Mark Cuban may be onto something here. If he could pull this off and outspend the old money that is holding the bowl system in place, the guy would be a saint in my eyes.

Quote :

"DALLAS -- After two failed bids to buy a Major League Baseball team, billionaire Mark Cuban is seriously considering trying to use his money to create a playoff alternative to college football's Bowl Championship Series. Cuban, the outspoken owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, told ESPNDallas.com on Wednesday that he is "actively interested but in the exploratory stage" of creating and funding a playoff system to crown a champion for major college football. "The more I think about it, the more sense it makes as opposed to buying a baseball team," said Cuban, who tried to buy the Chicago Cubs and Texas Rangers within the last few years. "You can do something the whole country wants done." Cuban said he has talked to two athletic directors from BCS conferences who were extremely enthusiastic about the idea. He intends to contact several school presidents and state senators in the coming weeks to determine whether the idea is worth pursuing. Cuban said he envisions either a 12- or 16-team playoff field with the higher seeds getting homefield advantage. The homefield advantage, Cuban said, would ensure the college football regular-season games would not lose any importance. The bowl games could still exist under Cuban's plan, but he said he would make it more profitable for programs to make the playoffs than a bowl. "Put $500 million in the bank and go to all the schools and pay them money as an option," Cuban said. "Say, 'Look, I'm going to give you X amount every five years. In exchange, you say if you're picked for the playoff system, you'll go.' " One way to push school presidents toward approving the idea would be to lobby major donors of college athletic programs, Cuban said. He suggested convincing the donors to cut off their donations until their presidents approved a playoff system. Cuban, who is reading the book "Death to the BCS," said he thinks it would take about three or four years of planning before enacting the playoff system. He believes it's a better business opportunity than owning a baseball team, and he admits he's intrigued by the idea of revolutionizing a major sport. "It's an inefficient business where there's obviously a better way of doing it," Cuban said. "The only thing that's kept them from doing it is a lack of capital, which I can deal with. "The one thing every college football fan wants you can probably create for less than it takes to buy a baseball team.""

12/16/2010 10:47:53 AM

What is "inefficient" about the current system? He just wants a piece of the pie.

12/16/2010 10:54:21 AM

I'd like to have a beer or 12 with Mark Cuban (no homo)

^the eventual champion isn't decided on the field of play, but rather by polls and computers.



[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 11:00 AM. Reason : \/ gotcha, maybe i should read the whole article]

12/16/2010 10:54:46 AM

Right, but he's talking about the current system being an "inefficient business" not an inefficient way of determining who is best. I disagree with Cuban.

Do you really think Cuban is out there to altruistically improve the BCS? Of course not... he just wants to make money off of college football.

I also think he's a douche.




[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 11:08 AM. Reason : .]

12/16/2010 10:58:19 AM

12/16/2010 11:01:50 AM

Remember when Mark Cuban was going to start that new football league?

I think he just wants into football for his own greed, and this is another attempt to show he's a threat. Like Donald Trump and the USFL in the 80s.

12/16/2010 11:36:43 AM

Quote :

"What is "inefficient" about the current system?"

12/16/2010 11:37:13 AM

I just wish they'd get rid of the automatic bids and rotate the top pick among the 5 biggest bowls.

Also, all the games need to move back to New Year's Day on roughly the same schedule as the early 90s. Maybe play the 1 vs. 2 game on the 2nd, but only if it's not the Rose. Rose has to be on New Year's Day.

12/16/2010 11:43:21 AM

Never would have thought Cuban was 52

12/16/2010 11:43:35 AM

Maybe he should show that the Mavs can win a championship before he tries to remake another sport.

12/16/2010 11:45:26 AM

It's cool with me that he's in it for the money. I approve, Mr. Cuban. Bring on the playoff system.

12/16/2010 12:07:46 PM

Thank you, Mr. Cuban. Money talks a lot faster than congressional hearings.

If you're questioning if he's in it for the money, of course he is. He's a businessman. That's what he does. Why the hell would you do this for charity?

12/16/2010 12:19:15 PM

Quote :

"he just wants to make money off of college football"

I'm sure he wouldn't invest his time and money if he didn't think he'd make a return on the investment.

And that's no different than the current system. The reason it hasn't changed is b/c people who are making money off college football don't want it to change. So there is nothing new here.

If it brings a playoff system, I don't care who makes the money.

[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 12:22 PM. Reason : And by the way, I think Cuban is a douche. But I support him on this.]

12/16/2010 12:21:46 PM

I should have put it like this:

Quote :

"he just wants to make money off of college football."

It's obvious that the current stakeholders are making a ton of money off of college football.... Cuban just wants in. I don't quite get why he can say the current system isn't an efficient business. Why, cause Cuban has no investment in it? I thought the current, retarded way of determining the national champion was kept in place exactly because of how much money it makes?

And it's not like the idea Cuban is suggesting isn't much different than the ideas sportswriters and bloggers suggest all the time, he just has a bunch of money and the media sucks his dick everytime he talks about dabbling in another sports venture.

[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 12:45 PM. Reason : .]

12/16/2010 12:43:46 PM

Quote :

"And it's not like the idea Cuban is suggesting isn't much different than the ideas sportswriters and bloggers suggest all the time"

None of the sportswriters or bloggers are willing to put up half a million dollars to actually make it happen

I get that you hate the Cubs and therefore Cuban, but this has absolutely nothing to do with any of that

12/16/2010 12:54:28 PM

Quote :

"And it's not like the idea Cuban is suggesting isn't much different than the ideas sportswriters and bloggers suggest all the time, he just has a bunch of money"

Really, you had to cut the quote off to deride me for something I admitted right after the comma? I wish Cuban would have bought the Cubs so the rivalry would still be fun, but I mostly don't like him because he acts like he can do whatever the fuck he wants no matter what the institution.

12/16/2010 12:56:49 PM

should i have also included the part of the quote about the media sucking his dick?

i just dont understand how anybody would be opposed to a D1-A playoff, unless you are currently directly involved with bowl money

and money talks, hence the potential of this being another real step towards a playoff

12/16/2010 12:59:57 PM

How can you seriously think the current system is efficient in any way shape or form unless you have absolutely no business sense or creativity. I mean it isn't the most efficient in picking a champion, and it isn't the most efficient in profit making. SO in EITHER sense it isn't efficient at all.

How is a system where often at least one if not more of the "major" bowl games to conclude the season aren't watchable to a lot of people, aren't interesting, or the games anyone desires to see?

A playoff system would increase the chances of having more higher quality games, and more on the line for each of those games. Why do I want to watch UConn play? That is not efficient where teams I'd love to see aren't getting into the biggest games, and teams that have no business being there are.

The games sell out and are watched simply because it is football and we love it. But when you start to think of the potential matchups that could happen from say the RO8 on you are talking about potentially getting 7 great meaningful games vs. the current setup which fails sometimes to give us 2 or 3. More games, better games, more meaningful games = more money.

And you'd still have the lesser bowls in place as well. The current system is NOT the most profitable setup for college football. It is the most profitable setup for the few people that have control of the system and they don't want to relinquish the control of the money. Even if you let a UConn into the playoffs they'd just get eliminated first round and at least I'd be interested in watching because something is on the line and maybe they do win and move on.

12/16/2010 1:03:07 PM

I swear there's a thread on here about it, but the "inefficient" bowl system is mapped out in the book "Death to the BCS". If I remember right from hearing about this on ESPN radio:

Basically, all of the bowl games are thrown around as charity events. None of them, except for the Chick-Fila bowl, actually donate money to charity. The money all goes to the parent organization. In addition, the schools make barely any money off of the bowl, and sometimes it costs the school money.

There is some other major point, but the fact is that the bowls are not efficiently getting money to where it needs to be, being the charities and schools that these bowls are supposedly based on.

I may be wrong, but that's what I remember from listening to it back in October.

12/16/2010 1:06:15 PM

My Mark Cuban hate is blocking both my business sense and my creativity... I'll find a support group.

12/16/2010 1:07:44 PM

Quote :

"In addition, the schools make barely any money off of the bowl, and sometimes it costs the school money."

2010 BCS Payouts

Big Six conferences
SEC $22.2 million
Big Ten $22.2 million
ACC $17.7 million
Big East $17.7 million
Big 12 $17.7 million
Pac-10 $17.7 million

Non-Big Six conferences
Mountain West $9.8 million
Western Athletic $7.8 million
Conference USA $2.8 million
Mid-American $2.1 million
Sun Belt $1.5 million

Other recipients
FCS conferences $1.8 million
Notre Dame $1.3 million
Army $100,000
Navy $100,000

[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 1:17 PM. Reason : also http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_games_bowl_schedule.html]

12/16/2010 1:13:20 PM

Quote :

"A Hartford Courant article quotes Knight Commission Executive Director Amy Perko: “There is a myth that exists that going to a bowl game is a financial windfall for the university.” While the University of Connecticut received $1.2 million from the Big East Conference for its participation in the Meineke Car Care Bowl, the university spent nearly all of the money on bowl-related expenses. The final profit was $25,266. In addition to paying for the travel expenses for the team and band, 108 people were part of the official travel party, including administrators, 25 spouses, secretaries, and team support personnel. The university also gave 13 employees bonuses for the team being selected to participate in the bowl game."

Maybe the problem is that they had 108 additional people travel.. but anyway just shows how quickly that bowl money gets used up.

12/16/2010 1:25:39 PM

My two cents: I think it's an unjust system if half the teams in the FBS are unable to win a national championship before the season even begins.

12/16/2010 1:28:39 PM

exactly

12/16/2010 1:34:55 PM

^Ernie, I can't really dispute that. I didn't read the book and don't have access to its findings, I just heard an interview with the author, who did years of research into the program.

So, with that in mind, here are some quotes from the book's website:

Quote :

"Like most college football fans, we tired of the ridiculous excuses about why we don’t have a playoff. So we dug through thousands of pages of bowl game tax returns and university documents, filed hundreds of Freedom of Information Act requests and interviewed people throughout college and professional sports. We even hired accountants to help follow the money trails. What we found was infuriating. The factual information and hard data dispute every talking point of BCS defenders and show naked political plays, scams and a system that wastes hundreds of millions of dollars that should be in the coffers of universities. ... While the big six conferences hogged 82.3 percent of the $155.2 million paid out by BCS games last year, the Mountain West Conference, Western Athletic Conference, Mid-American Conference, Conference USA, and Sun Belt Conference scraped along with the leftovers. The Cartel and the BCS exist to consolidate control among the power conferences and position themselves to never let go. Suggesting a playoff to the Cartel is futile because it doesn’t care how big the postseason revenue pie gets or even if its slice would grow. It simply wants to ensure that no one else holds the knife. ... We know how the BCS really works, or, more accurately, doesn’t work. It’s every bit as troubling as the old coach can imagine. Because of the BCS, universities have blown nearly $2 million paying for empty seats at a single game. Because of the BCS, athletic directors cash $30,000-plus bonus checks, even for sending teams to the lowliest of bowl games. Because of the BCS, teams are rewarded for waltzing through cupcake schedules every fall. Because of the BCS, Division I-A college football is the only sport in which the NCAA declines to crown an official national champion. ... Except that disease has infiltrated the bowl’s circulatory system, pumping from the heart all the way to the tiniest veins. The power-conference commissioners scheme to protect their dominant position in the postseason. The bowl executives rake in huge salaries while serving as middlemen. Nearly 60 percent of schools spend more money to participate in bowls than the games offer in payouts. ... And it’s a lot of money. An awful lot. Experts estimate a college football playoff could approach $750 million in annual revenue, more than $600 million ahead of the current system. The old bowls would survive mostly as is, no matter what dire predictions the Cartel repeats. Run in concert with the playoff , they would generate another $100 million-plus in gross revenues. As tuition rises to obscene levels, endowments dry up, donations plummet, and schools look for taxpayer subsidies, the BCS bosses continue to sit on a diamond mine because they so relish their position. "

[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 1:39 PM. Reason : but don't take MY word for it...[reading rainbow]]

12/16/2010 1:37:06 PM

Quote :

"Basically, all of the bowl games are thrown around as charity events."

I've never heard a Bowl called a charity event. Could you be confusing charity with a non-profit?

I am not convinced that bowls are inefficient. That's not to say that it is the most efficient, but I think it does a good job of getting the money to those who have the most invested.

Cuban can talk to all of the senators and AD's he wants. Until he gets buy-in from the few big schools such as Texas, USC, and Bama, none of this will matter. And he will need to put up a bunch of guaranteed money for these schools to participate. I dont see it happening, but I hope he can do it.

[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 1:46 PM. Reason : Maybe I will read "Death to the BCS" during my vacation next week.]

12/16/2010 1:43:28 PM

Quote :

"Experts estimate a college football playoff could approach $750 million in annual revenue, more than $600 million ahead of the current system. The old bowls would survive mostly as is, no matter what dire predictions the Cartel repeats. Run in concert with the playoff , they would generate another $100 million-plus in gross revenues."

So, 5 BCS games make 155 million, for about 30 million each. A 16 team playoff has 15 games, and they'd make $50 million each?

60% of schools spend more to go to bowls, but those would make $100 million in a reduced role?


I haven't read the book, and I might do it to find out their reasoning, but on the surface that looks kinda fishy.

12/16/2010 1:59:42 PM

Mark Cuban is the man.

Fuck the NCAA and fuck the BCS.

It's about time someone stepped up.

12/16/2010 2:05:45 PM

Quote :

" I've never heard a Bowl called a charity event."

Yeah, me neither, and millions of other football fans too.

http://www.collegefootballcafeteria.com/analysis/the-bcs-exists-for-charity/

Quote :

"Yes you read the title correctly, and this story is priceless. We all know the evils of the BCS and the people trying to stop a college football playoff from happening, but let me tell you about something you may not know about. Congress has been investigating the BCS recently. There have been hearings, testimonies and all that, but one in particular stands out above them all. Derrick Fox is the executive director of the Alamo Bowl. In case you didn’t know, it is one of the bigger of the lesser bowls. Average attendance is around 55,000 people and it features pretty decent teams from the Big 12 and Big Ten. Fox is a guy who has a pretty solid understanding of the bowl system since he runs a pretty big one. That’s what makes this so funny. I will just pull some direct quotes here, and I’m not even joking. This is what Fox said in his testimony: “Almost all the postseason bowl games are put on by charitable groups” and “local charities receive tens of millions of dollars every year.”"

It also references http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ys-congressbcs052509

Another thing to think about is the amount of money the schools stand to receive by advancing through the playoffs. Each game getting millions of dollars would be very good for a university.

12/16/2010 2:14:08 PM

I can't believe anyone doesn't like this idea.

and what is this cockamamie notion that its "bad because Cuban is just trying to make money"? Basketball and to a lesser extent college baseball all have playoff systems and someone makes a ton of money off all of them.

I don't care who makes money, i am just tired of the stupid season-long argument every year about the non-AQ's and will they get in over a 1 or 2 loss SEC team, yada yada yada. The answer is NO they won't.

The bowl system could be the NIT of College Football for all i care.

12/16/2010 2:44:33 PM

Quote :

"The bowl system could be the NIT of College Football for all i care."

aside from a half dozen bowls or so, it already is

aside from NCSU and WVU, does anybody give a shit about our bowl game? Aside from UNC and Tennessee, does anybody give a shit about their bowl game?

12/16/2010 2:45:52 PM

exactly and those other meaningful bowls lose their luster somewhat since only 1 of the 6 is for the still-mythical National Championship. It'd be like the losers in the final four playing each other for 3rd place.

12/16/2010 2:49:08 PM

^^ Wow, that's bizarre that they think of themselves as a charity. I guess this is why he said that:

Quote :

"he wasn’t trying to be deceptive by describing private businesses as “charitable groups” but believed that any entity that does any charity counts."

That is the type of stupidity and arrogance you would expect out of this BCS crowd.

And that revenue number seems awful low. Only $186MM in revenue for 23 bowls?

Quote :

"Another thing to think about is the amount of money the schools stand to receive by advancing through the playoffs. Each game getting millions of dollars would be very good for a university."

I guess my point was schools like UT and USC and Bama are pretty much guaranteed a certain amount of money just for playing one bowl game, so whoever puts the playoff system together will have to ensure that these schools will make at least that amount in their first playoff game, because it is the only guaranteed game they will play.

12/16/2010 3:04:23 PM

schools like that would host their 1st (and possibly 2nd) round game...extra home games = extra money

and each round of the playoffs, each particular matchup, would certainly have a big corporate sponsor

theres so much money to be made...its just that the current parties who get paid dont want to mess up their current deals

12/16/2010 3:06:52 PM

I vaguely remember some big millionaire about 2 years ago saying he would fund a playoff himself if the NCAA would adopt it. I'm sure the same deal has been offered up by a couple of people in the past. Hopefully Cuban and his ability to garner attention can make something happen.

12/16/2010 3:12:54 PM

I'd feel better if it wasn't one dude that I'm not sure isn't the Donald Trump of a new era.

This will be about as successfully as his football league.

[Edited on December 16, 2010 at 4:26 PM. Reason : x]

12/16/2010 4:25:42 PM

It's just fucking ridiculous no matter how you look at it. How does DI-A football not have a playoff or official NCAA championship? That just doesn't make sense and is just stupid.

12/16/2010 4:29:34 PM

Personally, I'd prefer to just have the NCAA run a tournament identical to the FCS one. Championship game gets to be at the LA Memorial Coliseum, since I doubt the Rose Bowl will go for it.

12/16/2010 4:48:10 PM

Butch Davis is the key to all of this BCS mess.

12/16/2010 5:22:37 PM

C.R.E.A.M (and football, unfortunately)

12/16/2010 5:59:39 PM

12/16/2010 6:22:54 PM

1-AA playoffs were stupid this year. I only looked at the bracket once, but they had like 19 teams in it somehow.

12/16/2010 9:37:03 PM

The BCS director and the Pac 10 commish, whose conference has a team with one of the berths in the MNC under the current system, think a major college football playoff wouldn't work. Why am I not surprised?

Quote :

"NEW YORK -- Don't expect Mark Cuban's money to break the BCS. Bowl Championship Series executive director Bill Hancock doubts "financial inducements," such as the one the Dallas Mavericks' outspoken owner is considering, will lead to a major college football playoff. Cuban told reporters before the Mavs' game Wednesday night that he was "actively interested but in the exploratory stage" of trying to bankroll a 12- or 16-team playoff to replace the often-criticized BCS. He thinks about $500 million might do the trick. Hancock responded to Cuban's comments in an e-mail to the AP on Thursday, saying, "Given how much support our current system has among university presidents, athletics directors, coaches and athletes, I don't think any amount of financial inducement will make people abandon" the BCS. Cuban, who has made unsuccessful attempts to buy the Chicago Cubs and Texas Rangers in recent years, said he's spoken to two athletic directors from conferences with automatic BCS bids who were enthusiastic about his idea. He intends to contact several school presidents and state senators to determine whether the idea is worth pursuing. "Put $500 million in the bank and go to all the schools and pay them money as an option," Cuban was quoted by ESPNDallas.com. "Say, 'Look, I'm going to give you X amount every five years. In exchange, you say if you're picked for the playoff system, you'll go." The BCS, using polls and computer rankings, matches the top two teams in the country after the regular season in a national title game. No. 1 Auburn and No. 2 Oregon meet on Jan. 10 in Glendale, Ariz. The BCS is wildly unpopular among fans, but the leadership of the six most powerful conferences -- the Big Ten, Big East, Big 12, ACC, SEC and Pac-10 -- support it and the bowl system, making any radical changes in the near future highly unlikely. "It speaks to the power and popularity of college football that a successful businessman and innovator like Mark Cuban would have this level of interest in investing in college football," Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott said in an e-mail. "But the fact is that college football has never been more popular in its current format, and it's a mistake to assume the impediment to a playoff is money. We could get a lot more money tomorrow from lots of folks by moving to an expansive playoff; this is about a broader set of priorities benefiting schools and student-athletes." Cuban suggested trying to persuade major donors to college athletic programs to cut off financial support until their presidents approve a playoff system. He said he thinks it would take about three or four years of planning to get a playoff up and running. He called the BCS "an inefficient business where there's obviously a better way." "The only thing that's kept them from doing it is a lack of capital," Cuban said, "which I can deal with." Hancock, of course, disagrees. "College football is so popular today," he said, "because we have a great regular season and because we have an important bowl tradition that provides a meaningful experience for the students and fans -- all of which would be at risk if this concept were implemented.""

[Edited on December 17, 2010 at 10:18 AM. Reason : quote]

12/17/2010 10:16:57 AM

Quote :

""But the fact is that college football has never been more popular in its current format, and it's a mistake to assume the impediment to a playoff is money. We could get a lot more money tomorrow from lots of folks by moving to an expansive playoff; this is about a broader set of priorities benefiting schools and student-athletes." Cuban suggested trying to persuade major donors to college athletic programs to cut off financial support until their presidents approve a playoff system. He said he thinks it would take about three or four years of planning to get a playoff up and running. He called the BCS "an inefficient business where there's obviously a better way." "The only thing that's kept them from doing it is a lack of capital," Cuban said, "which I can deal with." Hancock, of course, disagrees. "College football is so popular today," he said, "because we have a great regular season and because we have an important bowl tradition that provides a meaningful experience for the students and fans -- all of which would be at risk if this concept were implemented.""

so.... in other words... there's no reason NOT to have a playoff?

12/17/2010 10:22:58 AM

IMPORTANT BOWL TRADITION

God forbid crown jewels like the Kraft Hunger Bowl, the Papajohns.com Bowl or the San Diego Credit Union Poinsetta bowl get lost in the shuffle

12/17/2010 10:23:48 AM

What broader set of priorities to students and student athletes? Bunch of bullshit.

12/17/2010 10:53:40 AM

If anyone doesn't read Mark Cuban's blogmaverick already, you should start

He has a new post up about the football playoff where he is fielding ideas for persuading schools to join the playoff system.

Quote :

"The best one I have heard so far ? A Student Experience Fund for the Southeastern Conference. Not a scholarship fund, but a Student Experience Fund. Someone suggested that I put up $50mm dollars to be made available to current SEC students in the amount of up to $3,000 for them to use on unique projects sponsored and endorsed by a professor. It can be anything that the professor feels enhances the overall education of the student. It is a one time grant. A student can not receive more than one. It can not be used for tuition, room or board. How many such grants are given out in any given year would be left to the discretion of the Schools in the Conference. As would the allocation among schools. I’m fine with the Commissioner of the SEC running the fund. Why the SEC ? For obvious reasons. But it was also suggested that this offer also be made to a second conference on a first come first serve basis. What does everyone think about the idea ? What ideas do you have that create a unique and compelling educational opportunity for students that can be tied to a playoff system ?"

http://blogmaverick.com/2010/12/17/starting-the-process-college-football-playoffs/

12/18/2010 1:46:34 PM

If Mark Cuban can speed up the rate at which the BCS system is crushed then I am all for it..it'll be interesting to see how the process goes...

12/19/2010 3:40:37 AM

Quote :

"As much as I appreciate all the feedback about how to perfect a playoff system, the perfect system is not what is going to create change. The perfect system won’t be needed until we have the levers of change. The tipping point that drives the current BCS system out of business won’t come from a perfect playoff system. It won’t come by reminding University Presidents that they are not maximizing the financial opportunity available to their schools and conferences. It won’t come from going to legislatures and Congress and pushing them to take action. It won’t come from any of these elements because every stakeholder is already well aware of each and every one of these issues. They have heard them all and they have practiced their responses to them. I have no doubt it bothers them to no end to hear continuous criticism on the subject. There is no point in repeating what has been well chronicled with an expectation that minds will be changed. What all of us with an interest in this subject have got to do is ask questions rather than give answers. Rather than telling University Presidents/Chancellors and Conference Commissioners what they should do, we need to ask them about things they would like to do. The thing about education in this country is that no individual or group on any level is proclaiming that a college or university education is perfect. No one is claiming that it is perfectly priced. No one is claiming that there isn’t a long list of wonderful ideas that each President /Chancellor has on their wish list that would make their institution far, far better. What we need to find out is what those hopes, dreams and ideas of the schools leadership are. From those, we need to find some that we can all rally around . Bottomline is that we need to be able to identify those aspirations that an enlightened leader can say “if you can show us how we can accomplish this goal(s) through the increased financial support a playoff system would provide, then I have no choice but to support this new system” Then its up to me and the people I am working with to figure out how to make it work. In some respects this may come across as a stretch, and even corny, but the more people I talk to , the more obvious it is that the BCS is about power. And the one thing that trumps the power someone has today, is the opportunity of power on a bigger playing field. Having a meaningful impact on the future of education is a far greater legacy and base of power for the head of a major university than having control over which bowl a team plays in. So rather than posting your ideas on what a playoff structure might look like, tell me what you think the goals of your school’s administration are. Ask your school President what he/she dreams of for your school and would they trade their influence over bowl games to be able to support that goal for your school. IMHO, thats the trade off that can get the ball rolling. Kill em with love and support. See if we can put them in a position to succeed like they have never imagined. Lets see what happens. let me know what you think"

12/19/2010 10:11:32 AM

Two new Cuban posts on his quest for a playoff

Quote :

"TCU vs Auburn Won’t Happen and More on the BCS Jan 11th 2011 1:17PM A week before Auburn vs Oregon came down to the final play we made the inquiries. Could TCU play the winner of Auburn vs Oregon ? TCU had only played 13 games. Oregon would only have played 13 games. Auburn, 14 games. If Oregon won , would it be possible to play TCU as their 14th game ? The schools, on an off the record basis, were not opposed to it. They didn’t come out and agree to it, but they certainly were not opposed to the idea. The problem ? It wasn’t money. The problem was that when we asked anyone who could know whether or not the NCAA would approve another game , a +plus one playoff game, the response was unanimous , and I’m paraphrasing here “There is no way in hell the NCAA would approve a +1 playoff game between any two teams . There is no way TCU vs anyone could happen” Hey. We asked. We projected that there would be about $50mm available to the schools. But it wasn’t a question of money. It was a question of yes or no from the NCAA. We decided it was better not to actually pop the question to the NCAA. We decided to rethink the question of whether or not there should be a BCS playoff. The first step in rethinking the process is to first work from the most likely premise and try to adapt it to the goal. So we started with a simple perspective: “What if the current BCS system is a good system and the only system available to determine which two teams should play for the national championship ?”. To some, this may be a non-starter. They believe that the BCS is so flawed and incapable of crowning a true national champion that it’s not worthy of consideration. I disagree. When you look at the system, the current BCS system it is actually a very, very good starting point for determining a national champion. It is not perfect. It is far from perfect from a financial perspective. It leaves a lot of money on the table. But maximizing revenue is not a stated goal of the BCS system. So you can’t really blame them for that. The BCS system actually reaches quite a few of its goals. It retains tradition. It makes every game of the regular season important. It retains some semblance of normality for student athletes schedules and it allows them to enjoy the unique experiences of the bowl system – a week in a cool location with family, friends, fans and teammates. You may argue about these goals, but the current system gets there from here. The one goal that is not arguable is that the best two teams are always in the BCS Championship game. Even the staunchest BCS supporter will tell you that every year there are going to be disappointed teams and fans who feel that the only barrier between their team and a National Championship is the lack of a true playoff. So I set off to think about whether or not there is a way to work within the current BCS system to optimize the likelihood that the last two teams playing were the two best teams. In technology there is the very simple principle of GIGO. No matter what the algorithm, if the data going in is incomplete or misapplied then the results will be less than optimal or just plain wrong. The problem with the BCS is that the data going into the system is bad. I’m not talking about the polls. Yes we can argue about the polls the BCS uses and their problems of which they are many. But no polling or ranking system, whether built on votes or on technical analysis is going to be anywhere near perfect. (And for the record, in FOOTBALL the margin of victory weighted and re-weighted for the quality of the competition should be a factor in ranking teams ) The biggest problem with the BCS system is that there are no parameters or constraints on who BCS eligible teams schedule. Pretty much every BCS eligible school tries their best to game the system to put themselves in the best position to qualify for a bowl and to go undefeated. Put another way, almost every school schedules at least 2, if not 3 “cupcakes” every year. There in lies the rub of the BCS system. Cupcakes distort the system. Rather than playing games that could further contract the number of teams in the championship hunt, these games increase the number. GIGO. The way to fix the system is to replace the cupcakes with a mid-season playoff system . The first question in replacing cupcake games with BCS impactful is to ask whether or not teams can change their game schedules, many of which are planned years in advance. In the words of an AD “changing games is a lot easier than you think”. Particularly when you realize that the cupcakes take on the role of sacrificial lamb purely for the money. It would be relatively easy to buy out the cupcakes. Then there is also the consideration that the cupcakes are scheduled so that schools can become bowl eligible. Bowl eligibility is not just about the experience, but also about the bonuses. Get to a bowl. Get paid. Nothing wrong with that. But in order for some to consider making their schedules more difficult they are going to want to have their bowl bonuses covered. We can do that as part of this new approach. With those little inhibitors eliminated the question becomes “what is the optimal approach to an in season tournament” ? I don’t have the perfect solution, which is why I wanted to throw it out for people to discuss on http://www.facebook.com/pages/HDNet-CFB-Playoff-Series/171212686252635 My first thought on this is that we ask the BCS to require any school that would like to be considered for the BCS championship game to be leave as open dates on their schedule the 6th , 7th and 8th weeks of the season. Then we take the published BCS rankings and we “playoff ” zero loss teams against each other. We do the same with 1 loss teams, 2 loss teams, etc. So the best undefeated teams play each other in a 3 game playoff. In the event there are an uneven number of undefeated teams, we take the highest ranking one loss team (s). You do the same all the way down the line. In the first round the highest ranked undefeated team plays the lowest ranked. The teams are then re ranked after the results of the first games. Then we do the same thing all over again. Formerly undefeated teams are placed in the 1 loss ‘division’ , 2 losses in the 2 loss division, only this time there is one huge change. Starting with the 2nd round, each team plays the team ranked directly below them . So 1 plays 2. 3 plays 4. 5 plays 6, all the way through however many eligible teams are participating. Then we do the same thing all over again in the 3rd week. By the end of these 3 weeks the number of undefeated teams are reduced, and there is the real possibility that there are no undefeated teams left. Any and every Non AQ undefeated team is going to get their chance. We will have had some amazing matchups between conferences and probably even intra conference. And on the bottom of the heap, every winless team is going to face another winless or at worst a very poor team and have a chance to get on the board with a win. More importantly, the rankings in the BCS system will now reflect the results of games designed to be competitive. By the end of the season, the likelihood that they two best teams are competing in the championship game has increased substantially. What about the money ? How much do you think the value of these games will increase for current TV partners ? Auburn vs TCU as the 7th game of the season vs Auburn vs Chattanooga ? How much will sponsors pay to brand this tournament ? How much more excited will fans be ? Of course there is the issue of who gets the home game in this series, that can be handled via a flip of a coin. And there is the costs associated with uncertain travel expenses, which can easily be picked up via sponsorship and increased TV revenues. And what about the Bowl Games ? They can continue on as they always have, BUT, they have the opportunity to create “re-matches”. If Boise State knocked Penn State from the ranks of the undefeated in the first match-up game, but both ended up with 2 or 3 losses, why not a re-match ? In addition, if there is a Cinderella team(s) from the tournament, they now have a much higher national profile which in turn will make the bowl game they are involved in much more attractive. What does everyone think ? I’m not saying this is a perfect solution. That doesn’t exist. Even in a playoff system, someone will always be disappointed. But I do think that this works within the current system in a manner that is completely in control of school ADs who do the scheduling and works within the guidelines set by the BCS and the NCAA (as far as I could tell in a first pass look), and results in a far better chance of the BCS Championship game hosting the two best teams. How can I make this approach better ?"

1/26/2011 11:40:58 AM