Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Author Message
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,482
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 111
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #1
Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
It almost made wonder if I need to reconsider my stance on 8 teams but then again I remember my dad told me "Even a blind squirrel will find a nut on occasion"

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...time-soon/
12-05-2017 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Chappy Online
Resident Goonie
*

Posts: 15,731
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 550
I Root For: ECU
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #2
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Quote:Nothing against the Knights, but do the college football stakeholders really want UCF playing for a national championship? History, tradition and the commissioners who created this exclusive club say no.

Collusion.
12-05-2017 03:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Chappy Online
Resident Goonie
*

Posts: 15,731
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 550
I Root For: ECU
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #3
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Let's be honest, the real reason that an 8-team playoff is years away (but I believe it will happen eventually) is the same reason a decade ago the BCS told us a +1 model (the model they currently use) was impossible. Because the people running the CFB postseason must have assurances that they keep the bulk of the $$ and the bulk of the power before it can expand.
12-05-2017 03:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,807
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 488
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #4
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Just saw this and I never thought that I could ever *disagree* more with Dennis Dodd. The only legit argument is about health concerns, except that the powers that be are hypocritical on that point. Every single other argument is a complete artificial straw-man. I'm sick of the whining about a hypothetical "4-loss conference champion making the playoff". IMHO, as long as it was earned 100% completely on-the-field, then that's ALWAYS more equitable than a bunch of old guys sitting in a conference room in Dallas choosing teams based on the eye test. It's not even that a 4-loss P5 champion is even that likely (which isn't in this day and age) - it's that it shouldn't even matter because if you win your conference, that is the ONLY thing that a school (outside of independents) can do that is 100% within its control and ought to be elevated accordingly. Everything else, such as strength of schedule, non-conference games and eye ball test issues are not within anyone's true control. I also don't know where Dodd gets this wacky notion that (a) there somehow can't be P5 champ auto-bids but (b) there MUST a reserved spot for the G5. Absolutely none of that argument made sense whatsoever. I'm sure the G5 fans on this board would like that one... but once again, that makes no sense.

Also, where on Earth do we get the notion that conference championship games would need to be eliminated to have a larger playoff? Are we once again believing the money-grubbing college administrators that they will supposedly refuse to have 2 more teams play one extra week in January for hundreds of millions of more dollars? Really?

ESPN might not *want* to spend more money, but that doesn't mean that it won't spend money to get the highest-rated product available... and I think an 8-team playoff would raise ratings from the regular season through the postseason across the board.

I could go on and on about these issues, but pretty much every argument against an expanded playoff outside of health concerns for the players is an artificial barrier made up in the minds of the powers that be... and such barriers can be removed easily when the price is right. They did it before with the current 4-team playoff system, where the most powerful people in the sport were stating that there would NEVER be an expansion of the BCS just a few months before they suddenly all changed their tunes. When the price is right, all of these immovable barriers suddenly don't look immovable anymore.
12-05-2017 03:11 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,750
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 620
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 03:11 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Just saw this and I never thought that I could ever *disagree* more with Dennis Dodd. The only legit argument is about health concerns, except that the powers that be are hypocritical on that point. Every single other argument is a complete artificial straw-man. I'm sick of the whining about a hypothetical "4-loss conference champion making the playoff". IMHO, as long as it was earned 100% completely on-the-field, then that's ALWAYS more equitable than a bunch of old guys sitting in a conference room in Dallas choosing teams based on the eye test. It's not even that a 4-loss P5 champion is even that likely (which isn't in this day and age) - it's that it shouldn't even matter because if you win your conference, that is the ONLY thing that a school (outside of independents) can do that is 100% within its control and ought to be elevated accordingly. Everything else, such as strength of schedule, non-conference games and eye ball test issues are not within anyone's true control. I also don't know where Dodd gets this wacky notion that (a) there somehow can't be P5 champ auto-bids but (b) there MUST a reserved spot for the G5. Absolutely none of that argument made sense whatsoever. I'm sure the G5 fans on this board would like that one... but once again, that makes no sense.

Also, where on Earth do we get the notion that conference championship games would need to be eliminated to have a larger playoff? Are we once again believing the money-grubbing college administrators that they will supposedly refuse to have 2 more teams play one extra week in January for hundreds of millions of more dollars? Really?

ESPN might not *want* to spend more money, but that doesn't mean that it won't spend money to get the highest-rated product available... and I think an 8-team playoff would raise ratings from the regular season through the postseason across the board.

I could go on and on about these issues, but pretty much every argument against an expanded playoff outside of health concerns for the players is an artificial barrier made up in the minds of the powers that be... and such barriers can be removed easily when the price is right. They did it before with the current 4-team playoff system, where the most powerful people in the sport were stating that there would NEVER be an expansion of the BCS just a few months before they suddenly all changed their tunes. When the price is right, all of these immovable barriers suddenly don't look immovable anymore.

Even the health of the players is a little bit of a bogus issue as every other division, including non-scholarship Division III, has playoffs larger than 8. Many states have 32-64 game playoffs in high school.

And what's wrong with an 8 game playoff including a G5 champ? As far as the autobid, that is one of the biggest reasons for expanding to 8. Champs get autobids in every other NCAA sport.
12-05-2017 03:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,482
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 111
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
The other 4 conferences would be insane not to sue to include all champs. This is why the CFP does not offer auto-bids to the playoffs. The OSU and Bama actually strengthens their argument as to G5 champs be ignored.
12-05-2017 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,807
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 488
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #7
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 03:17 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(12-05-2017 03:11 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Just saw this and I never thought that I could ever *disagree* more with Dennis Dodd. The only legit argument is about health concerns, except that the powers that be are hypocritical on that point. Every single other argument is a complete artificial straw-man. I'm sick of the whining about a hypothetical "4-loss conference champion making the playoff". IMHO, as long as it was earned 100% completely on-the-field, then that's ALWAYS more equitable than a bunch of old guys sitting in a conference room in Dallas choosing teams based on the eye test. It's not even that a 4-loss P5 champion is even that likely (which isn't in this day and age) - it's that it shouldn't even matter because if you win your conference, that is the ONLY thing that a school (outside of independents) can do that is 100% within its control and ought to be elevated accordingly. Everything else, such as strength of schedule, non-conference games and eye ball test issues are not within anyone's true control. I also don't know where Dodd gets this wacky notion that (a) there somehow can't be P5 champ auto-bids but (b) there MUST a reserved spot for the G5. Absolutely none of that argument made sense whatsoever. I'm sure the G5 fans on this board would like that one... but once again, that makes no sense.

Also, where on Earth do we get the notion that conference championship games would need to be eliminated to have a larger playoff? Are we once again believing the money-grubbing college administrators that they will supposedly refuse to have 2 more teams play one extra week in January for hundreds of millions of more dollars? Really?

ESPN might not *want* to spend more money, but that doesn't mean that it won't spend money to get the highest-rated product available... and I think an 8-team playoff would raise ratings from the regular season through the postseason across the board.

I could go on and on about these issues, but pretty much every argument against an expanded playoff outside of health concerns for the players is an artificial barrier made up in the minds of the powers that be... and such barriers can be removed easily when the price is right. They did it before with the current 4-team playoff system, where the most powerful people in the sport were stating that there would NEVER be an expansion of the BCS just a few months before they suddenly all changed their tunes. When the price is right, all of these immovable barriers suddenly don't look immovable anymore.

Even the health of the players is a little bit of a bogus issue as every other division, including non-scholarship Division III, has playoffs larger than 8. Many states have 32-64 game playoffs in high school.

And what's wrong with an 8 game playoff including a G5 champ? As far as the autobid, that is one of the biggest reasons for expanding to 8. Champs get autobids in every other NCAA sport.

Yes, exactly. That's what I mean by the powers that be being hypocritical on the health issue. They say that they care, but then take actions that show that they really don't care.

Also agree where I'm all for the 8-team playoff with P5 auto-bids (or contracts to be more legally appropriate) plus the top G5 champ. Dodd's argument was simply strange where he said that an 8-team playoff could allow for the P5 to get auto-bids yet there would need to be one spot reserved for the G5. So, effectively 7 at-large spots plus 1 *G5* spot? I have no idea where that came from.
12-05-2017 03:32 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 9,002
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 298
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Bad column.

1. ESPN isn't in a spending mood. This is true. But you can just as easily look at it this way--ESPN might demand 2 more games (the semifinals after the bowls) or they reduce the value of the next contract.

"Imagine Cincinnati playing Wisconsin in a quarterfinal game in mid-December. " Well, we're presumably talking about Cincinnati that is the top-ranked G5 champion playing a Wisconsin team that either won the Big Ten or got one of two at-large spots. So that game would do just fine on TV.

2. Health concerns. True, but that has never mattered yet, and adding two extra football games a year won't make much difference.

3. Who said anything about FCS?

4. He dismisses the idea of autobids. Nonsense. "What if your 8-4 division winner wins the CCG and knocks your 12-0 best team out?" Well, then the conference champion gets in, as the 7 or 8 seed depending on who the G5 sends. And either the 12-1 team gets in as one of the two wildcards, or they don't because they lost a de facto playoff game. 6 autobids (5 P5, 1 G5) and 2 wildcards is very doable.

5. "In that scenario, Alabama and Ohio State -- claiming a combined 24 national championships -- would meet in the first round." So freaking what? Ohio State is playing USC in the Cotton Bowl. It happens.

6. "Nothing against the Knights, but do the college football stakeholders really want UCF playing for a national championship? History, tradition and the commissioners who created this exclusive club say no." I believe that The Powers That Be wouldn't be happy about it. But there is also a track record of TPTB making concessions to pacify the have-nots. And this is a situation where I don't know that the G5 can afford to take a lesser concession--if you think the Peach/Cotton/Fiesta Access Bowl is a "disappointment game" for the P5 team, wait until it's competing with 4 CFP quarterfinal games in the other major bowls..
12-05-2017 03:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 9,002
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 298
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 03:07 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Let's be honest, the real reason that an 8-team playoff is years away (but I believe it will happen eventually) is the same reason a decade ago the BCS told us a +1 model (the model they currently use) was impossible. Because the people running the CFB postseason must have assurances that they keep the bulk of the $$ and the bulk of the power before it can expand.

This. Going from bowls to a 4-team playoff was a huge step. They have a golden goose, and they want to be very careful about what they feed it and how they treat it.
12-05-2017 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,796
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 97
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #10
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Frank,

The lack of logic, or wild conclusion of Dennis Dodd, should not be surprising. While many here note (and more on twitter) how generally less than intelligent Dodd is, the same can be said for nearly every sportswriter and broadcaster. A few at least have some logic pattern in their thinking and a few have some brights, but it's not a very intelligent group on the whole, compared to say a room full of Engineers, Doctors or Lawyers, and they lack the thought process of businessmen. Hence they are always surprised by off field decisions.

Consider who goes into the field, it's not the best and brightest. In the SF Bay Area a political hack like Monte Pool is considered intelligent, because his fellow sports reporters cannot tell the difference between Democratic Party talking points and actual considered thought. This is the norm. You expect too much if you expect logic from these folks. Heck most of them think G5 football schools make money. They have no clue how much those programs are subsidized via tax dollars indirectly.

Now to the subject on hand. I agree on the 5 P5 champions, I am less thrilled with the G5 getting a bid. I think they should be in the pool to consider, but should not automatically be in one of those three slots. This Year UCF and I think that 2004 Boise State team I'd be fine with. But others like WMU last year ... no. Perhaps a top 15 or top 12 ranking would be required.

The biggest problem I see is the semi-final games. Getting decent turnout almost forces on campus. but you don't want a game in Ann Arbor. I'd suggest for northern schools the nearest NFL Dome (Lions for the Michigan schools, Lucas Oil for most of the B1G; Jerry world can serve for Texas and Oklahoma teams that advance from B12; P12 North schools perhaps Levi Stadium and so on).

But going to 8 would actually make the Conference Championships matter. Note, I'd also add a rule that for a non-P5 champion they must play 10 P5 games to qualify. The G5 obviously exempt, as a different criteria would be used to select them.

Oh, my early favorite for G5 access next year is Florida Atlantic -- they have the coach and most of their players coming back, should run the CUSA table again, but need to win 3 OOC games, which I think they will.
12-05-2017 03:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,241
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1050
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
Dodd makes this absolutely ridiculous argument--

It cannot be five Power Five conference winners plus three at-large for the same reason the CFP doesn't automatically pick conference winners. You don't want your 8-4 division winner beating a 12-0 division winner and knocking your best team out of the playoff. Plus, expansion would introduce another layer of mediocrity. Do we really want a three-loss team winning a national championship? That might be the case this season if you consider Auburn (10-3) might have had entree into this year's eight-team field.

First--if the 8-3 team beats Mr 12-0, maybe Mr 12-0 isnt as good as you thought. Isnt that why teams that lose usually move down in the rankings?

Second--For hundreth time--if your not going to count the results you dont like, why play the games at all?

Third--We have accepted the concept that flawed teams can in fact, despite their flaws, defeat teams that are "better" on paper in every sport. Hell, we even are ok with it in football for the entire year and in the playoffs. For some unknown reason, we seem convinced that the college football playoffs will lose something if it becomes less of a beauty contest and more of an actual playoff. Again, I ask--why play the games. Are we actually afraid the outcomes might not match your expectations? Why not assemble a bunch of experts in September and simply look for the best, most impressive rosters, and declare the best most impressive roster the FBS champion. Saves all the trouble and travel expense for those messy games--plus it would solve the football concussions issue.

Fourth-If you have 5 P5 champs AQ and the top G5 AQ---you still have 2 wildcards left. The 12-0 team Dodd is terrified might lose in the conference final will get one of those 2 slots in the two team beauty contest he is afraid might vanish. Rejoice---the beauty contest aspect is retained. In fact, isnt a two team beauty contest the way we crowned a champ for the entire BCS era?


Fifth--I thought college football was special because every game matters. UCF payed 12 games that apparently dont matter. Well--thats just the G5 you say. "The G5 never matters." Ok then---what about the Big10 and Pac12. The Big10 and Pac12 just played an entire conference schedule plus two CCG's that didnt matter. Make the regular season and conference races matter. Make conference championships matter.

Finally, we really dont have any idea how many times the real NCAA champ has been eliminated on Selection Sunday. In the CFP 4-team format, the VERY FIRST YEAR--a 4 seed won the national championship. How many times might this have been the result in past years before there were 4 teams? In fact, how many times might the 5th, 6th, 7th, or 8th seed had won if given the opportunity? My guess is---probably more than you might expect.
(This post was last modified: 12-05-2017 05:28 PM by Attackcoog.)
12-05-2017 03:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,808
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 346
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #12
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 03:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Frank,

The lack of logic, or wild conclusion of Dennis Dodd, should not be surprising. While many here note (and more on twitter) how generally less than intelligent Dodd is, the same can be said for nearly every sportswriter and broadcaster. A few at least have some logic pattern in their thinking and a few have some brights, but it's not a very intelligent group on the whole, compared to say a room full of Engineers, Doctors or Lawyers, and they lack the thought process of businessmen. Hence they are always surprised by off field decisions.

Consider who goes into the field, it's not the best and brightest. In the SF Bay Area a political hack like Monte Pool is considered intelligent, because his fellow sports reporters cannot tell the difference between Democratic Party talking points and actual considered thought. This is the norm. You expect too much if you expect logic from these folks. Heck most of them think G5 football schools make money. They have no clue how much those programs are subsidized via tax dollars indirectly.

Now to the subject on hand. I agree on the 5 P5 champions, I am less thrilled with the G5 getting a bid. I think they should be in the pool to consider, but should not automatically be in one of those three slots. This Year UCF and I think that 2004 Boise State team I'd be fine with. But others like WMU last year ... no. Perhaps a top 15 or top 12 ranking would be required.

The biggest problem I see is the semi-final games. Getting decent turnout almost forces on campus. but you don't want a game in Ann Arbor. I'd suggest for northern schools the nearest NFL Dome (Lions for the Michigan schools, Lucas Oil for most of the B1G; Jerry world can serve for Texas and Oklahoma teams that advance from B12; P12 North schools perhaps Levi Stadium and so on).

But going to 8 would actually make the Conference Championships matter. Note, I'd also add a rule that for a non-P5 champion they must play 10 P5 games to qualify. The G5 obviously exempt, as a different criteria would be used to select them.

Oh, my early favorite for G5 access next year is Florida Atlantic -- they have the coach and most of their players coming back, should run the CUSA table again, but need to win 3 OOC games, which I think they will.

Considering they have Oklahoma and UCF on the road next year, that's a tall order. If they pull it off, I guess they will deserve it.
12-05-2017 04:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 22,044
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 647
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
ESPN may not be in a spending mood and may encourage the CFP to keep the current model through 2025 but 2026 barring apocalypse is going to arrive eventually and there will be a college football season and some manner of maximizing revenue via a post-season event.

An 8 team playoff will be a major event that features seven high value football games that someone is going to want the media rights to.

Division II had a 28 team field and three bowls for non-playoff teams. NW Missouri played 15 games with about 1/3rd of the scholarships of Alabama. Division III has a 32 team playoff with no scholarship players (though they play a shorter regular season).

Anyone who was paying attention knows the 12 game season was created as a poison pill to kill playoff talk.

If anyone has GENIUNE concern for player health they can step up and call for an 11 game season and a 16 team playoff with every conference receiving an auto bid.

As it stands barring cancellations 130 schools will play 12 games and at least 78 will play 13, and starting next year at least 20 will play 14 and we may have a couple go 15.

Cut the season back to 11 games. 20 will play 12 thanks to conference title games. The playoff will have at least 10 who played 12 and 0 to 6 more who played 12. Assuming only conference title game participants advance then you will have two schools play 16, two more end at 15, four more end at 14. So two more schools play one more game than currently but overall fewer games are played total by a significant amount.
12-05-2017 04:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 9,002
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 298
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 03:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Frank,

The lack of logic, or wild conclusion of Dennis Dodd, should not be surprising. While many here note (and more on twitter) how generally less than intelligent Dodd is, the same can be said for nearly every sportswriter and broadcaster.

Dodd is good at having sources and having sources tell him things. This column was, not that. Moving on.

Quote:Hence they are always surprised by off field decisions.

Quote:Now to the subject on hand. I agree on the 5 P5 champions, I am less thrilled with the G5 getting a bid. I think they should be in the pool to consider, but should not automatically be in one of those three slots. This Year UCF and I think that 2004 Boise State team I'd be fine with. But others like WMU last year ... no. Perhaps a top 15 or top 12 ranking would be required.

Now you're being surprised by off-the-field decisions. The G5 isn't going to agree to sit quietly and approve this if they get LESS than they have now, which is 1 bid out of however many there are. They can't face their stakeholders and say "well we got X" when X is clearly less than what they have now.

Quote:The biggest problem I see is the semi-final games.

I agree. If you're relying on fans, you're talking about a trip to the CCG, to the New Years' quarterfinal, and adding a semifinal. I'd expect the semifinal and quarterfinal sites to rotate in the 6 New Years Bowls (2 bowls "double-host" much like the old BCS), so it's a known destination.

Will the schools be able to sell out their ticket allotments for 4 road trips? PRobably, but that's a concern.
12-05-2017 04:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,807
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 488
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #15
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 04:49 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(12-05-2017 03:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Frank,

The lack of logic, or wild conclusion of Dennis Dodd, should not be surprising. While many here note (and more on twitter) how generally less than intelligent Dodd is, the same can be said for nearly every sportswriter and broadcaster.

Dodd is good at having sources and having sources tell him things. This column was, not that. Moving on.

Quote:Hence they are always surprised by off field decisions.

Quote:Now to the subject on hand. I agree on the 5 P5 champions, I am less thrilled with the G5 getting a bid. I think they should be in the pool to consider, but should not automatically be in one of those three slots. This Year UCF and I think that 2004 Boise State team I'd be fine with. But others like WMU last year ... no. Perhaps a top 15 or top 12 ranking would be required.

Now you're being surprised by off-the-field decisions. The G5 isn't going to agree to sit quietly and approve this if they get LESS than they have now, which is 1 bid out of however many there are. They can't face their stakeholders and say "well we got X" when X is clearly less than what they have now.

Quote:The biggest problem I see is the semi-final games.

I agree. If you're relying on fans, you're talking about a trip to the CCG, to the New Years' quarterfinal, and adding a semifinal. I'd expect the semifinal and quarterfinal sites to rotate in the 6 New Years Bowls (2 bowls "double-host" much like the old BCS), so it's a known destination.

Will the schools be able to sell out their ticket allotments for 4 road trips? PRobably, but that's a concern.

In my perfect world, the bowls would host the quarterfinals on/around New Years. Then, the *semifinals* would be on-campus games at the two highest ranked remaining teams. That gives every playoff participant a bowl trip and provides a true home field advantage to the two highest ranked opponents in the semifinal round (which is a big-time incentive to get as high of a ranking as you can plus reduces travel fatigue). There are some logistical concerns with that type of format (e.g. winterized Northern stadiums), but I like that format more than making the first round into on-campus games (because maybe it's just me, but I can't stand the thought of having the "reward" for the very best elite teams of being a December road trip to a place like Tuscaloosa while inferior teams get to go to LA, Miami or Orlando for New Years).
12-05-2017 05:16 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,254
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 126
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
There were no haves and have nots in choosing a champ. You had champs and co-champs of schools that are not part of the P5. You had Army, Rice, SMU, BYU and the Ivy League teams, plus you do had co-champs of schools that are now FCS, D2 and D3 now. The P5 have been created by ESPN since the late 1980s. It shows that even big names do not mean that they are big names today like Miami Florida. LSU, Nebraska and Texas also lost the gleam in recent years, and so have Colorado, USC, UCLA and Washington. Right now, people are tired of seeing Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Clemson in the playoffs every year it seems. You can tell the ratings drop each year when it is the same teams get in every year.
12-05-2017 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,191
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 882
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 05:16 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(12-05-2017 04:49 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(12-05-2017 03:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Frank,

The lack of logic, or wild conclusion of Dennis Dodd, should not be surprising. While many here note (and more on twitter) how generally less than intelligent Dodd is, the same can be said for nearly every sportswriter and broadcaster.

Dodd is good at having sources and having sources tell him things. This column was, not that. Moving on.

Quote:Hence they are always surprised by off field decisions.

Quote:Now to the subject on hand. I agree on the 5 P5 champions, I am less thrilled with the G5 getting a bid. I think they should be in the pool to consider, but should not automatically be in one of those three slots. This Year UCF and I think that 2004 Boise State team I'd be fine with. But others like WMU last year ... no. Perhaps a top 15 or top 12 ranking would be required.

Now you're being surprised by off-the-field decisions. The G5 isn't going to agree to sit quietly and approve this if they get LESS than they have now, which is 1 bid out of however many there are. They can't face their stakeholders and say "well we got X" when X is clearly less than what they have now.

Quote:The biggest problem I see is the semi-final games.

I agree. If you're relying on fans, you're talking about a trip to the CCG, to the New Years' quarterfinal, and adding a semifinal. I'd expect the semifinal and quarterfinal sites to rotate in the 6 New Years Bowls (2 bowls "double-host" much like the old BCS), so it's a known destination.

Will the schools be able to sell out their ticket allotments for 4 road trips? PRobably, but that's a concern.

In my perfect world, the bowls would host the quarterfinals on/around New Years. Then, the *semifinals* would be on-campus games at the two highest ranked remaining teams. That gives every playoff participant a bowl trip and provides a true home field advantage to the two highest ranked opponents in the semifinal round (which is a big-time incentive to get as high of a ranking as you can plus reduces travel fatigue). There are some logistical concerns with that type of format (e.g. winterized Northern stadiums), but I like that format more than making the first round into on-campus games (because maybe it's just me, but I can't stand the thought of having the "reward" for the very best elite teams of being a December road trip to a place like Tuscaloosa while inferior teams get to go to LA, Miami or Orlando for New Years).

What's the matter Frank? Tuscaloosa is great.............


.....when compared to Starkville or Fayetteville!03-wink
12-05-2017 06:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,745
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 228
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 03:55 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  This Year UCF and I think that 2004 Boise State team I'd be fine with. But others like WMU last year ... no. Perhaps a top 15 or top 12 ranking would be required.

That simply means the new high for G5 is 17 to 20
12-05-2017 06:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 13,646
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 439
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #19
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
cbssports . com? L-O-L.

Just gonna leave this here...

CBS Sports "Accidentally" Plagiarized SB Nation Posts Due To "Technical Issue"

Quote:CBS Sports has blamed a “technical issue” for scraping blogs from various SB Nation team sites and posting them in full on its website with no attribution, according to a statement from CBS Sports Digital to Deadspin.

The confusion began last week and grew today, when SB Nation writers posted on Twitter about the apparent plagiarism. Other Twitter users wondered if SB Nation had some sort of content-sharing deal with CBS Sports.
Quote:The CBS spokeswoman did not respond to a followup email asking for specifics on the technical issue.
12-05-2017 06:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,191
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 882
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Never thought I ever agree with Dennis Dodd
(12-05-2017 06:28 PM)Wedge Wrote:  cbssports . com? L-O-L.

Just gonna leave this here...

CBS Sports "Accidentally" Plagiarized SB Nation Posts Due To "Technical Issue"

Quote:CBS Sports has blamed a “technical issue” for scraping blogs from various SB Nation team sites and posting them in full on its website with no attribution, according to a statement from CBS Sports Digital to Deadspin.

The confusion began last week and grew today, when SB Nation writers posted on Twitter about the apparent plagiarism. Other Twitter users wondered if SB Nation had some sort of content-sharing deal with CBS Sports.
Quote:The CBS spokeswoman did not respond to a followup email asking for specifics on the technical issue.

C.B.S. must now stand for the Columbia Borrowing System!
12-05-2017 06:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.