Started By
Message
Players sitting out for bowl games will force playoff expansion to 8, 12 or even 16 teams.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:00 am
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:00 am
As more and more players opt to sit out of the non playoff bowl games, the games become more of and exhibition game and less of a draw for both TV and tickets. This will hurt revenue, which will finally motivate the bowl committees to open themselves up to participating in an expanded playoff system.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
15
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:04 am to tigbit
This is principally an LSU phenomenon since LSU is perennially outside looking in and playing in second tier bowls against the likes of UCF or Iowa.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:07 am to 14&Counting
I'm not the guy that provides the list of players sitting out bowl games, I'm just the one that points out that you're ignorant. 
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:10 am to wahoocs
Ate any of DBU’s star players showing up for this beauty of a game against UCF?
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:13 am to tigbit
Danny White and UCFast forced the playoff expansion.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:15 am to tigbit
For most of their history, bowl games were considered a reward and more of an exhibition than competition. AP and UPI both awarded their national championships before the games were even played.
The playoffs have simply returned non-playoff bowls to the exhibition like status they held for the first 50 plus years of college football.
Quit acting like the world is ending.
The playoffs have simply returned non-playoff bowls to the exhibition like status they held for the first 50 plus years of college football.
Quit acting like the world is ending.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:15 am to tigbit
No it won't.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:26 am to JustGetItRight
quote:
The playoffs have simply returned non-playoff bowls to the exhibition like status they held for the first 50 plus years of college football.
Quit acting like the world is ending.
Yes, the bowl world of 50 years ago is ending. The decision to play could cost 10s of millions of dollars - that was not the case 50 years ago. Time you realize college football is now a business and 50 years ago it was played mostly for pride, so going to a lesser bowl still meant something - win and get ranked higher. Now the risk of injury outweighs pride, but not the chance of a championship.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:28 am to tigbit
The current playoff format has hurt the bowl season. The BCS system although flawed was still fun and intriguing. It has to increase to try to save anything CFB had just a few years ago.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 11:35 am to 14&Counting
"This is principally an LSU phenomenon...."
Not true - the entire USC team is sitting out this year!!!
Not true - the entire USC team is sitting out this year!!!
This post was edited on 12/26/18 at 11:37 am
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:03 pm to tigbit
quote:BOOM !!
Not true - the entire USC team is sitting out this year!!!
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:06 pm to SadUCFKnight
quote:
Danny White and UCFast forced the playoff expansion.
and ucf still wouldn't make it
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:13 pm to John Milner
Have signing a scolley require that the player must play in all games that his school signs to play.
If you sit out a game you have to pay back the scolly money.
$250,000 is a lot of cheese.
If you sit out a game you have to pay back the scolly money.
$250,000 is a lot of cheese.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:21 pm to tigbit
LOL if there are 100 factors that will force playoff expansion, players sitting out bowl games ranks about 189th.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:23 pm to Herman Frisco
Ha that'd hold up for about .06 seconds in court.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:30 pm to tigbit
General lack of fan interest, regardless of players sitting out, will force playoff expansion.
Non-playoff bowl game viewership is way down. This will continue.
Non-playoff bowl game viewership is way down. This will continue.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 12:33 pm to TeLeFaWx
More money is being made overall. Nobody cares what the non-playoff bowls are bringing in. Expansion will only hurt them worse, but as a whole expansion will bring more money.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 1:17 pm to 14&Counting
Lol, USC hasn't been relevant in 15 years. As a matter of fact, the best team you fielded during that time frame was with our coach as your interim HC. Your program is trash, and would be lucky to even reach a bowl game, much less a so called "mid tier bowl" like the Fiesta Bowl. Delusion suits you my friend. Hopefully y'all have a shot at the New Orleans Bowl or something similar next season but I don't see y'all winning six games tbh.
Posted on 12/26/18 at 1:26 pm to DatNolaClap
IMO it will go to 8 teams after 2020. Flat dumb to go damn near a month without games. NAIA...DIII...DII...D1AA can do it and D1 will do it before long. If Notre Damn gets skull screwed by Clemson that's not in a conference and didn't play a conference championship game while the Big 10 champion is sitting at home for the 2nd year in a row it will just speed the process of a 8 team playoff up.
This post was edited on 12/26/18 at 1:27 pm
Posted on 12/26/18 at 1:49 pm to bigpapamac
quote:
More money is being made overall. Nobody cares what the non-playoff bowls are bringing in.
Why do you think this? Because the playoff contracts were more than the BCS contracts? You don't understand overlap do you?
You do know that in the second year of the playoff when ESPN tried to make the semifinals on NYE, the decline in viewership caused ESPN to return MILLIONS in ad revenue. This didn't impact the conference payouts, and thus it didn't impact how much teams received since they are fixed regardless of the viewership, but if you don't think viewership impacts revenues, and ultimately the bottom line when the next contracts come out, you're dumb.
quote:
Expansion will only hurt them worse, but as a whole expansion will bring more money.
No it won't. The decrease in valuable inventory and overall content will lead to less money.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News