(06-04-2013 09:29 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: (06-03-2013 08:16 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote: I think the best hope for the non-Big 5 teams in the post-season is to start a second-level 16 team tournament with the games being played at the homes of the higher seed.
Feeding the corrupt bowl system hurts the schools, and limits the excitement and marketability of the product. It works for the big 5, but not the others. We have to provide a different product.
Tournaments generate lots of excitement. Ask ECU fans about the excitement their College Insider Tournament championship generated. Having something like this in college football would build the local fan base for many nonBig 5 teams, and provide a different, unique product that would make money, instead of the bowls guaranteeing that money is lost.
Totally different situation. Yes the CIT tournament generated a lot of excitement for ECU, but that was just more about ECU fans have been looking for a reason to be excited about basketball for so long than that the CIT is that exciting itself. Tournaments only generate excitement for those excited to be in them.
That excitement is what would make a 2nd level football tournament successful. That excitement would build the local fan base for nonBCS teams - helping them build their programs. A tournament would be much more exciting for these teams than 2nd level bowl games.
(06-04-2013 09:29 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: You look at the power conference teams that end up in the NIT or CBI and they just don't care. That's how the better and more traditionally good G5 would view that type of tournament. They wouldn't see it as an opportunity but more of a punishment.
Power conferences have bowl arrangements locked up for years. Though, judging from the CBI, those with losing records could still be invited. Also, at most half the power conference teams in 2nd level bowls are excited to be there, wishing they were in a bigger bowl instead.
However, as I stated earlier, a 2nd level playoff is much better for nonBig 5 teams, while the bowl system is better for Big5 teams.
(06-04-2013 09:29 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: ECU fans would not be jacked up about hosting Akron (or any other random G5 team we have zero history with) in a tournament that ECU fans all know in the grand scheme of things is meaningless.
ECU would still get 45K fans out to see Akron, and that blows away the attendance of at least half the bowl games, 2nd level or not. Next tourney level game may not be a big name, but likely a solid team that won 8-10 games. The semi-finals and finals would probably be against a ranked team, even with the top conference champ going to a first level bowl. There would be significant national interest in the final 4 and championship - much more than the bowls the nonBig5 are currently stuck with.
2nd level bowls are meaningless in the grand scheme, or even in the yearly scheme. Until I checked, I had forgotten that ECU was even bowl eligible last year, let alone who they played or where. I tourney champ would mean a high ranking and a big accomplishment - much more than a bowl game.
A 16 team 2nd level playoff would be golden for the nonBCS, actually making money for them instead of losing money in 2nd level bowl games.
Go Cougs!!!! (to a playoff, not a bowl game ; )