ESPN: Results are in: Expanded playoff wouldn't mean more competition

Donate To GopherHole
highwayman said:
Incredible post and fun, but ludicrous.

My prediction: it will be a 4 team field for at least 10 more years. We may then see a 5 or 6 team playoff. 8 teams won’t happen for 20. Not competitive enough, and most fans will never travel for 4 games, let alone the 3 now. The cracks in the CCG plus 2 game playoff system attendance is already showing. I honestly do not see the CCGs going away, especially in the new 14 team mega-conference era.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will happen either....but I had the first two rounds at the higher seeds home field. I understand that they aren't selling tickets to the Championship Game this year as well as they have in the past, but part of that is because it is Clemson and Alabama again, but also because it is in San Francisco. The game would be like the Super Bowl, where more corporations buy tickets....but the TV ratings and rights would be huge. Also, college basketball fans travel for 3 weekends....they would only have to travel for three if the first two rounds were at the higher seeds field.
 
Last edited:

highwayman said:
Incredible post and fun, but ludicrous.

My prediction: it will be a 4 team field for at least 10 more years. We may then see a 5 or 6 team playoff. 8 teams won’t happen for 20. Not competitive enough, and most fans will never travel for 4 games, let alone the 3 now. The cracks in the CCG plus 2 game playoff system attendance is already showing. I honestly do not see the CCGs going away, especially in the new 14 team mega-conference era.
Click to expand...

Delaney is starting to believe in an 8 game playoff, and he's the most powerful man in college sports.
If Big Ten misses the CFP next year, you can bet there will be an announcement during 2020 that a wider playoff will be in effect by 2022.
 

Michigan had three or four starters on defense who didn't even play in the Bowl game....it pretty much took the fun out of what should have been a great Bowl game. At least the way I did it all the games would be totally meaningful, unlike the way they were this year.
 

ethomasp31 said:
Michigan had three or four starters on defense who didn't even play in the Bowl game....it pretty much took the fun out of what should have been a great Bowl game. At least the way I did it all the games would be totally meaningful, unlike the way they were this year.
Click to expand...

If they won't risk injury playing in one bowl game, why would they want to play potentially 3 games?
 

ethomasp31 said:
Michigan had three or four starters on defense who didn't even play in the Bowl game....it pretty much took the fun out of what should have been a great Bowl game. At least the way I did it all the games would be totally meaningful, unlike the way they were this year.
Click to expand...

Here's how you make every game meaningful...you ditch the playoffs and go back to how things used to be.
 


Ope3 said:
I'd be totally fine going back to the they way it was prior to BCS with conferences tied into NYD Bowls and then having the AP and whomever else vote on their champion. It was unique and I liked it. New Year's Day always meant something.
Click to expand...

Exactly, this was so much better. The more it becomes like the NFL the worse I like it. I liked when every week of the season meant something. It was unique and it was great! I didn't even mind when there would be co-champions. Now we've lost the history of the Rose Bowl, teams are scheduling patsies for non conference games.
 

btowngopher said:
If they won't risk injury playing in one bowl game, why would they want to play potentially 3 games?
Click to expand...

Because they would still be playing for the National Championship. If Michigan had beaten Ohio State and Northwestern in the B1G Championship, all those guys would have played in the playoff. They sat out because they were playing in a Bowl game they thought wasn't meaningful enough for them to play in. If they went back to the way it used to be, it is still not a meaningful enough Bowl game for them to play in. Every other level of football, except for the BCS, has a playoff of more than 4 teams being picked at the end of the season. Division III has 32 teams, Division II has 28 teams and Division IAA has 24 teams. I had never thought of it any differently than the way it's been done up to this point, but after watching and listening to Mike Leach talk about expanding the playoffs, it seems to make sense to me. Why is it done at every other level except for this one? For the Bowl games that have half empty stadiums?
 

btowngopher said:
Exactly, this was so much better. The more it becomes like the NFL the worse I like it. I liked when every week of the season meant something. It was unique and it was great! I didn't even mind when there would be co-champions. Now we've lost the history of the Rose Bowl, teams are scheduling patsies for non conference games.
Click to expand...

Yeah instead of having 31 truly meaningful games, you have maybe 4.
 

ethomasp31 said:
I don't think it will happen either....but I had the first two rounds at the higher seeds home field. I understand that they aren't selling tickets to the Championship Game this year as well as they have in the past, but part of that is because it is Clemson and Alabama again, but also because it is in San Francisco. The game would be like the Super Bowl, where more corporations buy tickets....but the TV ratings and rights would be huge. Also, college basketball fans travel for 3 weekends....they would only have to travel for three if the first two rounds were at the higher seeds field.
Click to expand...

You have maybe 3-4000 fans travel for all the basketball games. You'll need 20,000 for football. Different. Also, one of the most expensive times of the year for travel. Way different. Just saying.
 




ethomasp31 said:
Because they would still be playing for the National Championship. If Michigan had beaten Ohio State and Northwestern in the B1G Championship, all those guys would have played in the playoff. They sat out because they were playing in a Bowl game they thought wasn't meaningful enough for them to play in. If they went back to the way it used to be, it is still not a meaningful enough Bowl game for them to play in. Every other level of football, except for the BCS, has a playoff of more than 4 teams being picked at the end of the season. Division III has 32 teams, Division II has 28 teams and Division IAA has 24 teams. I had never thought of it any differently than the way it's been done up to this point, but after watching and listening to Mike Leach talk about expanding the playoffs, it seems to make sense to me. Why is it done at every other level except for this one? For the Bowl games that have half empty stadiums?
Click to expand...

I guarantee you people would choose millions of dollars over a chance at a college national championship. Why does it matter that every other level does a bigger playoff? It's okay to have something that's different.
 

btowngopher said:
Wrong, every single week of the season there would be meaningful games.
Click to expand...

Okay I feel this is so wrong, because after Michigan lost to Ohio State their season was over. After Ohio State lost to Purdue, their season was basically over too. If you have 32 teams (actually more would be fighting to get in the playoffs) fighting to get into the playoff, there are a lot more games that involve a lot more teams that are meaningful as the season goes on. No one cares about the Midas Campground Bowl or the Avis Rent a Car Military Bowl. They could give away tickets to most of the Bowl games and the stands wouldn't be full.

Players skip the Bowls because their are basically exhibition games. They don't mean anything. If you are going to have a playoff, have a playoff like they do in every other sport at every other level. Not where you pick 4 teams based on politics where most years you don't even pick the right four teams.
 
Last edited:

highwayman said:
You have maybe 3-4000 fans travel for all the basketball games. You'll need 20,000 for football. Different. Also, one of the most expensive times of the year for travel. Way different. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Nationwide, college football is bigger than college basketball. If they had a tournament like this, it would be bigger than March Madness.

I didn't like the like the idea/think it would work when when I first heard it talked about. But the Bowl system is way too watered down, and after you created a playoff, even the Rose Bowl doesn't have nearly the same meaning as it used too. Especially if the Pac 12 or B1G have a team or teams in the playoff. The Michigan/Florida game should have been a huge Bowl game this year. But it turned meaningless because 4 of Michigan's best defenders decided the game didn't mean enough to play in the game. It was basically an exhibition game. If that game would have been a second round playoff game, there would have been 5 times as many people watching that game (maybe more than that even). I'm talking in television....not in person.
 
Last edited:



ethomasp31 said:
Okay I feel this is so wrong, because after Michigan lost to Ohio State their season was over. After Ohio State lost to Purdue, their season was basically over too. If you have 32 teams (actually more would be fighting to get in the playoffs) fighting to get into the playoff, there are a lot more games that involve a lot more teams that are meaningful as the season goes on. No one cares about the Midas Campground Bowl or the Avis Rent a Car Military Bowl. They could give away tickets to most of the Bowl games and the stands wouldn't be full.

Players skip the Bowls because their are basically exhibition games. They don't mean anything. If you are going to have a playoff, have a playoff like they do in every other sport at every other level. Not where you pick 4 teams based on politics where most years you don't even pick the right four teams.
Click to expand...

Playoff games don't mean anything either compared to a NFL career when millions of dollars are at stake.
 

ethomasp31 said:
Okay I feel this is so wrong, because after Michigan lost to Ohio State their season was over. After Ohio State lost to Purdue, their season was basically over too. If you have 32 teams (actually more would be fighting to get in the playoffs) fighting to get into the playoff, there are a lot more games that involve a lot more teams that are meaningful as the season goes on. No one cares about the Midas Campground Bowl or the Avis Rent a Car Military Bowl. They could give away tickets to most of the Bowl games and the stands wouldn't be full.

Players skip the Bowls because their are basically exhibition games. They don't mean anything. If you are going to have a playoff, have a playoff like they do in every other sport at every other level. Not where you pick 4 teams based on politics where most years you don't even pick the right four teams.
Click to expand...

Ohio State's season should be over as far as a national championship is concerned after losing to Purdue. They still have things to play for, conference championships still mean something. The season use to basically be the playoff, that was the beauty of it. Every week felt like a playoff.
 

ethomasp31 said:
Nationwide, college football is bigger than college basketball. If they had a tournament like this, it would be bigger than March Madness.
Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't. March Madness is big because every podunk university in the country has a chance to get in. Not in football.

You realistically have a few open spots here. 20 of the slots would be filled by the same 20 teams almost every year.
 

highwayman said:
No, it wouldn't. March Madness is big because every podunk university in the country has a chance to get in. Not in football.

You realistically have a few open spots here. 20 of the slots would be filled by the same 20 teams almost every year.
Click to expand...

You could probably say that for any sport playoff at any level. Haven't Alabama and Clemson played (or going to play) the last 4 years? It seems to me the same teams are in the playoff the way it is NOW!! I'm not putting NCAA IAA into the playoff like they are for basketball, so yes some teams like North Dakota State would still have their own tournament and not be able to play in the National Championship Tournament.

Like I said, the Bowl system seems broken to me. The stadiums are less than half full for over half the Bowl games. You couldn't even give tickets away to fill the stadiums for most of the Bowl games. You have some of the best players skipping the Bowl games because they are glorified exhibition games. Why not make it so there are 31 meaningful games, instead of 3-5 meaningful Bowl games. I guarantee you that if Michigan was playing Florida this year in a Sweet 16 playoff game instead of the Best Buy Tony Roma's Peach Bowl, there would have been AT LEAST 5 times more people watching the game...probably closer to 10 times as many people. There wouldn't be players skipping the playoffs either.

There would also be a lot more new teams in the playoffs every year than there is now.
 
Last edited:

8 team playoff? I wouldn’t have minded this:

Alabama vs UCF
Clemson vs Michigan
Notre Dame vs Ohio St
Oklahoma vs Georgia

Semis:

Alabama vs Georgia
Clemson vs Ohio St


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Some Day...Maybe said:
8 team playoff? I wouldn’t have minded this:

Alabama vs UCF
Clemson vs Michigan
Notre Dame vs Ohio St
Oklahoma vs Georgia

Semis:

Alabama vs Georgia
Clemson vs Ohio St


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Don’t think Georgia beats Oklahoma
Not sure if UCF gets in. Could see committee putting Florida or penn State ahead of them
 

Some Day...Maybe said:
8 team playoff? I wouldn’t have minded this:

Alabama vs UCF
Clemson vs Michigan
Notre Dame vs Ohio St
Oklahoma vs Georgia

Semis:

Alabama vs Georgia
Clemson vs Ohio St


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

There would have been 4 more games that would have been interesting if you had an 8 team playoff. The 4 team playoff has hurt the Bowls in my opinion, and adding more teams is just going to hurt them more. I read an article last week which compared the 2006 and 2016 Fiesta Bowls. Both games were between Ohio State and Notre Dame. Both years both teams were rated in the top 10 in the country. In 2006, Ohio State won the B1G but they didn't go to the Rose Bowl because the Rose Bowl was designated as the National Championship game.

So we have the same two schools, same bowl and only 10 years apart. But in 2006 the viewership was more than twice the viewership of the 2016 game.
 

In hindsight: Even though Ohio State was the better than Note Dame and should have been in the playoff, it doesn't change the fact that Clemson was far and away the best team and would have waltzed their way to the championship regardless. So if the goal of the playoff is to determine the best team in the nation, then it worked.

In the past when you had 3 undefeated teams at the end of the season with a 2-team championship, there is always that lingering doubt about the #3 team, but not so in this case. There is no argument that the #5 team (Ohio State) was better than the eventual champion.

Even though I do think an 8 or 16 team playoff would be really fun, I don't think there will be any urgency to expand the playoffs until a team left out (not including UCF) can legitimately still try to make a claim that they were the best.
 

gopher7 said:
In hindsight: Even though Ohio State was the better than Note Dame and should have been in the playoff, it doesn't change the fact that Clemson was far and away the best team and would have waltzed their way to the championship regardless. So if the goal of the playoff is to determine the best team in the nation, then it worked.

In the past when you had 3 undefeated teams at the end of the season with a 2-team championship, there is always that lingering doubt about the #3 team, but not so in this case. There is no argument that the #5 team (Ohio State) was better than the eventual champion.

Even though I do think an 8 or 16 team playoff would be really fun, I don't think there will be any urgency to expand the playoffs until a team left out (not including UCF) can legitimately still try to make a claim that they were the best.
Click to expand...

I largely agree, but we don't know that Ohio State would lose to Clemson.
We think we know, and most would agree with us, but we don't know.
 

I still go back to blowing up all the conferences and having about 80 teams in Division 1 football. Reports show that the south is the only region with football having growth. Scheduling and future plans need to take this into account. A new system needs to force teams to play outside of their region and balance the playing field.

I propose about 80 teams with no divisions but have each team play 6 teams every year regionally (Protected games) and then two West Region games, two East and two south region games. 6 home and 6 away. Then just select 16 teams based on committee, polls and computers. The rest can go to bowl games.
 

Well, I've seen some people talk about getting rid of the conferences and having a 24 team Super Conference with all the teams that have been the most successful attendance and record wise over the last 20 years or so. It would basically dissolve the B1G and other conferences for football. They would be divided into 4 divisions of 6 teams each, play 5 games within their division and the top 2 or 3 teams from their division would make the playoff. The rest of their schedule they could schedule whoever they liked. It would stink for the Gophers. Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Nebraska and Penn State would make that super conference in from the B1G....I think you would probably guess the rest of the teams.

Here is the article
 

ethomasp31 said:
Well, I've seen some people talk about getting rid of the conferences and having a 24 team Super Conference with all the teams that have been the most successful attendance and record wise over the last 20 years or so. It would basically dissolve the B1G and other conferences for football. They would be divided into 4 divisions of 6 teams each, play 5 games within their division and the top 2 or 3 teams from their division would make the playoff. The rest of their schedule they could schedule whoever they liked. It would stink for the Gophers. Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Nebraska and Penn State would make that super conference in from the B1G....I think you would probably guess the rest of the teams.

Here is the article
Click to expand...

I get what he is saying, but while football drives big ten expansion, the big ten is about a lot more than football.
 

ethomasp31 said:
Well, I've seen some people talk about getting rid of the conferences and having a 24 team Super Conference with all the teams that have been the most successful attendance and record wise over the last 20 years or so. It would basically dissolve the B1G and other conferences for football. They would be divided into 4 divisions of 6 teams each, play 5 games within their division and the top 2 or 3 teams from their division would make the playoff. The rest of their schedule they could schedule whoever they liked. It would stink for the Gophers. Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Nebraska and Penn State would make that super conference in from the B1G....I think you would probably guess the rest of the teams.

Here is the article
Click to expand...

What a horrible idea. Seems like people just want another NFL, so lets just get rid of most college teams and keep the 32 best ones. 2 conferences, 8 divisions. Division winners make the playoffs plus two wildcards on each side, 12 teams total. College football is being ruined.
 

btowngopher said:
What a horrible idea. Seems like people just want another NFL, so lets just get rid of most college teams and keep the 32 best ones. 2 conferences, 8 divisions. Division winners make the playoffs plus two wildcards on each side, 12 teams total. College football is being ruined.
Click to expand...

The NFL is an entertainment show (allegedly) and league of mercenary carpetbaggers with scant redeeming social value. College football and athletics allows some that would otherwise miss out on the networking, interning, and book learning opportunites to have a better shot in life. The NCAA and leagues could do more in this area by forcible diversion of some facility money/staff salary to support the education/scholarship mission of the (non-profit) schools.
 

btowngopher said:
What a horrible idea. Seems like people just want another NFL, so lets just get rid of most college teams and keep the 32 best ones. 2 conferences, 8 divisions. Division winners make the playoffs plus two wildcards on each side, 12 teams total. College football is being ruined.
Click to expand...

I would hate this too. I can't believe that the teams in the B1G would let their best teams leave the conference for football. I was just sharing what I read.
 

gopher7 said:
In hindsight: Even though Ohio State was the better than Note Dame and should have been in the playoff, it doesn't change the fact that Clemson was far and away the best team and would have waltzed their way to the championship regardless. So if the goal of the playoff is to determine the best team in the nation, then it worked.

In the past when you had 3 undefeated teams at the end of the season with a 2-team championship, there is always that lingering doubt about the #3 team, but not so in this case. There is no argument that the #5 team (Ohio State) was better than the eventual champion.

Even though I do think an 8 or 16 team playoff would be really fun, I don't think there will be any urgency to expand the playoffs until a team left out (not including UCF) can legitimately still try to make a claim that they were the best.
Click to expand...

The Division I Football Championship at the FCS Level with 24 teams involves every conference champion in the playoffs and serves to lift up the whole of FCS college football. You can goto any school and have an avenue to the championship. A 4 team championship would be very damaging to this championship level, and make the season much more meaningless.

With Bowls being exhibition games and many bowls being de-Emphasized by players, coaches, and fans as mostly meaningless, extending the playoff to make it inclusive of all FBS leagues will be needed at some point soon to bring meaning back to the FBS football season. Winning a championship in any FBS league should afford you an avenue to compete for the championship.

The Patriot League (like the MWC) has little or no shot to ever win the title, but their champion is in the playoff, and it’s good for their league. Either include the G5 (why not?), or kick them out of FBS football.
 
Last edited:

Herd said:
The Division I Football Championship at the FCS Level with 24 teams involves every conference champion in the playoffs and serves to lift up the whole of FCS college football. You can goto any school and have an avenue to the championship. A 4 team championship would be very damaging to this championship level, and make the season much more meaningless.

With Bowls being exhibition games and many bowls being de-Emphasized by players, coaches, and fans as mostly meaningless, extending the playoff to make it inclusive of all FBS leagues will be needed at some point soon to bring meaning back to the FBS football season. Winning a championship in any FBS league should afford you an avenue to compete for the championship.

The Patriot League (like the MWC) has little or no shot to ever win the title, but their champion is in the playoff, and it’s good for their league. Either include the G5 (why not?), or kick them out of FBS football.
Click to expand...

How does a 4 team playoff make the regular season more meaningless than a 24 team playoff? The regular season was most meaningful when there was no playoff at all.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom