Ok, we now know that in 2014 there will be a college football playoff. The one thing that *everyone* has been clamoring for is 'settling it on the field'. I guess this will allow it to be settled on the field, at least for two more teams.
The question I have is given limited resources for fans, would you go to a semi-final bowl game or would you wait and see if your team makes the championship game? Would you simply clean out the college fund and do both?
I know we Georgia fans tend to travel well when we are excited for our team, but being realistic, a Sugar Bowl Trip combined with a possible trip to Dallas, Los Angeles or Miami, considering the near certainty of elevated hotel prices and 3-4 night mins, you are talking in excess of $3000 per person for the two game trip. If the trips were LA and Miami/Dallas that number easily goes to $4000 per person.
I'm not saying we'll be faced with this decision, just thinking about how this is something 'for the fans' that is less fan friendly than playing 11:00 AM games against Directional A&T.
TD
Georgia Sports Blog FanShop
- Georgia Bulldogs Women's Sideline Clutch
- Price: $84.99
7 comments:
This is all for TV. The games will become like the Super Bowl in that most of the "fans" there will be corporate.
I wish they would seed the thing and have the semis on campus at the higher seeds' stadiums.
No doubt that this will be like the Super Bowl and completely out of reach for the average fan. That is the most maddening part of the near persistent drumbeat of the national media in this regard. It doesn't matter to them, they get to go to the game.
It won't be played in front of nearly evenly split partisan fans. It'll be played in front of a few thousand fans from each school and football tourists.
Campus semi's would be the only way normal College football fans would get to see both.
Aladawg
The following has been one of ESPN's poll questions since last night:
Is a four-team playoff the right move for college football?
There have been 45,977 respondents so far. 81% have answered "yes" and 19% have answered "no".
My point in bringing this up is that this is what the overwhelming majority wants.
Might as well go to the srmi-final because tickets to the final will not be available to 30,000 - 50,000 Hartman Fund folks except on the secondary market at a huge mark -up.
And I'm saying of the 81% that answered yes 75% either haven't considered the impact it will have on the game, the fans or the atmosphere or don't care about those things.
I'm not saying that the majority want it. I am saying that of those that do want it, a majority haven't actually considered what it means on a micro level.
Also, I don't see how four teams will make it fairer/better than a two team playoff...which is the post I am writing right now.
The question wasn't whether they thought neutral sites for the semis was the right move. That's a different topic. The question was whether a 4 team playoff is the right move.
With 4 teams, you're not going to be leaving out undefeated teams.
Post a Comment