One idiot like me, one team, one conference .. none of those can move the jello that is the NCAA. What will it take for them to open the national championship to eight rather than four teams?
If I put the pros on one side of a piece of paper and negative on the other, I'm not sure I need the second column. About the only thing I've ever heard is that it would take the students away from their studies too long. Chuckle chuckle. It's a week longer, guys, for a couple of teams. Has a larger playoff ruined many (any?) of the FCS players' chances for a non football career following graduation?
Has the Basketball tournament become more or less interesting since they moved from 16 to 64 teams? Has the NCAA or have the schools lost money as it expanded?
In football the week before the New Years six would no longer be a bunch of games two cities or towns or in some cases two states and a collection of addled alumnae are interested in. Read that as more money coming in from four more bowls which would go to schools (who generally run a break-even operation in participation) conferences (who knows what they'd do ... maybe hire better commissioners) and the NCAA (I REALLY don't know what they do with their money). If it's a good thing, there will still plenty of bowls that lead to nothing but some hardware for the trophy case and probably some old age lies.
It would give a lot of schools that, even with a perfect record, are most likely going to be turned away at the door for a chance to win the big one and, once in a little longer than a blue moon, one would. How could that hurt the rep of the NCAA?
Maybe there's the negative, a dip in the sale of crying towels.
I get it. Once there are eight teams the demand for 16 will begin, then 32 and then 64 until we have February Freakout. Those are not going to happen but neither will a missed opportunity to crown the best team, at the end of the season, as long as we have eight teams.
Right now, we need to try eight ... dammit.
If I put the pros on one side of a piece of paper and negative on the other, I'm not sure I need the second column. About the only thing I've ever heard is that it would take the students away from their studies too long. Chuckle chuckle. It's a week longer, guys, for a couple of teams. Has a larger playoff ruined many (any?) of the FCS players' chances for a non football career following graduation?
Has the Basketball tournament become more or less interesting since they moved from 16 to 64 teams? Has the NCAA or have the schools lost money as it expanded?
In football the week before the New Years six would no longer be a bunch of games two cities or towns or in some cases two states and a collection of addled alumnae are interested in. Read that as more money coming in from four more bowls which would go to schools (who generally run a break-even operation in participation) conferences (who knows what they'd do ... maybe hire better commissioners) and the NCAA (I REALLY don't know what they do with their money). If it's a good thing, there will still plenty of bowls that lead to nothing but some hardware for the trophy case and probably some old age lies.
It would give a lot of schools that, even with a perfect record, are most likely going to be turned away at the door for a chance to win the big one and, once in a little longer than a blue moon, one would. How could that hurt the rep of the NCAA?
Maybe there's the negative, a dip in the sale of crying towels.
I get it. Once there are eight teams the demand for 16 will begin, then 32 and then 64 until we have February Freakout. Those are not going to happen but neither will a missed opportunity to crown the best team, at the end of the season, as long as we have eight teams.
Right now, we need to try eight ... dammit.
Last edited:
