Would a new group of big hitters be better for college football?

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

Pretty much ever since the playoffs were last introduced, it seems like the same group of teams are either always in, or always hanging around. That list has become even more repetitive over the last 5 years or so. Going into 2022, you can guarantee at least a couple, if not more, of the following teams will either be in the playoffs, or just outside:

-Bama
-Georgia
-Clemson
-Ohio State
-Oklahoma

So I’m curious, what would it do for college football interest if this year the playoffs looked completely different? What if the following year it was different again? For instance:

2022 playoffs:
-Miami
-Iowa
-Arkansas
-Wake Forest

Then in 2023:

-Tennessee
-USC
-Florida State
-Michigan State

Something like that? Would CFB be more entertaining overall that way? Or do people enjoy having the consistent giants every year that every team is trying to slay? Just curious of everyone’s thoughts. Do dynasty’s make college football more entertaining, or less?

 

[OrangeEtBlanc]

I definitely think parity would go a long way in increasing casual fan engagement for CFB.

Would like to see some new teams for the playoffs, like Tennessee (of course), Penn State, Wisconsin, Nebraska (not likely, but it’d be nice), NC State, Utah, Oregon, Arkansas, and other such programs. Just get some new teams competing for the title.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Pretty much ever since the playoffs were last introduced, it seems like the same group of teams are either always in, or always hanging around. That list has become even more repetitive over the last 5 years or so. Going into 2022, you can guarantee at least a couple, if not more, of the following teams will either be in the playoffs, or just outside:

-Bama
-Georgia
-Clemson
-Ohio State
-Oklahoma

So I’m curious, what would it do for college football interest if this year the playoffs looked completely different? What if the following year it was different again? For instance:

2022 playoffs:
-Miami
-Iowa
-Arkansas
-Wake Forest

Then in 2023:

-Tennessee
-USC
-Florida State
-Michigan State

Something like that? Would CFB be more entertaining overall that way? Or do people enjoy having the consistent giants every year that every team is trying to slay? Just curious of everyone’s thoughts. Do dynasty’s make college football more entertaining, or less?

I think it would be good to have a USC or a Miami or even UT re-emerge. It looks like that’s a legit possibility right now too. I think college football is better when those schools are relevant, especially USC. It’s good to have regions other than the Southeast and Columbus care about college football.

I think your 2023 CFP would move the needle a lot more than Wake, Arkansas and Iowa, at least TV #’s.

 

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

I think it would be good to have a USC or a Miami or even UT re-emerge. It looks like that’s a legit possibility right now too. I think college football is better when those schools are relevant, especially USC. It’s good to have regions other than the Southeast and Columbus care about college football.

I think your 2023 CFP would move the needle a lot more than Wake, Arkansas and Iowa, at least TV #’s.

Yeah good point. I was just trying to throw out semi big names that would be a bit of a shocker.

I agree with everyone. In the last 7 years, the Natty has been won by either Bama or Clemson for 5 of them. Seems like that’s very much hurting CFB fanhood these days.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

The NCAA is continuing to lose or forfeit its grip on college football. CFB is inching toward being the governing organization.

There will likely be an overhaul of the playoff structure but that's secondary to who will be "in" and who will be "out" of the "Major League" in college football.

As the "super conferences" coalesce around massive TV money, CFB will surely see that also ran programs and conferences aren't useful (read: profitable) for the organization.

The NCAA was never able to just abandon the lower Divisions to flounder in some "Rah, Rah for the old school" legacy organization but the CFB will likely be more connected to the TV money and more businesslike to want to involve or control Arkansas-Monticello or Emory & Henry who are worth nothing to the organization.

I may be dead before it comes to full fruition but CFB has the chance to create and control the "NFL-Lite" era of college football.

For the haters, the cat is out of the bag with NIL. These elite "students" ARE professionals, ARE going to be paid substantially, and the old "student-athlete" model WILL disappear. I'm not saying I like it but the school admins from the "elite" schools.... the CFB big boys.... will surely see that the old model is dead.

Elite schools can either essentially license the school name to professionally managed pro franchises or mismanage their brand until they're too useless for the CFB to keep.

It's a business now. Unless the CFB chooses to repeat the mistakes of the NCAA, it'll be treated like a business.

Sources: CFP mulls breaking football out of NCAA

 

[VolPack22]

Possibly one of the highest CFP ratings would be a foursome of Alabama, Ohio St, Texas, and USC. I have a feeling there would be a lot of eyes on that playoff.

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

Unless your a fan of the usual Bama, Clemson,Ohio State,UGA and OU I think most fans are tired of the same old teams every season. I think certain programs that have been down for awhile NEED to become national players for fans again....those include the likes of; Tenneessee,Michigan,Florida State,Nebraska,Texas,USC and LSU.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Unless your a fan of the usual Bama, Clemson,Ohio State,UGA and OU I think most fans are tired of the same old teams every season. I think certain programs that have been down for awhile NEED to become national players for fans again....those include the likes of; Tenneessee,Michigan,Florida State,Nebraska,Texas,USC and LSU.

I agree, but LSU won a title 3 years ago. A Blue blood re-emergence would be great.

 

[OrangeEtBlanc]

College Football has undergone tremendous evolution since it began. The discussion of amateurism is not something new.

Debate over giving athletes scholarships to play football nearly rent the sport apart early in the 20th century, and is what led the Ivy League schools, the original powerhouses, to essentially downgrade their football programs. CFB changed, adapted, and survived.

NIL is just that whole argument all over again for the 21st century.

In fact, it seems NIL will help create more parity in the long run by leveling-out the talent for the schools that are legitimately able to compete. It will also continue to morph as different collectives see (or do not see) a ROI for their contributions.

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

I agree, but LSU won a title 3 years ago. A Blue blood re-emergence would be great.

True....I left the west coast schools out besides USC because generally most of the country could careless about WC teams....of course that might change with USC & UCLA in the B1G

 

[GoDucks349]

True....I left the west coast schools out besides USC because generally most of the country could careless about WC teams....of course that might change with USC & UCLA in the B1G

It will be interesting to see how USC and UCLA do in the Big 10. Neither has won a PAC-12 title in football. Yes you have to go back to PAC-10 days for either one of them to have won the conference title. Also, under Chip Kelly UCLA has averaged around 46,000 attendance or around 70% of capacity not exactly "super conference" numbers. Recent years have USC averaging around 66,000 or 85% of capacity.

It will be interesting to see how many LA fans come out to see an Indiana or Nebraska, Rutgers or Maryland game.

 

[05_never_again]

It will be interesting to see how USC and UCLA do in the Big 10. Neither has won a PAC-12 title in football. Yes you have to go back to PAC-10 days for either one of them to have won the conference title. Also, under Chip Kelly UCLA has averaged around 46,000 attendance or around 70% of capacity not exactly "super conference" numbers. Recent years have USC averaging around 66,000 or 85% of capacity.

It will be interesting to see how many LA fans come out to see an Indiana or Nebraska, Rutgers or Maryland game.

Basically none, but it doesn't matter as much because the game is about TV deals now and expanding into new areas.

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

Basically none, but it doesn't matter as much because the game is about TV deals now and expanding into new areas.

This is true. Schools no longer rely or care about attendance when you have the mega TV deals.

 

[05_never_again]

This is true. Schools no longer rely or care about attendance when you have the mega TV deals.

Schools care about it, they just don't care about it as much. In the era before the mega TV deals and certainly before games were on TV, attendance was basically the end-all-be-all. They desperately wanted butts in seats. They still do, but not as desperately. You occasionally see empty upper-level seats even for big, highly anticipated games, especially in sections where the visiting team's fans sit. People don't travel like they used to because the experience of watching from home is so good (every single game is in HD and 70+ inch TVs are relatively cheap) and so much cheaper.

 

[stolitonic]

Unless your a fan of the usual Bama, Clemson,Ohio State,UGA and OU I think most fans are tired of the same old teams every season. I think certain programs that have been down for awhile NEED to become national players for fans again....those include the likes of; Tenneessee,Michigan,Florida State,Nebraska,Texas,USC and LSU.

Michigan got in last year-and got smacked around.
Cincy last year didn't belong on the field in the playoffs. Sorry, but it's true.

I think the main problem with the playoffs is that the semifinal games are usually jokes. Each year, it seems there are two great teams and a bunch of pretty good ones. The pretty good ones fight it out for the other two playoff spots.

How many of the semifinal games have actually been back and forth games or nail biters? Just a few that I recall.

Even the finals games are sometimes lackluster at best.

 

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

It will be interesting to see how USC and UCLA do in the Big 10. Neither has won a PAC-12 title in football. Yes you have to go back to PAC-10 days for either one of them to have won the conference title. Also, under Chip Kelly UCLA has averaged around 46,000 attendance or around 70% of capacity not exactly "super conference" numbers. Recent years have USC averaging around 66,000 or 85% of capacity.

It will be interesting to see how many LA fans come out to see an Indiana or Nebraska, Rutgers or Maryland game.

It’s crazy with fans of those big name PAC-12 schools. I’ve known a couple of big USC fans. Like cheer them on, wear the hat, etc etc. Those dudes knew NOTHING about their own team. They knew absurd amounts about the NFL, and nothing about the college teams they were supposedly such big fans of.

 

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

Michigan got in last year-and got smacked around.
Cincy last year didn't belong on the field in the playoffs. Sorry, but it's true.

I think the main problem with the playoffs is that the semifinal games are usually jokes. Each year, it seems there are two great teams and a bunch of pretty good ones. The pretty good ones fight it out for the other two playoff spots.

How many of the semifinal games have actually been back and forth games or nail biters? Just a few that I recall.

Even the finals games are sometimes lackluster at best.

Cincy last year proved the problem with a 4 team playoff.

Did they deserve to be in the playoffs? Absolutely.

Did they belong in the playoffs? Absolutely not.

 

[LouderVol]

Cincy last year proved the problem with a 4 team playoff.

Did they deserve to be in the playoffs? Absolutely.

Did they belong in the playoffs? Absolutely not.

I dont see how expanding fixes it. If you go to 8, those first games will still be trash. The second round may be decent but not close, and then you get the same championship game we already have.

Yeah some "Cinderella" may slip into the second round with a 4 vs a 5 or something. But as soon as they meet a good team it will be the same blowout.

The average margin of victory in the semi finals is already 21 points. That's a touchdown worse than the regular season average of 15 point differences.

 

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

I dont see how expanding fixes it. If you go to 8, those first games will still be trash. The second round may be decent but not close, and then you get the same championship game we already have.

Yeah some "Cinderella" may slip into the second round with a 4 vs a 5 or something. But as soon as they meet a good team it will be the same blowout.

The average margin of victory in the semi finals is already 21 points. That's a touchdown worse than the regular season average of 15 point differences.

It doesn’t fix that necessarily, but I would say there was probably another team somewhere that could have made a better showing. Whoever that team was, an expanded playoff would have gotten them in too.

 

[LouderVol]

It doesn’t fix that necessarily, but I would say there was probably another team somewhere that could have made a better showing. Whoever that team was, an expanded playoff would have gotten them in too.

Yes, usually one of the SEC, Big 10 tens would be better than some other teams but dont have the record to get them in. My beef is that an expanded playoff guarentees the big schools get in, despite 2 or 3 losses.

 

[05_never_again]

Michigan got in last year-and got smacked around.
Cincy last year didn't belong on the field in the playoffs. Sorry, but it's true.

I think the main problem with the playoffs is that the semifinal games are usually jokes. Each year, it seems there are two great teams and a bunch of pretty good ones. The pretty good ones fight it out for the other two playoff spots.

How many of the semifinal games have actually been back and forth games or nail biters? Just a few that I recall.

Even the finals games are sometimes lackluster at best.

Not many, and what's funny is that nearly everybody wants playoff expansion. If a bunch of games that involve teams 1-4 aren't competitive, what do they think a competition involving 1-8, 1-12, or 1-16 would be?

You are correct that very few of the semifinal games have been close. Honestly, when you look at the list of them (College Football Playoff - Wikipedia), only 3 of them have been memorable games. 2015 Sugar, 2018 Rose, 2019 Fiesta. 3 out of 16 total games.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Not many, and what's funny is that nearly everybody wants playoff expansion. If a bunch of games that involve teams 1-4 aren't competitive, what do they think a competition involving 1-8, 1-12, or 1-16 would be?

You are correct that very few of the semifinal games have been close. Honestly, when you look at the list of them (College Football Playoff - Wikipedia), only 3 of them have been memorable games. 2015 Sugar, 2018 Rose, 2019 Fiesta. 3 out of 16 total games.

My argument is what’s the difference? If you’re gonna get blowouts, might as well see what happens if you expand. Plus, I think it makes the regular season more interesting for more teams deeper into the season. Give Byes to the 1-4 seeds and let them host CFP games. Let 5-12 play the 1st round at home stadiums of 5-8 . Let 1-4 host playoff games against the winners of the 5-12 and then play the Final 4 play out the way it has. I think w/ NIL and an expanded CFP it allows more teams to sell the idea of being competitive w/ the usual suspects and actually being able to back it up for once. I honestly think the worst thing for college football is the current NY6 games. Those teams are so close, but they can’t compete for a championship and the draftable guys sit out. It’s bad for the sport.

 

[LouderVol]

My argument is what’s the difference? If you’re gonna get blowouts, might as well see what happens if you expand. Plus, I think it makes the regular season more interesting for more teams deeper into the season. Give Byes to the 1-4 seeds and let them host CFP games. Let 5-12 play the 1st round at home stadiums of 5-8 . Let 1-4 host playoff games against the winners of the 5-12 and then play the Final 4 play out the way it has. I think w/ NIL and an expanded CFP it allows more teams to sell the idea of being competitive w/ the usual suspects and actually being able to back it up for once. I honestly think the worst thing for college football is the current NY6 games. Those teams are so close, but they can’t compete for a championship and the draftable guys sit out. It’s bad for the sport.

Without the playoffs the 5-12 group just plays each other in a bowl game. And it's more competitive because they arent facing the top 4 who have generally separated themselves. Utah Ohio State was a great non playoff bowl game that wouldnt have been improved one bit by being in the playoff.

And I dont see how allowing in teams with more losses helps the regular season. It will let Bama, UGA, Ohio State, Clemson, Oklahoma coast through. They would be able to lose a game against a good team and it not matter because it's not a bad loss.

An expanded playoff just ensures that more teams who didnt win their conference or even division, especially with a P2 super conference set up, get into the finals.

 

[KnoxRealtorVOL]

My argument is what’s the difference? If you’re gonna get blowouts, might as well see what happens if you expand. Plus, I think it makes the regular season more interesting for more teams deeper into the season. Give Byes to the 1-4 seeds and let them host CFP games. Let 5-12 play the 1st round at home stadiums of 5-8 . Let 1-4 host playoff games against the winners of the 5-12 and then play the Final 4 play out the way it has. I think w/ NIL and an expanded CFP it allows more teams to sell the idea of being competitive w/ the usual suspects and actually being able to back it up for once. I honestly think the worst thing for college football is the current NY6 games. Those teams are so close, but they can’t compete for a championship and [/B]the draftable guys sit out. It’s bad for the sport[/B].

The bolded is the primary reason why the bowl system needs to end. When key players sit, it’s not even the same team playing anymore.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Without the playoffs the 5-12 group just plays each other in a bowl game. And it's more competitive because they arent facing the top 4 who have generally separated themselves. Utah Ohio State was a great non playoff bowl game that wouldnt have been improved one bit by being in the playoff.

And I dont see how allowing in teams with more losses helps the regular season. It will let Bama, UGA, Ohio State, Clemson, Oklahoma coast through. They would be able to lose a game against a good team and it not matter because it's not a bad loss.

An expanded playoff just ensures that more teams who didnt win their conference or even division, especially with a P2 super conference set up, get into the finals.

The Ohio State vs Utah game was a very good game. That was about the only NY6 game anyone cared about last year. In fact the ratings for college football have steadily declined recently.

Why do teams who only win their conference deserve a chance to go to the CFP? I can’t think of a single other Sport or league that operates in that way. Not one. The game has evolved past playing for just the Rose Bowl. College Football has been hamstrung for so long by guys repping the Rose Bowl or the Sugar Bowl that it’s not going to change over night, but I think that it needs to. These bowl games no longer carry as much clout as they think they do or want to. I’m all for keeping the mid tier games and using it as a reward, but no one is excited to see the 2nd string QB for Pitt take on a Michigan State team that has its best players sitting out too. Pitt should’ve had Kenny Pickett leading them into South Bend to take on #5 Notre Dame for a quarterfinal. Kenneth Walker should’ve been playing in a quarterfinal at Baylor. I think these kind of games combined w/ NIL would eventually create more parity for the CFP. Like i said, I don’t think it’s going to happen overnight, but eventually we’ll run into a different cycle where the 4-5 usual teams will be different and you’ll see more competition.