The playoff is way better than what we had before....BCS, Bowl Coalition, AP Poll...
Also, what took the Big 10 so long to get a championship game??? The Big 10 champ game has been a tremendous success
(12-06-2015 12:26 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ]Also, what took the Big 10 so long to get a championship game??? The Big 10 champ game has been a tremendous success
Obsession with getting Notre Dame before Nebraska became available.
There wasn't a right team to expand to 12 with.
And yes, the playoff is great. But it's just the next step in the evolution of the major college football postseason.
Yes the CFP is great. It really lets you see multiple conference champs play each other for bragging rights.
Not to me. The same failures that we had with the BCS are the same failures we have with the playoff. Which is limited access.
(12-06-2015 12:26 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ]The playoff is way better than what we had before....BCS, Bowl Coalition, AP Poll...
Also, what took the Big 10 so long to get a championship game??? The Big 10 champ game has been a tremendous success
And this year, my preferred/predicted system, the old-fashioned bowls plus-one, would be significantly worse than what we have.
We'd have had
Rose: Stanford vs Michigan State
Sugar: Alabama vs Oklahoma
Orange: Clemson vs Iowa?, Ohio State?, Notre Dame?
Assuming that the favorites win, there's a huge uproar as to who gets left out--Clemson, Alabama or Michigan STate.
(12-06-2015 01:17 PM)hawghiggs Wrote: [ -> ]Not to me. The same failures that we had with the BCS are the same failures we have with the playoff. Which is limited access.
Well, there's twice as much access, so, :shrug:
When all conference champs have access then we win have a true playoff for the National Championship.
(12-06-2015 01:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]When all conference champs have access then we win have a true playoff for the National Championship.
We'd end up with the same 4 teams....
(12-06-2015 01:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 01:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]When all conference champs have access then we win have a true playoff for the National Championship.
We'd end up with the same 4 teams....
but people would at least all have a chance, which they do not now.
This is my old guy, obligatory post stating a desire to completely scrap the playoff and go back to the "mythical national champion" days when the polls determined their own champion and people got to argue why their team was most worthy.
(12-06-2015 01:24 PM)johnbragg Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 12:26 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ]The playoff is way better than what we had before....BCS, Bowl Coalition, AP Poll...
Also, what took the Big 10 so long to get a championship game??? The Big 10 champ game has been a tremendous success
And this year, my preferred/predicted system, the old-fashioned bowls plus-one, would be significantly worse than what we have.
We'd have had
Rose: Stanford vs Michigan State
Sugar: Alabama vs Oklahoma
Orange: Clemson vs Iowa?, Ohio State?, Notre Dame?
Assuming that the favorites win, there's a huge uproar as to who gets left out--Clemson, Alabama or Michigan STate.
Your point is right ... but I think that scenario would've worked out, because Ohio St or Iowa would beat Clemson.
The winners of Rose and Sugar would be in the plus one, then.
(12-06-2015 02:59 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote: [ -> ]This is my old guy, obligatory post stating a desire to completely scrap the playoff and go back to the "mythical national champion" days when the polls determined their own champion and people got to argue why their team was most worthy.
I completely agree. It was much better when we could all argue without knowing for sure. I'm sure the schools liked it better too - a lot more schools could tell their alumni that they had a successful season.
And I'm in my early 30s, not exactly an old fart.
(12-06-2015 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 01:17 PM)hawghiggs Wrote: [ -> ]Not to me. The same failures that we had with the BCS are the same failures we have with the playoff. Which is limited access.
Well, there's twice as much access, so, :shrug:
...and it's still limited.
Limited access = exclusive access = exciting games throughout the season.
(12-06-2015 03:34 PM)RUScarlets Wrote: [ -> ]Limited access = exclusive access = exciting games throughout the season.
typical p5 snobbery = exclusionary = scrap the whole thing and start over = access for all
(12-06-2015 03:38 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 03:34 PM)RUScarlets Wrote: [ -> ]Limited access = exclusive access = exciting games throughout the season.
typical p5 snobbery = exclusionary = scrap the whole thing and start over = access for all
Every G5 conference signed onto the CFP.
(12-06-2015 03:43 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 03:38 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 03:34 PM)RUScarlets Wrote: [ -> ]Limited access = exclusive access = exciting games throughout the season.
typical p5 snobbery = exclusionary = scrap the whole thing and start over = access for all
Every G5 conference signed onto the CFP.
With a proverbial gun to the head!!
(12-06-2015 03:44 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 03:43 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 03:38 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2015 03:34 PM)RUScarlets Wrote: [ -> ]Limited access = exclusive access = exciting games throughout the season.
typical p5 snobbery = exclusionary = scrap the whole thing and start over = access for all
Every G5 conference signed onto the CFP.
With a proverbial gun to the head!!
What? If by gun, you mean wads of cash in their pockets. Then yes.
a system where 0 out of 128 teams have a chance of playing for a championship without the approval of a corrupt group of people who care about TV ratings more than QB ratings and you're celebrating this?
CFP is a sham.