Would anybody not love this?

[kdog27]

uhh?

[NWLB]

EXACTLY!!!!!

[orangeandbrown]

We spend all this time going for three bowl berths, and then we go back to one (in essence). A playoff would be the worst thing for the MAC .

[hammb]

I'd rather lose by 200 points as a #16 seed in a tournament that had a chance to win it all than go to the whogivesashit.com bowl.

Nathan & I Have had this argument every year for like the last 5 years now. He's against it. I'm for it. It's all been hashed, and rehashed...

[kdog27]

whogivesashit.com bowl.

Is that before or after the Toilet Bowl?

[Jacobs4Heisman]

We spend all this time going for three bowl berths, and then we go back to one (in essence). A playoff would be the worst thing for the MAC .

Nothing changes as far as bowl bids go. The MAC would still have the same amount of bowls they have now.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

And Utah won the national title.......when? Ah, wait, they didn't.

Utah would have had a chance to win it, which they did not under the current system.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

The longer people debate what kind of a system would “work” the more the entire argument slowly pulls apart.

All a tourney would do is create another title, which still won't put the debate of who is best to bed better than what we have now. And we already gets lots of extra football without a tourney. The regular season does only mean something to those with something left to play for, to an extent anyway. A tourney only dilutes the regular season.

In any case, it won't and shouldn't happen, so I don't worry much about it. Half the people pointing to the USC/UM/UF topic as a reason why we somehow need a tourney still can't really seem to get a grip on why it helps their point of view. The new media line this year is “call the regular season what you want, but its not a playoff.” The new line is right, but does utterly nothing to advance any view that a tourney is needed.

Net result, nobody is marching in the street, there is no ground swell, and the topic is effectively dead for years to come.

This is all supposed to be about the kids, right? Take a poll of the 16 teams in the (former) D1-AA playoffs, and I bet they're overwhelmingly in favor of their playoff. Now take a poll of all the kids in D1A -- I bet almost all of them would want a playoff of some sort.

It's not about the kids you say? Then it must be about the fans. Over 80% of them want a playoff too.

Not about the fans or the kids? Then surely it's about money. I'm staggered at the amount of money a playoff would bring in.


If you polled 1,000 random people, and asked them what the college game was about, you wouldn't have one person say "The presidents of the universities" or "the ADs". And yet, that's the only thing standing in the way of what almost everybody else wants.


And the topic isn't dead. I've seen hundreds of threads like this on countless message boards across the country. The question "should there be a playoff" was posed to an analyst on every single post-game, pre-game, and specialty CFB show I've seen in the last month. You have whiners like Urban, Mack Brown, and Tommy Tuberville bringing attention to it almost every time they open their mouths. I think you're seriously underestimating the outcry for a playoff system.

[Warthog]

This is all supposed to be about the kids, right? Take a poll of the 16 teams in the (former) D1-AA playoffs, and I bet they're overwhelmingly in favor of their playoff. Now take a poll of all the kids in D1A -- I bet almost all of them would want a playoff of some sort.

It's not about the kids you say? Then it must be about the fans. Over 80% of them want a playoff too.

Not about the fans or the kids? Then surely it's about money. I'm staggered at the amount of money a playoff would bring in.


If you polled 1,000 random people, and asked them what the college game was about, you wouldn't have one person say "The presidents of the universities" or "the ADs". And yet, that's the only thing standing in the way of what almost everybody else wants.

J4H, I am in agreement with your thoughts. But to play the devil's advocate, the AD's and university presidents will say it is about the kids as well. Making those 8 teams play extra games hurts them both physically and academically. We can't ask those few teams to have to go through that additional stress.

Of course that is total crap. If they really thought it was about the kids, why did they make all 119 I-A teams play a 12th regular season game now? So they can add one game to EVERY team's schedule, but they can't add two or three games to a handful of teams schedule?

Adding a twelve game effects 119 teams * 80 players = 9,520 students. Having a 16 team playoff (with an 11 game schedule), would effect 16 teams * 80 players 1,280 players. But if you take into account that all 16 of these teams would be playing a twelve game in a bowl anyway, you get down to only 8 teams playing any "extra" games in a playoff system. So that only impacts 640 students. Which plan would be more benficial academically? Adding a 12th regular season game that impacts over 9,500 students or adding 8 games with a playoff system that impacts 600+ students. Their logic just doesn't make any sense to me.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

From a SportsNation BCS poll with over 209,000 votes...

Does college football need a playoff system?


89.8% Yes

10.2% No


Since college football is a business, and the customers are the fans, I think this will eventually happen.

Here's my other favorite question from the poll:

7) Which is the worst team playing in the BCS?


54.6% Notre Dame

22.9% Wake Forest

17.4% Boise State

5.1% Oklahoma

[cbjhack]

... There should also be a cap of 7 home games per institution forcing schools to go on the road. ...

So you are saying that Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Tennessee should forgo playing before 100,000 plus to play in a stadium a third that size (i.e. most MAC schools)? The only ones making money on the game would be the scalpers. Moving to a "neutral" site would make sense, kind of like the NCAA Basketball Tourney is. However, in Ohio High School Football, the first round is played at the higher seeded team. After that "neutral" sites are used.

[NWLB]

And Utah won the national title.......when? Ah, wait, they didn't.

Utah would have had a chance to win it, which they did not under the current system.

Yeah, and I have a chance to get the GOP nomination for 2008.

A chance worth nothing, is still not worth dumping the "whaterverbowl" people gripe about. The pissing and moaning about bowl names, and there not being meaning to the games really doesn't hold water.

As noted, we have this debate each year. And nothing has changed, as we are clearly still not moving towards a playoff even now. So I'm happy.

[NWLB]

The longer people debate what kind of a system would “work” the more the entire argument slowly pulls apart.

All a tourney would do is create another title, which still won't put the debate of who is best to bed better than what we have now. And we already gets lots of extra football without a tourney. The regular season does only mean something to those with something left to play for, to an extent anyway. A tourney only dilutes the regular season.

In any case, it won't and shouldn't happen, so I don't worry much about it. Half the people pointing to the USC/UM/UF topic as a reason why we somehow need a tourney still can't really seem to get a grip on why it helps their point of view. The new media line this year is “call the regular season what you want, but its not a playoff.” The new line is right, but does utterly nothing to advance any view that a tourney is needed.

Net result, nobody is marching in the street, there is no ground swell, and the topic is effectively dead for years to come.

This is all supposed to be about the kids, right? Take a poll of the 16 teams in the (former) D1-AA playoffs, and I bet they're overwhelmingly in favor of their playoff. Now take a poll of all the kids in D1A -- I bet almost all of them would want a playoff of some sort.

It's not about the kids you say? Then it must be about the fans. Over 80% of them want a playoff too.

Not about the fans or the kids? Then surely it's about money. I'm staggered at the amount of money a playoff would bring in.


If you polled 1,000 random people, and asked them what the college game was about, you wouldn't have one person say "The presidents of the universities" or "the ADs". And yet, that's the only thing standing in the way of what almost everybody else wants.


And the topic isn't dead. I've seen hundreds of threads like this on countless message boards across the country. The question "should there be a playoff" was posed to an analyst on every single post-game, pre-game, and specialty CFB show I've seen in the last month. You have whiners like Urban, Mack Brown, and Tommy Tuberville bringing attention to it almost every time they open their mouths. I think you're seriously underestimating the outcry for a playoff system.

No, I'm not underestimating the mythical cry from the masses, for a playoff. There isn't one. Somebody will gripe depending on where his team landed, and thats more to be politically correct, lest there bea booster with the money to buy-out a Loyd Carrs contract, that does want one.

And in truth, its not "all about the kids." If that were the case, I'd say to drop bowls, night games, and 12 game seasons, and dismiss attendance issues and such. Intermural sports are for "the kids." Pop Warner is "for the kids." This is about the community, fans, players, alumni, students, and the hotels in town. Is that an unpopular thing to say? Maybe, but its true. If this were just a "thing we did for the kids" we wouldn't be anyplace near this topic, bowls, TV, or anything else.

No, there is no march in the streets in the offing. And the topic is dead, it just hasn't hit the ground yet.

[NWLB]

From a SportsNation BCS poll with over 209,000 votes...

Does college football need a playoff system?


89.8% Yes

10.2% No


Since college football is a business, and the customers are the fans, I think this will eventually happen.

Here's my other favorite question from the poll:

7) Which is the worst team playing in the BCS?


54.6% Notre Dame

22.9% Wake Forest

17.4% Boise State

5.1% Oklahoma

Yeah. And if Lou Dobb's polls were to be taken as gospel, we'd be at war with Mexico among other things.

Find me a website or sports radio show, and you can find a lot of guys blabbing endlessly about a playoff, with no more logic than you can get out of a drunk member of the college democrats in a coffee shop, while George Bush and the former Sec. of Defense walk through waving American flags.

I saw one Gallup poll a few years ago that indicate a majority though the college game was alright as it was. ESPN then sponsored a poll to counter that, and every radio jockey on earth tries the same deal.

There isn't support, or we all would hear a hell of a lot more about it than we do. In truth, most of the push ten years ago was TV driven, and that push has waned as cable, TV deals, and bowl games have grown in number. TV has the product they want, they don't need the playoff. Which is yet another reason we will never see such a waste of time undertaken.

[TG1996]

My thought on keeping both parties happy:

http://www.haveyoumettony.com/?p=830