Started By
Message
re: The future of NCAA football
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:16 am to Bham Bammer
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:16 am to Bham Bammer
Until the acc is much better it’s hard to see Clemson ever losing two regular season games. They don’t venture out and play big teams.
Bama at least plays someone with a pulse and the sec schedule.
An expanded playoff gives TOSU and Clemson so much more breathing room to get in. A fluke loss won’t stop them.
I just don’t see how a 8 or 16 team play off will be all that interesting. In most years by playoff time really only 1-3 teams are legitimate.
Last year 2019 LSU would have murdered any team that was put in front of it. In 2018 Bama and Clemson were going to mow everyone down. Even in 14 when tosu won as a four is really an outlier.
Bama at least plays someone with a pulse and the sec schedule.
An expanded playoff gives TOSU and Clemson so much more breathing room to get in. A fluke loss won’t stop them.
I just don’t see how a 8 or 16 team play off will be all that interesting. In most years by playoff time really only 1-3 teams are legitimate.
Last year 2019 LSU would have murdered any team that was put in front of it. In 2018 Bama and Clemson were going to mow everyone down. Even in 14 when tosu won as a four is really an outlier.
3
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:18 am to bamapoet
quote:
I don't think they will do away with the conference championship game.
You keep that And the late season rivalry games relevant by putting first round games on campus. The difference between being at home hosing BYU and going on the road to Norman is pretty significant
.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:20 am to Bham Bammer
quote:
Bama and Clemson are making it anyway. Expanding is about the other teams.
That doesn’t increase parity though. It just lines up another lamb for slaughter. You want to increase parity? Keep it at 4 and put a conference champion clause in.
That plus perhaps decreasing scholarships would help spread out the talent. It may not be instant but it would be sustainable.
I’ve said it before I don’t blame Saban. He has taken advantage of the opportunity given. However do you think he’d be able to pull the same class last year with making only 1/3 playoffs and getting embarrassed by clemson in the one that they did?
He’d get most but I’d bet a couple five stars would be able to get swayed by “Saban s getting old and lost it a bit”
Instead he’s made 2/3 and won a NC
This post was edited on 12/31/20 at 8:21 am
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:21 am to Big4SALTbro
quote:
I just don’t see how a 8 or 16 team play off will be all that interesting.
For diehards maybe not. But for pulling in casual fans it’s the solution. That’s what this is about - growing the sport. Plus I think in some years you’d have a chance at some upsets. I’m not crazy about devaluing the regular season, but it’s headed that way now. I think an expanded playoff grows the sport. I don’t care either way. I’m watching regardless, as is everyone here. The casuals OM the west coast, though, might be drawn in for a round or two is USC is in.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:22 am to Adam Banks
quote:
That doesn’t increase parity though. It just lines up another lamb for slaughter.
I'm fine with that. At least let the G5 conference champions get their shot on the field.
quote:
You want to increase parity? Keep it at 4 and put a conference champion clause in.
There are more than 4 conferences, so there needs to be more than 4 playoff spots.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:23 am to Adam Banks
You can’t argue that making the playoffs benefits recruiting and the suggest that expanding the playoffs wouldn’t benefit recruiting for more teams (creating parity).
This post was edited on 12/31/20 at 8:24 am
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:23 am to Big4SALTbro
quote:
I just don’t see how a 8 or 16 team play off will be all that interesting. In most years by playoff time really only 1-3 teams are legitimate.
This year in a 16 team playoff, with p5 conference winners getting a home game, your matchups are most likely:
BYU @ Bama
Northwestern @ Clemson
UNC @ tOSU
Costal @ Notre Dame
Indiana @ USC
Iowa State @ A&M
Georgia @ Oklahoma
Cincinnati @ Florida
Those are some fun matchups and even though a lot of these teams can’t win the whole thing, that game or two will be as big as a major bowl used to be. And you’d get some upsets too. Instead of sleepwalking through the ACC then having 2 games to win a title Clemson would have 4, much better possibility of a slip up.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:24 am to Draconian Sanctions
I feel like a g-5 winning a game in a playoff is going to be like a 15 beating a 2 type occurrence.
Boise state beat a disinterested ou team but had to pull every trick out of the book.
UCF beat a injured and disinterested auburn team and then the next year got ended by LSU without most of its starting D.
TCU did straight up beat Wisconsin in a rose bowl.
Utah 08 in the sugar vs bama was pretty straight up as well but that bama team wasn’t a real contender.
Boise state beat a disinterested ou team but had to pull every trick out of the book.
UCF beat a injured and disinterested auburn team and then the next year got ended by LSU without most of its starting D.
TCU did straight up beat Wisconsin in a rose bowl.
Utah 08 in the sugar vs bama was pretty straight up as well but that bama team wasn’t a real contender.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:24 am to Adam Banks
You increase parity by lowering scholarships to 70. 20 per class, grad transfers only count toward total, not class.
Do that, with expanded playoffs like I laid out and you would grow the sport tremendously.
Do that, with expanded playoffs like I laid out and you would grow the sport tremendously.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:25 am to Bham Bammer
quote:
You can’t argue that making the playoffs benefits recruiting and the suggest that expanding the playoffs would benefit recruiting for more teams.
Why not? Like I said it’s the new “we’re on national tv all the time”
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:25 am to VADawg
quote:
There are more than 4 conferences, so there needs to be more than 4 playoff spots.
Not all conferences are equal. 4 is plenty but we have to stop letting teams who don’t win their division in. It only perpetuates the narrative that the conference championship and regular season doesn’t matter and the only thing that matters is the playoff. It also perpetuates the recruiting narrative come here because you will always make the playoffs.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:25 am to lsu777
quote:
You increase parity by lowering scholarships to 70. 20 per class, grad transfers only count toward total, not class.
There was plenty enough parity before the playoff, 85/25 is fine
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:26 am to Bham Bammer
The danger in pushing things your die hard a will hate is you could end up like nascar which killed off its hardcore base to chase new fans and went from fast growing to no one cares.
I think college football is a bit safer in that regard since you have schools involved and when your team is good you will be more interested.
It’s still not a great idea to run off your die hards
I think college football is a bit safer in that regard since you have schools involved and when your team is good you will be more interested.
It’s still not a great idea to run off your die hards
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:27 am to Big4SALTbro
quote:
I feel like a g-5 winning a game in a playoff is going to be like a 15 beating a 2 type occurrence.
Does anyone really doubt Cincinnati would beat Florida this year?
It wouldn’t happen a ton, but then they can’t bitch about not getting their shot.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:27 am to Big4SALTbro
quote:
The danger in pushing things your die hard a will hate is you could end up like nascar which killed off its hardcore base to chase new fans and went from fast growing to no one cares.
This is happening anyway
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:28 am to Draconian Sanctions
Would be Oregon, not usc and I agree. Combined with lower scholarships , now more teams have a chance.
Also have to control total number of analyst. Not sure what the number is, but needs to be done.
I say all of this as a fan of a school that benefits from the current structure. Sure LSU isn't bama, but if it stays ths same and Saban retires, there is a chance we are the big dog again.
Last year we benefited from the systems and do many years, but its terrible overall for the sport and the sport will revert back to a regional thing unless you expand and limit scholarships/coaching.
Also have to control total number of analyst. Not sure what the number is, but needs to be done.
I say all of this as a fan of a school that benefits from the current structure. Sure LSU isn't bama, but if it stays ths same and Saban retires, there is a chance we are the big dog again.
Last year we benefited from the systems and do many years, but its terrible overall for the sport and the sport will revert back to a regional thing unless you expand and limit scholarships/coaching.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:28 am to Big4SALTbro
quote:
It’s still not a great idea to run off your die hards
I don’t know any die hards that would quit the sport because it went to a 16-team playoff.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:29 am to lsu777
quote:
Would be Oregon, not us
Technically Oregon didn’t win their division so I went with USC
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:29 am to Draconian Sanctions
Out of those UGA & OU would be interesting and maybe Iowa state vs Aggie would be as well.
Posted on 12/31/20 at 8:29 am to lsu777
Want to make the bowl games meaningful again, move all but
Rose
Sugar
Orange
Cotton
To labor day weekend. Invite only and make huge match-up. With the expanded playoffs, it wouldn't matter if you lose or not.
Rose
Sugar
Orange
Cotton
To labor day weekend. Invite only and make huge match-up. With the expanded playoffs, it wouldn't matter if you lose or not.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News