1) I was talking about fans here, not the ND administration. ND fans probably do not get upset about the idea of joining a conference because doing so would affect revenue.

2) Most schools fund their athletic programs with either football or basketball; ND isn’t special in this regard.

3) ND benefits more than other schools when it goes to a BCS game. But it also hurts more when it doesn’t. MSU did not go to a bowl game, but it benefits from OSU, UM, etc. If ND falls on hard times, it has no conference support. So saying that ND has lots to lose by splitting its BCS take is only half the picture (although I guess the new contract softens both sides).

4) “Suing the pants” off of someone is usually used when a litigant is seeking lots of money. In the unlikely event this did reach court, ND would probably be seeking some sort of injunction, not damages: ND would want a court to say ND does not have to join a conference, not that the NCAA must pay ND what it loses by joining a conference.

This is the profit and loss statement of Notre Dame athletics.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstDetail.asp?CRITERIA=3

If the link doesn’t work, search “Equity in Athletics” and look for the Office of Post Secondary Education. You’ll finr that the ND football program made a $43 million profit. However, the overall profit for the Athletic Department was less than $23 million. This, of course, means that all of the other athletics programs dombined for more than $20 million dollars in losses.

Split the $16 million ND earned in its BCS game 12 ways, and you’ll find that profit for the entire athletic department is reduced by more than 50%.

“Tradition” has absolutely nothing to do with Notre Dame football not wanting to join a conference. As a private enterprsie, they will sue the pants off of anyone who tries to make them join a conference.

And they will win easily in court.

I know the 9th team has a better chance of winning than the 66th team. (There are now 65 teams in the bball tourney.) But who, besides their fans, thinks Boise State has a chance to win it all? They are #9 in the AP and the coaches poll, #8 in the BCS.

I looked at Grand Valley State and they have an 11 week season that starts September 2nd. The playoffs start after a 2 week break on November 25th and they end, after 4 weeks of games, December 16th.

I like 16 teams for a playoff with an 11-game regular season that ends the Saturday before Thanksgiving. This gives you a 4-week playoff, and the maximum number of games a team would play in a season would be 15.

Anyone know how many games D1-AA, DII and DIII seasons run, and how the playoffs work?

As for basketball, the NCAA tournament has weakened conference games and championships??? The NCAA tourney (and the NIT before it) has been around since the 1930′s, nearly as long as colleges have been playing the game.

Budah, I appreciate your passionate and vehement stand against the incoming tide that is a playoff. Buckley signing off on this thread. Go Blue, go Big-10.

Paul — how do you like ND’s chances vs LSU? Them Tigers was really improving at the end, playing as good as anybody at the end of the season.

I’m enjoying this conversation, but the basketball postseason doesn’t provide lessons for the football postseason. They’re far too different.

Also, Paul, I think you understate it a bit when you say the tournament has weakened the conference games and championships.

1)The reasoning on that site has a serious flaw:
“Given the sports fan’s desire to settle matters on the field, as well as the concept of the bowl game no longer filling its original purpose, perhaps a playoff system is a accurate reflection of the fact that we now have full information on the abilities of any team in the country, and thus can accurately select a group of teams to participate in a short championship tournament.”
I cannot disagree more vehemently with the notion that the availability of information means we can accurately select teams. That is one of the points of my post. College football is so extraordinarily regional that even though anyone can watch any team play and can see a wealth of stats for each team, they still don’t give you a truly accurate picture because there’s so little interplay — if any at all. The availability of information does not make the judgments any more accurate.

2)I think money would be a larger hurdle if you started removing regular season games to make room for a playoff.

3)The argument of determining playoff teams is not an ancillary argument — it is the key argument. It is what will seal its fate one way or another. I think only conference champions should be allowed in a playoff, but that’s not a likely scenario. But then there’s the question of seeding the playoff teams…

4)Your comment about preferring one debate over another makes an interesting point: the debate will always be there. And it will be there in playoff seeding, too, no matter what, so it won’t be confined to the 16th team.

I still believe college football does not need a disputed-as-little-as-possible national champion. I think it should emphasize its conferences, and not a national system. I think it is at its best when it does so. Leave national rankings as opinion and consider conference standings the highest reliable standings. As it is constructed, that’s what makes sense for college football.

But, like js, I know a playoff is most likely inevitable. It’s just a matter of when and how. And then a matter of what unforeseen occurrence makes the playoff system look stupid — which I also believe will happen sooner or later.

Time for me to chime in. The above link captures my sentiments. School presidents and athletic directors are addicted to bowl money; that’s the largest hurdle to a playoff system….but it doesn’t have to be. I won’t pretend I know how many teams should be in a playoff, but for argument’s sake, let’s say it’s 16. That leaves 48 schools available for bowl games outside of a playoff (currently 32 bowl games exist meaning 64 teams play in a bowl game — over 50% of Div 1-A schools). There would be plenty of money available from sponsorship and TV to replace bowl money for schools in the playoff, and you still would have 24 bowl games for those outside the playoff.

I’ll leave the argument for how you determine the playoff teams to another thread, but one idea would be: BCS conference champs are automatically in, and a selection committee picks the remaining teams, and also seeds the teams. I’d much rather endure a debate over who the 16th team is vs the incessant blathering over who should play in a fictional national championship game.

I’m not in any way defending the BCS. I’ve been a big BCS hater for years. But I hate the old way as well. The old way stunk. The old way worked if you were in a conference that you loved. Winning your conference is great and all but does nothing for me as a ND fan. There has to be a national champ.

I agree that ESPN has too much control on people. I personally watch a bunch of ESPN. And I’m constantly yelling at them for getting things wrong. ESPN is part of the reason so many losers worship the genius Belickeck and the glorious Patriots. (Sorry the Colts fan in me coming out) But really they get stuck in the moment and whatever is great right now is the best ever.

The piano is starting to play to start Sunday School, I better stop my rant now. My point is that I hate the old way. My point is that I hate the new way. There has to be some way that will work.