Ok, IF you want to argue playoff...

H

hawkeyebob62

Well-Known Member
...PLEASE have more valid and salient points than the guy from yahoosports who was on Big Ten Football...and Beyond on BTN last night.

A couple of gems from this "author":

--Most fans prefer it (If so, not by any great margin. Polls have varied within the same narrow range for years)
--More money than the inefficient system currently in place (Really? You mean bowl sponsors will shell out for 15 games versus one single bowl game? And the NCAA will pony up for 15 playoff games?)
--Numerous comparisons to the NFL (Dork, if I wanted college football to be like the NFL, I'd become a recruiting "fundraiser" to compete with USC and the SEC)
--Teams who don't have big enough "brand names" get shut out by the BCS (And to think the b-ball selection committee can't get it right with 64--now 68--teams. They'll certainly be forgiving to a one-loss Boise State or TCU. And if there are 3 no-loss BCS teams, one will, inevitably, have to be left out, anyway)
--Now, for the very dumbest of his "points":
-With on-campus games, it doesn't matter if the IOWAs of the world have to travel to more games, they can still go to Florida for vacation "They don't close Florida!" (Brilliant! Fans will be perfectly willing to put off holiday plans for for four extra trips in December!)
-They will be playing on-campus, not in half-empty, antiseptic stadiums like the Alamo Bowl and Citrus Bowl (Huh? Neither of those stadiums has EVER hosted a BCS game. And neither has been close to "half-empty" in recent memory, if ever)
-It will get rid of the non-conference games against 1-AA teams (Sure it will. Those genius ADs will now be calling Alabama, OSU, et. al., begging for TWO away games in September so they can travel instead of staying home and paying East Airhead State $450k to come to their place)
-"Host" teams determined by seed (Great, now we can see the "fair" duplication of the b-ball tourney and compare Alabama football to UNC/Duke b-ball...FUN!)
-The bowls don't have to go away (I assume he means those games in half-empty, antiseptic stadiums, but you certainly can't be too sure with this guy, given that he is arguing against himself on a good third to half of his bullet points)

And Big Ten Pulse is going in a different direction, WHY, exactly?
 
I think the title of this post should have been:

"Ok, If you want to argue against what they said on BTN and Beyond please have better rebuttals than my points"


You arguments against a playoff are very weak and closed minded.

1) what are these polls you speak of, what reason is to think that they are accurate.

2)With a playoff there is opportunity to for the NCAA and colleges to take in more money (higher ratings = Bigger TV contracts). The small bowl games don't make teams any money once you factor in travel expenses.

So much money is wasted on travelling both teams out to distant locations when they could just house most of the rounds at home. Does the average college fan give a crap about the bowl comittee's financial well being??? No. They are the ones that lose if we move to a playoff. Bowls are inefficient.

3)Playoff would gurantee one thing, if you go undefeated you are in the playoff with an equal chance to win NC no matter who you are. Current system has failed in that facet a couple times already and is looking likely to fail again this year in that regard. I don't think anyone will lose sleep over a 2 loss team not getting into the playoff.

4)I can't even follow your logic on this point

5)Would depend on selection criteria to playoff, if they move to a selection committee approach that took SOS into consideration versus BCS formula I think teams would be willing to schedule tougher in pre-season. Make the selection committee penalize teams for playing I-AA. I think everyone agrees Polls are biased and too weighted by preseason.

6)It's better than being put on the sideline and watching "UNC / Duke" put into the National Title game automatically each year. At least teams will have the opportunity on the field.

7)Bowl games don't have to go away. Have first round of playoffs in early December decide who gets into BCS bowls. Losers of first round plus teams that didn't make playoff can be selected by the likes of Cap One, Outback, Cotton, etc... Move most bowl games back to Jan 1st timeline. Purge many of the unnesccessary bowls would be good for the sport.
 
I enjoy the college football season as it is, but my biggest line of reasoning for why I as a fan would enjoy a playoff system is because of the fact that sometimes deserving teams don't even get a shot at playing for the title. Auburn in 2004 comes to mind. You might be able to say the same of Boise this year, but we'll see.

I remember a 2-loss LSU team jumping a team or two to get into the title game a few years back as well. Even though they did win the title game, they were a good enough team to do so, but the fact that they had 2 losses, in my book, made me feel that they weren't as DESERVING as Virginia Tech, who in my opinion got snubbed because they were in the ACC instead of the almight SEC. You lose the games, in my book, you should be out.

Or what about Oklahoma back in 2003 (I think) that got crushed in the Big XII title game yet still got to play in the title game. Probably ahead of a more deserving team.

Or the year Nebraska got smoked by Miami in the title game (2001?), after getting clobbered by Colorado the last game of the season. Again, another more-deserving team probably was left out.

Too much human bias goes into the polls, in my opinion, and the current system is completley poll-driven. Get a playoff, and the deserving teams will have a shot at earning it on the field, no matter which pollsters don't like them. Yeah, if you have a 4 team playoff, team #5 will whine. An 8-team system, team #9 will whine. It's unavoidable. But those who had a good enough season to finish in the Top-5 or so will get their shot.
 
I would be for a very small playoff, either 4 or 8 teams, that will still make every game very important, but will solve the problem of having 3 undefeated teams, but then in a few years we will ahve 16 teams, then 32, then we have the NCAA BB tournament. No system will make everybody happy.
 
I think it's ridiculous that we don't have a playoff. There are playoffs for just about every other sport (except the racing events like track and swimming, plus the judged events like gymnastics), and there are playoffs at every level of football from Pop Warner through the pros. There's even already existing college football playoffs for Division I-AA, as well as Divison II and III schools. The ONLY reason we don't have a playoff is because of money. There's no chance you'd be able to generate even nearly as much money from a playoff as you do for the bowl games.

But the only argument needed in favor of a playoff is that it will go a much further way in determining who the BEST team is. I'd say Boise State is the best 1-game team in football. They can get really hyped up and do a great job prepping for one team, but it's unlikely they could do that 7 or 8 times a season. They'd be exposed by a playoff. Going hand-in-hand with that, it wouldn't completely eliminate 1-loss teams from contention. The way things are now, if a team loses their QB for a game, and let's say their star MLB was also hurt, they could have a fluke loss keep them from even competing for the title. If there was a playoff, you could have a team suffer some adversity, put it back together, and still make their way through a tournament.

I guess it comes down to what's more important; money or picking the right champion. I guess it would also be nice to have the occasional "Cinderella" team in football. It's impossible to have one now, since every BCS team has been ranked high all year and everyone knows a lot about them. But if there was a playoff, a mid-major team like Nevada or USF could EARN their way to a championship game. I just think it would make significantly more sense to let the players decide the champion on the field of play, rather than turning it over to some "experts" with a computer.
 
Scotttyd said:
I would be for a very small playoff, either 4 or 8 teams, that will still make every game very important, but will solve the problem of having 3 undefeated teams, but then in a few years we will ahve 16 teams, then 32, then we have the NCAA BB tournament. No system will make everybody happy.
Click to expand...

I agree. If you have a playoff, keep it small - 8 teams max. Maybe start with a 4-team playoff, and maybe increase it to 8 later if you want. More than that and it starts to get watered down.

The regular season would still be meaningful, yet the top teams would still have their chance to play for the title. The remaining teams outside of the top 4 or 8 could still all have their bowl games like they do now. I think that's about as close as we could get to an ideal situation..
 
1977Hawkeye said:
I enjoy the college football season as it is, but my biggest line of reasoning for why I as a fan would enjoy a playoff system is because of the fact that sometimes deserving teams don't even get a shot at playing for the title. Auburn in 2004 comes to mind. You might be able to say the same of Boise this year, but we'll see.

I remember a 2-loss LSU team jumping a team or two to get into the title game a few years back as well. Even though they did win the title game, they were a good enough team to do so, but the fact that they had 2 losses, in my book, made me feel that they weren't as DESERVING as Virginia Tech, who in my opinion got snubbed because they were in the ACC instead of the almight SEC. You lose the games, in my book, you should be out.

Or what about Oklahoma back in 2003 (I think) that got crushed in the Big XII title game yet still got to play in the title game. Probably ahead of a more deserving team.

Or the year Nebraska got smoked by Miami in the title game (2001?), after getting clobbered by Colorado the last game of the season. Again, another more-deserving team probably was left out.

Too much human bias goes into the polls, in my opinion, and the current system is completley poll-driven. Get a playoff, and the deserving teams will have a shot at earning it on the field, no matter which pollsters don't like them. Yeah, if you have a 4 team playoff, team #5 will whine. An 8-team system, team #9 will whine. It's unavoidable. But those who had a good enough season to finish in the Top-5 or so will get their shot.
Click to expand...

2003 was the year that USC was #1 in both the Coaches' and AP polls, and didn't make the title game. Nebraska got in ahead of the Joey Harrington-led Ducks in Eugene. Both were ridiculous (and both went on to win the Rose Bowl convincingly, while the teams that jumped them lost convincingly.).
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
Great, go write for yahoo. Or make a valid point. The choice is yours, I guess...
Click to expand...

Listen hear Bob...

The College players and Fans want a playoff...

Players

Overall
135 FBS players
Yes: 62.2%
No: 37.8%


BCS players
72 from BCS conferences
Yes: 61.1%
No: 38.9%


Non-BCS players
63 from non-BCS conferences
Yes: 63.5%
No: 36.5%

FANS
In the most recent poll I could find on the topic, Gallup recorded overwhelming support for a playoff among college football fans. In this January 2007 survey, 69% of college football fans supported a playoff that would involve at least four teams while an additional 16% favored a one-game playoff among the top two teams after the bowl games. Thus, only 15% of college football fans want to keep the present BCS system.

Here is a nifty picture for you
playoff2-thumb-450x453.png


Here is what the NCAA President thinks:
. When Emmert hangs 'em up as NCAA president — in five years, in a decade — we might remember him as the guy who successfully bucked all the guys out there in the fuchsia sport coats, the bowl officials, and finally jammed into place some sort of football playoff.


"I happen to be one that thinks it's inevitable we'll have a playoff," he told me in a conversation about 18 months ago.

That could be something modest, like the plus-one format that wouldn't materially affect the bowls, or it could be more dramatic, something like an eight- or 16-team fiesta.

If and when that happens, it will be because it's a big revenue-producer. That won't solve the myriad financial problems of college programs, but it will come partly in response to them.
 
Last edited:
tm3308 said:
2003 was the year that USC was #1 in both the Coaches' and AP polls, and didn't make the title game.
Click to expand...

How the heck can you be #1 in both the AP & Coaches polls and not even be in the title game? That is beyond wrong. Prime example right there of why we need at least a minimal playoff.
 
First off, BTN's Big Ten and Beyond needs to do a better job of being unbiased theselves. Especially if the network thinks the Pulse was undeserving. The Pulse was a good show, BT&B is questionable.

I agree with the OP in most points he is trying to make. I do think a "Plus 1" format is the best solution. An 8 team playoff would only work if there was some way to "back-up" all the other bowls so that we don't have all this traveling to do, post holidays. Some of us actually work and can afford to only travel once per bowl season, usually preferably around New Years. I love football, but stretching NCAA FB into Feb is "rude" on so many fronts (not the least of which is to the unpaid players).

Then the question of "home" field advantage comes into play. Do the northern teams get to host a NC game as well (if they are the higher rated team)? If we are to have a true playoff format, the burden of travel would have to be mitigated to be fair.

Is it really, really true that all D1, even most D1 teams have as their primary goal at the start of the season to win the NC? I would venture that realistically only 30-40 schools do. This isn't b-ball and it's not the NFL. If you want a championship format like the NFL and by mid-season when your team is clearly out of it, do you continue to follow, watch and attend games like you would if you're in contention? Highly doubtful - life happens.
 
I agree bob. Wetzel was weak. He just seems to think that college football is not a clone of NFL so it is lacking. Sorry,Dan, but I do not want an NFL style playoff for college football. This is not pro sports. And I am so glad that Dinardo,Greenstein and Revsine shoved back on his lame arguements. But, he is selling a book,so he is going to shill for his viewpoint. Clearly he has no concept of the actual fabric of college football,which is tradition. Dilute the regular season, kill the golden goose. And just corrupt the whole sport even more...with the same 20 teams making the cut for the playoff every year,reducing the other 85 FBS teams to complete irrelevancy.

As Greenstein said, college football is unique and special as it stands. Change it into a mini-NFL and watch that all go away. Those 20 schools might as well break away,form their own superconferences, take all the money for themselves,and start paying their players. Recruiting becomes like a giant free-agency for recruits,with the OSU's(Yankees of football) outbidding for the top talent....sure,Dan..that'll be great.
 
Heres a couple ideas i had for playoff, so people still shoot for 1 or 2 so they can get a bye to the "final four" or with the other if they win there automatically in.
playoff.jpg
.
playoff1.jpg
 
JHHawk said:
I agree bob. Wetzel was weak. He just seems to think that college football is not a clone of NFL so it is lacking. Sorry,Dan, but I do not want an NFL style playoff for college football. This is not pro sports. And I am so glad that Dinardo,Greenstein and Revsine shoved back on his lame arguements. But, he is selling a book,so he is going to shill for his viewpoint. Clearly he has no concept of the actual fabric of college football,which is tradition. Dilute the regular season, kill the golden goose. And just corrupt the whole sport even more...with the same 20 teams making the cut for the playoff every year,reducing the other 85 FBS teams to complete irrelevancy.

As Greenstein said, college football is unique and special as it stands. Change it into a mini-NFL and watch that all go away. Those 20 schools might as well break away,form their own superconferences, take all the money for themselves,and start paying their players. Recruiting becomes like a giant free-agency for recruits,with the OSU's(Yankees of football) outbidding for the top talent....sure,Dan..that'll be great.
Click to expand...

Clearly, tradition just screams "Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl". Give me a break. There's very little tradition in the Bowl system outside of the old guard (Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, Peach, etc.).

Corrupt the sport even more? The same 20 teams making the cut? Since 2002, 33 different teams were in the last regular season top 25 poll. Now to give that further context, consider that Alabama and Florida were only in that final poll a COMBINED 5 times in that time frame, and Boise State has been there 4 times.

In that 8-year timeframe, only FIVE teams (Ohio State, USC, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Texas) appeared in the "final" top 10 more than four times. And only two (LSU, Boise State) were in it four times. So only seven teams were in the top 10 at the end of the regular season for at least half of those eight years (and it's not like they were always in it at the same time).

There were also several teams who only made one or no appearances, but were very close. Notre Dame in 2002 and Purdue in 2003 both finished the regular season at #11.

Schools who you wouldn't think would compete for that top 10 that made the cut: Washington State, Louisville, Mizzou, Kansas, Hawaii, and Cincy. I can go back and look at the top 20 in that time frame if you like, as those teams would have been in contention for the playoff spots. That will make the list quite a bit larger.

Edit: Just checked the top 20 list. 64 different teams were in the top 20 in the final regular season polls from 2002-2009. That's over half of the current FBS programs that would have been in contention for the playoffs in the past 8 years. 20 of those teams appeared at least 50% of the time. Before you get excited about being "right", bear in mind that the following teams were among that group: West Virginia, TCU, Boise State, BYU, and Wisconsin. And just nine teams were in the top 20 6-8 times in that timeframe. That's 6-8 years that they were in contention for the playoffs, not 6-8 years that they made the playoffs.
 
Last edited:
Big Ten Highlghts, Big Ten Interviews, Big Ten Features, Big Ten Video - Big Ten Network

Here is the video of the Big Ten Network show (by the way, I think this show is great, contrary to others on here).

I think Weitzel although outnumbered in this debate really holds his own, especially countering Revsine's point about the Hawkeyes.

I went to the Orange Bowl last year and it was AWESOME! But if I could trade that for a system where Iowa had a chance to play for the National Championship. I would do it in a heartbeat.

I would shrink his idea from 16 teams to 8 teams, but still, I think he is right on.

Football is America's sport now, college football would become even more exciting, if they added a playoff.
 
The stats prove that almost everyone supports a playoff and that the system is biased. I have always been a Boise fan and love these underdog stories, and now that for now Iowa is most likely out of the NC (for now, unless teams start losing) I'm all for Boise in the NC. Now yes there schedule is weak but the playoff is the best way to determine who is the best team. Boise would have to play at least 2 consecutive games against Big programs.

I have always wanted a playoff. My proposal is to have the 4 BCS games be the first round and then the winners advance. You can still have all of the smaller bowls to keep tradition. There is more money to be made with a playoff. BUT do not go bigger than 16 teams.

Evidence proves it. Look at the FCS playoffs. They are very successful with the 16 team format, they just expanded to 20 teams which is starting to water it down because there is not as much parody in FCS as there is in FBS. The FCS playoff system works great and there is no reason that it cant work well for FBS. University Presidents are afraid of change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top