[Husker] The fed bringing the heat on the BCS

[Skylar Dodds]

I am against a playoff, but if they ever did it I would hope they'd do a
home-team system where the higher seeds host all the way up to the final
game (played at a neutral field).  

I don't care if it's -20 degrees in Lincoln... :)

--
Skylar

-----Original Message-----
From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf Of
Mike Jaixen
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 11:11 AM
To: David Strong; j j; Theodore Heise; Jon Johnston; Husker List; Mark
Landin; Duane Feldman
Subject: Re: [Husker] The fed bringing the heat on the BCS

Actually, trying to set up predetermined sites for the preliminary rounds is
going to be a logistical and financial nightmare.  It works for the NCAA
Men's basketball tournament because (a) it's March Madness and (b) arenas
only hold 15k-20k.  Bring in 8 teams from around the country, and if each
brings 500 to 1,000 fans, you've already filled half the arena.  Supplement
that with local ticket sales, and it's a very manageable event.

Now extract that to football.  Make it 70,000 seat stadium and only 2 teams.
Teams don't know where they are playing until a week before the game, which
is nearly impossible to put together charters in  time, and airlines will
charge you the maximum rate possible for not booking early.  If the site is
within 500 miles, many fans could drive, but that limits Nebraska to playing
in Minneapolis, St. Louis, KC, Chicago, and Denver.

How many fans are going to be able to head to Phoenix, Charlotte, Tampa, or
Seattle on a week's notice?  Not enough to fill a football stadium.  The
only way a neutral site game would work is if the local markets grab on and
buy all the tickets for these preliminary games.  Problem with that is you
get a neutral crowd who arrives late and leaves early and isn't into the
game all that much, as compared to a partisan crowd.

The NFL knows this, and that's why they play all of their preliminary games
on home fields where you earn the right to play at home throughout the
playoffs.  (Yes, that means the regular season is STILL meaningful, because
going undefeated means you are playing at home for much of the playoffs,
while sneaking in with a 9-3 record means you'll be on the road the whole
way...)  Use the BCS formula as a baseline to select teams as well as seed
them, and get strength of schedule back in the formula.  A USC should be
rewarded for scheduling Florida (even if they lose) over scheduling
Appalachian State as a non-conference opponent.

 Mike Jaixen
http://huskermike.blogspot.com
http://www.cornnation.com




________________________________
From: David Strong <gbrlist at yahoo.com>
To: j j <jjj112665 at yahoo.com>; Theodore Heise <theo at heise.nu>; Jon Johnston
<jon.johnston at gmail.com>; Husker List <husker at tssi.com>; Mark Landin
<marklandin at gmail.com>; Duane Feldman <dlfeldman at ameritech.net>
Sent: Tue, February 2, 2010 10:45:02 AM
Subject: RE: [Husker] The fed bringing the heat on the BCS


There you go.  Certainly a workable scenario, one of many.  I don't really
see your flaw as a flaw.  The BCS would go away if a tournament was ever
instituted.  Accommodating bowls is irrelevant.  I expect that if a
tournament is ever put in place, they will have predetermined, designated
sites for the games, much like the basketball tournament.  Ex.  the quarters
might be called "regionals" with sites for the games in cities within those
regions.  Then the semis and finals elsewhere.  Probably change every year,
or not.  Football games are big events and they would be easier to plan and
promote if this was so.   But regardless,  all very doable.

Dave


      

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker



      
_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker