Started By
Message
re: The new “opt out” bowls
Posted on 12/26/20 at 5:13 pm to djsdawg
Posted on 12/26/20 at 5:13 pm to djsdawg
quote:
It simply depends on how many post season games without opt outs you wish for. Opt out bowls don’t seem to bother you though.
Like it or not opt outs are a part of the game now. I don't like it. I agree that it is quitting. I also understand the players side of it, too.....to an extent.
So, the solution is...if we want to stop opt outs we should just make all bowl games playoff games?
Honest opinion. How may teams do you want to see? All NY6? Those are the premier games today. That would be what...12 teams? Ad those to the 4 we already have for the playoffs and we have 16 teams?
To me....I want the games to be interesting. A good game played. You add 4 more teams and people are going to stop watching the first round or two of the playoffs. Who wants to watch 59-20, 37-17, 38-0, 24-7,30-3 games? Those are the scores of some of the semi-final games we have gotten. You start putting the #1 team against the #8 team and it will get worse. a LOT worse. Then you compound that problem by not having some decent match ups in the NY6 games. You lose those competitive games altogether.
Time to get off the computer. I realize that the playoffs are going to happen. I am just going on record saying t=it will be a mistake, in my opinion.
4
Posted on 12/26/20 at 5:17 pm to djsdawg
quote:
I am not sure anyone is arguing they were.
Bowls have become meaningless once the playoff formats started.
This says otherwise. By saying they have become meaningless....what made the difference? Why were they meaningful before but meaningless now?
You've already insinuated that the shot at a title is what makes a game meaningful. If that is the case, then most bowls were meaningless before. there are two meaningful games before and there was only 1 or MAYBE 2 games before.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 5:36 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
I can only think of ONE player who lost money by getting hurt in a "meaningless" bowl and he recently just signed his 2nd NFL contract that incuded a $35 million signing bonus.
It's just a dumb risk to take especially for bowls which are just transparent, money grab exhibition matches. Does it really hurt the sport if younger guys get to play more? I think might even help since games are better when talent gaps are less pronounced.
Bottom line: this is the playing field these days. We solve it by making more of these games matter, which means we expand the Playoff. I'd love to end almost every season watching my school play in a high stakes game with real drama - win or lose. It makes the sport more fair and it makes it more entertaining. At this point it's a no-brainer.
This post was edited on 12/26/20 at 5:47 pm
Posted on 12/26/20 at 5:42 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
This says otherwise. By saying they have become meaningless....what made the difference? Why were they meaningful before but meaningless now?
You've already insinuated that the shot at a title is what makes a game meaningful. If that is the case, then most bowls were meaningless before. there are two meaningful games before and there was only 1 or MAYBE 2 games before
Bowls have been meaningless forever, and they become more meaningless with every one of these corporate-sponsored moneygrabs they add.
Is there a system anywhere that's worse than this? Is there one more contradictary - an amateur sport thats not about the athletes or the product, but about making sure everyone maintains their own piece of the money pie? It's fricking absurd.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:19 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Honest opinion. How may teams do you want to see? All NY6? Those are the premier games today. That would be what...12 teams?
What? An 8 team playoff means you play 7 games.You can incorporate every single on of then add the championship game.
Whats so difficult to figure out?
quote:
Ad those to the 4 we already have for the playoffs and we have 16 teams?
You just keep adding nonsensical hypotheticals to booster your arguments.
quote:
You add 4 more teams and people are going to stop watching the first round or two of the playoffs
How in world do you know this? I would absolutely watch 3 of the 4 in the scenario we discussed earlier along with almost every other CFB fan.
quote:
Who wants to watch 59-20, 37-17, 38-0, 24-7,30-3 games? Those are the scores of some of the semi-final games we have gotten.
And here are some other scores:55-19,41-14,42-14,37-14,21-0 and 42-20. You wanna guess where these scores are from?
Might as well go back to the old bowl system because the BCS obviously wasn't working with all these blowouts,correct?
I don't get the thinking that all future playoff games will somehow be "blowouts" because of whats happened in past years.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:21 pm to Peter Buck
NFL ratings aren't exactly great anymore, and don't look to be improving much any time soon. The younger generations don't care as much about football, and the older generations are sick of the rules changes, etc.
Add in the number of businesses that have gone under/are barely scraping by, and the individuals who are in the same boat, and the gate is going to drop precipitously, too.
Going forward, the money isn't going to be there like in years past.
Add in the number of businesses that have gone under/are barely scraping by, and the individuals who are in the same boat, and the gate is going to drop precipitously, too.
Going forward, the money isn't going to be there like in years past.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:26 pm to lewis and herschel
quote:
Once bowls have become meaningless, let next year's guys get the reps and playing time.
Why risk injury in meaningless game, regardless of experience level? From a money standpoint, the goal of every player with NFL aspirations should be to play the absolute minimum number of snaps possible, so as to minimize the potential for injury.
Once it's all about the dollars, it's *all* about the dollars.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:28 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
BTW,why not go ahead and extend this logic out to "meaningless" regular season games at the end of the season?
Same difference,correct?
Expect to see increasing amounts of that going forward.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:32 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
Sorry,its changing to eight whether you like it or not.
And then it will be expanded to 16, and then....
Playoffs always have the same problem: the lose fan bases. Sure, there will be casual interest in who wins, but how invested in the eventual results are all of the fanbases of all of the teams that don't get in?
That was what the old bowl system got right: it kept fan bases interested, because their team would be playing in a game that at least meant something to them.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:39 pm to FaCubeItches
quote:
Going forward, the money isn't going to be there like in years past.
Not sure where you're getting your information.
New NFL TV contract will be $100 billion for 10 years
Posted on 12/26/20 at 7:54 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Like it or not opt outs are a part of the game now. I don't like it.
Do you want to try to reduce how many opt out? Make the post season games more meaningful.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 8:22 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
So, the solution is...if we want to stop opt outs we should just make all bowl games playoff games?
No, and this is stupid if you think this is what anyone has said.
This isn't 1995 anymore. 8-3 with a 2-1 record against your rivals and a trip to the Tangerine Bowl isn't a good season.
It sucks, but players today only care about making the playoff. A 16 team playoff where every conference champion gets an autobid keeps more players and fans interested in the sport for a longer period of time.
I know that I watch less college football in general when Georgia gets taken out of playoff contention. I still watch Georgia games but other games mean nothing to me anymore. That is bad for the sport.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 8:24 pm to FaCubeItches
quote:
That was what the old bowl system got right: it kept fan bases interested, because their team would be playing in a game that at least meant something to them.
This line of thinking changed several years ago. Ever since the playoff began, the Sugar Bowl doesn't mean shite to the SEC anymore because playing in it means you weren't good enough to be in the playoff.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 8:50 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
What? An 8 team playoff means you play 7 games.You can incorporate every single on of then add the championship game.
Whats so difficult to figure out?
Apparently it is difficult for me to figure out. How do you get 7 games from 8 teams?
I know I am forgetting or not seeing something.
quote:
You just keep adding nonsensical hypotheticals to booster your arguments.
Do you not even realize that going to an 8 team playoff is a hypothetical? Or do you just imagine that y'all are the only ones that can make hypotheticals and nobody else can? We were told if they would just start a playoff with 4 teams that would fix everything. now it is 8 teams. Why do you think it will stop there? I mean, in 7 years there has been 1 team ranked at #4 that has proven they belong, but now we are to believe that there are 8 teams that have a shot to win it all?
quote:Are you of the assumption that people want to watch blow outs? Look at history and learn from it. I would rather stick a fork in my eye than watch another 38-0 game and listen to talking heads try to convince me that Cincinnati really does belong in the playoffs and they actually could win it!
How in world do you know this? I would absolutely watch 3 of the 4 in the scenario we discussed earlier along with almost every other CFB fan.
quote:The BCS wasn't working. That's why we are where we are. We now have a playoff.
And here are some other scores:55-19,41-14,42-14,37-14,21-0 and 42-20. You wanna guess where these scores are from?
Might as well go back to the old bowl system because the BCS obviously wasn't working with all these blowouts,correct?
I'm not arguing for the elimination of the playoff. I am arguing against the expansion of the playoffs.
The finals of the playoffs has been more successful than the semis for sure, but now you want to see more blow outs. You want to kill the sport? Tell everybody they will see epic games and everybody has a legitimate chance to win and then trot out lopsided scores for over half of the games. If 1 verses 4 produces 38-0 and 30-0 scores what do you think #1 verses #8 is going to produce?
quote:Certainly not all but why do you think the vast majority (like they are today) won't be? Do you somehow see parity coming to the sport?
I don't get the thinking that all future playoff games will somehow be "blowouts" because of whats happened in past years.
Every year we see Ohio State, Oklahoma, Clemson and Alabama with an occasional wild card team sprinkled in.
Why inn the world do you think this is going to change?
Who do you see that is going to suddenly gain on these teams? Honest question. Maybe us if Kirby learns, but I don't see any other team in the country that looks like they are about to start challenging to get into the playoffs.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 8:52 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Do you want to try to reduce how many opt out?
You aren't going to. They are here to stay.
Wait. Are you saying we should change the entire system to prevent opt outs?
Posted on 12/26/20 at 9:07 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
To me....I want the games to be interesting. A good game played.
The last 3 years
2017:
1. Clemson 8. USC
4. Alabama 5. Ohio State
3. Georgia 6. Wisconsin
2. Oklahoma 7. Auburn
2018:
1. Alabama 8. UCF
4. Oklahoma 5. Georgia
3. Notre Dame 6. OSU
2. Clemson 7. Michigam
2019:
1. LSU 8. Wisconsin
4. Oklahoma 5. Georgia
3. Clemson 6. Oregon
2. Ohio State 7. Baylor
We have more good matchups of teams at full strength, and every season we can expect an upset. It would be better.
This post was edited on 12/26/20 at 9:09 pm
Posted on 12/26/20 at 9:33 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
You aren't going to. They are here to stay.
I have yet to see a player quit a playoff team.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 9:42 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
We were told if they would just start a playoff with 4 teams that would fix everything. now it is 8 teams. Why do you think it will stop there?
It won't, and that's sort of the point. What you're going to find out is that players and fans could not give any less of a shite once they're eliminated from playoff contention. You're going to see players quit left and right once their teams are out.
It sucks, but today's college football player does not care about 7-4 Georgia vs 4-7 Georgia Tech.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 9:46 pm to VADawg
The playoffs have nothing to do with opt outs... the culture of making it acceptable for agents to give players advances before the bowls is 100% why we have opt outs.
Posted on 12/26/20 at 9:50 pm to Peter Buck
If NFL scouts viewing guys quitting on their college teams as an indictment on their future effort, this quitting shite would stop immediately.
Page 4 of 10
Latest Georgia News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News