Why Iowa Fans Shouldn't Care about a CFB Playoff.....

[Section136]

Here is more. Look at the chart below. I have looked at every Big Ten team's polling since 1981. Between 1981 to 1997 I used the last AP Poll of the regular season and the one before bowl games and noted when a Big Ten team was ranked and where they were ranked. I included teams who had a Top 4, 5 & 6 ranking as being in the debate for the 4th playoff spot. From 1998 through 2011, I used the final BCS poll and included the same 1 through 6 designations.

Purdue, Indiana, Michigan State, Minnesota and Northwestern never achieved a Top 6 ranking in any of these years. Wisconsin and Illinois did so just one time, Iowa twice. Nebraska's last instance of being in this mix was 1999. Penn State was in this mix just one time since joining the Big Ten conference. Michigan was in this mix just two times since the start of the BCS era.

I used 1981 as the start point because that was the year Iowa broke through the 'Big Two and Little Eight' barrier in the league.

So we would have, more than likely, had a shot to play for the national title in a 4 team playoff twice in the past 26 years. What is so bad about that?

It the current format, Iowa has to win every single game they play in order to have a shot at a national title...in most years.

 

[FML]

[/B]


1. Delany is letting the Rose Bowl go away from the Big Ten 50% of the time under this proposal,and the other 50%,it might not feature the winnners of the Big Ten and Pac 10. And in the years the Rose Bowl is not a semi-final, will the attention on it be the same? No way. It becomes a bit player to the sacred ''playoff game'' in the Orange and Fiesta/Sugar.
The Rose Bowl-Big Ten relationship has been eroded by the BCS,we all know that, but this is a chance to reclaim it,with the Plus One system. Every Big Ten player,coach and fan will know exactly what they are playing for each year...that bid to the Rose Bowl. If they win that,maybe something good will happen and they get the bid to the title game,but the goal will remain the same every year...get to the Rose Bowl.

2. You prefer degrading the regular season,like in college bb? Me, I prefer a strong Sept-December, vs two weeks of artificial frenzy as we watch SEC and Big 12 superprograms square off every year. Yea,gators and tide!
Who is laughing about the current postseason? The Media,who stand to profit from a playoff. ESPN. NFL fans like Dan Wetzel.

Why has college football become popular at all if it has such a laughable postseason? Why were ratings for the Insight Bowl up 34% last year?
Because fans really relished the prospect of OK vs Iowa,I guess.
If you really like watching college football,why do bowl matchups like this not spark your interest? As has been said a million times,the controversy related to not having a 120 team playoff that only could determine the
blessed ''true champion'' has always kept college football stoked, the debates hot, the game on the front page. Silence all that, and you have what? Not much.

The new playoff has not been finalized yet so no one knows for sure, but I have big doubts much will change with the current Rose Bowl set up (B1G v P12) There is a reason the SEC and B12 just made their own bowl game to have something similar to the Rose.

And yes, the post season is a joke. It's unbelievable how little press these games get compared to any NFL story. I'm not saying we still can't have some bowls..but it needs to be severly diluted to bring back some meaning of actually playing/making a bowl game.

 

[Section136]

One time for sure, the 2002 instance would have been a debate. Iowa was 5th and USC 4th. I think one of those two teams would have been in, but can't just assume it would have been Iowa.

I am not AGAINST this system, just not giddy about it and not exactly my preference.

Four is better than 8 IMO because Four is likely going to keep out the likes of Boise State whom I do not believe is deserving given the regular season schedule they play...or dont play.

What were the 2002 rankings?

1-Miami
2-OSU
3-??? Wazzuu? Oklahoma?
4-USC
5-Iowa

 

[Travisam]

A bit surprised by this post by you Jon. To be honest it seems like a Clone mentality. Basing your opinion of what is best simply based on how it affects your team? I find it to be akin to them saying that Iowa was responsible for trying to force the B10 to let ISU into the B10 when the Big 12 was crumbling. Crowning a true champion is the right thing to do because....it's the right thing to do, regardless of how it affects Iowa. This isn't little league. Not everybody's kid gets to play shortstop. This is college football. Determining a champion of such a major sport on a piece of paper is absolutely ludacris. The bowl system is a complete joke outside of maybe 6-8 bowls. My hope is this is only the beginning and that it expands to either an 8 or 16 team playoff.

 

[Section136]

A bit surprised by this post by you Jon. To be honest it seems like a Clone mentality. Basing your opinion of what is best simply based on how it affects your team? I find it to be akin to them saying that Iowa was responsible for trying to force the B10 to let ISU into the B10 when the Big 12 was crumbling. Crowning a true champion is the right thing to do because....it's the right thing to do, regardless of how it affects Iowa. This isn't little league. Not everybody's kid gets to play shortstop. This is college football. Determining a champion of such a major sport on a piece of paper is absolutely ludacris. The bowl system is a complete joke outside of maybe 6-8 bowls. My hope is this is only the beginning and that it expands to either an 8 or 16 team playoff.

Could not agree more. Well said.

 

[olivecourt]

Here is more. Look at the chart below. I have looked at every Big Ten team's polling since 1981. Between 1981 to 1997 I used the last AP Poll of the regular season and the one before bowl games and noted when a Big Ten team was ranked and where they were ranked. I included teams who had a Top 4, 5 & 6 ranking as being in the debate for the 4th playoff spot. From 1998 through 2011, I used the final BCS poll and included the same 1 through 6 designations.

Forgive me for harping on this Jon, because I really don't understand your argument. Are you pointing out that this system is bad because the Big Ten just isn't good enough to get teams in it? If so, I don't get it. No one would argue that the Big Ten hasn't struggled to be nationally relevant over the last decade or so. What does that have to do with crowning a national champion? I want this stuff to be settled on the field. If Iowa and the rest of the Big Ten aren't good enough to get a team in the conversation with four spots available, I'm fine with that. They should play better. They should stop building their non-conference schedules out of FCS and MAC teams. They should stop losing home games to teams they should dominate. It's not complicated. Win the Big Ten with no more than one loss, beat some decent teams out of conference, and you'll probably be in the mix for the national title. Sounds good to me.

 

[Xerxes]

A bit surprised by this post by you Jon. To be honest it seems like a Clone mentality. Basing your opinion of what is best simply based on how it affects your team? I find it to be akin to them saying that Iowa was responsible for trying to force the B10 to let ISU into the B10 when the Big 12 was crumbling. Crowning a true champion is the right thing to do because....it's the right thing to do, regardless of how it affects Iowa. This isn't little league. Not everybody's kid gets to play shortstop. This is college football. Determining a champion of such a major sport on a piece of paper is absolutely ludacris. The bowl system is a complete joke outside of maybe 6-8 bowls. My hope is this is only the beginning and that it expands to either an 8 or 16 team playoff.

Pretty much nailed it. Well done.

 

[IowaFan81]

[/B]


1. Delany is letting the Rose Bowl go away from the Big Ten 50% of the time under this proposal,and the other 50%,it might not feature the winnners of the Big Ten and Pac 10. And in the years the Rose Bowl is not a semi-final, will the attention on it be the same? No way. It becomes a bit player to the sacred ''playoff game'' in the Orange and Fiesta/Sugar.
The Rose Bowl-Big Ten relationship has been eroded by the BCS,we all know that, but this is a chance to reclaim it,with the Plus One system. Every Big Ten player,coach and fan will know exactly what they are playing for each year...that bid to the Rose Bowl. If they win that,maybe something good will happen and they get the bid to the title game,but the goal will remain the same every year...get to the Rose Bowl.

2. You prefer degrading the regular season,like in college bb? Me, I prefer a strong Sept-December, vs two weeks of artificial frenzy as we watch SEC and Big 12 superprograms square off every year. Yea,gators and tide!
Who is laughing about the current postseason? The Media,who stand to profit from a playoff. ESPN. NFL fans like Dan Wetzel.

Why has college football become popular at all if it has such a laughable postseason? Why were ratings for the Insight Bowl up 34% last year?
Because fans really relished the prospect of OK vs Iowa,I guess.
If you really like watching college football,why do bowl matchups like this not spark your interest? As has been said a million times,the controversy related to not having a 120 team playoff that only could determine the
blessed ''true champion'' has always kept college football stoked, the debates hot, the game on the front page. Silence all that, and you have what? Not much.

While this may be true, take a look at the attendance figures and tv ratings for bowl games overall the past few years. They are declining. Not many outside of SEC country wanted to see the national championship game last year. I don't understand why people are having a negative reaction to the playoff. We can still have bowl games, the same as before, with a couple more teams having a shot at the national title which in most years was needed. Iowa will still most likely play in the same bowl games vs the same teams in this format.

 

[JonDMiller]

A bit surprised by this post by you Jon. To be honest it seems like a Clone mentality. Basing your opinion of what is best simply based on how it affects your team? I find it to be akin to them saying that Iowa was responsible for trying to force the B10 to let ISU into the B10 when the Big 12 was crumbling. Crowning a true champion is the right thing to do because....it's the right thing to do, regardless of how it affects Iowa. This isn't little league. Not everybody's kid gets to play shortstop. This is college football. Determining a champion of such a major sport on a piece of paper is absolutely ludacris. The bowl system is a complete joke outside of maybe 6-8 bowls. My hope is this is only the beginning and that it expands to either an 8 or 16 team playoff.

My reaction is to how giddy some folks are over this...I just dont see it and dont share it...especially those who are saying the bowls are now going to be rendered meaningless. That's just not the case.

 

[Section136]

My reaction is to how giddy some folks are over this...I just dont see it and dont share it...especially those who are saying the bowls are now going to be rendered meaningless. That's just not the case.

Most of the bowls are already meaningless for a lot of people.

 

[JHHawk]

[QUOTE=FML;835787]The new playoff has not been finalized yet so no one knows for sure, but I have big doubts much will change with the current Rose Bowl set up (B1G v P12) There is a reason the SEC and B12 just made their own bowl game to have something similar to the Rose.

And yes, the post season is a joke. It's unbelievable how little press these games get compared to any NFL story. I'm not saying we still can't have some bowls..but it needs to be severly diluted to bring back some meaning of actually playing/making a bowl game.[/QUOTE]


You do not seem to understand the 4 team playoff proposal on the table.
It guarantees that the Big Ten and Pac 12 champs will not be playing in the Rose Bowl 50% of the time...guarantees it. They are using the 4 BCS bowls as semi-finals,so there is no doubt about this fact. So,the odds that Iowa will ever play in the Rose Bowl will basically be cut in half if this goes into effect.

As for the dilution of bowl season, I agree that they should cut down on the numbers a bit, but are you prepared to go a decade without a postseason as an iowa fan,or maybe several decades like 1957- 1981?
Would that make college football that much better to you?
Not me. Making a bowl gives programs more practices,more recruiting power,and rewards the players for sacrificing their bodies.
Do you really care that much about ink in the press?
The Plus One would make the BCS Bowls a quasi-playoff,if they featured at least one team in each game that has a shot...that would generate plenty of ink.

 

[olivecourt]

[/B]

In a Plus One, if Iowa was undefeated in 2009,we go to the Rose Bowl,if we win that we play the winner of Bama and Texas (Champions or Sugar Bowl) in the Title game. Iowa gets their shot,but also gets to be Rose Bowl Champs....what is wrong with that?

A Rose Bowl trip for the Big Ten champion hasn't been guaranteed since 1998. I guess I've moved on. I'd rather have a real playoff than what we have now, which is pretty much the worst of both worlds-- no real champion, but also no traditional conference bowl tie-ins. I guess I would like your solution in an ideal world, but I don't see any way you're going to get university presidents that aren't part of the Big Ten or PAC-12 to sign off on it. And it would also get screwed up if there were ever two Big Ten teams in the top four, which isn't really that far-fetched.

 

[PCBHAWK]

A 16 team playoff is the way to go....

You can have a 2 loss team that is playing their best football and is the best team at the end of the year.

Start the playoffs immediately after season with consecutive weekends to get to final 4. Have the final 4 around with 4 BCS bowls around New Years.

 

[TritonHawkeye]

A bit surprised by this post by you Jon. To be honest it seems like a Clone mentality. Basing your opinion of what is best simply based on how it affects your team? I find it to be akin to them saying that Iowa was responsible for trying to force the B10 to let ISU into the B10 when the Big 12 was crumbling. Crowning a true champion is the right thing to do because....it's the right thing to do, regardless of how it affects Iowa. This isn't little league. Not everybody's kid gets to play shortstop. This is college football. Determining a champion of such a major sport on a piece of paper is absolutely ludacris. The bowl system is a complete joke outside of maybe 6-8 bowls. My hope is this is only the beginning and that it expands to either an 8 or 16 team playoff.

My reaction is to how giddy some folks are over this...I just dont see it and dont share it...especially those who are saying the bowls are now going to be rendered meaningless. That's just not the case.

Time will tell the tale of this but I think a playoff will almost certainly make bowls less relevant than they are today. And the relevancy decline has been in motion for a long time already. This trend will only get worse.

Are you saying that you forsee a shift in view ratings for the Pumpkin or Pinstripe bowls?

 

[IowaFan81]

My reaction is to how giddy some folks are over this...I just dont see it and dont share it...especially those who are saying the bowls are now going to be rendered meaningless. That's just not the case.

True, while some people absolutely love it and some absolutely hate it, I'm somewhere in the middle. Some bowls are meaningless to some fans, who wants to watch 6-6 or 7-5 teams play if it's not your team, I don't. However, this is a step in the right direction, but I don't like the selection committee, still too much bias involved. Create a way to have conference champs who deserve it. I don't care if you have a team like Alabama who didn't win their conference, or division for that matter who gets left out. Win your conference and you're in. The rest can go to bowl games just like before. It's not hard to figure out. We as college football fans want a true champion that is decided on the field by the results not some committee or pollsters.

 

[2020hawk]

We agree the bowls are meaningless, but predict they will continue to exist anyway.
Sincerely,
The NIT, CBI, and CIT

 

[JonDMiller]

We agree the bowls are meaningless, but predict they will continue to exist anyway.
Sincerely,
The NIT, CBI, and CIT

Ask Matt Gatens how meaningless the NIT is

 

[DwayneTwill]

Playoffs are a joke. College football was fun while it lasted.

 

[JHHawk]

I am Big Ten-centric. I would watch every single Big Ten team in their bowl game if I could,but they all play at the same time,which is crazy. I watched ISU,rooting for Rutgers. Baylor-Wash...yes. Every single bowl,no. But most of the power conference teams,if I could. I love watching Big Ten teams,tho. Blame the BTN,I guess.

 

[hoffahawk]

Doing what is best for College Football and what is best for the team I cheer for aren't always the same thing.

Look, the bowls won't be going away completely, so Iowa will still get to go to a bowl whether they finish 10-2 or 7-5. I do agree that they should get rid of about 10 bowls but they obviously make money and that's why they are still around.

I would love an 8 or 16 team playoff because Iowa would have a better chance of playing in it but I don't understand the mentality just because the team you cheer for doesn't have a good shot of making it in the final 4 it should get thrown out.