The last national title in bball or fball was when?
Believe what you will, the fact that a playoff IS happening, is pretty telling.
But you are entitled to your opinion.
Why Iowa Fans Shouldn't Care about a CFB Playoff.....
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
The last national title in bball or fball was when?
Believe what you will, the fact that a playoff IS happening, is pretty telling.
But you are entitled to your opinion.
Section136
Well-Known Member
Not really, no.
And it showed in the butt ugly title game we got that year with Butler/UCONN.
I would rather have a matchup of top teams like we got with Kansas/Kentucky last we got this past season.
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
I know. It sucks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IowaFan81
What's changing with all the non-BCS bowls that will make it different and mean less? I would like to know so I can be prepared.
Again I ask what's going to be the difference between bowl games under the old system and the new playoff system? Bowl games outside of the semis and the final aren't going to be more or less meaningful than before.
Originally Posted by IowaFan81
What's changing with all the non-BCS bowls that will make it different and mean less? I would like to know so I can be prepared.
Again I ask what's going to be the difference between bowl games under the old system and the new playoff system? Bowl games outside of the semis and the final aren't going to be more or less meaningful than before.
I guess I am just ranting at the football gods on this,because the way that Delany and Scott caved in...I heard Mike Slive comment last week that he was surprised that they got right to the 4 team playoff,as he was simply pushing for the Plus One a couple of years ago,and considered that a big step forward. That implies that the SEC would have been content with a Plus One,but the Big Ten and Pac 12 offered up the plum..the Rose Bowl,without even being prompted. Where was the hard-nosed negogiator Delany? Did he get seduced by more dollars,strictly,and throw the Rose Bowl under the bus for the cash? This is his legacy now,not the BTN, he gave away the Rose Bowl and the Plus One ...willingly. SOB!
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
I don't think you can assume the SEC would have been content with a +1. I doubt that Delany did less than everything he could to keep this from being screwed up and ruining the sport.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
No, I am advocating a plus one. Play the bowl games, put the BCS games on January 1st (maybe add the Cotton), and then have the BCS championship game 2 weeks after.
Major college football is one of the few sports that still puts a great deal of emphasis on the regular season. Why water it down like MLB, NBA, NCAA Basketball...ect ect ect?
Section136
Well-Known Member
I like watching the tourney, of course. Im just not as big into all the cinderellas stories as most people. Every year I would rather see the Top 4 seeds in each region advance to the Sweet 16....that is unless the Hawks are in the tourney.
I hate this argument with a passion. The regular season isn't important? How many game 163's have we had lately? If a team took 1 game off they wouldn't be playing in that game 163? Ever hear of home court/field advantage? Ever hear of the bubble? Ever hear of players wanting to go on and play Pro Sports or players with incentives in their contracts? Simply put the regular season matters. If it didn't matter then why do fans still attend games?
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
So you enjoy seeing the best team get beat and not win the championship? Baseball more so in any other sport is way to watered down, no reason to play 162 games if you are going to make it that easy to reach the playoffs. NFL as well, Packers go from being the last team into the playoffs to winning the Super Bowl. The best team in college basketball does not always win the NCAA tournament either. I am fine with all that, but why ruin major college football? The bowl system works, well before you and I were on this earth so why change it now?
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
DO YOU LIKE APPLES?!
The concept of "meaningless" is vague, and has made this thread into more argument than I think was ever intended. The issue is really what to do with (or think about) games that don't impact the national title chase. Every season in every sport is filled with them. None outside of a very few in baseball (rainouts not made up between two non-contenders) are cancelled even if interest is low. College football and basketball are unique in that they have postseason elements that have no access to a national championship. These bowl games, NIT games, etc, exist due to enough interest in the competition taking place to draw a crowd and TV audience. Also as a reward for college athletes to some extent. Every fan has a threshold below which a game isn't worth watching. For some, early rounds of the NCAA tournament are meaningful d/t the upsets, for others the games are meaningless because the national title chase doesn't typically take shape right there. A single regular season game doesn't matter in the larger sense to some, but to fans of that team, a conference title or moving up a line or two in seeding is a big deal.
We will never agree on this stuff because we each have a threshold for caring that is different.
Jon is right, Iowa fans shouldn't care about a playoff system much in terms of access to a national title, and I predict this system won't harm bowl access or importance of the regular season much if at all. Most of us don't quit the season after the first loss (or any loss) just because a goal is out of reach. I want the win over Nebraska this November whether a certain bowl bid is on the line or not. Some fans of the sport will only wathc if the national title is impacted by that particular game. Every sport has this issue. The regular season games matter some more than others whether there is a playoff or not.
Sports is national now more than ever, and the "fans of the sport" carry more weight. They want a playoff, they will get one. But the bowls won't disappear, and the games will always matter at some level. There is no system that can make every game matter equally to everyone in every sport. This playoff simply represents a minor shift in which games count the most to the average fan of the sport.
We will never agree on this stuff because we each have a threshold for caring that is different.
Jon is right, Iowa fans shouldn't care about a playoff system much in terms of access to a national title, and I predict this system won't harm bowl access or importance of the regular season much if at all. Most of us don't quit the season after the first loss (or any loss) just because a goal is out of reach. I want the win over Nebraska this November whether a certain bowl bid is on the line or not. Some fans of the sport will only wathc if the national title is impacted by that particular game. Every sport has this issue. The regular season games matter some more than others whether there is a playoff or not.
Sports is national now more than ever, and the "fans of the sport" carry more weight. They want a playoff, they will get one. But the bowls won't disappear, and the games will always matter at some level. There is no system that can make every game matter equally to everyone in every sport. This playoff simply represents a minor shift in which games count the most to the average fan of the sport.
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
I'm a "fan of the sport" and absolutely don't want a playoff.
olivecourt
Well-Known Member
It was changed pretty significantly in the mid-90s to the point that it no longer really resembles the system that existed for several decades. Now we have the worst of all worlds-- we pretend to crown a national champion, but it's unfair and ridiculously convoluted, and we don't have any more traditional bowl tie-ins, so Iowa ends up in the Orange Bowl twice and never goes to the Rose Bowl. Barring a playoff, I'd be happy to go back to the old setup: half as many bowl games, firm conference tie-ins, etc. But that isn't happening, so don't pretend you're the guardian of some grand tradition, because the current system doesn't even pre-date ESPN2.
That's fair, but most do want one. I respect that opinion/preference and I go back and forth on wanting a playoff myself.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
I am completely fine with that, then perhaps we would see more Notre Dames and UCLA's on our non conference schedule like they did back in those days as well. Also, go back to letting the voters decide who win the National Champion. Again, all of this is what has made major college football unique. You change to a playoff and it becomes just like all the other sports.
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
Who's saying things should stay the way they are?
olivecourt
Well-Known Member
Tell me how you would get presidents, ADs, and bowl executives to go back to the old system, then. Or tell me how you would pitch this plus-one system and get fans and TV networks to buy into something that looks like a playoff, smells like a playoff, but isn't a playoff... because we have to protect the Rose Bowl? Tell me how your plan is better for everyone than a plan that opens the door to four teams, chosen by a committee that is not working for a particular bowl, and uses bowl game as sites for a national semifinal.
I think you're just concerned the B1G is/will be diminished.
Which is happening anyway.
