Ryno aka Menace Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 I used to be in favor of a playoff system to determine a clear cut ncaa football champion. I mean in every level of football it it tournament based. If you win the state title in high school football you play atleast 14 games, if you go to the Super Bowl you play 20 + games, so why is it a big deal if in college you play 16-18 games? sports analysis argue that bowl games are important to the teams that are playing in them. After experiencing the Motor City Bowl I would have to agree, it has done wonders for our fans and campus vibe.If anything I would now be in favor of a bowl slash tournament set up where the top 4 bowls are tournament based and the rest play for recruits and exposure like we did in Detroit. what are some of your thoughts? Quote
GP1 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 I love this topic.The only reason other levels of college football have a playoff is there would be no interest at all in their divisions if there wasn't.I like the bowls because for almost two straight weeks I am able to turn on the TV every night and watch a college football game. I love college football and I just like to watch games.The NFL has a playoff because there are only 32 teams and the purpose of the NFL season is to determine who gets into the playoffs and then who wins the Super Bowl. The purpose of the NCAA football is to determine conference champions for almost every team out there.A playoff would create an insurmountable recruiting advantage for those teams that make it every year and it would end up being the same 16 team in every year. Look at the other divisions, it is the same teams in their playoffs every year. Mount Union? The other teams in their league can't even come close to beating them now because every good D-III player in Ohio goes to Mt. There are no institutional checks (draft position, scheduling, etc.) like the NFL has to level the playing field for those teams who do not make the playoffs. Good programs like North Carolina State would be destroyed by a playoff.Attendance at college football playoffs at neutral fields would be horrible. It is one thing to fill a 18,000 seat stadium for NCAA basketball, it is another to fill a 80,000 seat stadium for football. Most fans can barely afford to go to a bowl game let alone four straight away games.Some say there is more money in a playoff system. I say that is a load of crap. Athletic Directors are pretty smart people and I'm sure they all have calculators and have sat down and calculated the take on bowls vs. playoffs. If there was more money in a playoff system, we would have one already.A football playoff would make the regular season as irrelevant as the current basketball regular season is. Every week, football games are hugely important and I want to keep it that way.A friend once told me the NCAA basketball tournament is the greatest "spectacle" in sports and football could have the same thing. I said that if I wanted a spectacle, I would go down to a trailor park and watch domestic violence cases break out. I don't want a spectacle, I just want good entertainment. The bowls are good entertainment and I was hugely entertained in Detroit on December 26. The trip to the Motor City Bowl was worth every penny I spent going to it.Lastly, I don't think the Earth will fall off of it's axis if there is not a football playoff and we keep the bowls. Quote
xu9697 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 A playoff system does not have to mean an end to bowls. At the very least, a "plus one" system would really clear things up. Sure, this year it would not specifically be necessary= but seeing#4 seed OSU vs. #1 seed USC and #3 seed PSU vs. #2 Texas would be fun. Winners play each other for NC.Even if you have an 8 or 16 team playoff, I think there is still room for 15 or so bowl games. Think of the bowl games as the basketball version of the NIT. Quote
GP1 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 A playoff system does not have to mean an end to bowls. At the very least, a "plus one" system would really clear things up. Sure, this year it would not specifically be necessary= but seeing#4 seed OSU vs. #1 seed USC and #3 seed PSU vs. #2 Texas would be fun. Winners play each other for NC.Even if you have an 8 or 16 team playoff, I think there is still room for 15 or so bowl games. Think of the bowl games as the basketball version of the NIT. Nothing gets me as excited as the NIT basketball tournament. If the NCAA wants to put on a one game freak show the night before the Super Bowl after all the bowl games have been played, then fine. But that will just be the first step for those who want a 16 team playoff nonsense. They'll never shut up. Quote
Zip Watcher Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 I'm with GP on this one. :macc: Quote
xu9697 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 People may not like the NIT, but that is what the other bowls are (like it or not). If your team is in the game, you care. If not, there may be 3-4 bowl games that matter much to the general public. Having a playoff will not make many of the bowls played before Jan 1 any more or less significant. Quote
Wally B Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 I really don't see the debate here.For mid-majors, nothing beats the current bowl system, we atleast have access. A major problem with the d1aa playoff system is the travel cost for the teams, as such many cite this as a reason to move up to d1a. If the bowl system was scrapped, big programs such as the ones playing for the championship tonight would get what........ 3-4 bowls each year depending on the length of the tournament? If you want a championship, a legit one that is, I say let the NCAA pick the top two teams after the bowls and have one more game, but all conferences must have reasonable access, including the SunBelt. Reality, the NCAA is not in control and the monkeys run the zoo Anyone read Animal Farm??? Quote
Kangaroo Craig Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 People may not like the NIT, but that is what the other bowls are (like it or not). If your team is in the game, you care. If not, there may be 3-4 bowl games that matter much to the general public. Having a playoff will not make many of the bowls played before Jan 1 any more or less significant.I agree with you XU. I would like to see a 16 team playoff, but only if it is set up so each 1A conference gets an automatic bid just like in basketball. I think there are about 11 1A conferences so that leaves the next five best at large teams for the other berths (ie. second place teams from ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, Notre Dame (If worthy)). You can still play the other second tier bowls by adding selected bowl eligible teams to fill, those slots. When you get down to the final eight there will be seven games left to determine the champion. designate those seven games to be played at the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl, and say maybe the Peach, Citrus, and Gator or Liberty. That way the bowls still get their money and so do the TV networks. Quote
xu9697 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 People may not like the NIT, but that is what the other bowls are (like it or not). If your team is in the game, you care. If not, there may be 3-4 bowl games that matter much to the general public. Having a playoff will not make many of the bowls played before Jan 1 any more or less significant.I agree with you XU. I would like to see a 16 team playoff, but only if it is set up so each 1A conference gets an automatic bid just like in basketball. I think there are about 11 1A conferences so that leaves the next five best at large teams for the other berths (ie. second place teams from ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, Notre Dame (If worthy)). You can still play the other second tier bowls by adding selected bowl eligible teams to fill, those slots. When you get down to the final eight there will be seven games left to determine the champion. designate those seven games to be played at the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl, and say maybe the Peach, Citrus, and Gator or Liberty. That way the bowls still get their money and so do the TV networks. I TOTALLY agree with your format for 16 team playoff= same one I propose. IF MAC, WAC, etc. is not included, don't bother. Some folks want the top 16 teams (based on rankings), which I believe defeats the purpose of an "all-inclusive" playoff. Quote
zip37 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 A legit playoff!Wt ball ammunition lock and load. Quote
msopher Posted January 4, 2006 Report Posted January 4, 2006 The current bowl system is fine to us MAC fans now because we just want to go to a bowl game. However, when one of our teams pulls off what Utah did last year, we'll be singing a playoff tune. I know I will. Quote
Ryno aka Menace Posted January 4, 2006 Author Report Posted January 4, 2006 The current bowl system is fine to us MAC fans now because we just want to go to a bowl game. However, when one of our teams pulls off what Utah did last year, we'll be singing a playoff tune. I know I will. Exactly!!!! Quote
Wally B Posted January 5, 2006 Report Posted January 5, 2006 The current bowl system is fine to us MAC fans now because we just want to go to a bowl game. However, when one of our teams pulls off what Utah did last year, we'll be singing a playoff tune. I know I will.Exactly!!!! Unfortunately that is not realistic as long as the National Championship (BCS) is determined by member teams and their $$$$. Key word is access. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.