College Playoff

[HailToMichigan]

The biggest argument being it makes the regular season less important.....hey Buckeye fan, would the Illinois game this weekend be fun to watch knowing a chance for the playoffs was obtainable?

My only question is why the powers that be have so much power? Who are these guys, and why do they dictate what college football does?

Hey Buckeye fan. Would the USC game this year have been anywhere near as important or highly anticipated knowing that the loser probably gets to go to the playoffs anyway? Instead of it being treated as an elimination game for the national title?

Would you even have played it, knowing that you could be basically in the playoffs right now if you'd replaced that loss with a win over Miami of Ohio?

And the powers that be are the university presidents. Pretty powerful. Certainly more so than the coaches.

Your 8-team playoff, assuming you use the BCS rankings*, leaves out Boise State and Ball State. Oops. I thought playoffs were supposed to solve the problem of shutting undefeated teams out of the system.

Most playoff arguments are just as easily shot down.

*Generally a fallacy however, because if the BCS rankings can't properly pick two teams, then they can't pick eight either.

 

[Zurp]

This is one of those issues that people are set on. Opinions will not be changed from other people's opinions.

 

[Oh8ch]

This is one of those issues that people are set on. Opinions will not be changed from other people's opinions.

I never thought of it that way.

Hey, I DO want a playoff!

 

[PatMicMac]

I think a full 8 team playoff would be a mistake and would take away from the regular season. With the BCS how it is now, all the BCS conferences are guaranteed at least one bid. With the 8 team playoff, there could be 4 Big XII teams, 3 SEC teams, and one Pac 10/Big 10. I think the 8 team playoff makes it even more subjective than it already is.

I'm of the opinion that if you don't win your conference, you don't deserve a shot at the title. A playoff invalidates the importance of winning ones conference.

That being said, I would be in favor of revising the system into the plus one format where there would be one extra bowl game. Whenever I hear people talking about this on the radio or on TV, they say that the first games wouldn't be attended because people will just want to wait and see if their team makes the championship. I don't buy this, because if a team is going to be playing for a national title and is contending all year, then having only one extra game will add to the excitement. They would obviously have to change around the bowls in order to do the plus one, which could have adverse effects on the rose bowl. I would say, maybe they should take winner of each conference and rank them. The top four are seeded to play 1v4 and 2v3 and the winners of those two games play in the NC game.

I think that adding one extra game would not diminish the excitement of the regular season at all and at least the champion would have won its own conference.

 

[notfadeaway]

President Elect Obama said on 60 minutes tonight that he would throw his weight aroung to get an 8 team playoff...no wonder the states of the SEC went for Mccain...they are scared to play it out

 

[fourteenandoh]

Hey Buckeye fan. Would the USC game this year have been anywhere near as important or highly anticipated knowing that the loser probably gets to go to the playoffs anyway? Instead of it being treated as an elimination game for the national title?

Would you even have played it, knowing that you could be basically in the playoffs right now if you'd replaced that loss with a win over Miami of Ohio?

And the powers that be are the university presidents. Pretty powerful. Certainly more so than the coaches.

Your 8-team playoff, assuming you use the BCS rankings*, leaves out Boise State and Ball State. Oops. I thought playoffs were supposed to solve the problem of shutting undefeated teams out of the system.

Most playoff arguments are just as easily shot down.

*Generally a fallacy however, because if the BCS rankings can't properly pick two teams, then they can't pick eight either.

i'll trade a game vs USC in September for possibly 3 playoff games in dec/jan anyday.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

i'll trade a game vs USC in September for possibly 3 playoff games in dec/jan anyday.

So, do you believe the Giants were the best team in the NFL last year?

Point is, on the issue of "who's the best team?" a playoff solves nothing. A recognizable champ? Sure. But, the BCS provides us that already. Hell, the pre-BCS polling provided us with that.... All you have to do is submit yourself to accepting the process in place.

But, don't fool yourself in to thinking a playoff will resolve anything.

Now, if you simply like the idea of 3 more games, then... well... playoffs will give you that.

 

[Smooth Olaf]

So, do you believe the Giants were the best team in the NFL last year?

Yes.

The only reason not to have a playoff is money. That's it. "Tradition" be damned.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Yes.

The only reason not to have a playoff is money. That's it. "Tradition" be damned.

They were the best team in the NFL last year, huh? Barely made the Playoffs, but they were the best?

How about Villanova 1985? NC State 1983?

I'll give you that these teams are recognized champions... the question was do you honestly think they were the best team and not if they're legit champions?

Of course not. They were the "hottest team" at the end of the year. Best is based on a body of work, not a 3 game run.

 

[fourteenandoh]

So, do you believe the Giants were the best team in the NFL last year?

Point is, on the issue of "who's the best team?" a playoff solves nothing. A recognizable champ? Sure. But, the BCS provides us that already. Hell, the pre-BCS polling provided us with that.... All you have to do is submit yourself to accepting the process in place.

But, don't fool yourself in to thinking a playoff will resolve anything.

Now, if you simply like the idea of 3 more games, then... well... playoffs will give you that.

it doesn't matter, they won the super bowl (and beat an undefeated pats team to do it).

winning the championship is what's important. if you don't get the chance, you can't win it.

a playoff will most definitely resolve some issues. you're fooling yourself if you don't think it will.

back to the original statement about the USC game. i think in the long run the quality football that would result from a playoff would far outweight the potential loss of 1 or 2 intriguing OOC games per season.

 

[methomps]

I'm of the opinion that if you don't win your conference, you don't deserve a shot at the title. A playoff invalidates the importance of winning ones conference.

I don't get this. So what if the conference champs are Missouri, Oregon State, Florida after they lose to FSU, Miami, Michigan State, and West Virginia? Do you end up with a NC matchup of 2-loss Florida and 2-loss Missouri while 1-loss teams like Alabama, TTech/Oklahoma, Texas, and USC are excluded?

A conference championship measures only a segment of the season. It shouldn't be a prerequisite for a national title.

 

[Oh8ch]

winning the championship is what's important.

It is purely a matter of what you want to look at as being important. This is true only if you discount the regular season.


Come on guys - Karl Marx called for a playoff in The Communist Manifesto. Now Obama wants one.

It CAN'T be the right thing to do.

 

[fourteenandoh]

It is purely a matter of what you want to look at as being important. This is true only if you discount the regular season.


Come on guys - Karl Marx called for a playoff in The Communist Manifesto. Now Obama wants one.

It CAN'T be the right thing to do.

i meant the key was winning it rather than having it awarded

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

I think a full 8 team playoff would be a mistake and would take away from the regular season. With the BCS how it is now, all the BCS conferences are guaranteed at least one bid. With the 8 team playoff, there could be 4 Big XII teams, 3 SEC teams, and one Pac 10/Big 10. I think the 8 team playoff makes it even more subjective than it already is..

You take the top BCS-ranked teams (eight or 16, depending on the format) regardless of conference membership...no guaranteed spots to any conference.

President Elect Obama said on 60 minutes tonight that he would throw his weight aroung to get an 8 team playoff...no wonder the states of the SEC went for Mccain...they are scared to play it out

As much as I'd like to see the playoff system come to fruition, politicians need to stay the fuck out of this.

 

[martinss01]

I will never wrap my head around the anti-playoff sentiment. All arguments are easily shot down.

The biggest argument being it makes the regular season less important.....hey Buckeye fan, would the Illinois game this weekend be fun to watch knowing a chance for the playoffs was obtainable?

I won't say that a season like 2002 would be less entertaining but I can't say that it wouldn't be either. You have to consider that if you are arguing that every game is important because you can't lose that after you do lose the season is much less appealing.

i completely disagree. not only is the bcs setup FAR more exciting and suspensful, it is considerably more profitable as well.

you argue that once your team looses a game the season looses its appeal for the fans. i would argue that from a viewership perspective its actually less entertaining when teams are winning. things don't really get interesting until teams start loosing. then anything becomes possible. once your team looses, your interest not only in the rest of your teams season increases but your interest in other teams (and thereby viewership) increases significantly as a result.

lets use usc as an example. clearly their season is over and the games have lost almost all appeal for their fans now that a nc is an impossibility correct? not only do i not believe that is the case, but the exact opposite is now true. i personally think that usc fans are now far more interested in watching their team finish out the season as a means to find arguements for their team to go to a nc over other deserving teams. but they are also very interested in watching teams like florida, okie, and texas. why? because they know for a fact that florida/bama and okie/texas tech will kock eachother off. so that virtually guarantees them #4 by the end of the year. all they need is 2 more losses and they are in. this doesn't decrease viewership and interest in games, it increases it.

under a playoff system as things currently stand no usc fan would give 2 [censored]s about the outcomes in the sec or big 12. they would be in so long as they win out. so what possible reason would they have to care about anyone else?

I can tell you that the format in this simulation seems to be altogether more exciting and the finale is certainly more conclusive.

ill give you more conclusive. but more exciting? i think not.

I think we are missing the moment when the tournament bracket is revealed and the story lines all come together and your heart starts to race thinking about the possibilities.

isn't that what happens week 1 of every season? only difference between that and a playoff is sometimes its single elimination and sometimes its not. but then.... wouldn't that be more exciting rather then less?

But the administration that oversees the championship is going to continue to stand behind their argument that a tournament is not in the best interests of the students. Because this is college and the players are students before football players. They will say this all while perched in figurehead positions paid for by the contradiction to their arguments.

i bolded the important part of your statement. this is about money. an absurd amount of money. until you can come up with a system that pays better for the individuals currently involved, its not changing. sorry.

You take the top BCS-ranked teams (eight or 16, depending on the format) regardless of conference membership...no guaranteed spots to any conference.

ummm... not even the nfl does that. you planning on just doing away with the conferences all together as they apparently will hold little to no value. i seriously doubt any of the conferences would support this.

As much as I'd like to see the playoff system come to fruition, politicians need to stay the [censored] out of this.

agreed. if politicians weren't already firmly entrenched in the debate we would probably already have one.