone.

It actually makes a lot of sense. First all conference champions are in. It still leaves 13 at-large spots open. The top 8 have the incentive of hosting and a first round bye. But what I like about the idea is this: In a 16 team playoff odds are against anyone from the MWC, Sun Belt, MAC, CUSA, or WAC hosting a game and unlikely that two would ever host. In a 24 team playoff teams seeded 9-16 will host a first round game.

Using the BCS standings, Hawaii would have hosted and BYU would have been very close to hosting this year. Last year Boise would have hosted and had a bye. 2004 Utah would have hosted and had a bye and Boise would have hosted. 2000 TCU would have hosted. 1999 Marshall would have hosted and 1998 Tulane would have hosted.

Imagine what it would do for a program to get a home playoff game even if this year for example it would have probably been FAU at Hawaii playing for the right to go to play USC. Last year you would have probably had Troy at Auburn playing for the right to go to Boise.

Giving a guaranteed bid to each conference will NEVER fly. You would trigger the reverse of what we have now--closely consolidated conferences using the power in numbers theory....teams would be looking for a way OUT of the big conferences so that they could dominate a smaller conference. That doesn't make sense and won't happen (esp. with TV contracts mostly being made with conferences these days).

No....what you will get is exactly what the Georgia President proposed. A bastardization of the current bowl situation that will ultimately kill the bowls not linked into the BCS and their mini-playoff. Can you imagine the interest that the lower tier bowls would attract in this scenario?? NONE.

The one mystery here is whether or not going ahead with this would FINALLY push the non-bcs teams to band together and file a lawsuit to break this mess up?

[Arkstfan]

Exactly, which is why in that situation Mobile and the GMAC bowl people would be screaming foul, yet Tempe would be all for it. It will take a plan that settles the current $ situations with some added common sense on playoff locations.

Let's say you are a member of the chamber of commerce, a small bar owner in Knoxville, TN and a big Vols fans. Do you want the Vols to play a first round playoff game in Detroit or Knoxville? Which one helps your business? Which one can you attend?

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

----Having an eight team playoff would leave a lot of good (not great) teams to fill the holiday bowls. This is the big stumbling block, money and tradition from these bowls and the efforts that these chamber of commerces have put into these. If this happens I would never expect more than a 12 teams playoff but 8 seems like the likely number to me. No one past #12 would have a reasonable prayer of winning it all anyway or really deserve to win because of their number of losses (possible exception would be a good team from a mid-major that is greatly underestimated, but I even doubt that).

[Arkstfan]

Pick a playoff size.

2 (like now), 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32. Regardless of what size is picked there will always be at least two teams grousing that they should have been in over one or more teams that made it.

Playoff does not end the controversy.

Based on the analysis of several high caliber marketing firms and consulting firms, the consensus is that four teams is the maximum that can be done at neutral sites. Three neutral site road trips in 30 to 40 days is considered to be difficult for significant numbers of fans. Note that Plus One will hit that limit if teams from the SEC, Big 12, or ACC championship games make the championship in Plus One. If Plus One passes it will be fascinating to see the long term attendance trends for those leagues in the games.

I think Plus One has a great chance of passing simply because it can be done without hurting the bowls. The Georgia 8 plan quite likely cannot because it means either double hosting or taking some games out of the open rotation.

The Georgia 8 plan will be a major blow to the other leagues. First under the auspices of the NCAA revenue distribution is not guaranteed to us nor is there any guarantee that the NCAA will turn back funds anywhere near as efficiently as the BCS does. Since the BCS was created there have only been two times when a non-team was in the top 8. Hawaii this year would have been left out and in turn we would have received less money under the BCS deal, under the normal formulas the NCAA applies there would be no shared pool that pays us if one of the uncool kids gets an invite unless they are from our conference.

Plus One if adopted will likely add the Cotton Bowl to the mix of bowls. 1 will face 4 in one game, 2 will face 3, then the other three bowls will fill their slots basically like the BCS does now. 1. The six highest rated leagues over the past two years get auto berths for their champions 2. The highest rated champion from outside those six leagues gets in if rated 12 or better or at 15 or better if a champion from one of the six leagues is rated 16 or worse. 3. Maximum of one at-large per conference.

The Sun Belt is no worse off, we can still get a team into one of the rich bowls but we get 50% more money if Plus One is adopted.

[Arkstfan]

----Having an eight team playoff would leave a lot of good (not great) teams to fill the holiday bowls. This is the big stumbling block, money and tradition from these bowls and the efforts that these chamber of commerces have put into these. If this happens I would never expect more than a 12 teams playoff but 8 seems like the likely number to me. No one past #12 would have a reasonable prayer of winning it all anyway or really deserve to win because of their number of losses (possible exception would be a good team from a mid-major that is greatly underestimated, but I even doubt that).

Using the AP poll.

The BCS system left #7 Missouri for the Cotton Bowl.

The Georgia 8 plan would have had #7 Missouri in the playoff, Cotton would have pulled #17 Texas up from the Holiday Bowl, unranked Texas Tech then would have ended up playing #12 Arizona State. TAMU would have then been pulled up from the Alamo and gone to the Gator to play #21 Virginia, Oklahoma State would have moved from the Insight to Alamo, Colorado would have moved up from the I-Bowl leaving it vacant. Illinois left out of the Georgia 8 would have gone to the Capital One pushing Michigan to the Outback, that would push Wisconsin to the Alamo, pushing Penn State to Champs Sports, pushing Michigan State to the Insight, pushing Purdue out.

Hawaii out of the Sugar Bowl would stay home to play moving Boise back to Boise and sending Fresno to New Mexico, sending Nevada home to watch television.

The I-Bowl would then either grab TCU from Texas sending Purdue to Texas or Shreveport would take Purdue.

We get even lousier bowl match-ups, less access to the high profile games for the sisters of the poor and one less bowl slot for one of the sisters of the poor. Can't imagine WHY the Georgia president likes the idea.

[VideoEagle]

You missed one other reason the Plus One plan might get support - more money overall. Adding a fifth bowl, the Cotton, to the mix increases the total cash by 25% while the number of auto-qualifying conferences remains the same. Two more of the big six conferences will get a second team into a BCS payout. While I would suggest the non-auto-qualifiers could get a second team, the number of years that happens would probably be very low. Although, to appear fair, the BCS might allow a second non-auto-qualifier into the mix in those years one is ranked high enough. But, I doubt they really want to be that fair!

And once the Cotton Bow is in the new stadium in Jerry-land, it is going to be spectacular. Say what you will about Jerry Jones, the man does know how to market and is willing to spend money - especially other people's money - to make a big splash. The two big things that kept the Cotton out of the mix before was the antique stadium and being on NBC at the time. The Cotton is on Fox now and will be in the best football venue ever constructed.

Pick a playoff size.

2 (like now), 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32. Regardless of what size is picked there will always be at least two teams grousing that they should have been in over one or more teams that made it.

Playoff does not end the controversy.

Based on the analysis of several high caliber marketing firms and consulting firms, the consensus is that four teams is the maximum that can be done at neutral sites. Three neutral site road trips in 30 to 40 days is considered to be difficult for significant numbers of fans. Note that Plus One will hit that limit if teams from the SEC, Big 12, or ACC championship games make the championship in Plus One. If Plus One passes it will be fascinating to see the long term attendance trends for those leagues in the games.

I think Plus One has a great chance of passing simply because it can be done without hurting the bowls. The Georgia 8 plan quite likely cannot because it means either double hosting or taking some games out of the open rotation.

The Georgia 8 plan will be a major blow to the other leagues. First under the auspices of the NCAA revenue distribution is not guaranteed to us nor is there any guarantee that the NCAA will turn back funds anywhere near as efficiently as the BCS does. Since the BCS was created there have only been two times when a non-team was in the top 8. Hawaii this year would have been left out and in turn we would have received less money under the BCS deal, under the normal formulas the NCAA applies there would be no shared pool that pays us if one of the uncool kids gets an invite unless they are from our conference.

Plus One if adopted will likely add the Cotton Bowl to the mix of bowls. 1 will face 4 in one game, 2 will face 3, then the other three bowls will fill their slots basically like the BCS does now. 1. The six highest rated leagues over the past two years get auto berths for their champions 2. The highest rated champion from outside those six leagues gets in if rated 12 or better or at 15 or better if a champion from one of the six leagues is rated 16 or worse. 3. Maximum of one at-large per conference.

The Sun Belt is no worse off, we can still get a team into one of the rich bowls but we get 50% more money if Plus One is adopted.

[Arkstfan]

You missed one other reason the Plus One plan might get support - more money overall. Adding a fifth bowl, the Cotton, to the mix increases the total cash by 25% while the number of auto-qualifying conferences remains the same. Two more of the big six conferences will get a second team into a BCS payout. While I would suggest the non-auto-qualifiers could get a second team, the number of years that happens would probably be very low. Although, to appear fair, the BCS might allow a second non-auto-qualifier into the mix in those years one is ranked high enough. But, I doubt they really want to be that fair!

Actually most estimates are that Plus One will increase revenue 50% because the current five game (four site) arrangement only assures one significant match-up, the Championship game. The other four games rely purely on having teams there is great interest in playing an interesting opponent. Plus One brings one more game (five bowl games plus the championship game) but assures three significant games: 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3 and the championship. You move from one guaranteed significant game out of five played to three out of six.

[UNTflyer]

This is what is feared in the Big XII, Big 10 (it's 11 you friggin' liars... just be honest...)

They are... you just have to read between the letters: