College Football Playoff Poll

#28
#28
VOLS INC. said:
WE HAVE A WINNER FOR THE "MOST SPECIAL" POSTER EVER.
:clap::clap::clap:
What are you talkin about.

Let me help you read and understand my original Post

PLAYOFFS??????? Why would we do that. ( SARCASTIC STATEMENT)

Playoffs would cause us to have a TRUE undisputed Champion like the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NCAA Baketball,baseball,hockey,etc....
( SEE UP TO THIS POINT I AM SUPPORTING A PLAYOFF/TOURNAMENT TYPE SYSTEM USING A SARCASTIC WAY TO EXPRESS IT. I AM IN FAVOR OF A PLAYOFF/TOURNAMENT BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU AN UNDISPUTED CHAMPION AND THESE ARE THE PROMINENT LEAGUES/ASSOCIATIONS THAT USES THEM)

I think writers and coaches voting on the champion is way better.
( ME MAKING FUN OF THE WAY THE CURRENT SYSTEM WORKS)
DISCLAIMER: If you are about to post a response bashing me because you didn't pick up on the obvious criticism you need to 1. Don't and 2. go play in traffic because you are an IDIOT.
( A DISCLAIMER FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO LACK THE BRAIN POWER TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE " I THINK WRITERS AND COACHES VOTING ON THE CHAMPION IS WAY BETTER" WAS A SARCASTIC STATEMENT SO DON'T REPLY BACK SERIOUSLY LIKE YOU DID)
Click to expand...

What you’re failing to comprehend is that cfb does have a playoff – it involves 2 teams. So that’s small but in every other example you gave there isn’t a consistency of the number of teams invited to participate in the post season. MLB has only 8 (and it wasn’t that long ago that it was only 4). College baseball invites 64 teams. NBA invites 16 teams while the NCAA invites 64. NHL invites 16 as does college hockey. The NFL invites 12 teams and cfb invites 2. In the end each is different. A range of 4 to 64 teams. Even when baseball only had 4 teams, we didn’t call their champion any less than NFL, NBA, etc..

Then there’s the format. MLB plays a best of 7 series while college baseball plays a double elimination then a best of 3. NCAA bb plays a single elimination but NBA plays best of 7 series. College hockey and the NHL are the same as bb. NFL and cfb play a single elimination.

They are all the same yet they are all different but it really doesn’t matter. Each crown their own “true” champion. Is the NCAA bb champion any less of a champion because they don’t play a best-of series? No their not and it’s the same for cfb.

As the sarcastic regarding writers and coaches choosing who plays for an NC, who do you think chooses to play in the NCAA bb tourney? The same coaches gather and cherry pick who gets to play. They are no fairer than any other system. Look at how many teams from the Big East get in and teams from lesser conferences with better records and even better RPI ratings are relegated to that coveted NIT tourney.
 
#29
#29
You just keep on thinking that the BCS works and it is a legitimate way to crown a champion. Why don't you ask the players and fans of the UNDEFEATED 2004 Auburn Tigers. YES UNDEFEATED IN THE BEST CONFERENCE IN THE LAND. yet writers and a computer left them out of your "2 team playoff".

And I'm fine with writers and coaches choosing teams for a playoff when they're are 68 teams involved, not 2.The NFL has it right and NCAA has it wrong when it comes to crowning a champion.

MY PROPOSAL - the 6 Major conference champs get in. Use the BCS formula to determine the last 2 teams in an 8 team playoff. Thats 7 games over 3 weeks. Choose the top 7 bowl games/Sites to host these games and the teams that didnt make the playoffs get invited to the other 25+ bowl games that are left. And don't give me that crap about Academics. The basketball players get by just fine. Besides you can move up the regular season by 1 week and cut a regular season game. THIS IS NOT HARD, THE PRESIDENTS JUST DON'T WANNA DO IT
 
#30
#30
VOLS INC. said:
You just keep on thinking that the BCS works and it is a legitimate way to crown a champion. Why don't you ask the players and fans of the UNDEFEATED 2004 Auburn Tigers. YES UNDEFEATED IN THE BEST CONFERENCE IN THE LAND. yet writers and a computer left them out of your "2 team playoff".

And I'm fine with writers and coaches choosing teams for a playoff when they're are 68 teams involved, not 2.The NFL has it right and NCAA has it wrong when it comes to crowning a champion.

MY PROPOSAL - the 6 Major conference champs get in. Use the BCS formula to determine the last 2 teams in an 8 team playoff. Thats 7 games over 3 weeks. Choose the top 7 bowl games/Sites to host these games and the teams that didnt make the playoffs get invited to the other 25+ bowl games that are left. And don't give me that crap about Academics. The basketball players get by just fine. Besides you can move up the regular season by 1 week and cut a regular season game. THIS IS NOT HARD, THE PRESIDENTS JUST DON'T WANNA DO IT
Click to expand...

I'd advise not to use the "look at Auburn" argument because you'll really diminsh your credibility.

There's no doubt Auburn did a tremdous feat in 04 going undefeated especially in the hardest conference in the land but there's one little problem about trying to elevate them to the championship game. That difference is The Citadel.

In 04 Auburn had Bowling Green scheduled and at the last minute BG bailed on them causing Auburn to scramble for a team to play. In the end they settled for Div 1-AA Citadel. At the time, they didnt think it made a difference.

If you take a look at the USC and OK schedules for that year, neither of the 2 played a Div 1-AA school. They played a full D1 schedule. In the end, Auburn's schedule wasnt as tough as the other two. Sad, but true. Giving the nod to Auburn over either of two would be a worse travesity than Aub being left out for playing a lesser schedule. Still, the two correct teams played for the NC.

Why is playing a Div 1-AA school so important here? Because there is a significant distinction between D1 and D1-AA per the NCAA. You can play all the D1 schools you want and play for a NC. To play in a bowl game - in this case the NC game-, you must have at least 6 wins over quality opponents (D1 teams). Aub chose the lesser route and it bit them back.

Now if Auburn had actually played BG and won, then you are correct and I agree totally - Auburn got screwed. But we all know that didnt happen. The two best teams were picked in the end. Someone had to be left out and Aub was it. Intrestingly, when BG backed out of the game with Auburn it was to play against none other than Oklahoma. lol. But that doesnt give Auburn a free pass. OK could have easily got a D1-AA school too but instead snaked them away. Auburn really should have done the same but they didnt and it hurt.

Even further to water down the "Auburn got screwed so we need a playoff" argument is the fact that even with a 4 team playoff, contraversy would have still abounded. Taking all three still leaves a spot open. #4 was California but they had a 10-1 record. Texas and Louisville with identical records would probably have an issue with that. Then there's #5 Utah at 11-0. In the end, even expanding to a +1 creates more problems than Auburn playing a D1-AA school.
 
#31
#31
Go back to the original bowl tie-ins. Fiesta determined by highest ranked bcs teams not already selected. Rose Bowl winner plays Fiesta Bowl winner. Sugar plays Orange Bowl winner. The semi-final games held the following weekend and championship game week after.

As for the argument of fan travel, I think the ADs are missing the big picture. How many "fans" go to the Superbowl or even the conference championships? Very few. They are corporate events. If they created a true playoff and championship game they could sell sponsorships and tv packages. The money involved could be sizable.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#32
#32
tri_vol said:
As for the argument of fan travel, I think the ADs are missing the big picture. How many "fans" go to the Superbowl or even the conference championships? Very few. They are corporate events. If they created a true playoff and championship game they could sell sponsorships and tv packages. The money involved could be sizable.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Apples and Oranges. Reasons?

1. the NFL's games leading up to Super Bowl are held at home locations, not neutral sites. Now, if your suggestion is to have the inital rounds at a home site with the finals at a neutral site, that's a completely different argument. Much more plausable that attendance for that game would not be effected. Problem is that the losing teams. Awarding them a bowl right after losing out on a chance to play for the NC will decrease the fans. Think about the let down Bama had after they played UF in the SECCG with the winner going to the NC. They played like poo in the Sugar Bowl.

2. The NFL post season is held in a time of year where nothing is occuring. Christmas is over, new years is over. No other activites to make a fan make a decision on whether to go to the game or not. All of the CFB post season games occur during the holiday season. Its stretching to ask fans to attend multiple games during a time of year generally reserved for family and parties.

Thing is a cfb playoff is the Cold Fusion of sports. There's some theories on how it would work but until its proven to work you wont see it. Right now its the best of all worlds. Fan attendance continues to increase, tv rating continue to increase, revenues continue to increase, payouts to schools continue to increase. There is no reason to buck the system. Until one or more of those mentioned begin to decrease there will not be a change. Period.
 
#33
#33
The bowls could all go back to being played New Year weekend. The semi games could be played at neutral sites the following week and championship game following week. Compared to the current system you'd only be adding a week to ten days.

As for the travel unfortunately the fans are going to get screwed when it comes to seeing the games live. In todays economy and going forward the money is with corporate partners and wealthy not "fans and alumuni". That's why UT is ripping out bleachers to add luxury style suites. Your traditional fans would still be able go enjoy the bowl games.

As for the attitude "if it aint broke don't fix it" I've always thought " if you're standing still you're moving backwards." That's what makes the NFL so great. The league is always evolving. People have showed they are willing to pay for 4 preseaon games and 16 regular season games. Ratings and revenue are going up. So why add an 18th game. More money. Be progressive. Unfortunately CFB is run by more mlb types resisting change than NFL guys looking for the next big thing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#34
#34
8 teams getting in is too many. There aren't 8 worthy teams every year. Winning the ACC with a 8-4 record probably also doesn't warrant a shot more than a team like Florida that's maybe gone 11-1 with the lone loss in the SEC Championship against an undefeated Bama team or any number of mid-major teams that have managed to go undefeated. Top 4 teams with BCS rankings determining their seeding would work just fine. Except we'd still hear tons of *****ing about teams getting screwed seeding-wise.
 
#35
#35
kptvol said:
8 teams getting in is too many. There aren't 8 worthy teams every year. Winning the ACC with a 8-4 record probably also doesn't warrant a shot more than a team like Florida that's maybe gone 11-1 with the lone loss in the SEC Championship against an undefeated Bama team or any number of mid-major teams that have managed to go undefeated. Top 4 teams with BCS rankings determining their seeding would work just fine.
Click to expand...
Completely agree. 8th place doesn't deserve a shot and auto-bids would be bad.
 
#36
#36
It doesnt matter what kind of system you have, there will always be whining about some team getting screwed. It happens in basketball every year, it happens in football every year. Thing is even with a playoff it'll still be the same BCS conferences in it and the whining will continue.

As pointed out, the problem in switching is that there's no switching back so those who's purses it would directly impact are very hesitant in changing. You can call it 'not moving you youre moving backwards' but that only is true if there is competetion. CFB has no competetion. There's nothing else to take away fans or viewers. Its a monolopy therefore bottom line is the most important thing. As said viewers, attendance, and money are continuing to rise. That's what a monolopy wants.

My suggestion is this: take all the non-BCS schools (WAC, CUSA, etc...) and create a playoff for them. Use all the things that have mentioned here - 4/8/16 teams, neutral sites, etc.... - and see if it actually works. Let them negioate tv contracts, corporate sponsors, etc... and put it on. If it doesnt work (viewers, money....) then we know for sure that a playoff in cfb wont work. If it does and they're able to reap the rewards, it forces the BCS to change. It would creates that competetion.
 
#37
#37
VolsSportsFan said:
I think underestimate the fans. There would be enough fans to go to both games. We're not talking a 64 team playoff here.
Click to expand...

GreveHaller's definition of a "real fan" is former band members of the University.

So it would be tough to fill stadiums up with real fans.
 
#39
#39
GreveHaller said:
My suggestion is this: take all the non-BCS schools (WAC, CUSA, etc...) and create a playoff for them. Use all the things that have mentioned here - 4/8/16 teams, neutral sites, etc.... - and see if it actually works. Let them negioate tv contracts, corporate sponsors, etc... and put it on. If it doesnt work (viewers, money....) then we know for sure that a playoff in cfb wont work. If it does and they're able to reap the rewards, it forces the BCS to change. It would creates that competetion.
Click to expand...
You're kidding, right? Mid major football would be completely irrelevant at that point, and the ratings/sponsors/money would all be a poor predictor of the ratings for teams that matters. But if that plot absolutely kills the idea of a 16 or 8 team playoff for the teams that matter, then I'm actually for it.
 
Last edited:
#40
#40
GreveHaller said:
It doesnt matter what kind of system you have, there will always be whining about some team getting screwed. It happens in basketball every year, it happens in football every year. Thing is even with a playoff it'll still be the same BCS conferences in it and the whining will continue.

As pointed out, the problem in switching is that there's no switching back so those who's purses it would directly impact are very hesitant in changing. You can call it 'not moving you youre moving backwards' but that only is true if there is competetion. CFB has no competetion. There's nothing else to take away fans or viewers. Its a monolopy therefore bottom line is the most important thing. As said viewers, attendance, and money are continuing to rise. That's what a monolopy wants.

My suggestion is this: take all the non-BCS schools (WAC, CUSA, etc...) and create a playoff for them. Use all the things that have mentioned here - 4/8/16 teams, neutral sites, etc.... - and see if it actually works. Let them negioate tv contracts, corporate sponsors, etc... and put it on. If it doesnt work (viewers, money....) then we know for sure that a playoff in cfb wont work. If it does and they're able to reap the rewards, it forces the BCS to change. It would creates that competetion.
Click to expand...

Of course there's always going to be whining, but that logic doesn't mean the BCS current setup is better than a 4 team playoff. Obviously you have to put a line somewhere, but logic should tell you that the #3 team in the land has a much bigger beef in the current system than the #9 team would have in an 8 team playoff.

Sorry but your non-BCS playoff plan is stupid from the get go...hardly anyone cares about them now unless one goes undefeated and pulls a TCU like last year and has a very slim shot at the BCS title game. You'd essentially be bringing D-1AA back.
 
#41
#41
GreveHaller said:
Apples and Oranges. Reasons?

1. the NFL's games leading up to Super Bowl are held at home locations, not neutral sites. Now, if your suggestion is to have the inital rounds at a home site with the finals at a neutral site, that's a completely different argument. Much more plausable that attendance for that game would not be effected. Problem is that the losing teams. Awarding them a bowl right after losing out on a chance to play for the NC will decrease the fans. Think about the let down Bama had after they played UF in the SECCG with the winner going to the NC. They played like poo in the Sugar Bowl.
.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting the loser teams would go to a "bowl" after losing the first round playoff game? There would be no "bowl" to go to, their season would be over.
 
#42
#42
VolsSportsFan said:
Where are you getting the loser teams would go to a "bowl" after losing the first round playoff game? There would be no "bowl" to go to, their season would be over.
Click to expand...

No bowl = no money = not happening.

Again, there is one reason there is cfb post season and that is money. Period. Any attempt to remove the money aspect of the equation will nullify any attempt at a cfb playoff. The conferences must be shown then can make as much if not more by changing systems. Fans can whine all they want but the demand continues to increase as well as the payouts. There is not another product to satisfy their demand. It isnt like Coke or McDonalds where if you dont like their product you can purchase Pepsi or Buger King. The options are to (a) watch cfb or (b) not watch cfb.

Cold Fusion.
 
#43
#43
GreveHaller said:
No bowl = no money = not happening. Again, there is one reason there is cfb post season and that is money. Period. Any attempt to remove the money aspect of the equation will nullify any attempt at a cfb playoff. The conferences must be shown then can make as much if not more by changing systems. Fans can whine all they want but the demand continues to increase as well as the payouts. There is not another product to satisfy their demand. It isnt like Coke or McDonalds where if you dont like their product you can purchase Pepsi or Buger King. The options are to (a) watch cfb or (b) not watch cfb. Cold Fusion.
Click to expand...

Every indepedent study I've seen has shown a playoff would make more money than the current system. It's not about money, it's about control.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#44
#44
VolsSportsFan said:
Sorry but your non-BCS playoff plan is stupid from the get go...hardly anyone cares about them now unless one goes undefeated and pulls a TCU like last year and has a very slim shot at the BCS title game. You'd essentially be bringing D-1AA back.
Click to expand...

Really? Because anyone that has an gram of business sense knows that there are a couple of things you do when you want to implement a new product.

First, a cost-benefit analysis. You weight both sides of the issue, not just one. Sure many fans may be happy with a playoff but at what cost is it? Will the increased expense of travel be worth the accolades of an extra game? How do others in a similar industry conduct business and how does it affect their revenue stream?

Next, after you believe that the analysis will be beneficial you conduct trial test. A sample group by doing it in a test enviroment before springing it onto the public. A focus group/taste test to see how some like it and see if there's anything that needs to be tweeked before the final product is introduced.

That's what my proposal does. Changing the entire business model on a 'chance' it might work is bad business. Testing it on a small group, in this case the non BCS conferences, allows them to be monitored on all the aspects. Will the fans travel to multiple games? Will the corporate sponsors support a tiered playoff system? Will the tv viewers watch? All questions that we dont know one way or another. At least a test enviorment will end the annual idiotic debate of "we need a playoff/no we dont". So far no one else has come up with an idea. At least its one.
 
#45
#45
VolsSportsFan said:
Every indepedent study I've seen has shown a playoff would make more money than the current system. It's not about money, it's about control.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Ok, and every study I've seen shows it wont work. If you'd like to provide links I'd be more than happy to show you their flaws.

Control?? are you kidding?? Who the heck do you think is in charge of the NCAA bb tourney?? The NCAA "controls" every aspect of who plays and how much money each team/conference gets. You'd rather have one central entity controling all the receipts and revenue dispursements? If so, you're really gonna like Obamacare.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top