Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

I know we have railed against the Blade's John Harris, but he raises a great point about adding a 12th game to the football season.

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dl ... /COLUMNIST

The point he is making is that the schools have argued against a playoff system because it would be too difficult on the student-athlete and their studies might suffer. Well, doesn't adding an extra game do the same thing? Oh, the extra game is practically guaranteed money while a playoff is an unkown, so lets take the guaranty.

This is from Jim Tressell: ""It's an added challenge for players and coaches alike to get ready for one more game. It's been my experience that longer seasons, which demand increased focus and discipline, result in better academic performances." Wasn't acedemic performance the reason they didn't want a playoff. So which is Jim? Just admit it is about the money.

Back to the earlier point about affects on the student. If they play a 12th game, ALL 117 Div I-A teams are affected. That is, let's say 80 kids per team, 9,360 students bearing the acedemic burden of playing an extra football game. Let's say we have a 16 team playoff instead. That would be 15 extra games. 16 teams *80=1,280 students affected. So please explain to me how a playoff is a bigger acedemic burden than a twelfth game. :shrug:

Warthog wrote:So please explain to me how a playoff is a bigger acedemic burden than a twelfth game. :shrug:

With a 12th game, you only have to pay the tutors to do athlete's papers until Thanksgiving or so. With a playoff, you have to keep them around into January.

Warthog wrote:I know we have railed against the Blade's John Harris, but he raises a great point about adding a 12th game to the football season.

He was also too lazy to pick up the phone and call either of the two Division I programs in his circulation area and ask why the MAC (apparently) supported this.

I have no patience for John Harris. None.

Schadenfreude wrote: He was also too lazy to pick up the phone and call either of the two Division I programs in his circulation area and ask why the MAC (apparently) supported this.

I would expect this of him if I figured he knew what the MAC was.

12 games also allows all the 6-6 BCS teams to be bowl eligible.

I'm all for the 12th game but....see above.

One could only hope that if a 12 game season does become permenant that to be eligible you would need to be 7-5, and truly have a winning season.

I can dream can't I.

A 12th game benefits all teams... vs. A playoff in which some teams will end up playing 15+ games... which has happened before... see BYU...

Trip to Hawaii = +1
Conference Championship = +1
Bowl Game = +1

12 Game schedule goes to 14/15 games...

If you do all this plus a playoff lets say to be fair you have 16 teams... that means you have 16 games or more for the two teams in the championship... that my friends is alot of football... how many players would be ineligible come spring for practice because they fail to study??

Who cares, I'd like to see 12 games, so would most people. 11 game seasons creates years like this past one, which while good for the MAC in a back-handed way, would lead to a football tourney faster than anything else.

They'll go with a football tourney about as soon as we have an American Pope.

Years like this past one do more to hurt the chances of the MAC getting more bowl bids than they help. With the field of teams able to play so shallow this year, the NCAA would point to it and say there isn't room for another bowl or two.

I suppose the entire football tourney question will now start boiling over for this year now.