Why shouldn't college football have a 32 team tournament?

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on December 18th, 2018 at 7:12 PM

BESIDES GREED

And don't bring up it disrupts academics because Michigan Baseball and Softball play almost 3 months away from Ann Arbor. 

Comments

FrozeMangoes

December 18th, 2018 at 7:32 PM ^

I think 32 games is too much but the way it is now most regular season games don't mean anything anyway.  Realistically, at the start of each season there are only 8ish teams who can win it all as the system stands. 

Iowa has no real chance of ever winning it all and those fans show up to every game.  Regular season will always matter because people love the schools they went to and/or root for.   College football is as much about nostalgia as it is about competing for a championship. 

FrozeMangoes

December 18th, 2018 at 7:42 PM ^

I am saying they mean something for other reasons than playing for a title.  In terms of a championship there are very few games that actually matter.  It is essentially which one of the 8 teams win out. Outside of those schedules the games have no impact but people still show up to them. 

wildbackdunesman

December 18th, 2018 at 8:54 PM ^

I use to be on that boat, but I think I am moving away from it.

FCS has a 24 team playoff.  D2 has a 28 team playoff.  D3 has a 32 team playoff.

They still have rivalries and pageantry.

In a 24 team playoff why wouldn't there be value to regular season games?

You fall out of the top 8 and you lose a crucial first round bye.  You fall out of 9th through 16 and you lose a home game in the first round.  You fall out of the top 24 and your coach might lose his job.

 

We currently have a highly flawed 4 team playoff that has made bowls less meaningful.  Players sitting, half the fans complaining about uninteresting matchups and players sitting.  Conferences whining...etc.

howmuch

December 18th, 2018 at 7:18 PM ^

Because the vast majority of those 32 teams aren't at the caliber of Alabama, Clemson, OSU...

Most of those games would be just as meaningless as the crappy bowl games they would replace.

clarkiefromcanada

December 18th, 2018 at 8:40 PM ^

2018 been a good year for upsets...

11. Temple, 16-point underdog, won at Maryland in Week 3

9. (tie) Eastern Michigan, 17-point underdog, won at Purdue in Week 2

9. (tie) East Carolina, 17-point underdog, beat North Carolina in Week 2

6. Hawaii (tie), 17.5-point underdog, won at Colorado State in Week 0

6. (tie) Wake Forest, 17.5-point underdog, won at No. 14 NC State in Week 11

6. (tie) Charlotte, 17.5-point underdog, won at FAU in Week 13

5. Akron, 21-point underdog, won at Northwestern in Week 3

4. UNLV, 22.5-point underdog, won at San Diego State in Week 11

3. BYU, 23.5-point underdog, won at No. 6 Wisconsin in Week 3

2. Oregon State, 24.5-point underdog, won at Colorado in Week 9

1. Old Dominion, 28-point underdog, beat No. 13 Virginia Tech in Week 4

As well, some team from Ohio lost at Purdue.

Credit: https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/9/2/17796432/college-football-upsets-2018-biggest-ranking

 

 

Indy Pete - Go Blue

December 18th, 2018 at 7:23 PM ^

 Because that would be 25% of the teams. Most of the  NCAA tournaments are a little bit more exclusive than that. Having 16 teams would allow an appropriate level of exclusivity (12.5% of teams) while also allowing the tournament to take place over four weeks. 

FeistyWolverine

December 18th, 2018 at 7:26 PM ^

No one's mentioned it, but individual football games are so much more demanding on a team than individual basketball games, for example. Unless you're cutting out regular season games, you're going to have way more injuries if you make teams play a bunch of games on the way to a national championship like in the NCAA tournament. With less teams, and therefore less games to reach 1v1, you're much more likely to have the final two teams at or near the peak strength.

FrozeMangoes

December 18th, 2018 at 7:27 PM ^

It would take too long to do this in football.  I think 16 would be about the most you could get into a tourney.  Id prefer 8, think 16 would sill be good.  I also think there should be another tourney for the group 5 teams.  Let them have a championship. 

FauxMo

December 18th, 2018 at 7:29 PM ^

Because everyone will die from closed head injuries? Because the players are people and students, not professionals? Because Diagonal Blue touches himself at night? 

ndekett

December 18th, 2018 at 7:30 PM ^

Every regular season, the MSU basketball fanbase says "wait until March" every time their team loses. If there was a non-zero chance of them missing the tourney, then the loss would hurt them more and bring moar lulz. I'm not saying scale back March madness, but I don't want that attitude toward football.

lhglrkwg

December 19th, 2018 at 5:54 AM ^

Seems like for nostalgia's sake, people bemoan that bowl games don't mean anything when they never really meant anything anyway. The Peach Bowl is just as much a feelings-ball exhibition as it was years ago. Same with just about every other bowl that didn't have a say in the national championship

Nervous Bird

December 18th, 2018 at 7:36 PM ^

An 8 team playoff would be fine. Once you get past 8-10 teams the quality really lessens. With the soft schedules in college football, it's hard to say that 3 loss and 4 loss teams deserve a chance at the National Title. For example, in 2017's last pre-bowl games poll, EVERY power 5 team in the rankings from #12 down had at least 3 losses. Do you really think that 4 loss Stanford, and 3 loss MSU deserved a chance to be in some kind of tournament for the National Title? 

Going with 8 teams would be a fine and fair playoff. The five Power-5 Champions, plus 3 at large teams (regardless of conference affiliation) would possibly be inclusive of all the teams deserving. It would be quite difficult, in ANY year, for the 9th best team to stake a claim to having been robbed of their chance at a title. 

Nervous Bird

December 19th, 2018 at 12:57 AM ^

Actually, this year it would have given you 5 conference Champions, Notre Dame, Georgia, and MICHIGAN! Last year it would have been 5 Champions, Alabama, Wisconsin, Auburn/Penn St. In 2016 it would have given you 5 Champions, Penn St, MICHIGAN, Wisconsin. In neither of the past 3 years would the SEC have gotten all of the at large berths. In reality, only the Big Ten would have been poised to achieve that feat. SEC bias is indeed real, but it is not as pervasive as some loudly proclaim it to be.