I'd argue that the major conferences want that. The fans will watch no matter what.
It was a good game for a change. What's this fighting over which conference is the best? Everybody knows which one that is anyway.
I was discussing this with a co-worker yesterday...
I think that the concept of a "National Champion" is eventually going to die out. As the major conferences get bigger and bigger, have their own TV networks, and make more and more money... why would they give up money to a third party for a bowl game or national championship game?
If the SEC, Big 10, and Pac-12 keep adding teams and eventually grow to be 20+ team "super-conferences" with their own networks... what's stopping them from giving the NCAA the bird, making their own rules, and hosting their own sort of play-off or championship game televised exclusively on their own network? They would stand to make even more money. Let's not kid ourselves... it all comes back to making money.
Most people agree that it's only a matter of time before college players are paid. Whether it comes in the form of a trust type account with a vesting period of 3-4 years (which is the smartest option IMO) or a straight salary; the concept of a "student athlete" will become obsolete. What we will eventually have are amateur teams sponsored by colleges. At that point, why even bother playing ball with the NCAA and why not just be your own indpendent entity.
In my opinion, the NCAA really screwed themselves over with the Penn State scandal. Levying fines and penalties against an entire university for the acts of one (or possibly a few) screwed up individual(s) really overstepped the bounds of what the NCAA should be able to do. I mean, eventually organizations like the Big 10 (or hell, even single schools like Texas) may make more or an equivalent amount of money as the NCAA. Why would they put up with some third party organization telling them what to do?
I think it's something interesting to think about...
Sure, that's why the major conferences agreed to go in the exact opposite direction that you're suggesting.
What got better ratings: SEC title game, Big10 title game, or last night's? It's not about getting fans to watch, it is about maximizing the number of them watching.
They over stepped their jurisdiction by doing anything at all. This was a criminal issue not a sport issue
This. They were supposed to walk all over the 12th best defense in the SEC. They didn't. They got it going in the 2nd half but they can really only say they beat the SEC champs for a half. I don't even believe Auburn was the best team in the SEC this year. Maybe not even top 3. Things fell their way.
In the absence of a national title game, a major conference championship (with teams spanning half the country... like the SEC or Big10) would get great ratings.
In the end it's about maximizing ad revenue and tv contracts. Ask the Yankees how that's worked out for them.
Don't for a second think that the Big10 added Maryland (Washington DC) and Rutgers (NY) for any reason other than their respective television markets.
Television contracts and ad revenues will drive all future changes in sports. That's just reality.
4 different NFL teams had to scramble to fight blackouts for playoff games. Playoff games! The reality is that experience of watching sports at home on 60+ inch HDTVs in conjunction with skyrocketing ticket prices has left the average consumer more than content to stay at home and watch sports on tv. As a result, sports teams are finding new ways to make money off their fans. The answer is lucrative tv contracts, exclusive rights for networks, and ad revenue.
In the end it's a business and it's about making money. What fans want is ultimately irrelevant. They will complain but in the end, they'll still watch. The NFL has proved that time and again.
Didn't FSU just beat the best team in the SEC? I'm confused , how does this show how weak the ACC is? 2-0 in BCS bowls this season. SEC is 0-2 .
They beat them in a whole game. It takes two halves to make a whole game and in that whole game, Auburn lost. The high and mighty SEC was shut out for the BCS games. Any way you want to spin it, 0-2 is still 0-2.
Who was the best in the SEC? I hope that you say Alabama. The same Alabama who got their ass hand fed to them by OU (the double digit underdog who beat them by 14pts)
Call it an off year for the SEC if you want but their best bowl game victory was #9 S.C beating #19 Wisconsin or #8 Mizzou beating #13 Ok state. None of these wins were from a lower team defeating a higher ranked team.
sooner or later ESPN will own all the television rights to all the games, they already have a contract worth BILLIONS with the SEC
You're an idiot. Alabama spent 4 years battling grinding games out. Lost to auburn in the iron bowl first year, auburn wins title. Year 2 battle LSU twice and win national title, year 3 get knocked off the podium but come back and make it to the championship game and dismantle ND. Battle all year long in the sec to get bit by auburn again in the iron bowl. Good luck getting fired up to play OU for something other than the NC. It's a grind in the sec. At least admit that FSU breezed through the ACC and that playing Auburns schedule would have been much tougher.
Do you want to win a National Championship at Florida State? You’ve got a better chance in the ACC than you have in the Big 12, or even the SEC.
You say, "Well, gosh, they’re much stronger in those conferences." Yeah! They beat up on each other and you can’t hardly get there. You know what? Florida State, wait ‘til you get good enough to rule the ACC then you start looking for someplace to jump. But my opinion? They should stay right where they are.
I hate Alabama. But like I said you are unable to take a honest look at the conferences. At least Bobby Bowden can.
BCS embarrassment ? Losing the title game by 3 points isn't an embarrassment for Auburn.
Oklahoma over Alabama was close until the late game fumble TD
The embarassment is that the powerful untouchable SEC went 0-2 in BCS bowl games. The same great and powerful SEC conference that was shoved down everyones throat as being undefeatable.
I don't know if anyone is arguing that the SEC isn't the toughest conference, but I think it's fair to say FSU could/would have gone undefeated in it. I dno't think that's far-fetched at all to say. IMO
I don't know if anyone is arguing that the SEC isn't the toughest conference, but I think it's fair to say FSU could/would have gone undefeated in it. I dno't think that's far-fetched at all to say. IMO
It'll be the same thing in the playoffs. SEC dominates year in and year out with 6 teams being contenders while the remaining 4 conferences hype 1 team each. Naturally the sec will dismantle each other until 2 make it to the playoffs and the remaining 4 conferences will battle for the two open spots. After a while you ***** that the championship game is always an sec vs sec game and that the sec is forcing thselves down your throat (but secretly you will enjoy it)