I agree. I don't really care about the national champion. I care about my team, whether or not it is competing for the national championship. A bowl game is a perfect end to the season. The playoffs are going to take the 16 best teams out of the historic bowl system, essentially leaving the bowls for the remaining 16 or so. And the conference tie-ins will become almost meaningless with 16 teams getting pulled out of the tie-ins.
College Football PLayoffs - What should be the criteria for selection?
- Thread starter eyekwah
- Start date
I agree. I don't really care about the national champion. I care about my team, whether or not it is competing for the national championship. A bowl game is a perfect end to the season. The playoffs are going to take the 16 best teams out of the historic bowl system, essentially leaving the bowls for the remaining 16 or so. And the conference tie-ins will become almost meaningless with 16 teams getting pulled out of the tie-ins.
eyekwah
Well-Known Member
That is why every team needs to know what the criteria for selection is before the season begins and before every future season. Here is Alabama's 2014 schedule with 2013 record:
- West Virginia - 3 and 9
- Florida Atlantic - 6 and 6
- Southern Mississippi -1 and 11, 3 and 5 in conference
- Florida - 4 and 8,
- @Mississippi - 8 and 5, 3 and 5 in conference
- @Arkansas - 3 and 9
- Texas A&M - 9 and 4, 4 and 4 in conference
- @Tennessee - 5 and 7
- @LSU - 10 and 2, 5 and 3 in conference
- Mississippi State - 7 and 6, 3 and 5 in conference
- Western Carolina - 2 and 9
- Auburn - 11 and 1 - 7 and 1 in conference
NCHawker
Well-Known Member
On a related note, Jimbo Fisher and I are of like mind about the changes that are a coming. http://espn.go.com/college-football...llege-football-playoff-bring-new-set-problems
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
It IS sort of amusing that many Iowa fans are so hell-bent on a playoff, given that, even in some of our BCS/Rose Bowl years, would have left us out. In addition, the lower-tier bowls weren't just a reward for "mediocrity", they were a reward for a decent season. The intent wasn't to crown a champion. Nobody screamed, even when a Nebraska suddenly got enough votes to overtake PSU in 1994 or take one of the poll "championships" from Michigan in 1997.
And seeing "Tiebreaker" on BTN certainly brought back memories for me. That was atrocious for Michigan to go to NO bowl, while several other teams that weren't nearly as good DID get to go. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 1970s that Big 10 teams (and some others) that did NOT win the conference were allowed to go. And the bowl system benefited and literally exploded because of it. Meanwhile, 2- and 3-loss ND teams were featured regularly on New Year's Day.
I also agree with Fisher. The playoff serves a "national" and "TV" audience, but at the expense of the traditions of individual schools. I don't care very much who wins the national championship. I care about a ton about whether my school wins a bowl game.
I also share Fishers opinion. Gone are the days when fan bases are pleased with making a bowl and winning it. That left some 25 fan bases fairly pleased. Now, there will be at most 4 happy fan bases...making the playoff might be considered a good season, but for those types of fans...only one winner, and the rest will have their coaches one bad season from the hot seat.
I hate the whole committee aspect. Make it simple. If you win your league title game, you advance. When and if the Big 12 add to their league and get a title game, then 4 of the 5 will make it, with one league champ missing it.
Keep it simple. SEC, Big Ten, Pac 12 and ACC play off for the title. Everyone else tries to be happy with a bowl win.
Whole concept stinks....go back to the ole days of 4-5 major bowls, and then vote for a champ afterward.
I hate the whole committee aspect. Make it simple. If you win your league title game, you advance. When and if the Big 12 add to their league and get a title game, then 4 of the 5 will make it, with one league champ missing it.
Keep it simple. SEC, Big Ten, Pac 12 and ACC play off for the title. Everyone else tries to be happy with a bowl win.
Whole concept stinks....go back to the ole days of 4-5 major bowls, and then vote for a champ afterward.
A 4-game playoff won't last long. It will take an 8-game (or maybe 16-game) playoff to make sure that the "best team" is actually in contention.
Just imagine the logistical nightmare of prepping the team and mobilizing the fan base for a 16-game playoff. It could be five more games with only 1 (maybe 2) weeks to do so.
How many of us could get to "destination locations" 4 or 5 times in a month on minimal notice? Only those with tremendous amounts of free time and money. Whereas with a bowl, people of all types are able to mobilize to support the team and have a great, relaxed single get-away most years.
Just imagine the logistical nightmare of prepping the team and mobilizing the fan base for a 16-game playoff. It could be five more games with only 1 (maybe 2) weeks to do so.
How many of us could get to "destination locations" 4 or 5 times in a month on minimal notice? Only those with tremendous amounts of free time and money. Whereas with a bowl, people of all types are able to mobilize to support the team and have a great, relaxed single get-away most years.
MiniMoeHawk
Well-Known Member
Bama's complete schedule >>>>> Iowa and it isn't even close. Iowa has an edge on the non-conf schedule though since @Pitt will be tough.
Pretty common for Alabama to have a cupcake non-conf game late in the season. Wonder why more teams don't do that?
MiniMoeHawk
Well-Known Member
It works in the SEC....Especially when they have a cupcake in week 7 or 8 of the season. Nothing like having Jacksonville State the week before playing a road game at LSU or Auburn.
