January 1, 2009 · 10:02 AM

The price of our support

Loran Smith, of all people, breaks down the costs of going playoff.

6 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

6 responses to “The price of our support”

  1. Muckbeast
    January 1, 2009 at 5:28 PM

    The whole article is a joke right from the headline:

    “Smith: Playoff just as tricky as BCS”

    Yeah, playoffs are so tricky. That’s why they work great in EVERY SINGLE OTHER SPORT.

    Seriously. The anti-playoff people reach new levels of irrationality every single time they try to argue their side. Playoffs work. Every single sport has proven this – EVEN FOOTBALL.

    Just admit you like crazy chaos and meaningless arguments about “who is really #1”, and stop pretending there is ANY rational argument for the anti-playoff position.

    Anti-playoff folks and flat earthers have to be the same people.

    Like

  2. Doc
    January 1, 2009 at 5:39 PM

    Muckbeast,
    Are you of the “Joe Muck” clan?

    Like

  3. Muckbeast
    January 1, 2009 at 5:42 PM

    I couldn’t resist. I had to add more:

    “Why do they wait two weeks to play the Super Bowl? To manage all the arrangements, of course.”

    Uh, no. There have been many years in the past where the Super Bowl took place 1 week after the AFC/NFC championships. The reasons for the 2 week delay are:

    1) More time to rest up/heal from injuries so it is a more “equal” game.

    2) The sheer amount of hype and money they can make from the extra time, and the insane amount of events they run now.

    “A playoff will be a hardship on the fans for sure. You’ve got to make arrangements for the three games in advance, or you might be left outside looking in.”

    And yet somehow, in EVERY OTHER SPORT this is not a problem.

    His economic argument boils down to this:

    It is cheaper to have a crappy system because then there are no games to go to. Yay.

    That’s like saying I should simply eat gruel for every meal, because why bother spending money on anything that’s more enjoyable.

    Like

  4. Muckbeast
    January 1, 2009 at 5:44 PM

    Sorry, I don’t know Joe Muck, but he has a great last name. 🙂

    Muckbeast is the name of my blog. I own a company that makes online computer games, and muckbeast is a blog where I write about game design and virtual worlds. I started the company while I was at UGA law school, and when I hated being a lawyer I went full time with it.

    The name is a reference to a monster in one of our games, Threshold (http://www.thresholdrpg.com).

    Like

  5. Macallanlover
    January 1, 2009 at 11:07 PM

    Still no decent argument against. Let’s take the “hysteria” out of Loren’s argument. First of all, the first round games should be hosted by the four highest rated teams (similar to the NFL) in mid-December. They are already equipped to handle tickets, crowds, etc., it is just another home game. Not any significant expense unless you are have one of the 5-8K visitor tickets allotted to the visiting team. Those few people, who would fight for the chance would have some of the costs he mentioned, but basically 1/3 of his projected costs aren’t there.

    Second round games would be played at the normal New Year’s Bowl date, so no added costs there. Now for TWO lucky teams there will be another game in mid January. Tell me who wouldn’t line up for those?

    Lastly, in the past 25 years UGA would have qualified for this “opportunity”, maybe, four times. 1983, 2002. and 2005 we would have qualified by winning the SEC title, and probably last year. In 2-3 of those we would likely hosted the first round game, and we MIGHT have made the title game twice. So in 25 years UGA fans would have had 2-3 extra home games, and perhaps two trips to a title game. I think we would be more than willing to pay for that opportunity. Now USC fans might have spent more money since they usually play their bowl as a home game. That is the price they have to pay to play in a conference where everyone else lays down. Bottomline, this is a non-issue, or at least a very minor one. Arguments I hear against an 8 team playoff usually sound like someone who is trying to find a way to be against it.

    Like

  6. HackerDog
    January 2, 2009 at 12:16 PM

    The irrational argument that playoff proponents believe whole heartedly is that losses count differently at different times of the year. Last year, the Giants lost several times in October, November, and December while the Patiots didn’t. The Patriots even beat the Giants in December. But because the Giants beat the Patiots in January, they definitively proved that they were the best team in the NFL.

    Is it logical? Not even close. But that’s what playoff proponents believe.

    Like