Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 119
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    10,283

    Default

    Only a few teams had a chance at the title under the prior systems...and the bowls were just as meaningful or meaningless as you wanted them to be. IMHO the fact that people are more excited about the playoff games today than the “also-ran bowls” says more about the prior system being so unsatisfying and (in recent decades) watered down than a playoff system being faulty.


  2. #32

    Default

    OSU got screwed.
    Notre Dame rewarded for not playing in a conference. Oklahoma rewarded for playing in a small, decimated conference. OSU penalized for playing in a ninth conference game instead of an FCS team.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldmember View Post
    OSU got screwed.
    Notre Dame rewarded for not playing in a conference. Oklahoma rewarded for playing in a small, decimated conference. OSU penalized for playing in a ninth conference game instead of an FCS team.
    So they shouldn't have played Purdue?

    As for diminishing the value of the other bowls. Minnesota, who at 6-6 should have been thrilled to be in a bowl, had what 2, 3 starters pass on the game to keep from being injured and prepare for the draft. Did any of the top 4 teams have players sit out willingly?

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldmember View Post
    OSU got screwed.
    Notre Dame rewarded for not playing in a conference. Oklahoma rewarded for playing in a small, decimated conference. OSU penalized for playing in a ninth conference game instead of an FCS team.
    Notre Dame got rewarded for winning all of their games. Conference or not, their schedule was legitimate. I agree that OSU should have been in instead of Oklahoma, but OSU was punished for losing to a bad Purdue team, not for playing a 9th game.

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 16FeetUnder View Post
    This is a problem. If this is true, then that means that not making the playoff dramatically diminished the rest of the bowl games (even the previously top tier bowl games). Expanding the playoff would further diminish any remaining bowl games and the regular season. So, we'd have 8 or 12 teams in the playoff, taking up all the good bowl games, while everyone else does what? Our favorite team, the Gophers, would be doing what? College football would look very different than it does today, and even today the Rose Bowl is looked at as a consolation prize. It doesn't feel right to me. Maybe the concept will grow on me.
    I think many would say that is an argument FOR expanded playoffs, essentially putting a fork in the meaningless bowl games. Rose Bowl and other top tier bowls could be incorporated into expanded playoff structure. Quick lane bowl probably goes the way of the dodo. Gives an opportunity to set up four important bowl games around Christmas, 2 around new years day and 1 a week later. The other division I football bowl structure has been working that way (not on those dates) for a long time. Conference championships become the defacto round of 16 with the power 5 getting automatic bids and the other three spots awarded to selected conference champs from group of 5.

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LakerFan View Post
    I think many would say that is an argument FOR expanded playoffs, essentially putting a fork in the meaningless bowl games. Rose Bowl and other top tier bowls could be incorporated into expanded playoff structure. Quick lane bowl probably goes the way of the dodo. Gives an opportunity to set up four important bowl games around Christmas, 2 around new years day and 1 a week later. The other division I football bowl structure has been working that way (not on those dates) for a long time. Conference championships become the defacto round of 16 with the power 5 getting automatic bids and the other three spots awarded to selected conference champs from group of 5.
    So you want LESS opportunity for teams outside of the elite few? Please explain to me how that makes any sense to you as a Gophers fan.

    And here we go again with the "meaningless bowl" canard. If you want to look at the big picture of life, sports in general are meaningless. As a Gophers fan, you should have greatly enjoyed the opportunity to watch another Gophers football game this year - I know that I did. No bowl is more or less "meaningful" than any other.

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LakerFan View Post
    I think many would say that is an argument FOR expanded playoffs, essentially putting a fork in the meaningless bowl games. Rose Bowl and other top tier bowls could be incorporated into expanded playoff structure. Quick lane bowl probably goes the way of the dodo. Gives an opportunity to set up four important bowl games around Christmas, 2 around new years day and 1 a week later. The other division I football bowl structure has been working that way (not on those dates) for a long time. Conference championships become the defacto round of 16 with the power 5 getting automatic bids and the other three spots awarded to selected conference champs from group of 5.
    I don't see why lesser bowls could not continue to exist. They would still provide the same purpose they have now. Bowl deals may have to go away, cause if you go to 8 teams the cotton bowl isn't going to be happy with the third place team every year from the SEC. Bowl free agency might even build more interest in the bowls. Who wouldn't have wanted to watch an LSU vs TAMU rematch of their 72-71 game! Or games in intraconference that didn't occur during the season because of divisions. Of course I also would like to see a New Year's Day Toilet Bowl in say Detroit where the two worst teams in Division 1 play to not win the esteemed Toilet Buddy Trophy! Give those crap teams extra practices to improve!

  8. #38

    Default

    FCS has a nice 24 team format with 8 byes

    D2 has a 28 team format with four byes

    D3 has a full on 32 team format

    anyone of these would be great

    I like higher seeds getting home games in northern climates

  9. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dpodoll68 View Post
    So you want LESS opportunity for teams outside of the elite few? Please explain to me how that makes any sense to you as a Gophers fan.

    And here we go again with the "meaningless bowl" canard. If you want to look at the big picture of life, sports in general are meaningless. As a Gophers fan, you should have greatly enjoyed the opportunity to watch another Gophers football game this year - I know that I did. No bowl is more or less "meaningful" than any other.
    I look at baseball as a good example, just making the post season is pretty special, for me making the playoffs in Hockey loses some of it's luster because about half the teams make it.

    To each his own, but beating Wisconsin this year was a lot more special to me than attending the quick lane bowl in Detroit. I watched the game and enjoyed it (once i figured out that the non-HD signal wasn't pixelated) but nowhere near the excitement of the Wisconsin game. If the conference championships become really meaningful and the defacto round 4, then 20 teams are playing in really important games and 20 seems like a pretty large number relative to maybe 140 teams competing 80 of which are competitive and 60 of would still be in the hunt until the last weeks of the season. With increased importance on the conference championship, each regular season game becomes more important and you end up having win and in games in the weeks leading up to the conference championship. Winning the Big Ten West as a prerequisite to make post season play is something I could live with. Implying that my position means I think all games and sports in general are meaningless is hyperbole.

  10. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LakerFan View Post
    I look at baseball as a good example, just making the post season is pretty special, for me making the playoffs in Hockey loses some of it's luster because about half the teams make it.

    To each his own, but beating Wisconsin this year was a lot more special to me than attending the quick lane bowl in Detroit. I watched the game and enjoyed it (once i figured out that the non-HD signal wasn't pixelated) but nowhere near the excitement of the Wisconsin game. If the conference championships become really meaningful and the defacto round 4, then 20 teams are playing in really important games and 20 seems like a pretty large number relative to maybe 140 teams competing 80 of which are competitive and 60 of would still be in the hunt until the last weeks of the season. With increased importance on the conference championship, each regular season game becomes more important and you end up having win and in games in the weeks leading up to the conference championship. Winning the Big Ten West as a prerequisite to make post season play is something I could live with. Implying that my position means I think all games and sports in general are meaningless is hyperbole.
    Why are you putting the wisconsin game and the bowl game against each other? What does the wisconsin game have to do at all with this topic? Of course I enjoyed the Axe victory more than the bowl game, but what does that have to do with anything? It's not as though the two are mutually exclusive.

    And you didn't answer my question - why do you want less Gopher football, as opposed to more?

  11. #41

    Default

    Two thoughts on this. First, I don't think a playoff system would have all that much impact on the non-elite bowl games. As long as there are cities that want to draw tourists, media companies that want to attract viewers, and schools that want to attend/play, there will be bowl games regardless of a playoff.

    Second, because we have bowl games for good but not great teams, major college football doesn't need as large a playoff system as the lower divisions. If you look at the scores of the early rounds of playoffs in D3/D2/FCS with 24-32 teams, there are tons of blowouts and this would be the same for major college football. I personally think the current 4 teams is fine (with better guidelines like conference championship qualifiers/disqualifiers) but 8 would be OK too. 16 teams probably starts to stretch things even though there would probably be some interesting match ups.

  12. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bleedsmaroonandgold View Post
    Notre Dame got rewarded for winning all of their games. Conference or not, their schedule was legitimate. I agree that OSU should have been in instead of Oklahoma, but OSU was punished for losing to a bad Purdue team, not for playing a 9th game.
    Notre Dame played only second or third tier opponents. When they finally faced a P5 conference champion caliber opponent they were (predictably) trounced as they always are by such teams.

    Oklahoma has a similar advantage. When the greatest threat on your schedule is Iowa State, you just haven’t accomplished as much as everyone else. Their performance in the BCS/CFP is so bad it defies statistics.

    Reality is that OSU played Purdue instead of an FCS opponent. Instead of a ninth game, Clemson played Furman... and Alabama played the Citadel. If the Big Ten had allowed OSU to follow these CFP perennials’ lead, and play VMI instead of Purdue, do you think they are still left out of the playoff?

    Reality is the current system heaps reward on schools for playing fewer challenging regular season games. Playoff expansion would make that problem even worse.

  13. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dpodoll68 View Post
    Why are you putting the wisconsin game and the bowl game against each other? What does the wisconsin game have to do at all with this topic? Of course I enjoyed the Axe victory more than the bowl game, but what does that have to do with anything? It's not as though the two are mutually exclusive.

    And you didn't answer my question - why do you want less Gopher football, as opposed to more?
    On the other hand, look at Northwestern this year as the example.

    Let's say the Gophers won the West at 8-4 and caught the East team with their pants down at the B1G championship game. Would you want that team to have a crack at the National Championship or not? The 8 team playoff gives you that, the current system does not.

    Or if we are talking a 24-32 team, say the Gophers won the West at 8-4 and lost to the East team (again, like NW did this year). Would you rather they play in the Outback Bowl/Holiday Bowl/etc. or in a playoff?

    Yes, if FBS goes to a playoff the Gophers will have post season football less. No question. But if every time they go they have a chance at winning a National Championship if things go right, I think that makes getting there even more special.

  14. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldmember View Post
    Notre Dame played only second or third tier opponents. When they finally faced a P5 conference champion caliber opponent they were (predictably) trounced as they always are by such teams.

    Oklahoma has a similar advantage. When the greatest threat on your schedule is Iowa State, you just haven’t accomplished as much as everyone else. Their performance in the BCS/CFP is so bad it defies statistics.

    Reality is that OSU played Purdue instead of an FCS opponent. Instead of a ninth game, Clemson played Furman... and Alabama played the Citadel. If the Big Ten had allowed OSU to follow these CFP perennials’ lead, and play VMI instead of Purdue, do you think they are still left out of the playoff?

    Reality is the current system heaps reward on schools for playing fewer challenging regular season games. Playoff expansion would make that problem even worse.
    "Played only second or third tier opponents "? Notre Dame's best win was against the same team that OSU's was, and Notre Dame didn't lose to a bad Purdue team.

  15. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakeville Goldy View Post
    On the other hand, look at Northwestern this year as the example.

    Let's say the Gophers won the West at 8-4 and caught the East team with their pants down at the B1G championship game. Would you want that team to have a crack at the National Championship or not? The 8 team playoff gives you that, the current system does not.

    Or if we are talking a 24-32 team, say the Gophers won the West at 8-4 and lost to the East team (again, like NW did this year). Would you rather they play in the Outback Bowl/Holiday Bowl/etc. or in a playoff?

    Yes, if FBS goes to a playoff the Gophers will have post season football less. No question. But if every time they go they have a chance at winning a National Championship if things go right, I think that makes getting there even more special.
    I would rather watch the Gophers in 8 or 9 bowl games per decade than have a 0.5% chance of having an opportunity to get killed in the playoffs once per generation. That is most definitely a trade I'm willing to make.

    When and if the Gophers finally make the playoffs, they will have earned it and not lucked their way through a bad division to do so.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •