Playoff??

Submitted by wolverine1987 on
I love College Football, and look forward to it all year. If I'm not attending our games I'm parked in front of College Gameday in the morning and watch into the night, right through College Football Final. So inevitably, I watch the inevitable and repetitive debate every year about instituting a playoff system. Here's the thing: I don't care. If we never have a playoff that's fine by me. In fact, if we had no BCS and went back to traditional bowl games I would like that BETTER than the BCS. Why? Not sure, but I do know that I just can't work up the outrage of the typical journalist--"why don't we settle it on the field like every other sport--aaarrrggghhh". Perhaps I'm not anal, maybe I'm dumb, maybe I'm not enough of a fan. After all, the guy I voted for, our new president, is on record as saying he knows no serious fan that opposes a playoff. Hmm. Even though I like playoffs in every sport, for some reason the idea that we pick a champion from a poll--ok. Maybe (horrors) it's just a game and no one gets hurt by this. So save your outrage. I used to think I had company in this POV, but am starting to think I'm now alone. Am I?
MGoBoard

wildbackdunesman

November 28th, 2008 at 11:28 AM ^

That system would allow a 4 loss Houston team to move in ahead of a 1 loss Texas Tech team. Assuming Texas and Oklahoma are the 2 teams that get taken from the B12. I am not sure if that is fair. Consider that Houston got blown out by Ok State and lost to Colo State, Air Force, and Marshall. Not really impressive.

Joined: 07/16/2008

MGoPoints: 30282

Feaster18

November 26th, 2008 at 6:19 PM ^

You're not alone. I've been a college football fan for 40 years, and I really dislike the idea of a playoff. As much as I love the sport, it really doesn't bother me that in any particular year I might not know precisely who the best team at the end of the year is. College football has thrived for more than 100 years without a playoff. A playoff might work well in other sports, or even in other divisions of college football, but there simply is no need to threaten the importance of meaning of regular-season games in an attempt to conclusively prove what team is best. With a playoff, games such as UM-OSU 2006, or the upcoming Florida-Alabama SEC championship game, are essentially rendered meaningless, because both teams are sure to head to a playoff regardless of the result. Look at what's happened to regular-season college basketball since the growth of the NCAA tournament. No one cares, because the games involving any sure tournament qualifier are meaningless.

Joined: 11/26/2008

MGoPoints: 744

CPS

November 26th, 2008 at 6:32 PM ^

I don't care if we have a playoff or not. I just don't see it happening. But I definitely don't like the BCS system. I'd rather go with the traditional bowl games and a single poll (AP, Coaches, Harris, Blogpoll, whatever) that determines the winner. If that leads to controversy and debate about the crowning of the MNC, so be it. I actually enjoyed those postseason debates.

Joined: 10/20/2008

MGoPoints: -405

CPS

November 26th, 2008 at 6:54 PM ^

The primary appeal of a playoff is to have a conclusive winner, and it works for other sports. Uncertainty is forbidden! But people are mislead by that justification, because there will invariably be a debate about who should and should not have been included in the playoff in the first place. It's no different than the title game now. Except instead of one game, it's 4 games or 8 games or whatever number of games that are needed for the first round. Only when you have a large number of teams that make the initial round (e.g., 64) can those complaints die down because it's much more inclusive.

Joined: 10/20/2008

MGoPoints: -405

CPS

November 26th, 2008 at 7:18 PM ^

And the first round is not going to get much bigger than 16 teams. They aren't going to play more than one game a week for football, and a 16 teams playoff already constitutes a month of playoffs. That's fine for other sports where multiple games can be played in a week. When it comes down to it, all protestations to the contrary, these are still amateur athletes, and they're not going to be kept in a playoff for more than a month. The winner of each conference playing each other has some appeal, but it would require substantial conference realignment to create more parity between the conferences and bring the independents into the fold. It also takes away a certain level of conference independence, because the goal is to have some form of conformity. This means, for example, each conference having the same number of teams and a title game to determine a clear conference winner, that winner being eligible for the national playoffs. I don't ever see the conferences giving up that much independence, much less bowl tie-ins, dilution of rivalries, etc.

Joined: 10/20/2008

MGoPoints: -405

scottiemmm

November 26th, 2008 at 7:24 PM ^

I don't want a playoff either, and I think that most college football fans don't. However, football fans and sports fans do, and there are more of them. People should just attach less importance to national championships because they involve a lot of things to go right that are out of control sometimes. If Obama were a college football fan instead of just a football fan, we'd know what team he likes.

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 10

theyellowdart

November 26th, 2008 at 9:14 PM ^

I'm willing to bet you that "most college football fans don't" want a playoff. I assure you, the majority of college football fans (not just football fans) really want a playoff. There are those like you that feel the current system, or even the previous system, is completely fine. It's just not the majority that's all.

Joined: 09/03/2008

MGoPoints: 1570

wolverine1987

November 27th, 2008 at 12:04 PM ^

I think that those that vote in these polls are for the most part much more motivated by the "injustice" of the current system and argue for change, because they are "outraged", just as Chris Fowler, Herbstreit et. al. They are far more motivated, ala Obama supporters vs. McCain supporters.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 18065

Brodie

November 28th, 2008 at 9:51 AM ^

I'll buy it when I see a scientific poll.... you know, one that's not demographically toward the very young, doesn't allow for multiple votes and allows for actual analysis. The NCAA and the conferences have commissioned internal research, you have to imagine the results were more along the lines of "A lot of people would like to see a playoff but don't really care." Because most people I know feel that way. The only people who feel like "This is retarded, get a playoff already!" are people who don't really watch CFB anyway. Edit: And for the record it's only about 40,000 votes. That represents a vast majority of people on ESPN.com... but pretending that those results would be typical amongst the general population is an absurd jump in logic.

Joined: 11/19/2008

MGoPoints: 10713

cbuswolverine

November 28th, 2008 at 1:03 PM ^

I bet I've seen 100 of them across different sites over the past few years. It's roughly the same result every time. You asked for numbers, there they are. 85-15. If you can find a scientific poll that will overcome that kind of margin (which has been repeateded in probably every poll ever taken on the subject), more power to you. You have zero facts to back up your assertions yet you're the one talking about me making an absurd jump in logic. You're probably tons of fun to talk politics with.

Joined: 08/14/2008

MGoPoints: 5958

Brodie

November 28th, 2008 at 3:07 PM ^

I haven't made a single assertion to back up. And I'd hope so as I spent three years working toward a poli sci degree... given your penchant for hyperbole ("hundreds of thousands", "hundreds of polls") I'd imagine you're the type to label the other party "evil" and compare them to the Third Reich.

Joined: 11/19/2008

MGoPoints: 10713

cbuswolverine

November 28th, 2008 at 3:39 PM ^

But you're clearly the type who never admits he's wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence. This is the first time I've ever run into people who think the anti-playoff lobby is in the majority. I don't know what the odds are of you all finding your way to the same thread on the same board, but I bet they're pretty damned high. You guys must have just crawled out of a cave or something if you don't realize that everybody and their brother is in favor of a playoff.

Joined: 08/14/2008

MGoPoints: 5958

cbuswolverine

November 28th, 2008 at 11:45 PM ^

http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/011108/football_20080111054.shtml http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Spring03/Varnadore/index.htm "Can we just make this playoff thing happen? An overwhelming amount of players (73.1%) are in favor of it, including just about everyone in the SEC (10 out of 11 schools).": http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/agray/posts/2723 http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08328/929917-143.stm "In a December 2003 online survey conducted by New Media Strategies, 75 % of football fans said they’d like to see the BCS scrapped, with 54 % supporting a playoff. That was reported in an excellent book called Bowls, Polls & Tattered Souls, written by Stewart Mandel, a college football reporter for Sports Illustrated’s website.": http://blog.dispatch.com/blog-16/2007/12/spitting_into_the_wind_for_a_c… http://www.survey.com/surveys/poll_44.html http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/POLL/results/1344291.html Nielsen Survey: http://www.nielsen.com/media/2008/pr_080123.html "Gives fans what they want. Surveys, including those done for USA TODAY, consistently show a solid majority for a playoff.": http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-09-09-ten-changes-playoff-pros-cons… I'm bored and don't feel like adding the million links (hyperbole FTW!!!) that are out there. They're all over the place. A bunch of new surveys will pop up this time of year just like they always do. It's easier to keep an eye out for those than to look up old ones. Maybe there are polls that have the majority against a playoff, but I have never seen one.

Joined: 08/14/2008

MGoPoints: 5958

sedieso

November 26th, 2008 at 10:09 PM ^

All the bubble teams who don't get into the NCAA basketball tourny bitch and moan about how they deserved to get in. Also the last thing I want to see, I don't know if it will happen or not, but teams resting their starters towards the later part of the year if they are guaranteed a spot in the playoffs.

Joined: 09/12/2008

MGoPoints: 563

joeyb

November 27th, 2008 at 1:47 AM ^

Every conference champion this year has been/well be determined in the last week of conference play. Big10 wasn't decided until PSU beat MSU. Big12, ACC, and SEC have a championship game. The Pac10 will probably go to Oregon State, but they need to keep winning conference games. The Cincinnati is in the lead in the Big East right now, but IF they lose to Syracuse and WVU wins their next two, then they take the championship. My point is that I don't think that you need to worry about them resting their players.

Joined: 10/12/2008

MGoPoints: 16869

joeyb

December 1st, 2008 at 7:41 PM ^

But if Florida loses to Florida St and Alabama then they are for sure out of the top 8 and probably out of the top 16. The same goes for Auburn. If you don't play your starters you run the risk of not only losing the conference, but also an at-large bid.

Joined: 10/12/2008

MGoPoints: 16869

tpilews

November 27th, 2008 at 10:47 AM ^

No matter what "system" is in place, there are going to be teams that bitch and moan; it's human nature to bitch. That being said, the playoff is the best system to allow the teams to settle the champion on the field. If you have a 16 team playoff, the teams that don't make it, well guess what, don't lose two f-ing games. The last two "championship games" have proven we need something different with tuos's pitiful performances. And if PSU had squeeked by Iowa, it'd be three years in a row the big ten looked like shit.

Joined: 10/17/2008

MGoPoints: 3128

wildbackdunesman

November 27th, 2008 at 8:20 AM ^

I don't really want a playoff system. That said, I wouldn't strongly oppose a plus one system. However, I don't want a 16 team playoff. I liked the traditional system better than the BCS. I have heard that the NCAA owns the rights to any college football playoff, which is more reason to oppose one. Just 2 of the 5 BCS bowl games give out more money to colleges than the entire 65 team NCAA run college basketball March Madness tournament. The NCAA is pretty much a monopoly and I think if it got its hands on the post season it would give money more to its pet projects than to the schools.

Joined: 07/16/2008

MGoPoints: 30282

wolverine1987

November 27th, 2008 at 12:10 PM ^

if we must have a "Championship Game" would be going back to traditional Bowl Matchups, then choose a plus one Championship Game by voting two teams to play in it out of the four winners of the four traditional bowls. This would assure maximum effort in the Bowl Games (something we don't always get, see Oklahoma as an example) plus huge focus on those four games.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 18065

mspeters

November 27th, 2008 at 12:58 PM ^

Going back to traditional matchups for bowls, then a 4 team, 2 round playoff makes more sense. MGOBlog's proposal is better IMO, but this would be a close second. Winning provides plenty of motivation if there is a guarantee of playing the next week... There are issues with who makes what bowl esp for independents, but the farther you push it up the food chain, the better the system. There needs to be a point where any team is in control of its own destiny. The main concern should be making sure that those criteria are explicit, whether it is as simple as winning your conference, or better defined terms for minor conferences and independents regarding bowl tie-ins. I would love to see traditional matchups for the major bowls again though.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 38

Zone Read Left

November 27th, 2008 at 12:48 PM ^

A playoff would be terrible for a college football. 1. College basketball is doing terribly right now. No one watches the regular season games cause they don't matter. Everyone watches the first round games because they still have a chance to win the pool, but by the team you reach the final four the only people still watching are the 2 people who still have a chance to win. 2. Were the New York Giants the best team in football last year? NO. as Brian always talks about, there is a normal distribution of outcomes for any particular game. Even after the super bowl, the New England Patriots were still the best team in football. They DID prove it on the field the first 18 games. 3. Would you want RichRod resting his players against osu if they were assured a spot in the playoffs? Keep in mind that ANGRY MICHIGAN SAFETY HATING GOD thinks RichRod should rest the players. 4. Of course, college football is the one sport where playoffs make some sense since the schedule is so destandardized. CAN MLB REALLY NOT KNOW WHO THE BEST TEAM IN BASEBALL IS AFTER 162 GAMES? I wish every pro league was like the English Premier League 6. Maybe its because I really don't care about untangible things like "national championships". Part of the charm of college football is still being able to debate with Nebraska fans 11 years later about who was the better team.

Joined: 08/13/2008

MGoPoints: 474

turbo cool

November 27th, 2008 at 2:55 PM ^

every pro league should be like the EPL, or every other foreign soccer league for that matter. It makes the regular season much more competitive when there's a chance that the bottom 3 fall to a lower tier league. Also, it would also increase the support of the 'minor leagues' where they had the same system, w/ their top 3 moving up and bottom 3 moving down. competition increases by a lot.

Joined: 07/10/2008

MGoPoints: 977