Eyeballs on the tube and asses in the seats

This is why there’s resistance to expanding the postseason:

And to take it further…

Gee, I wonder how well the SECCG could have done had it been a meaningful game.  Suck it, San Jose State.

About these ads

34 Comments

Filed under It's Just Bidness, SEC Football

34 responses to “Eyeballs on the tube and asses in the seats

  1. Chopper Reid

    This should not be a suprise. CBS gets to choose the single best SEC game every week….and the best SEC game is almost always the best game in college football that week.

    Next you’ll tell me that the top 10% of highschoolers score the highest on the SAT and ACT. Shocker.

  2. Zdawg

    Dang. I wish we didn’t fold like a cheap tent in the second half. Would of given the viewers something to watch and given us some serious momentum into next year. Oh well, at least the game didn’t didn’t mean anything, right San Jose State?

    • Bulldog Joe

      We picked a bad time to play the worst half of football in our history (0-35).

      We have every reason to play the 2012 season with a chip on our shoulder, beginning with the bowl game.

      • Zdawg

        Only slightly less bad was that first half against Bama during blackout game. Looking forward to less big misses during national spotlight games thats for sure. It always seems like our weaknesses get seriously exposed. Hopefully Richt will take a lesson from this (special teams) a little faster than he did vs bama (defense duh.)

  3. Irwin R. Fletcher

    Yes…those playoffs really kill interest in the regular season.

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/12/weekend-nfl-tv-ratings-juggernaut-rolls/1

    Durrrrrr……

    • I love you guys.

      When I make comparisons between college football and the NFL, I get told they’re not the same. And when I make comparisons between college football and college basketball, I’m told they’re not the same.

      But when you guys do it… ;)

      • Irwin R. Fletcher

        “This is why there’s resistance to expanding the postseason”

        I just don’t think it is as self-evident as that statement makes it appear.

        They aren’t the same. I think that’s clear. But………

        there is no way you can argue that it is a foregone conclusion that a playoff in D-1 football would kill ratings in the regular season.

        • Irwin R. Fletcher

          By the way, it’s nice to be a commenter rather than the author. Makes it easier to slide in and out of my nonsensical rants.

          Keep up the good work!

        • Mark

          I think it’s a valid point the Senator makes. For instance, I watch teams that are rated higher than UGA so I can root for them to be upset. Implement an expanded playoff and I wouldn’t care near as much about the games those other teams are playing. At that point, it’s only seeding which isn’t near as important as getting in.

          If the playoffs are expanded too much, the college football season becomes much more regional than it already is. OSU vs OU was only interesting to me as an SEC fan because it had an impact on the rankings and whether or not Bama or OSU would be in or out. Change it to a 16 team playoff and I could not have cared less about the OSU vs OU game and I wouldn’t have watched it.

        • Forgive the comparison, but it sure as hell has with college basketball.

          • Didn’t Kentucky and UNC play last Saturday? I mean, those are two of the most storied programs in college basketball history and both have been the #1 team in the nation at some point this season. I bet the ratings for that game were no different than some Big Ten game between middling teams that ESPN tends to show mid-week.

          • Chopdawg

            A 16-team playoff, factored into the current bowl system, would make for a lot more interesting December than what we’re in for now….

            But yeah, I get the “meaningful regular-season games” argument, what with Georgia vs Buffalo next year, Georgia vs. Georgia Southern, Georgia vs Florida Atlantic, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

      • Mark

        LOL! Love your sense of humor. (As a side note, the “I blame Bobo” comment always makes me laugh out loud.) IMO, there is no doubt the national interest in college regular season would take a hit if an expanded playoff was implemented. However, a small playoff such as 4 to 6 teams might actually increase the interest beyond the locals in some regular season games. For instance, OSU vs. OU would have been far more interesting on a national level if there had been a plus 1 model.

        I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, we are better off with the current system than we would be with a 16 team playoff. However, I think a plus 1 model would be an improvement and would increase interest in the regular season and create more money due to the increased interest in the final games of the season and the interest from a 4 team playoff bracket.

        • Mark, I agree completely with what you said. Plus 1 works for me.

          • I submit that this year plus none makes more sense than plus one. Screw it, LSU is the best they won all their games in the toughest conference. They beat the second best team in the country in their house . Its over ,end of discussion. Why make more rules because they only potentially screw up what the regular season proved conclusively.Let Alabama prove they are better than Okie St for second place.

  4. Jermaine'sDye

    Now imagine those ratings if there wa an actual post-season playoff (like every other level of football) and not just a slew of meaningless exhibition games.

    • Hackerdog

      Right. If we had an expanded playoff, the ratings for the regular season would obviously stay the same, plus we would bring in tens of millions from the playoff. The only reason that we haven’t moved to an expanded playoff is that the AQ conference presidents and commissioners are all such idiots.

      It’s just so easy, right?

  5. RandallPinkFloyd

    They are two different beasts. I like that the hot team in the NFL can ride the wave and win like Green Bay did last year, but I like the way college football puts you on your heels for 12 weeks. Chuck and Chernoff (sp?) were debating this at length, yesterday. I actually find myself agreeing with Chuck, which is a surprise in and of itself. His arguement: If you lose a game during the regular season, you can’t argue with the way the system plays out. I hate that we’re playing a rematch and I hate it even more that LSU has to beat Saban twice in one season, but I can’t argue that we don’t have the two best teams in the ‘ship.

  6. Raleigh St. Clair

    I’m not sure I follow. The obvious interest in college football is the reason for no expanded playoff? The very idea that the people who tuned into the SEC this year wouldn’t do so if the bowl system were scrapped is completely illogical.

    An expanded postseason would simply represenent an opportunity for people to watch more college football games, which the numbers cleat show they will.

    • SCDawg

      The idea is that by turning the whole regular season into a bracket contest, the regular season and the Conf. Champ. games just won’t mean as much. Sure having a one seed is better than a 16 seed, but the real interest only comes when the playoffs begin. If Bama had lost to Auburn the last game of this year, it wouldn’t have been kicked out of the championship, it just would been an eight seed instead of a two seed. That game meant more than a seed, it meant the chance to play in the biggest game. (depending on whether you think it should have been them-they HAD to win that game).

      I am not opposed to a plus one as I don’t think it will hurt the regular season very much. To me, however, mission creep will set in the first time a five seed should have gotten in they’ll expand it to 8, then 16, etc. There is no playoff that has ever gotten smaller. All they do is get bigger until they kill the golden goose. I just think people will care less when the question is “who got the 16 seed?” Plus, which criminals are going to run the playoff?

    • Hackerdog

      See college basketball for a perfect example of an expanded playoff turning the regular season into a nearly meaningless exercise.

      • Raleigh St. Clair

        I’m sorry, but who proposed a 64-team college football playoff that was preceded by a 30+ game regular season. Basketball, by it’s nature, mandates a longer regular season to determine who is best. It is very much like baseball in that regard. Football is totally different. The real comparison is the NFL, which does just fine in the regular season. Americans simply love football. It is like Europeans and . . . football. College football ratings wouldnt change at all with a playoff.

        • Hackerdog

          Nobody proposed 64 teams. That’s not even a nice straw man you constructed. We’re talking about using the regular season simply to seed an extended playoff. That makes the regular season less important, which decreases interest. Just like in college basketball. Whether the college basketball regular season is 15 games, 30 games, or 45 games, you can count me with the other 99% in not giving a shit about it until March.

          I would hate for people to start ignoring the college football games played in September and October because you’ll find out in late November where your team will be seeded in the December/January playoff.

          And if you really think that ratings wouldn’t change at all with a playoff, then I guess you think that most of the presidents and commissioners of the AQ conferences are all just boneheads uninterested in making money, right? I mean, if everybody believes differently than you do, that just proves how wrong they are, right?

  7. Matt

    Hmmm, SEC Champ Game was # 2. I wonder what the most watched regular season game was?

    More interesting question – will the rematch bring more viewers than the first edition. ( I think it will)

    And to further discussion above – if the public had been told before LSU/AL # 1 that they would meet again in the post season (regardless of format), would the 11/5/11 match-up have brought as many viewers as it did?
    (I think that it wouldn’t)

    • Macallanlover

      Was your interesting question rhetorical? How can the most hyped game, with zero competition from other games, or fans absent from earlier CFB games not get a higher audience? While I consider the decision for the faux title game to be wrong, I will most certainly watch. But then, I stay up and watch PAC12 and Hawaii games after mid-night during the regular season. Well, that is a really bad example, those are all regular season games and thus, sacred. I don’t wish to violate the commandments so I am compelled to watch.

  8. The General

    My ideal is a 4-team playoff among the 4 highest ranked champions of conferences with at least 12 teams and a conference title game (no automatic bids for specific conferences). That way the conference title games would always matter. They would be like the first round of the playoffs, but you would still have arguments over who are the best four. (I, for one, don’t want to do away with all debate; it’s part of what makes CFB unique and more fun than other sports.) Because of the beauty contest aspect of it, you would also preserve the intensity of the regular season. Sorry, teams like Bama and Houston, you lost when it counted most. Nobody can game the system by being independent or playing in a depleted conference. You would have to give the conferences at least a full year’s notice before implementing so they can scrounge for teams accordingly. Tell me this wouldn’t add excitement and legitimacy over what we have now.

  9. Noonan

    Imagine a weekly TV show which leads in ratings year-in and year-out. Should the network decide to only televise this show quarterly so viewers don’t get tired of watching it?

  10. 69Dawg

    I’m a UGA grad and season ticket holder but I watch as many college games a week as I can. On Sunday I watch the last 5 minutes of a Pro game. Pro football has become the NBA, it’s only good in the last few minutes. College football is much more exciting because of the variety of offenses and defenses,

  11. stoopnagle

    I wonder how much of the former has to do with there being only one other “network” game at 3:30 and that’s usually split at least two if not three ways by region? CBS runs the SEC nationwide, ABC is running a regional game in the same slot.

    I wonder how the ABC 8 pm game fares? It must do well since CBS worked relentlessly to get LSU-Bama I moved to 8.

  12. Hogbody Spradlin

    When Georgia plays, . . . people watch. (sits smugly, polishes nails on shirt)

  13. 4th & Short

    People knew we would score some points against LSU and challenge them offensively better than Alabama. And for the first half, we really looked sharp and surprised a lot of people. Dumb decision to kick to #7, and 3 turnovers put it away. Offensively, we challenged LSU, and defensively, matched up pretty well. We gave Alabama a lot of good video to study about how to beat LSU.

    • NRBQ

      Actually, UGA played the best 30 minutes of defensive football I’ve ever seen, on any level, especially considering they stoned the best team in CFB which was on a 13-game winning streak.

      Maybe we can lend Bama some defensive players, and get partial credit if they beat Miles.