Quote:
Yes, sometimes here and there a "Cinderella" will make a run in the NCAA Tournament but most of the time in the Final Four you've got the same powerhouses just like in football. Like I said earlier, I like both for their own reasons and have never viewed it as a comparison between which was better/more entertaining. There are all kinds of ways to determine champions. In the EPL they don't even have playoffs. They just say whoever has the best record at the end of the season is the champion. I'm sure if that's how you grew up watching sports then that's how you would prefer it. I though like playoff element in sports. The NCAA to me plays just like the NFL. One chance and it's over. I think that's the best. My own personal taste. |
Quote:
Why the hell would we want to encourage upsets? More critically, why would we want to encourage silly outcomes. An 'upset' as we define it is generally nothing more than a higher ranking team losing to a lower ranking one. Well hell, all those really are are indictments on the rankings more often than not. I want a true outcome - that's all. I'm not the least bit interested in adjusting the rules to make it easier for inferior squads to have a hot half, get a fluke bounce and then hold on for dear life. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Some seasons the 'big powers' simply aren't as good. Many of Mizzou's 'upsets' this year weren't upsets at all. Mizzou is simply a more talented football team in 2013. You act as though national powers will be more talented simply by name every single season, but it's not the case. Great programs will have off years. Average to good programs will have great years. To my eyes, Mizzou is the 2nd most talented team in the SEC this season. You could argue anywhere from 2nd to 5th, but this is a damn good football team that would beat A&M, LSU and Auburn on a neutral field more often than not this season. And if those teams play, I don't want a 5 point FG that they can have some guy go out there and bomb away for 1/2 the game deciding the outcome. I want a set of true results. You're talking about program-building to some degree whereas I'm talking about actual gameplay. The NCAA (football) has done a lot to encourage more equity in program building but they have refused to do anything to encourage fluke results on the field. Good. They shouldn't. Try your best to level the playing field so that all teams are on relatively even keel when getting players/coaches and then let them go prove who the most talented team is. That doesn't happen often enough in college basketball. There are too many silly outcomes. |
Quote:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmi...h-9-5-million/ If your team wins a major BCS bowl game they make upwards of $22 million and when the college football playoffs happen the 5 major conference will get $250 million /yr ($50 million per conference) |
I think however that a conference's 2nd BCS team gets a significantly lower payout right? At any rate this is a function of the control conferences have of football money vs the NCAA taking the whole $800M in tourney revenue. You have to think Slive and Delaney are chomping at the bit to take that someday as well.
|
Quote:
And to answer your question you are correct. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.