I don't think that the BCS system is fair, and I would like to see a fair playoff system, but I am not sure who it would benefit more, AQ teams or non-AQ teams. That fact that few of us are clamoring for a playoff system where all conference champs, including the Sun Belt, get an invite, leads me to believe that any playoff system would just open up more slots for AQ teams instead opening it up for more nonAQ teams. If a playoff doesn't include all conference champions what leads us to beleive the MWC champ would get an automatic invite? And I have less faith in a playoff system that relies on polls since most of us agree that they are far from unbiased.

Maybe it is the pessimist in me that makes me worry that a playoff system could be just as unfair as the BCS system, but then it would have the appearance of fairness. If they are going to "fix" this then they had better fix it right the first time, or it could become more lopsided.

MormonRasta, I believe you are wrong about the gap not closing, and I will show you why. I do agree that in comparison the BCS money is less than compared to ticket sales and merchandising, but it is still dramatic. This is the scenario I came up with, there are several suppositions, but I believe it's fair for a generic example.

First, I tried to take a middle of the pack BCS team with a stadium attendance of 60,000 compared to a Non-BCS of 30,000. I also assumed that a BCS team would play 7 games at home, whereas a Non-BCS would only get 6.

I doubt my table will show up nicely, so here it is spelled out.

BCS Team
60,000 seats x $20.00/ticket = $1,200,000/per game - 20% share with other team (-$240,000) = $960,000 x 7 home games = $6,720,000 + 500,000 (A conservative amount from away game ticket sales) + BCS Revenue Sharing 2,000,000 = Grand Total: $10,660,000

Non-BCS Team
30,000 seats x $20.00/ticket = $600,000/per game - 20% share with other team (-$120,000) = 480,000 x 6 home games = $2,880,000 + 480,000 (A conservative amount from away game ticket sales) + BCS Revenue Sharing ($176,470) = $4,136,470

so, lets assume that the NCAA finally grows a backbone and steps in and institutes a playoff system and levels the playing field with equal money sharing, and forcing a 6 home and 6 away games (just imagine).

BCS Team with Playoff
60,000 seats x $20.00/ticket = $1,200,000/per game - 20% share with other team (-$240,000) = $960,000 x 6 home games = $5,760,000 + 600,000 (A conservative amount from away game ticket sales) + BCS Revenue Sharing 2,000,000 = Grand Total: $9,560,000

Non-BCS Team with Playoff
30,000 seats x $20.00/ticket = $600,000/per game - 20% share with other team (-$120,000) = 480,000 x 6 home games = $2,880,000 + 480,000 (A conservative amount from away game ticket sales) + BCS Revenue Sharing ($2,000,000) = $5,960,000

As you can see, the gap went from $6,523,530 a year to $3,600,000. Thats basically cut the gap in half.

Here is the table I used, it was in my last topic, but it was screwing up the format:

Code:

Type of Team Stadium Size Ticket Price Away Team Cost Total Per Game # of Home Games Total Home Game Away Team Gains BCS Revenue Share Total Gap BCS as is 60,000 $20.00 ($240,000) $960,000 7 $6,720,000 $500,000 $2,000,000 $10,660,000 Non-BCS as is 30,000 $20.00 ($120,000) $480,000 6 $2,880,000 $480,000 $176,470 $4,136,470 $6,523,530 BCS w/ Playoff 60,000 $20.00 ($240,000) $960,000 6 $5,760,000 $600,000 $2,000,000 $9,560,000 Non-BCS w/ Playoff 30,000 $20.00 ($120,000) $480,000 6 $2,880,000 $480,000 $2,000,000 $5,960,000 $3,600,000

Hawkwing,

There are alot of flaws with your argument. The primary one is the supposition that instituting a playoff would equate to regular season revenue sharing and a balanced schedule. If there was a playoff the Floridas of the world would continue to get 7 home games while the Utah State's of the world would continue to get 5. Nothing would change in the regular season format.

Let's review in terms of real numbers what I'm talking about. Compare Texas Tech and Nevada. TT has a 52000+ stadium and virtually no shot at a BCS bowl each year. They've had some modest success, but they are clearly a middle of the road Big 12 team. Nevada is also a middle of the road WAC team in their 29,964 seat stadium.

TT generates at least 2.44 million dollars per game in '04 while Nevada generated $447,976 per game in '04. So it's not just the number of seats, but revenue per seat which is $47 to $15. So even if the postseason revenue is equal Texas Tech would have a DECISIVE advantage over Nevada. Source below:
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/revenue_stat/show