Started By
Message
re: Is the Playoff ruining CFB or is it a symptom of a bigger problem?
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:43 am to Eighteen
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:43 am to Eighteen
quote:
Previously sure there were years where teams #3 and #4 that would feel cheated out of a chance to play in Champ game..but other teams (in this case, Cincinnati/Coastal) would know they wouldn’t be top two
To your point, the 3 and 4 seeds are a combined 4-8 in CFP semifinals.
In the 8 losses, they've been beaten by 39, 20, 38, 17, 31, 27, 11, and 35 points
1
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:43 am to mikehoncho69
The root cause is national championship obsession. The primary ill-effect that has is the degradation of the regular season.
If you make it 8 teams or 16 teams playoffs, then how many games are Bama/Clemson/OSU allowed to lose while still inevitably "getting in"?
The beauty of the BCS/pre-BCS era was that teams could ill-afford to lose a single game. It wasn't perfect - timing of your loss mattered, but it was way better than now. Now you have non-conference champs getting in on the regular.
Why was it so important to have that "can't lose a game" quality? Because it made it much more enthralling for the fans of both the contending teams and the spoiler teams.
The ACC & SEC championship games literally didn't matter this weekend. If Bama had lost they still would have gotten in (more debatable if Florida), and we saw a one-sided affair in ACC championship and both teams are in. How is that anything but bad for the in-game drama and experience? Expanding it to 8/16 teams only makes things worse.
While I hate to say it, group of 5 needs its own championship, league and goals. They are the only compelling reason for expanding the playoffs but it just isn't worth it with all of the faults national-championship obsession has created.
TLDR
The "cause" is a misguided obsession with crowning a NC out of 130 teams
The first symptom which made things worse was putting a playoff together with a committee that has demonstrated for all to see they are about ratings
The worse thing you could do is throw more logs in that fire.
If you make it 8 teams or 16 teams playoffs, then how many games are Bama/Clemson/OSU allowed to lose while still inevitably "getting in"?
The beauty of the BCS/pre-BCS era was that teams could ill-afford to lose a single game. It wasn't perfect - timing of your loss mattered, but it was way better than now. Now you have non-conference champs getting in on the regular.
Why was it so important to have that "can't lose a game" quality? Because it made it much more enthralling for the fans of both the contending teams and the spoiler teams.
The ACC & SEC championship games literally didn't matter this weekend. If Bama had lost they still would have gotten in (more debatable if Florida), and we saw a one-sided affair in ACC championship and both teams are in. How is that anything but bad for the in-game drama and experience? Expanding it to 8/16 teams only makes things worse.
While I hate to say it, group of 5 needs its own championship, league and goals. They are the only compelling reason for expanding the playoffs but it just isn't worth it with all of the faults national-championship obsession has created.
TLDR
The "cause" is a misguided obsession with crowning a NC out of 130 teams
The first symptom which made things worse was putting a playoff together with a committee that has demonstrated for all to see they are about ratings
The worse thing you could do is throw more logs in that fire.
This post was edited on 12/21/20 at 10:46 am
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:45 am to mikehoncho69
I am convinced that college football needs to limit scholarships to 70 - from current 85. They could do it gradually over the next 15 years. I think it would help with parity by distributing talent and address some transfer issues. It would also make the G5 stronger and more deserving of a birth in an expanded playoff system.
For some reason, college football is the only sport where a team can go undefeated and not play for the championship. That has to be corrected.
For some reason, college football is the only sport where a team can go undefeated and not play for the championship. That has to be corrected.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:46 am to Cornelius
quote:
For some reason, college football is the only sport where a team can go undefeated and not play for the championship. That has to be corrected.
You start to fix that by reducing the number of teams.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:50 am to paperwasp
quote:
To your point, the 3 and 4 seeds are a combined 4-8 in CFP semifinals.
In the 8 losses, they've been beaten by 39, 20, 38, 17, 31, 27, 11, and 35 points
Blows my mind that people argue for an expanded playoff given this information.
I think the one way to make the regular season "matter" more in the current system is to move the semifinal games on campus where the higher seed hosts. There's no way the bowl games are going to allow that though.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 10:51 am to Cornelius
quote:
I am convinced that college football needs to limit scholarships to 70 - from current 85. They could do it gradually over the next 15 years. I think it would help with parity by distributing talent and address some transfer issues. It would also make the G5 stronger and more deserving of a birth in an expanded playoff system.
Yes, clearly the solution is to limit the opportunities presented to teenagers in order to elevate shitty teams into mediocrity because they get an extra 4* recruit or two every year who don't even want to go to school there but no longer had a scholarship available for them elsewhere.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:06 am to myflabbersghasted
College football seems to have become a southern sport. No one outside of the south has been relevant (exception of Ohio State for a couple of years maybe) for almost 2 decades. Old rivalries have either been dissolved, or are no longer relevant due to the drop off of one/both of the teams. My days of watching college football (or pro) all day are over. There was a time I would have 2 or 3 TVs set up next to each other. Now that would be a recipe for falling asleep.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:11 am to mikehoncho69
The problem is the death of 3 different programs: Michigan, Nebraska, and Tennessee.
They used to provide checks on the success of Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Alabama respectively. But none of these teams can seem to dig themselves out of their holes. As a result, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Ohio State can run roughshod over their respective conferences.
(Add in Clemson’s rise as Florida State imploded.)
They used to provide checks on the success of Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Alabama respectively. But none of these teams can seem to dig themselves out of their holes. As a result, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Ohio State can run roughshod over their respective conferences.
(Add in Clemson’s rise as Florida State imploded.)
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:16 am to mikehoncho69
Definitely symptom of a bigger problem. CFB is horribly topheavy
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:17 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
The problem is the death of 3 different programs: Michigan, Nebraska, and Tennessee.
I'd add in the regression of the Pac 12. Oregon has shown signs of life a few times, and Washington made the playoffs a few years ago, but other than that, that league has been garbage since USC's run in the early to mid 00's.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:19 am to mikehoncho69
quote:
this is what I'm thinking. The playoff would look something like this every year: Bama Clemson Notre Dame Ohio State Oklahoma Florida/Georgia Oregon/winner of Pac 12 A random G5 team But people will have the same complaints
Nobody seems to complain about the NFL
Patriots
Saints
Chiefs
Green Bay
Seattle
Steelers
The same teams are pulling top 10 classes every year and the same 4 teams win their conferences every year. It’s always been this way with some outliers but the BCS only allowed 2 and the rest went to actual meaningful bowl games. The only fix is an 8 team playoff. Maybe A&M, OU, Oregon, or USC would have surprised everyone this year, they all have the talent to win if they get hot.
This post was edited on 12/21/20 at 11:22 am
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:21 am to EricZeier
quote:
CFB is a mess. UNC is playing in one of its biggest bowl games in forever and 3 of their best players have opted out.
Well, these UNC players don't seem to think this is a particularly big game. If this Orange Bowl was like a quarterfinals playoff game, or something like that, there might be something on the line for them as an incentive to play.
Just expand the playoff. Have any teams in the playoff had opt outs?
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:22 am to UndercoverBryologist
I wouldn't lump Tennessee in with the others. Yeah they suck now, but even with them down the SEC is still a significantly more competitive league than the Big 12, ACC, or B1G. OU has won the Big 12 6 years in a row, Clemson has won the ACC 6 years in a row, and Ohio State has won the B1G 4 years in a row. None of those streaks appear poised to end anytime soon. Alabama's longest streak of SEC championships under Saban is 3, from 2014-2016.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 11:29 am to Boomer00
Simple....its $$$. Im older than most and in older days a players said yes sir, no sir to coaches and if not they were shown the exit door.
When you watch college football on TV today you have endless ads and theres a reason....the advertisers want exposure and networks in turn give conferences big $$$ for it.
TV networks and advertisers run the show....period. Greed is rampant in society and everyone shouts "show me the money"
What do you expect? Johnny Sixpack has no say in it and boosters have limited power these days.
When you watch college football on TV today you have endless ads and theres a reason....the advertisers want exposure and networks in turn give conferences big $$$ for it.
TV networks and advertisers run the show....period. Greed is rampant in society and everyone shouts "show me the money"
What do you expect? Johnny Sixpack has no say in it and boosters have limited power these days.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 12:01 pm to EricZeier
quote:
CFB is a mess. UNC is playing in one of its biggest bowl games in forever and 3 of their best players have opted out.
Maybe the problem is leadership. Did anyone have a better reason to opt out of bowl season last year than Jerry Jeudy and Henry Ruggs? With all the players opting out before the season this year, did anyone have a better reason to opt out than Devonta Smith and Najee Harris?
Players don't increase their value by not playing. One coach has managed to get his players to understand that.
Posted on 12/21/20 at 12:29 pm to Swoopin
quote:
If you make it 8 teams or 16 teams playoffs, then how many games are Bama/Clemson/OSU allowed to lose while still inevitably "getting in"?
I've often said that all these people wanting 16 will be pissed when they see Alabama get in 20 years in a row. They'll be pissed when a #15 Alabama wins it all.
quote:
The "cause" is a misguided obsession with crowning a NC out of 130 teams
The misguided obsession is with several of those schools who used to be FCS or what was Division II but made the jump to chase those dollars. Appy State, Troy, Ga State, Ga Southern, Liberty, etc, etc. They could have all chosen to stay right where they were.
This post was edited on 12/21/20 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 12/21/20 at 12:34 pm to Beached Tusky
quote:
Anybody who doesn't think there's bias to protect the flow of $ to certain programs is an idiot.
I don't think there's bias to pump money to certain programs. But, rather, success begets success.
Back in the 70's and 80's before the Oklahoma/Georgia lawsuit against the NCAA, there were only one or two teams a week on TV. And the teams on TV were the successful teams - Bama/Ohio State/USC/TX/etc. And during that time, those programs prospered because of the exposure that attracted recruits.
Although pretty much every SEC game is televised now, the most popular time slots are the 3:30 and 8 o'clock major network games. And the Bama's and Ohio States and Clemsons continue to dominate there.
The conferences reap the money and then split the revenues among the schools. The schools need to put a better product on the field if they want to attract players.
If I'm a 4 or 5* athlete, believe I have a shot at the NFL, and have a choice between my Gamecocks and Alabama or Clemson, the choices are stark. Which one gives me a shot at the maximum exposure? That's why the also-ran programs struggle, IMHO
Posted on 12/21/20 at 12:39 pm to GoGators04
quote:
I think recruiting is ruining the sport. The best players go to the same schools that they believe will give them the best shot of making the NFL.
Sorry, but this is a pretty danged stupid take.
Until very recently, schools could give as many scholarships as they could afford. All the big schools signed kids just to keep them from going other places.
The talent is more evenly distributed now that it has ever been in the history of college football.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News