Text Size

College Sports Arena

Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Talk Buckeye football and hoops, Viking hoops, as well as all other discussion on college sports in here.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, danwismar, furls

Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Triple-S » Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:44 pm

..the regular season? I was curious, as I've seen that argument tossed around a bit by people in favor of the BCS. I don't see it, I would think that if you had a pool of say 4 to 8 teams, that the stakes in the regular season to try and stay perfect or close to it, would potentially increase if it anything.

Also, I don't see Rivalries like TOSU-Meatchicken, Texas-Oklahoma or hell, even Akron V. Kent St battle for the Golden ACME bag suddenly dampened by a playoff, what if a loss to one by one of those teams (even in a down year) suddenly mean't you're elimination from a shot at the Nat'l title?

And does anyone really going expect people to stop watching on saturdays because of a playoff, rendering the regular season "meaningless", it's FOOTBALL for god's sake, there's people who pay money to go watch Derek Anderson throw INT's and Eric Mangini suck and still watch the game on TV.

I was curious what people around here think of some of the arguments such as this one against a playoff system are full of holes?
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6380
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:13 pm

If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby swerb » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:15 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:29 pm

Swerb wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.


It's pretty basic:

16 teams

11 bids for conference champs (all I-A conferences)

5 at-large bids

Maximum of 2 bids for a conference

First-and-second-round games at campus sites (possibly semifinals as well)

Championship game rotates between Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar Bowl sites (possibly new Cotton Bowl site as well)
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:30 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
Maximum of 2 bids for a conference



I really like this aspect.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:32 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

***EDIT: totally confused with your last post, thinking I misunderstood your first one...

I assume this is tongue and cheek shot at college basketball?

Apples and Oranges.

In college football, there is so very little common opponants between conferences that it is literally imposible to accuratly nail down the best two teams.

The NCAA is not comparable to the NFL and there are 75% less teams and many more common opponants. In college football few if any games could EVER be deemed meaning less, with or without a playoff system.

College basketball can NEVER be compared to college football due to the number of games played.

12 precious games is all a CFB team has to prove itself, and a playoff system in no way changes that simple fact, IMO.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:34 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
Swerb wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.


It's pretty basic:

16 teams

11 bids for conference champs (all I-A conferences)

5 at-large bids

Maximum of 2 bids for a conference

First-and-second-round games at campus sites (possibly semifinals as well)

Championship game rotates between Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar Bowl sites (possibly new Cotton Bowl site as well)


This was the best scenario I have seen batted around, but I saw it at yahoo, not here.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:35 pm

JCoz wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:
Swerb wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.


It's pretty basic:

16 teams

11 bids for conference champs (all I-A conferences)

5 at-large bids

Maximum of 2 bids for a conference

First-and-second-round games at campus sites (possibly semifinals as well)

Championship game rotates between Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar Bowl sites (possibly new Cotton Bowl site as well)


This was the best scenario I have seen batted around, but I saw it at yahoo, not here.



Yup, Dan Wenzel came up with this tournament as well. (I promise I wasn't cribbing him.)
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:41 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
Yup, Dan Wenzel came up with this tournament as well. (I promise I wasn't cribbing him.)


Didn't mean to suggest that you did, just meant to say where I read it. My bad if it came off as accusing you of copying..
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:43 pm

No, you didn't. It's all good.

That having been said, if I ever bring it up again in a column, I really should link to the Wenzel Plan just to avoid misunderstandings.

What's sad is that Pete Fiutak, who in my humble opinion is the best college football writer going, is married to the eight-team, six-BCS champ, two-at large playoff, which I think is hopelessly flawed.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:52 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:No, you didn't. It's all good.

That having been said, if I ever bring it up again in a column, I really should link to the Wenzel Plan just to avoid misunderstandings.

What's sad is that Pete Fiutak, who in my humble opinion is the best college football writer going, is married to the eight-team, six-BCS champ, two-at large playoff, which I think is hopelessly flawed.


I think he's a hell of a writer as well, and I agree that that system is flawed as well.

I can't tell you how much more I like this 16 teamer over any other suggestion...
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RickNashEquilibrium » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:13 pm

For anyone who cares, here is the link to Wetzel's proposal:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff112707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
"All Beckett needs to do to cap off this mess is order some fried chicken and beer" – 5/10/12 before Beckett got chased in the 3rd at Fenway.
User avatar
RickNashEquilibrium
Beer, Bitch
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:35 pm
Location: Mentor
Favorite Player: Mexican Cooking
Least Favorite Player: 99% of all humans

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Triple-S » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:20 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
Swerb wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.


It's pretty basic:

16 teams

11 bids for conference champs (all I-A conferences)

5 at-large bids

Maximum of 2 bids for a conference

First-and-second-round games at campus sites (possibly semifinals as well)

Championship game rotates between Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar Bowl sites (possibly new Cotton Bowl site as well)


http://www.sportsargumentwiki.com/index ... AF_Playoff

sounds similiar to the one that I saw pitched which seems like a hybred between the orignal bowl matchups and a tourney.

At this point, I'd take any form of a playoff at this point, be it as small a Plus one setup. I would however, prefer the 16 model as it would be nice to see teams in the MAC, Conf. USA pull a couple of 1979 Indiana State like runs, or at the very least an occasional first round upset.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6380
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:24 pm

Triple-S wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:
Swerb wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.


It's pretty basic:

16 teams

11 bids for conference champs (all I-A conferences)

5 at-large bids

Maximum of 2 bids for a conference

First-and-second-round games at campus sites (possibly semifinals as well)

Championship game rotates between Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar Bowl sites (possibly new Cotton Bowl site as well)


http://www.sportsargumentwiki.com/index ... AF_Playoff

sounds similiar to the one that I saw pitched which seems like a hybred between the orignal bowl matchups and a tourney.

At this point, I'd take any form of a playoff at this point, be it as small a Plus one setup. I would however, prefer the 16 model as it would be nice to see teams in the MAC, Conf. USA pull a couple of 1979 Indiana State like runs, or at the very least an occasional first round upset.


I want to see an SEC/Pacten/Big12 opponant in the Shoe in December.

Hell yes.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Triple-S » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:28 pm

JCoz wrote:I want to see an SEC/Pacten/Big12 opponant in the Shoe in December.

Hell yes.


Would be nice, I've heard TOSU had invited Florida to play a home/away series and Florida pussied out.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6380
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:04 am

Triple-S wrote:
At this point, I'd take any form of a playoff at this point, be it as small a Plus one setup. I would however, prefer the 16 model as it would be nice to see teams in the MAC, Conf. USA pull a couple of 1979 Indiana State like runs, or at the very least an occasional first round upset.


The 16 team model is definitely the fairest way to go, and your point about Cinderellas is a good one too, as this year we'd be looking at traditionally inept Temple potentially having the chance to play for the national championship.

My problem with any playoff, and something that Wenzel doesn't address in his column, is what would be done with Notre Dame. As of now, they are given major bowl bids they probably haven't earned for the sake of ratings and potential profits. Clearly we could expect them to get similar preferential treatment, and this time for undeserved national championship shots.
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:04 am

RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:
At this point, I'd take any form of a playoff at this point, be it as small a Plus one setup. I would however, prefer the 16 model as it would be nice to see teams in the MAC, Conf. USA pull a couple of 1979 Indiana State like runs, or at the very least an occasional first round upset.


The 16 team model is definitely the fairest way to go, and your point about Cinderellas is a good one too, as this year we'd be looking at traditionally inept Temple potentially having the chance to play for the national championship.

My problem with any playoff, and something that Wenzel doesn't address in his column, is what would be done with Notre Dame. As of now, they are given major bowl bids they probably haven't earned for the sake of ratings and potential profits. Clearly we could expect them to get similar preferential treatment, and this time for undeserved national championship shots.


Agree 100% with the sentiment the mid-majors should get auto-bids. Either they are D 1 aka BCS or they are not. If you don't want them in your army, fine. Kick them out. But get off their back. Either let them play in a tourney or send them to FCS.

And couldn't ND just get an at large if they deserved it? Or maybe this pushes them into the Big 10 - finally - and we can all finally overcome our 1920's biases and prejudices. The Big 10 is where ND belongs. Clearly.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:55 am

JB wrote:
Agree 100% with the sentiment the mid-majors should get auto-bids. Either they are D 1 aka BCS or they are not. If you don't want them in your army, fine. Kick them out. But get off their back. Either let them play in a tourney or send them to FCS.

And couldn't ND just get an at large if they deserved it? Or maybe this pushes them into the Big 10 - finally - and we can all finally overcome our 1920's biases and prejudices. The Big 10 is where ND belongs. Clearly.


My issue is there is no evidence to suggest Notre Dame would only get a bid if they earned it. For two examples, one can look at a 6-4-1 Irish team being sent to the Fiesta Bowl in 1994 and the 2000 season where they were again sent to one the Big Four bowls over a Nebraska team with the same record who had already beaten them that season.

I absolutely agree that ND belongs in a conference, I just don't see any evidence of them being forced to do that in advance of a playoff system either.
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby DrPoove » Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:56 am

HermanFontenot wrote:
Swerb wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:If you tied a tournament into winning your conference championship, it wouldn't diminish the regular season at all- if anything it would enhance it.

You got a link to The Lamovsky Plan you've thrown out there in a couple past columns? Was always partial to that over other playoff scenarios I've heard.


It's pretty basic:

16 teams

11 bids for conference champs (all I-A conferences)

5 at-large bids

Maximum of 2 bids for a conference

First-and-second-round games at campus sites (possibly semifinals as well)

Championship game rotates between Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar Bowl sites (possibly new Cotton Bowl site as well)

Indeed. Rank them 1-16 by poll standing or BCS standing or with a GD committee. How would this not be better?
"What is understood need not be discussed."
-Loren Adams
User avatar
DrPoove
Special Guest Referee
 
Posts: 2279
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:36 am
Location: Lakewood, OH
Favorite Player: Cleveland
Least Favorite Player: The Inbred

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:20 pm

RIBrownsFan wrote:
JB wrote:
Agree 100% with the sentiment the mid-majors should get auto-bids. Either they are D 1 aka BCS or they are not. If you don't want them in your army, fine. Kick them out. But get off their back. Either let them play in a tourney or send them to FCS.

And couldn't ND just get an at large if they deserved it? Or maybe this pushes them into the Big 10 - finally - and we can all finally overcome our 1920's biases and prejudices. The Big 10 is where ND belongs. Clearly.


My issue is there is no evidence to suggest Notre Dame would only get a bid if they earned it. For two examples, one can look at a 6-4-1 Irish team being sent to the Fiesta Bowl in 1994 and the 2000 season where they were again sent to one the Big Four bowls over a Nebraska team with the same record who had already beaten them that season.

I absolutely agree that ND belongs in a conference, I just don't see any evidence of them being forced to do that in advance of a playoff system either.


I can't argue with you. But you will also see at large bias given toward SEC teams in this model. Just the nature of the beast.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:40 pm

JB wrote:The Big 10 is where ND belongs. Clearly.


Notre Dame belongs in the Big East, as does Penn State, Miami and BC.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby e0y2e3 » Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:55 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
JB wrote:The Big 10 is where ND belongs. Clearly.


Notre Dame belongs in the Big East, as does Penn State, Miami and BC.


ND deserves to play 1-AA football.

Effing faggy ass, poseur, used to relevant Catholic fucksticks.

Eff them, TD Geezes, the Dome, their overrated campus, their annoying alums, The Gipper, Knute Rockne, Lou Holtz, the Pope and this thing:

Image

Gawd I hate that program. Hate them 10K time more than I hate scUM, Pitt, the Yankees, and the Rats combined.

Do away w/ them and their overrated fat fuck coach.

But, yeah, w/ their 1-AA talent level they do belong in the Big Least.
“Irony is wasted on the stupid” - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
e0y2e3
Et Tu, Brute?
 
Posts: 13982
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:41 pm
Favorite Player: Prosecutor
Least Favorite Player: motherscratcher

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:01 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
JB wrote:The Big 10 is where ND belongs. Clearly.


Notre Dame belongs in the Big East, as does Penn State, Miami and BC.


I can understand PSU, although I am very glad they are in this conference, but why would Notre Dame belong in the Big East?

Geographically that makes a lot LESS sense than PSU being in the BE...
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:04 pm

JCoz wrote:I can understand PSU, although I am very glad they are in this conference, but why would Notre Dame belong in the Big East?

Geographically that makes a lot LESS sense than PSU being in the BE...


The geography of Notre Dame matters less than with most programs. They've always been a national program with a national following that extends far outside the borders of the state of Indiana. They also share an independent heritage with most of the Big East schools like BC, Pitt, Syracuse, etc.

Plus I don't want them in the Big 10.
Last edited by hermanfontenot on Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Triple-S » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:08 pm

Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..

Image
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6380
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:15 pm

Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:19 pm

RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:22 pm

RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


This.

I hate what the Big 12 arrangement did to these 2 programs' rivalry. Sure, when they did it they anticipated these 2 or Texas meeting for a title and NU didn't hold up their end of the bargain.

But clooege football is better when NU is relavant.

They need to bring Gill back there.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:24 pm

I like the possibility of a 12th team (if its the right one) and a CCG.

OSU
Michigan
Michigan St.
NW
Purdue
Illinios

ND
Penn St
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Indiana

I like these divisions..
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:24 pm

JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.


I'm not a fan of any of the four teams involved, but I'm not sure why you would say that. Oklahoma-Nebraska of the 1970s and 80s was every bit as big as Ohio State-Michigan at the time. The Big 8 championship was on the line in all but two or three of the games between 1969 and 1988.
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:26 pm

JB wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


This.

I hate what the Big 12 arrangement did to these 2 programs' rivalry. Sure, when they did it they anticipated these 2 or Texas meeting for a title and NU didn't hold up their end of the bargain.

But clooege football is better when NU is relavant.

They need to bring Gill back there.


I actually think Pelini was a good hire, and probably should've been made the full-time head coach after the Alamo Bowl victory in 2003.

But as you noted about NU and OU/Texas, I don't think it impossible to imagine the Big 10 higher-ups having similar thoughts about a Michigan-Ohio State championship game.
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:27 pm

RIBrownsFan wrote:
JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.


I'm not a fan of any of the four teams involved, but I'm not sure why you would say that. Oklahoma-Nebraska of the 1970s and 80s was every bit as big as Ohio State-Michigan at the time. The Big 8 championship was on the line in all but two or three of the games between 1969 and 1988.


Because the OSU/Michigan rivalry is 100 years old, not 30.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:28 pm

JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.



Wow. I know you are provincial but this is a crazy take spoken out of misguided historical perspective.

tOSU - UM
USC - UCLA
OU - NU

Best and most important rivalries for about 30 years from 1960 - 1990.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:29 pm

JB wrote:
JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.



Wow. I know you are provincial but this is a crazy take spoken out of misguided historical perspective.

tOSU - UM
USC - UCLA
OU - NU

Best and most important rivalries for about 30 years from 1960 - 1990.


I'm extremely confused that you seem to be insinuating that the OSU/UM rivalry started in the 60's....
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:31 pm

JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.


I'm not a fan of any of the four teams involved, but I'm not sure why you would say that. Oklahoma-Nebraska of the 1970s and 80s was every bit as big as Ohio State-Michigan at the time. The Big 8 championship was on the line in all but two or three of the games between 1969 and 1988.


Because the OSU/Michigan rivalry is 100 years old, not 30.



Until Harley in the late teens it was a warm up game for UM. tOSU may has well been Ohio Wesylian.

30 years? Read, then post.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska%E2%80%93Oklahoma_rivalry

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/75016-oklahoma-nebraska-the-greatest-rivalry-ever-forgotten

If you want big game longevity, then it is The Game. Yale v Harvard.
Last edited by jb on Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:34 pm

Also I have to take issue with the provincial comment JB. I watch as much CFB as I can, I also pay attention to the recruiting and news stories of teams from the SEC to the Pac10....

I pay 100 bucks a year for a subscription to rivals just so I can read other team's news stories..it sure isnt for the buckeyes site...because that site is far far away from being nearly as good as bucknuts....
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:34 pm

JCoz wrote:
Because the OSU/Michigan rivalry is 100 years old, not 30.


Nebraska and Oklahoma have played 85 times, and they certainly had big games prior to the 1970s. At any rate, it was still as nationally relevant, if not more so, then Ohio State and Michigan for the period 1960-1990.

So to say it's impossible that they would split up OSU-Michigan ignores the fact that the geniuses running college football have already split up an equally significant rivalry when creating a conference title game.
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:38 pm

JCoz wrote:Also I have to take issue with the provincial comment JB. I watch as much CFB as I can, I also pay attention to the recruiting and news stories of teams from the SEC to the Pac10....

I pay 100 bucks a year for a subscription to rivals just so I can read other team's news stories..it sure isnt for the buckeyes site...because that site is far far away from being nearly as good as bucknuts....


I thought it was better to write "provincial" than "bad" and give you some credit.

Bottom line - you're wrong objectivley. Both are great rivalries and "best" is purely subjective to fan allegence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_%E2%80%93_Ohio_State_rivalry
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:39 pm

JB wrote:
JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
JCoz wrote:
RIBrownsFan wrote:
Triple-S wrote:Why not herm.? It's a guranteed WIN for the Buckeyes probably every time if Notre Dame joins. Plus, maybe finally NBC would show other CFB games other than Notre Dame getting their ass handed to them by Navy.

I'd like to see a Conference Championship for the Big Ten, but at the same time, I'm a bit concerned that would take away from the one we already have/had..



And there's always the possibility that they would put Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions, killing the rivalry the same way the Big 12 did to Oklahoma and Nebraska.


There is no way that the Big ten would do that. NO CHANCE.

Its also silly to compare the OK-Nebraska rivaly to the OSU/MIchigan rivalry, no offense intended to fans of OK NEB.


I'm not a fan of any of the four teams involved, but I'm not sure why you would say that. Oklahoma-Nebraska of the 1970s and 80s was every bit as big as Ohio State-Michigan at the time. The Big 8 championship was on the line in all but two or three of the games between 1969 and 1988.


Because the OSU/Michigan rivalry is 100 years old, not 30.



Until Harley in the late teens it was a warm up game for UM. tOSU may has well been Ohio Wesylian.

30 years? Read, then post.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska%E2%80%93Oklahoma_rivalry

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/75016-oklahoma-nebraska-the-greatest-rivalry-ever-forgotten

If you want big game longevity, then it is The Game. Yale v Harvard.


Fair enough JB, I'll admit I didn't really know much about the rivalry there, and was only reacting to the time frame given by yourself....

In my own time really watching and paying attention to CFB, this simply has not been a significant rivalry, and has never been entered into the argument of greatest rivalry games either.

Its always, the Red River, the Iron Bowl, THE game....hell USC UCLA too.

You never hear this hat thrown into the mix. Not saying it's right, like I said, I just got schooled in the history just now....
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:44 pm

RIBrownsFan wrote:
JCoz wrote:
Because the OSU/Michigan rivalry is 100 years old, not 30.


Nebraska and Oklahoma have played 85 times, and they certainly had big games prior to the 1970s. At any rate, it was still as nationally relevant, if not more so, then Ohio State and Michigan for the period 1960-1990.

So to say it's impossible that they would split up OSU-Michigan ignores the fact that the geniuses running college football have already split up an equally significant rivalry when creating a conference title game.


Consider me schooled in the matter...

But back to the original comment other than me wrongfully minimizing the NEB/OK rivalry...

I still feel there is simply no way in hell, not in a billion years, that the Big Ten is going to fuck with that game in the case of expansion.

This is the Big Ten, there is not other conference so stuck up its own ass with regards to tradition....

Sometimes it's archaic as with no night games in Nov, no games after Thanksgiving....etc.

Other times it really is one of the more endearing things about the conference....one of those things is the OSU/UM rivalry.

I think Delany would vote for a playoff before he changed the Rivalry.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:48 pm

JCoz wrote:
Consider me schooled in the matter...

But back to the original comment other than me wrongfully minimizing the NEB/OK rivalry...

I still feel there is simply no way in hell, not in a billion years, that the Big Ten is going to fuck with that game in the case of expansion.

This is the Big Ten, there is not other conference so stuck up its own ass with regards to tradition....

Sometimes it's archaic as with no night games in Nov, no games after Thanksgiving....etc.

Other times it really is one of the more endearing things about the conference....one of those things is the OSU/UM rivalry.

I think Delany would vote for a playoff before he changed the Rivalry.


Don't get me wrong, I hope you're a 100% right on about this. If they added Notre Dame, they could certainly use Penn State and the Irish as anchors in one division and OSU and UM in the other. The sport has just made too many dumb mistakes year in and year out for me not to be skeptical...
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:03 pm

JB wrote:
JCoz wrote:Also I have to take issue with the provincial comment JB. I watch as much CFB as I can, I also pay attention to the recruiting and news stories of teams from the SEC to the Pac10....

I pay 100 bucks a year for a subscription to rivals just so I can read other team's news stories..it sure isnt for the buckeyes site...because that site is far far away from being nearly as good as bucknuts....


I thought it was better to write "provincial" than "bad" and give you some credit.

Bottom line - you're wrong objectivley. Both are great rivalries and "best" is purely subjective to fan allegence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_%E2%80%93_Ohio_State_rivalry


By the way JB, not sure its fair to point out that OSU was a warm up for Michigan until the late teens (which was true).....if this line is also true:

"From the first in 1912 to 1942, Nebraska won or tied all but three games."

Still reading, but right there, that's a pretty brutal stretch, in fact I want to say its almost twice as bad as OSU's first stretch of games (in record at least) against Michigan...
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Kingpin74 » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:08 pm

As fun as Jesse's plan would be, I think it's just too unrealistic. Letting 16 teams in would really hurt all the good non-BCS bowls(Capital One, Holiday, etc.) as well as the BCS bowls that would get left out of the semifinal and final games. I obviously could care less about what bowl officials in ugly jackets think, but it's all about the money in college football. I can't imagine the schools would make more on two rounds of home playoff games than on the bowl purses where people travel, etc and the bowls pay large fees. Plus, the Sun Belt, MAC, and Conference USA would make the first round game fairly easy and routine for the top 3 teams and the WAC and Mountain West could do the same in a down year. And in a 16 teamer, it really would devalue the regular season because any 2 loss team in a BCS conference would practically be guaranteed a bid. Personally, I like the element that any single loss COULD eliminate you from the national title race and that could even die with an 8 teamer.

An 8 team playoff would be a good solution but again, you could end up with meaningless games for important late-season rivalries. The '06 OSU-Michigan game and this year's Florida-Alabama SEC Championship game would amount to exhibition games because the loser would be all but guaranteed an at-large spot. Plus, an 8 teamer leaves only twobids for good teams like Boise State and TCU to fight BCS non-conference winners for. I think that could be a similar mess to what we have now. Jesse is right on though in that conference play HAS to be emphasized. Schools may not be such pu**ies with their non-conference scheduling if all they had to was win their conference. An improved non-conference slate might be enough to cancel out the negative effects on the regular season.

The one I personally like that's sort of a happy medium in this argument may is the "Plus One" format that's been suggested. The BCS has ruined conference traditions for a lot of its bowls and under a Plus One, you'd return all the Bowls to their original mandatory conference ties(Big Ten and Pac 10 to Rose, Big 12 to Fiesta, SEC to Sugar, ACC and Big East to Orange), play the bowl games, and vote on the #1 and #2 teams after that for the BCS title game. This way, if you had a situation like last year where 4-5 teams had a legitimate argument, they'd all have a chance to prove themselves in their bowl games, you'd have a lot more bowl games that meant something, and the regular season wouldn't be diluted by a playoff. It would essentially be an indirect playoff that would restore all the great bowl tradition that we grew up with. I'm not necessarily opposed to a 4 team playoff either but I think you would still end up with chaos at the 4/5 spot like you have now.

On second thought, maybe the fact that I cared enough to spend 20 minutes of a workday typing this is the best argument of all that the controversy of the current format wins out.
"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor
User avatar
Kingpin74
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:11 pm
Favorite Player: Mario Lemieux
Least Favorite Player: Dwight Howard

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:22 pm

JCoz wrote:
JB wrote:
JCoz wrote:Also I have to take issue with the provincial comment JB. I watch as much CFB as I can, I also pay attention to the recruiting and news stories of teams from the SEC to the Pac10....

I pay 100 bucks a year for a subscription to rivals just so I can read other team's news stories..it sure isnt for the buckeyes site...because that site is far far away from being nearly as good as bucknuts....


I thought it was better to write "provincial" than "bad" and give you some credit.

Bottom line - you're wrong objectivley. Both are great rivalries and "best" is purely subjective to fan allegence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_%E2%80%93_Ohio_State_rivalry


By the way JB, not sure its fair to point out that OSU was a warm up for Michigan until the late teens (which was true).....if this line is also true:

"From the first in 1912 to 1942, Nebraska won or tied all but three games."

Still reading, but right there, that's a pretty brutal stretch, in fact I want to say its almost twice as bad as OSU's first stretch of games (in record at least) against Michigan...



John Cooper Sr. was their coach.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby jb » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:24 pm

Kingpin74 wrote:As fun as Jesse's plan would be, I think it's just too unrealistic. Letting 16 teams in would really hurt all the good non-BCS bowls(Capital One, Holiday, etc.) as well as the BCS bowls that would get left out of the semifinal and final games. I obviously could care less about what bowl officials in ugly jackets think, but it's all about the money in college football. I can't imagine the schools would make more on two rounds of home playoff games than on the bowl purses where people travel, etc and the bowls pay large fees. Plus, the Sun Belt, MAC, and Conference USA would make the first round game fairly easy and routine for the top 3 teams and the WAC and Mountain West could do the same in a down year. And in a 16 teamer, it really would devalue the regular season because any 2 loss team in a BCS conference would practically be guaranteed a bid. Personally, I like the element that any single loss COULD eliminate you from the national title race and that could even die with an 8 teamer.

An 8 team playoff would be a good solution but again, you could end up with meaningless games for important late-season rivalries. The '06 OSU-Michigan game and this year's Florida-Alabama SEC Championship game would amount to exhibition games because the loser would be all but guaranteed an at-large spot. Plus, an 8 teamer leaves only twobids for good teams like Boise State and TCU to fight BCS non-conference winners for. I think that could be a similar mess to what we have now. Jesse is right on though in that conference play HAS to be emphasized. Schools may not be such pu**ies with their non-conference scheduling if all they had to was win their conference. An improved non-conference slate might be enough to cancel out the negative effects on the regular season.

The one I personally like that's sort of a happy medium in this argument may is the "Plus One" format that's been suggested. The BCS has ruined conference traditions for a lot of its bowls and under a Plus One, you'd return all the Bowls to their original mandatory conference ties(Big Ten and Pac 10 to Rose, Big 12 to Fiesta, SEC to Sugar, ACC and Big East to Orange), play the bowl games, and vote on the #1 and #2 teams after that for the BCS title game. This way, if you had a situation like last year where 4-5 teams had a legitimate argument, they'd all have a chance to prove themselves in their bowl games, you'd have a lot more bowl games that meant something, and the regular season wouldn't be diluted by a playoff. It would essentially be an indirect playoff that would restore all the great bowl tradition that we grew up with. I'm not necessarily opposed to a 4 team playoff either but I think you would still end up with chaos at the 4/5 spot like you have now.

On second thought, maybe the fact that I cared enough to spend 20 minutes of a workday typing this is the best argument of all that the controversy of the current format wins out.


This could be a very good "second best" recognizing reality as you suggest.

It would give the Utah's of the world a more legit shot.

In fact, if you could do a "plus two" games, with the NC game held during the SB perp bye week, that would be sweet.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:37 pm

Kingpin74 wrote:As fun as Jesse's plan would be, I think it's just too unrealistic. Letting 16 teams in would really hurt all the good non-BCS bowls(Capital One, Holiday, etc.) as well as the BCS bowls that would get left out of the semifinal and final games. I obviously could care less about what bowl officials in ugly jackets think, but it's all about the money in college football. I can't imagine the schools would make more on two rounds of home playoff games than on the bowl purses where people travel, etc and the bowls pay large fees. Plus, the Sun Belt, MAC, and Conference USA would make the first round game fairly easy and routine for the top 3 teams and the WAC and Mountain West could do the same in a down year. And in a 16 teamer, it really would devalue the regular season because any 2 loss team in a BCS conference would practically be guaranteed a bid. Personally, I like the element that any single loss COULD eliminate you from the national title race and that could even die with an 8 teamer.

An 8 team playoff would be a good solution but again, you could end up with meaningless games for important late-season rivalries. The '06 OSU-Michigan game and this year's Florida-Alabama SEC Championship game would amount to exhibition games because the loser would be all but guaranteed an at-large spot. Plus, an 8 teamer leaves only twobids for good teams like Boise State and TCU to fight BCS non-conference winners for. I think that could be a similar mess to what we have now. Jesse is right on though in that conference play HAS to be emphasized. Schools may not be such pu**ies with their non-conference scheduling if all they had to was win their conference. An improved non-conference slate might be enough to cancel out the negative effects on the regular season.

The one I personally like that's sort of a happy medium in this argument may is the "Plus One" format that's been suggested. The BCS has ruined conference traditions for a lot of its bowls and under a Plus One, you'd return all the Bowls to their original mandatory conference ties(Big Ten and Pac 10 to Rose, Big 12 to Fiesta, SEC to Sugar, ACC and Big East to Orange), play the bowl games, and vote on the #1 and #2 teams after that for the BCS title game. This way, if you had a situation like last year where 4-5 teams had a legitimate argument, they'd all have a chance to prove themselves in their bowl games, you'd have a lot more bowl games that meant something, and the regular season wouldn't be diluted by a playoff. It would essentially be an indirect playoff that would restore all the great bowl tradition that we grew up with. I'm not necessarily opposed to a 4 team playoff either but I think you would still end up with chaos at the 4/5 spot like you have now.

On second thought, maybe the fact that I cared enough to spend 20 minutes of a workday typing this is the best argument of all that the controversy of the current format wins out.


Of course reality v. fairness are two separate issues and it is more likely that something like you suggest would become reality first. But then, the NCAA Basketball tournament also started out with eight teams...

I think you underestimate the benefits of having 16 teams in some ways, however. First, I think it would actually make the conference championship games potentially more exciting. Sure, we have the SEC title game with some meaning this year, but the Big 12 and ACC are going to be pretty blah.

Now, imagine if Kansas State or Nebraska were playing Texas for a shot to play for a national championship. Likewise whatever generic ACC team ends up playing Georgia Tech. It certainly lends itself to a great deal more drama.

Likewise I think more effort should be made to include the non-BCS leagues. It seems ridiculous that programs like Boise State and Utah need to prove themselves year after year where others get the benefit of the doubt unnecessarily. Last year, we were told a Florida team that lost at home to Ole Miss was good enough to play for a national championship because they beat Alabama narrowly in the SEC title game. Utah can then destroy the same Alabama team and yet be given no shot whatsoever. That win coming a few years after they destroyed Big East champion Pitt in the Fiesta Bowl.

Obviously you will have down years where the champions of those lower tier leagues are weak, such as when Hawaii was destroyed by Georgia, but as we move forward I think we'll see more and more of the Boise State over Oklahoma bowl game victories. The upper echelon teams simply aren't as elite as they once were due to scholarship reductions and the like. That's how we end with ridiculous arguments like "well, we were undefeated in regulation"....

And of course everyone still watches the opening rounds of the NCAA Tournament despite knowing that the lower seeds have no realistic chance of winning it. I didn't attend CSU, but I was certainly pulling for them in last year's dance. And you're telling me that the students at Troy or Temple or Buffalo would care that they lost in the round of 8 if they managed to upset one of the BCS conference champs?

In the long term, I think that is a much better road to travel than trying to maintain the wonder that is the International Bowl....
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Kingpin74 » Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:20 pm

Look, I'm with you. A 16 teamer would be the best 4 weeks of TV all year. And I guess there would be a sort of playoff within the playoff because anyone who finished in the top 2 would get a much easier matchup against the Sun Belt or MAC. But you really don't think that, say, LSU-Florida in October or Iowa-OSU this week would lose a TON of steam with that format? All four of those teams would be comfortable in the tournament at this point regardless of who won either game. It's obviously personal preference but it comes down to a balancing test between removing the teeth from the BCS conference season and being fair to all the little guys(which granted is a huge consideration in light of the growing parity in college football).
"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor
User avatar
Kingpin74
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:11 pm
Favorite Player: Mario Lemieux
Least Favorite Player: Dwight Howard

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby RIBrownsFan » Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:47 pm

Kingpin74 wrote:Look, I'm with you. A 16 teamer would be the best 4 weeks of TV all year. And I guess there would be a sort of playoff within the playoff because anyone who finished in the top 2 would get a much easier matchup against the Sun Belt or MAC. But you really don't think that, say, LSU-Florida in October or Iowa-OSU this week would lose a TON of steam with that format? All four of those teams would be comfortable in the tournament at this point regardless of who won either game. It's obviously personal preference but it comes down to a balancing test between removing the teeth from the BCS conference season and being fair to all the little guys(which granted is a huge consideration in light of the growing parity in college football).


Actually I don't think it would diminish from those matchups you mention. If you placed a two team limit on conference participation in the tournament, as I would, it would actually enhance them. Every game would still mean a ton, and arguably more than they do now, as more teams would have a chance to win the national championship.

For the sake of having too much time on my hands, let's consider this season:

Automatic bids: (11)

ACC: Georgia Tech
Big East: Pitt
Big 10: Ohio State
Big 12: Texas
C-USA: Houston
MAC: Temple
MWC: TCU
Pac 10: Oregon
SEC: Florida/Alabama
Sun Belt: Troy
WAC: Boise State

at-large bids: (5) - possible contenders

ACC: Miami, FL
Big East: Cincinnati, WVU
Big 10: Iowa, Penn St, Wisconsin
Big 12: Okie State
C-USA: none
MAC: none
MWC: Utah, BYU
Pac-10: Arizona, USC
SEC: Florida/Alabama
Independents: none

So, under this scenario you would have 12 teams competing for 5 spots. This is already better than what we have now, as teams like Okie State are simply reduced to seeing if they'll play in the Cotton or Holiday Bowls.

Now, using Okie State as an example, let's say they win out and are 10-2 having crushed Oklahoma. Let's say the committee plans on taking Alabama, Iowa, USC, Cincinnati, and Okie State as the five at large teams, or whoever you would select in this scenario.

But then, throw in an upset in the ACC and Big 12 title games. Texas "steals" the bid from Okie State. Does the ACC then get two with an 11-2 Georgia Tech sitting there? To me, you create a situation where the whole country gives a shit as to what's happening in Jacksonville as opposed to the no one who does now.

Of course, just one man's perspective...
"I feel very strongly that the name Whalers is synonymous with Connecticut hockey. The Cleveland Browns should always be the Cleveland Browns."

-Howard Baldwin
User avatar
RIBrownsFan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: Providence, RI
Favorite Player: Howard Baldwin
Least Favorite Player: the Prom Queen's ego

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby Triple-S » Sat Nov 21, 2009 2:46 pm

Random rant here, I just heard Gorden Gee being interviewed on the radio, and although he's very intelligent and runs Ohio State amazingly well, he seems likes he's completely clueless when it comes to College Football..

And that's the problem, rather than let someone like say, Archie Griffin or Jim Tressel have a say in the matter of whether or not a College Playoff should happen, you have guys like Mr. Gee who doesn't have a single clue about the sport, vote on it and vote against it.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6380
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Would a playoff in college football really diminish...

Unread postby leadpipe » Sat Nov 21, 2009 5:15 pm

When the powers that be say things like "It will diminish the regular season," roughly translated, that menas, "We can't make as much money."

Several good plans here. They could figure out several good plans in regard to fair competition.

But they can't come up with a single plan that makes more money than the current bowl system.

When they do, you'll have your playoff. Guaranteed.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6643
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Next

Return to College Sports Arena

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest