https://watchstadium.com/college-football-playoff-expansion-athletic-directors-04-07-2020/
My preference is for a 24 team playoff. I'm going to lay this out because I'm currently on a conference call with other parties who are arguing like school children about things that really aren't that important. Don't really have a dog in the discovery fight, but I'm still on the call. I lose you win. Or waste your time on my rambling. Your call.
A larger playoff may be crucial for college athletics:
The article doesn't mention the elephant in the room - a lot of schools are going to be absolutely rat****ed by the lower revenues from not having a tournament and will struggle to pay their bills. If the football season is played without fans, very few schools will survive without severe cuts to non-revenue sports, completely changing the college sports landscape.
...unless a news source of revenue is found. To me, the most obvious source is an expanded football playoff. The basketball deal brings in roughly $1billion per year, I think football would be worth at least $1.5 billion per year. Shop the TV contract to networks and make sure you get a damn good deal for streaming rights. Require some advanced payments. Even without advanced payments, schools would be able to borrow money against the future revenue stream.
Bowls have survived because of tradition, but mostly because the bowl owners have cozied up to NCAA and conference officials. Those relationships have been almost impossible to break, but the changing math may leave no other choice.
Filling the bracket:
Conference champions from each of the 10 conferences, then the highest ranked independent team. Fill other 13 teams with a committee because committees are great for the networks who love the added eyeballs watching the season long process and selection. If you really wanted to be crazy nuts about it, and the timing worked out (before the FCS tournament started), give the top ranked FCS team the option to enter in the FCS playoff with a ranking assigned by the committee.
Game locations:
Round 1 has the top 8 seeds getting a bye, while the next 16 teams play at the higher seeds' stadium. Round 2 (round of 16) has games at higher seeds' stadium. Subsequent rounds are at neutral sites. Revenue from all games is pooled and distributed just like the basketball tournament, but provide bonuses to schools that make the playoffs and bonuses for advancing.
Game days:
Round 1 with 1 game on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and 4 on Saturday. Round 2 the same way. Round 3 (8 teams) with 1 game on Thursday, 3 on Saturday. Week off for hype time. Round 4 on Saturday. Round 5 the following Saturday or Monday, whatever gets the best ratings.
How to make a 24 team tournament work with schedules:
This article only mentions 8, 12, and 16, likely because of the additional games a few teams would play, a maximum of 5 if a non-bye team went the whole way, but more likely an additional 4 games for the 2 teams in the championship. My solution to the number of games issue is simple:
1. Eliminate conference championship games. Fans hate them and teams are generally lukewarm on them because they usually represent a chance to lose more than can be gained. Now we have 2 teams playing 3 (maybe 4) extra games, 4 teams playing 4 (maybe 5) extra games, and 8 teams playing 3-4 extra games.
2. Eliminate 1-3 non-conference games. Fans hate "tune up" games. Networks hate tune up games because rating suck compared to games with good opponents.
The only people that like them are coaches and athletic departments wanting to set up an easy path to bowl games and/or the playoff and who like the additional revenue from the games - revenue that should pale in comparison to playoff distributions. The "need the revenue" and "easy playoff / bowl path" arguments are no longer issues when you put 24 in the playoff. If we drop 2 non-con games, we have 2 teams playing 1 (maybe 2) extra games, 4 teams playing 3 (maybe 4) extra games, and 8 teams playing 2-3 extra games.
My preference is for a 24 team playoff. I'm going to lay this out because I'm currently on a conference call with other parties who are arguing like school children about things that really aren't that important. Don't really have a dog in the discovery fight, but I'm still on the call. I lose you win. Or waste your time on my rambling. Your call.
A larger playoff may be crucial for college athletics:
The article doesn't mention the elephant in the room - a lot of schools are going to be absolutely rat****ed by the lower revenues from not having a tournament and will struggle to pay their bills. If the football season is played without fans, very few schools will survive without severe cuts to non-revenue sports, completely changing the college sports landscape.
...unless a news source of revenue is found. To me, the most obvious source is an expanded football playoff. The basketball deal brings in roughly $1billion per year, I think football would be worth at least $1.5 billion per year. Shop the TV contract to networks and make sure you get a damn good deal for streaming rights. Require some advanced payments. Even without advanced payments, schools would be able to borrow money against the future revenue stream.
Bowls have survived because of tradition, but mostly because the bowl owners have cozied up to NCAA and conference officials. Those relationships have been almost impossible to break, but the changing math may leave no other choice.
Filling the bracket:
Conference champions from each of the 10 conferences, then the highest ranked independent team. Fill other 13 teams with a committee because committees are great for the networks who love the added eyeballs watching the season long process and selection. If you really wanted to be crazy nuts about it, and the timing worked out (before the FCS tournament started), give the top ranked FCS team the option to enter in the FCS playoff with a ranking assigned by the committee.
Game locations:
Round 1 has the top 8 seeds getting a bye, while the next 16 teams play at the higher seeds' stadium. Round 2 (round of 16) has games at higher seeds' stadium. Subsequent rounds are at neutral sites. Revenue from all games is pooled and distributed just like the basketball tournament, but provide bonuses to schools that make the playoffs and bonuses for advancing.
Game days:
Round 1 with 1 game on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and 4 on Saturday. Round 2 the same way. Round 3 (8 teams) with 1 game on Thursday, 3 on Saturday. Week off for hype time. Round 4 on Saturday. Round 5 the following Saturday or Monday, whatever gets the best ratings.
How to make a 24 team tournament work with schedules:
This article only mentions 8, 12, and 16, likely because of the additional games a few teams would play, a maximum of 5 if a non-bye team went the whole way, but more likely an additional 4 games for the 2 teams in the championship. My solution to the number of games issue is simple:
1. Eliminate conference championship games. Fans hate them and teams are generally lukewarm on them because they usually represent a chance to lose more than can be gained. Now we have 2 teams playing 3 (maybe 4) extra games, 4 teams playing 4 (maybe 5) extra games, and 8 teams playing 3-4 extra games.
2. Eliminate 1-3 non-conference games. Fans hate "tune up" games. Networks hate tune up games because rating suck compared to games with good opponents.
The only people that like them are coaches and athletic departments wanting to set up an easy path to bowl games and/or the playoff and who like the additional revenue from the games - revenue that should pale in comparison to playoff distributions. The "need the revenue" and "easy playoff / bowl path" arguments are no longer issues when you put 24 in the playoff. If we drop 2 non-con games, we have 2 teams playing 1 (maybe 2) extra games, 4 teams playing 3 (maybe 4) extra games, and 8 teams playing 2-3 extra games.
