and those will probably still be there for most teams. I think it would be a bonus if there was less breathing room for 6 and 6 teams with a win over an FCS program.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
For all you playoff fans
- Thread starter MtnBuff
- Start date
and those will probably still be there for most teams. I think it would be a bonus if there was less breathing room for 6 and 6 teams with a win over an FCS program.
Terrible comparison. Each team plays one another in their respective leagues. Crowning the Premier League champion is like crowning the PAC-10 champion. UEFA Champions League is a better comparison and guess what, they have a playoff!
I see, so the subject matter itself is irrelevant to the argument - got it!!
Why? Does it diminish the remaining regular season when CU is eliminated early from the BIG XII championship? Would CSU or Nebraska be less of a rivalry?
Example 1:
Frank: "Hey John are you going to the CU vs. NU game?"
John: "I was going to, but ever since the BCS playoffs were established the game just doesn't do it for me anymore."
Example 2 (if 16-team playoff):
Frank: "Hey John are you going to the #18 CU vs. #16 NU game?"
John: "I know that winning this game would probably put CU into the playoffs, but ever since the BCS playoffs were established the game just doesn't do it for me anymore."
Nor Cal Buff
Well-Known Member
You should note that my response was to someone claiming that nowhere else in the world do they not use a playoff to determine the champion, which was obviously blatantly false.
Everyone plays everyone in the NBA and NHL yet they have playoffs. Why? Because it makes the leagues a ****load of money. Once the NCAA figures out how to make more money with playoffs than they currently are, they'll move to a playoff. In the end, it really doesn't matter which way determines a champion best to the organization that runs things. They just want the most money. But you'll never convince me that a 16 team playoff is a better way to determine the champion than the current system. In fact, almost every year you'll miss out on a matchup of the 2 best teams because that's the nature of playoffs. You also devalue the regular season by quite a big margin with a 16 team playoff. You also get some unintended consequences. Say you're undefeated and have your 12th game of the season against a bubble team. Football is a physical sport and like you see in the NFL when teams clinch a top seed, you'll undoubtedly see backups for most or all of the game. How is that even remotely fair to other bubble teams and how do you account for that when deciding who gets the last few spots. You also have the potential to seriously devalue rivalries. Consider the previous situation but now it's a rivalry game. Do you risk your players getting injured and seriously hurting your chances of winning a national championship or do you rest them and completely devalue your rivalry, which is part of what makes college football great. Whichever decision the coach makes, he is going to get ripped by fans and media. Something like this could easily have happened in this year's Iron Bowl. Additionally, why does the 16th ranked team really deserve a chance at a national championship when they already proved they weren't worthy over more games than a playoff. They likely lost 3 games or more while the top team usually is undefeated or has 1 loss.
Why should those lower tier bowl games get lower ratings or be less relevant?? How many times has the Alamo Bowl had anything to do with the national championship? But it still sells the tickets and gets the ratings it does. Same for all but 4 of the bowl games. Face it, if your name isn't Rose, Fiesta, Sugar or Orange, you are already irrelevant in any way that a playoff could possibly impact.
Bienemy4life
Member
Wow, there are still people who defend the nat championship coronation (BCS)? I'm impressed, how quaint. I enjoy powdered whigs, horses and carriages too.
Every major American sport has a playoff, save one.
Every major American sport has a playoff, save one.
That makes college football cool.
I just want a system where every undefeated team has a chance to prove it on the field.
Yes the bottom end bowl games suck. They suck almost as much as watching the #1 seeds laying 40 point beatings on #16 seeds every year in the tourney. Oh I forgot, the tourney makes it relevant.
Nobody makes you watch the New Orleans Bowl or the New Mexico Bowl or any of the other bottom end bowls. At the same time nobody pretends that those bowls are anything other than a reward for the teams having a decent but not great season. I enjoy those games a lot more than I enjoy watching the #7/#12 and #6/#11 match-ups in the BB tourney of teams that have no business having a shot at the championship or watching the #1 through #3 seeds pounding some happless opponent from the mid-nowhere conference.
I also don't really enjoy watching final four games when I know that a couple of the teams that have been the best teams all year are gone because they had an injury or an off night or a bad match-up and some team that was up and down all year is on a hot streak and there in their place.
Other things matter, but money is probably the biggest factor by a large margin.
I love the open mindness.
Don't we have that now?
You say that the regular season will be devalued but you give no reasoning. At least state why! Do you think less people will go to Colorado games? Will Alabama fans stay home? Don't try to compare NCAA BB to football; they are two entirely different animals.
Those are some BIG assumptions. First, the NFL decides playoff spots by record alone; there is no voter aspect to the process. Therefore team X knows it is assured of the #2 seed and any future regular season outcome will not affect their postseason position; that is why they sit stars. What makes you think the voters would respond to that in the same way? Does Alabama sit their starters against Chattanooga St.? No, but they sit them after they're up 35-0 at half.
Let's flip this. If you were coach of the #1 team in a 8-team playoff system and you're playing your rival would you sit your starters? No, you play your tail off to assure yourself a piece of the playoff pie.
A player has just as great a chance of getting injured in a rivalry game whether we have a playoff system or the BCS. Let's pretend Cam Newton is held out of the Iron Bowl (it would be idiotic to sit him unless he was suspended or had a broken leg). Ask any Alabama or Auburn fan if they wouldn't watch that game? Or if the players would hit less hard?
You're assuming a lot about that 16th team. What if it was an undefeated Ball State? With a 16-team playoff you could include this year's Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Michigan State. Did Michigan State show that they were less worthy of a chance than Wisconsin or Ohio State? Well for that matter both Wisconsin and Ohio State don't even get a shot at a national title; they're all 11-1.
Last edited:
My point was in the case of a game between 2 highly-ranked teams. For example, #2 is playing #3 in late November. The winner is clearly still alive for the national championship game or a 4-team playoff, but in the case of an 8-team playoff the losing team would still get in.
Big 10 commissioner Delaney speaks out regarding the Rose Bowl: http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/21017/delany-stands-up-for-big-tens-rose-access
Conversation with WAC commissioner Benson:
Benson: "The BCS has provided greater access. Look at 120 schools, 11 conferences and to establish opportunities for those student-athletes. To play on the big stage, we've been to the big stage. ...
Delany: "The problem is your big stage takes away opportunities for my teams, to play on the stage they created in 1902."
Conversation with WAC commissioner Benson:
Benson: "The BCS has provided greater access. Look at 120 schools, 11 conferences and to establish opportunities for those student-athletes. To play on the big stage, we've been to the big stage. ...
Delany: "The problem is your big stage takes away opportunities for my teams, to play on the stage they created in 1902."
Coincidentally, the year Delaney was born. Nothing should ever change, right jimmy?