Playoff In The Future...

#2
#2
The homefield advantage would ensure the college football regular-season games would not lose any importance.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but this argument is garbage. You think this past Iron Bowl means nearly as much if Auburn's just playing for home field advantage? If they lost, they're out under the current system. With a 16 team playoff, they probably finish number 3 and very possibly get home field advantage throughout anyways. But yeah, definitely wouldn't diminish the importance of the regular season at all.

8 teams is too much. The idea of a team like 2009 Iowa getting a shot at the national title is repulsive. It's not the game we've all loved for years. And no system with auto bids could possibly avoid diminishing the importance of the regular season. Don't believe me if you don't want to, but you would eventually see big rivalry games with the starters on the bench resting up for the conference title game.
 
Last edited:
#4
#4
chavisut said:
Glanced and saw 12-16 team so didn't read.
Click to expand...
I'd be thrilled with a plus 1 and pretty happy with a 4 team playoff. I'm afraid it would be much bigger than that. Hell, 64 teams isn't even enough for basketball as they seem to want more.
 
#6
#6
I'd be fine with a four team playoff but I think I'm one of the few that actually wouldn't mind it staying the same.
 
Last edited:
#7
#7
chavisut said:
I'd be fine with a four team playoff but I think I'm one of the few that actually wants it to stay the way it is.
Click to expand...
I'm not necessarily sure I think it's best this way, but anything that changes should be relatively small, and I certainly prefer this method to auto-bids for the Conference USA champion.
 
#10
#10
milohimself said:
Top 4 seeds in a playoff, all neutral sites, done and done.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

The problem with that scenario (and why Mark Cuban is suggesting a 12 or 16 team playoff) is that he wouldn't be able to make as much money off of a 4 team playoff. He's not offering to fund a playoff out of the goodness of his heart. He's seeing that this could be a major money maker.
 
#13
#13
What I'd like to see him do if he really wants to back this playoff thing is to get all the non BCS schools and let them have a playoff of some sort. 4, 8, 16, whatever. Either home fields to the champ game or use the bowls they are already contracted to a champ game. It will solve the debate if a playoff will work or not at the D1 level. If it works then the BCS has to take a very, very serious look at doing it. If it doesnt, no harm no foul. Cuban writes it off as a loss and none of the conferences/teams are put in financial binds.
 
#15
#15
tvolsfan said:
I'm sorry, but this argument is garbage. You think this past Iron Bowl means nearly as much if Auburn's just playing for home field advantage? If they lost, they're out under the current system. With a 16 team playoff, they probably finish number 3 and very possibly get home field advantage throughout anyways. But yeah, definitely wouldn't diminish the importance of the regular season at all.

8 teams is too much. The idea of a team like 2009 Iowa getting a shot at the national title is repulsive. It's not the game we've all loved for years. And no system with auto bids could possibly avoid diminishing the importance of the regular season. Don't believe me if you don't want to, but you would eventually see big rivalry games with the starters on the bench resting up for the conference title game.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight...

You're arguing against the 2009 Iowa team getting a playoff spot despite the fact they only lost two games with a back up true freshman quarterback. Games they lost by 3(OT) and 7.

While you're arguing that Iowa shouldn't get a playoff spot period, LSU got a title shot in a similar scenario. Losing by 2 and 6 in OT. Difference is, Matt Flynn was on the field for both of their losses.

Two loss LSU being placed in the championship game based on the current set up is far more "repulsive" than the idea of the 2009 Iowa team getting a playoff spot.

Explain to me where you're coming from because I do not understand. I dislike Iowa too but clearly not as much as you. This just seems like you're using the opportunity to attack Iowa once again.

2009 Iowa getting a shot in the playoffs > 2007 LSU being placed directly into the championship
 
#16
#16
Sounds like a great idea to me. Plus one is like a playoff for the wimps.

Why would we keep a failed system the same?
 
#17
#17
The_Orange_Pearl said:
Let me get this straight...

You're arguing against the 2009 Iowa team getting a playoff spot despite the fact they only lost two games with a back up true freshman quarterback. Games they lost by 3(OT) and 7.

While you're arguing that Iowa shouldn't get a playoff spot period, LSU got a title shot in a similar scenario. Losing by 2 and 6 in OT. Difference is, Matt Flynn was on the field for both of their losses.

Two loss LSU being placed in the championship game based on the current set up is far more "repulsive" than the idea of the 2009 Iowa team getting a playoff spot.

Explain to me where you're coming from because I do not understand. I dislike Iowa too but clearly not as much as you. This just seems like you're using the opportunity to attack Iowa once again.

2009 Iowa getting a shot in the playoffs > 2007 LSU being placed directly into the championship
Click to expand...
Resident Iowa apologist returns. Remind me how Ferentz is a great coach?

Anyway, they didn't deserve a shot because they weren't that great a team. Other teams out there were head and shoulders above them. We don't need to create March Madness 2.0 here.
 
Last edited:
#18
#18
The_Orange_Pearl said:
While you're arguing that Iowa shouldn't get a playoff spot period, LSU got a title shot in a similar scenario. Losing by 2 and 6 in OT. Difference is, Matt Flynn was on the field for both of their losses.
Click to expand...
The difference was LSU was actually one of the two best teams in the country and probably the most proven. Iowa was just squeaked through a horrific schedule with a lot of luck.
 
#20
#20
No matter how many teams go into a playoff, there is going to be someone standing outside with a legitimate gripe as to why they deserved a shot. A system like the one currently in place, but with not automatic bids based on conference, seems to be the best bet IMO.
 
#21
#21
I love the idea of a playoff but still having bowls for teams below the playoffs...love it!
 
#22
#22
theutvolunteers said:
Sounds like a great idea to me. Plus one is like a playoff for the wimps.

Why would we keep a failed system the same?
Click to expand...

So a 1 loss Stanford, Wisconsin, Ohio State should have an equal shot at a NC as undefeated TCU, Ore, or Aub? Thanks for running the table guys but you could have lost one and we'd let you in. . Some years that 1 loss would have let you try for it. Not this year. A 1 loss is second best this year. But its more important to fill the bracket than it is to ensure the best teams play.
 
#23
#23
The idea that the regular season would mean less is perhaps the most idiotic i have heard. Anyone with a brain would know that the regular season would me exponentially more. The example of the IRON bowl is laughable. Alabama would have been playing for a playoff spot.
 
#24
#24
GreveHaller said:
So a 1 loss Stanford, Wisconsin, Ohio State should have an equal shot at a NC as undefeated TCU, Ore, or Aub? Thanks for running the table guys but you could have lost one and we'd let you in. . Some years that 1 loss would have let you try for it. Not this year. A 1 loss is second best this year. But its more important to fill the bracket than it is to ensure the best teams play.
Click to expand...

More stupidity. The only way to ensure that the best teams play is to have more teams. There is no round robin. Teams from different conferences play completely different schedules a 1 loss difference does not prove who the best team is.
 
#25
#25
iambruce said:
The idea that the regular season would mean less is perhaps the most idiotic i have heard. Anyone with a brain would know that the regular season would me exponentially more. The example of the IRON bowl is laughable. Alabama would have been playing for a playoff spot.
Click to expand...

it already does. If you're grouping a 1 loss team with 3 undefeateds (like what would happen this year) its admitting that the regular season isnt as important. But you gotta fill that spot whether the team is as good as the others or not. It doesnt matter if the 4th team has 4 losses, they'd still get grouped with the 3 undefeateds. Spread it out to 8 teams and 2 or 3 losses versus a team(s) that go undefeated and the diminishing of the season worsens.

Playoff spots are consistant year to year. Team records arent. It is more important to fill the spot than insure the best are playing.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top