Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,263
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #1
Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
Saw this article today:

Dennis Dodd says there won't be an 8 team CFP anytime soon

I'm going to preface this with saying I'm not exactly sure how the powers that be are going to pull this off. I have some theories on that, but I'm not 100% certain.

I'll also say that the CFP expansion to 8 won't occur next year or anything so some of this depends on what exactly Dodd means by "anytime soon."

1. Dodd's first point is that ESPN isn't exactly in a spending mood. Technically, that's correct. ESPN is laying off a few more people and it probably won't be the last time they do it. That and the cable industry is suffering from cord-cutting.

I'll be fair here and say that Dodd wrote this article today before news came out that Disney was looking at purchasing Fox's system of RSNs. If that doesn't scream "we're ready to invest in more sports" then I don't know what does.

But even before Dodd wrote this article, he should have been cognizant of that the fact that Disney did just lay the groundwork for an ESPN streaming service. Don't think ESPN is about to fade into the night. What they'll do is what any strong business does and adapt to the marketplace. Cable and satellite subs will likely be around for some time yet, but slowly and surely ESPN is going to start making money from their OTT service. And I'd still be a little surprised if Disney didn't eventually bundle their movie and TV package with ESPN on the streaming side. They'd probably make more money that way although they may take a while to experiment with other approaches. After all, the technology is still fairly new and the market isn't anywhere close to being cornered yet. If anyone was going to corner it, it'd be Disney. There's plenty of time for experimentation.

Point being this, content ultimately pays the bills for any network and especially a sports network. Adding another round to the playoff would be a guaranteed money maker compared to some of the other things ESPN invests their time in. I have a very hard time believing they wouldn't be interested in it.

2. Dodd references health concerns. This is probably his strongest point, but don't underestimate the creativity of the powers that be when it comes to making adjustments.

I alluded earlier that I have some theories on how administrators could pull off an expanded playoff. We saw one of those ways earlier this season. Week Zero...

From SI

A quirk in the NCAA rules allowed teams playing Hawaii to go ahead and schedule their season openers a week before everyone else. Stanford and Rice were given a waiver, as far as I can tell, to play that week in Australia due to the excessive travel. And there you had several FBS schools playing during Week Zero. I have a hard time believe there was no coordination of this whatsoever at a higher level...that this wasn't some sort of experiment. I would bet a large number of administrators and execs were looking to see how this played out.

How hard would it be for the NCAA to alter their rules a little bit and give everyone that extra week to start their season? You think the networks would be interested in getting an extra week of a high performing sport if for no other reason than they could spread out their offerings and get a little more bang for their buck? What would it communicate to those concerned with health if college football was proactive and went back to a setup that allowed everyone to get 2 BYE weeks again?

Not to mention, college athletes are probably about to start getting much better insurance and other benefits added to their scholarship package.

3. Dodd references the FCS argument...the idea that other divisions play a lot of playoff games and so why couldn't FBS do the same?

Well, he's half right. FBS isn't about to cut back on the regular season and they won't get rid of the conference championship games...too much money in both of those endeavors.

But we're not talking about adding multiple rounds here. We're talking about adding 1 round or 4 additional teams to the mix. Not all of these schools will have even played a CCG. Only 2 of them at most will play a 16th game.

It's true that pro careers could be on the line here, but they're already on the line every week. It's a physical game. They were on the line when we talked about creating a playoff in the first place. All of these arguments existed prior to the current setup. What prompted change? I'll get into that in a little bit.

4. His next point is the most non-sensical.

Quote:An eight-team playoff doesn't necessarily solve anything: It has to be the seven best teams plus an automatic spot for the best of the Group of Five. 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.

No, no, and more no.

First of all, the G5 isn't even in this discussion. One of the primary reasons for that is that they'll end up with their own playoff before it's all said and done.

Secondly and most importantly, there is no mechanism outside of political pressure to force administrators to include a single G5 school in any circumstance. That pressure won't come into play as long as a committee has discretion over who to pick. While I'd love a P4 with conference champions admitted, it won't happen because the politicos will have an argument that a strong G5 has no access at that point. Well, the G5 doesn't actually need access. They just need the illusion of access. That means we need a committee to choose teams based on an indeterminate criteria. We can't have conference champions being automatically admitted if there are only 4 spots.

Point being this, we'll end up expanding to 8 so that all 5 conferences get their champion in. The lack of exposure and revenue will drive administrators to want more guarantees. The guarantees will come in the form of auto-bids for the Power 5. This is why getting 2 SEC teams into the CFP this year could be so important. Remember, it was the all SEC BCS Championship game in 2011 that ultimately gave us the CFP in the first place. At this point, I really believe 2 conferences being left out of the CFP will give us an expansion.

Once the P5 administrators have their guarantees then it will be up to the committee to more subjectively choose 3 additional participants. This will give deserving teams a shot at redemption and boost the ratings for networks. At the same time, it will give the G5 an opportunity to state their case. Now who knows, maybe once in a blue moon an exceptional G5 team will get in if there's really not a good option at the P5 level to fill out that 8th spot...it could create some drama. But it won't happen often if ever. The important part is that the illusion of access will exist and that will ensure the politicos stay off the backs of administrators. Plus, all the Power schools really have to do is funnel a little cash back to the G5s. Give some of that CFP pot to the G5 as you're already doing. That's another reason we won't see a reduction in the regular season. We might, however, see a banning of FCS games because that would mean more money games for the G5 and that sort of move could grease the wheels a little bit.

As to Dodd's point about introducing another level of mediocrity, he clearly hasn't checked on anybody's bank account. This isn't about preventing mediocrity or ensuring excellence. This is about selling a product to the masses for a lot of extra cash. Now, I do believe that going beyond 8 would start to produce diminishing returns so I don't expect to ever see that happen, but 8 teams will be fervently watched by all regions of the country. That's the point. Any team that could conceivably have an argument that they could win a national title will be in. Every Power conference will have at least one representative. There will still be plenty of drama over who is left out and who gets picked. The regular season will matter just as much as it does now. Schools win and networks win.
12-06-2017 06:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,458
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 76
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
Please skip 8 team playoffs and go straight to 64 teams as bothbwill just ruin the one thing that makes college football great; a meaningful regular season
12-06-2017 08:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,926
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 73
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
5+1+2 is perfect. This year we'd have something like:

Wisconsin @ Clemson
Ohio State @ Alabama

Southern Cal @ UGA
UCF @ Oklahoma

This really doesn't cheapen the regular season at all. The G5 becomes more important as games like USF/UCF, Fresno/Boise, and Memphis/UCF suddenly have huge playoff implications. The Pac 12 title game suddenly determines a playoff spot. The ACC and SEC championship games still are de facto play in games and don't lose any significance. The only game that loses some importance is the Big Ten Championship games as Wisconsin is probably guaranteed in either way.

If "playing too many games" is suddenly a factor to the powers that be then shorten the season to 11 games and remove the FCS games. Rivalry weekend the week before thanksgiving, CCGs the week after, Heisman ceremony the first week in December, and First Round games the week before Christmas.
12-06-2017 08:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,458
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 76
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
ABC is still griping about the ratings for the playoffs on new year’s eve. I understand most viewers are out at parties watching football instead of being at their individual homes getting the numbers up, but for a long evening of drinking and hanging out with strangers, these two football games gets the guys chatting about something. I remember the party I went to had about a dozen guys watching the Alabama game. Young to old.
12-06-2017 08:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
The Big 10, SEC, PAC and even the ACC are against expanding the season further. There is no motivation by any of the University presidents anywhere for the addition of another game to the season. The possibility of replacing Spring Games with a preseason game might be there, but the answer will be a resounding no to the rest of it.

In that much Dodd is correct. This hogwash about expanding to 8 is not only resisted by AD's, presidents, and commissioners, the very idea of it is repulsive to them. Not to mention that basketball in December is already under terrific stress as far as crowd support goes.

Nobody in football wants to diminish the regular season. Why? That's where the gate is. They may replace G5 & FCS games with P5 games, but they aren't adding another potential game to the schedule period.

So I'm sorry guys, and don't mean to be a killjoy but there is no support among college officials of any kind to expand the playoffs.

The tournament has made the basketball regular season all but meaningless. Schedule three dozen games roughly and if you win 20 of them you've got a shot to be in a field of 66 teams. Then you win by process of elimination, not by being the best at anything consistently.

The past 2 years two of the teams in the 4 team CFP have failed to be competitive. Maybe this year will be different, maybe. I say that because the two strongest teams are paired in the first round and the two weaker teams are paired in the first round IMO.

Alabama lost to Auburn in part because of injuries. Auburn lost to Georgia the 2nd time around mostly because of injuries. Hello? Are any of you paying attention to that! Add that extra game and you cut significantly into the recuperation period that we now have between conference championships and the playoffs.

It's simply a no go and it's not even close to being a consideration.
(This post was last modified: 12-06-2017 12:26 PM by JRsec.)
12-06-2017 10:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 08:55 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  ABC is still griping about the ratings for the playoffs on new year’s eve. I understand most viewers are out at parties watching football instead of being at their individual homes getting the numbers up, but for a long evening of drinking and hanging out with strangers, these two football games gets the guys chatting about something. I remember the party I went to had about a dozen guys watching the Alabama game. Young to old.

For my generation New Year's Eve was for the sweetheart when I was single and a dedicated night to wife when I was married. I never wanted football on New Year's Eve and those were usually the only bowl games I wouldn't watch.

I was more into roulette with friends, champagne, and the babe on my arm. The last thing I want / or wanted to do on New Year's Eve was hang out with the hard-tails and watch football.
12-06-2017 12:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,458
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 76
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 12:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 08:55 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  ABC is still griping about the ratings for the playoffs on new year’s eve. I understand most viewers are out at parties watching football instead of being at their individual homes getting the numbers up, but for a long evening of drinking and hanging out with strangers, these two football games gets the guys chatting about something. I remember the party I went to had about a dozen guys watching the Alabama game. Young to old.

For my generation New Year's Eve was for the sweetheart when I was single and a dedicated night to wife when I was married. I never wanted football on New Year's Eve and those were usually the only bowl games I wouldn't watch.

I was more into roulette with friends, champagne, and the babe on my arm. The last thing I want / or wanted to do on New Year's Eve was hang out with the hard-tails and watch football.

Depends what kind of party you want to go to. Having kids changes plans.
12-06-2017 01:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 01:41 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 12:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 08:55 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  ABC is still griping about the ratings for the playoffs on new year’s eve. I understand most viewers are out at parties watching football instead of being at their individual homes getting the numbers up, but for a long evening of drinking and hanging out with strangers, these two football games gets the guys chatting about something. I remember the party I went to had about a dozen guys watching the Alabama game. Young to old.

For my generation New Year's Eve was for the sweetheart when I was single and a dedicated night to wife when I was married. I never wanted football on New Year's Eve and those were usually the only bowl games I wouldn't watch.

I was more into roulette with friends, champagne, and the babe on my arm. The last thing I want / or wanted to do on New Year's Eve was hang out with the hard-tails and watch football.

Depends what kind of party you want to go to. Having kids changes plans.

I had them, grandkids too! The solution is called a babysitter and on that night she keeps them at her place and is paid well to do it. Now it's just me and Mrs. so that time has past too. Now the trick is to have a drink and a nice evening, but we do waste about half of the bottle of champagne.
12-06-2017 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,263
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 10:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The Big 10, SEC, PAC and even the ACC are against expanding the season further. There is no motivation by any of the University presidents anywhere for the addition of another game to the season. The possibility of replacing Spring Games with a preseason game might be there, but the answer will be a resounding no to the rest of it.

In that much Dodd is correct. This hogwash about expanding to 8 is not only resisted by AD's, presidents, and commissioners, the very idea of it is repulsive to them. Not to mention that basketball in December is already under terrific stress as far as crowd support goes.

Nobody in football wants to diminish the regular season. Why? That's where the gate is. They may replace G5 & FCS games with P5 games, but they aren't adding another potential game to the schedule period.

So I'm sorry guys, and don't mean to be a killjoy but there is no support among college officials of any kind to expand the playoffs.

The tournament has made the basketball regular season all but meaningless. Schedule three dozen games roughly and if you win 20 of them you've got a shot to be in a field of 66 teams. Then you win by process of elimination, not by being the best at anything consistently.

The past 2 years two of the teams in the 4 team CFP have failed to be competitive. Maybe this year will be different, maybe. I say that because the two strongest teams are paired in the first round and the two weaker teams are paired in the first round IMO.

Alabama lost to Auburn in part because of injuries. Auburn lost to Georgia the 2nd time around mostly because of injuries. Hello? Are any of you paying attention to that! Add that extra game and you cut significantly into the recuperation period that we now have between conference championships and the playoffs.

It's simply a no go and it's not even close to being a consideration.

I can completely buy that administrators weren't interested up until this point. But if the prospect of consistently being left out arises then that could change minds.

There used to be a lot of resistance to any form of playoff whatsoever and then the dynamics changed. I'm not saying everybody will be on board with it, but I have to believe there are a lot of individuals today who are starting to think about a world where their conference gets consistently left out in exchange for multiple reps from one league or another...or in a situation where Notre Dame gets in perhaps. This sort of dynamic alone was enough to weaken support for maintaining the Big 12 from within its own ranks.

There are a variety of creative ways to handling these issues. The key will be administrators who think outside the box a little bit.

1. Starting the season earlier and utilizing what is now Week Zero. It's a simple adjustment and you won't have to worry about winter weather keeping people from games.

2. If we're going to play FCS or G5 teams then they could utilize the Spring game and get some gate out of that. I'm sure fans would love to have a decent competitive match-up in the middle of the offseason.

3. So if you start the regular season earlier and remove one game from the latter part of the season and move it to the Spring then that starts to free up some space. Everybody can play 11 games and get 2 BYE weeks during the season. Then we could play the conference championship games during Thanksgiving weekend instead of the first Saturday in December.

4. I completely understand the concern about the need for a recuperation period, but this is also a reason against playing an all P5 schedule. Removing a few cupcakes and everyone playing 12 tough games will lead to more injuries.

5. If they want to add another round then everyone gets roughly one month off before you start the round of 8.

Heck, they could make some of these adjustments anyway even if they don't add a round to the playoffs.
12-06-2017 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,263
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
All in all, the problem with comparing an 8 team football playoff to the current NCAA basketball tournament is that the scales are wildly different. There are now 68 teams in the basketball tournament. Every conference that most people have never even heard of will get an auto-bid.

What we're talking about in football is an additional 4 teams. Enough to guarantee that each Power conference has 1 representative. Any additional teams will have had to have excellent seasons or they won't be picked.

The value of the regular season won't be diminished at all. It will be increased actually because each Power conference race will produce one entrant automatically. That's a lot of eyes on each conference race.

The teams that get the at-large bids won't necessarily be the other schools in the conference title game. For one, there aren't enough slots to account for all those schools. Two, you could very easily and likely will see situations where teams who had very good seasons, but didn't win their divisions get in. This year, Bama got in because of a great record, but they didn't win all the games necessary to be in the CCG. I think you'll see that quite frequently actually which means every regular season game still counts. You have to put your best foot forward or the committee won't pick you.
12-06-2017 04:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 04:00 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 10:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The Big 10, SEC, PAC and even the ACC are against expanding the season further. There is no motivation by any of the University presidents anywhere for the addition of another game to the season. The possibility of replacing Spring Games with a preseason game might be there, but the answer will be a resounding no to the rest of it.

In that much Dodd is correct. This hogwash about expanding to 8 is not only resisted by AD's, presidents, and commissioners, the very idea of it is repulsive to them. Not to mention that basketball in December is already under terrific stress as far as crowd support goes.

Nobody in football wants to diminish the regular season. Why? That's where the gate is. They may replace G5 & FCS games with P5 games, but they aren't adding another potential game to the schedule period.

So I'm sorry guys, and don't mean to be a killjoy but there is no support among college officials of any kind to expand the playoffs.

The tournament has made the basketball regular season all but meaningless. Schedule three dozen games roughly and if you win 20 of them you've got a shot to be in a field of 66 teams. Then you win by process of elimination, not by being the best at anything consistently.

The past 2 years two of the teams in the 4 team CFP have failed to be competitive. Maybe this year will be different, maybe. I say that because the two strongest teams are paired in the first round and the two weaker teams are paired in the first round IMO.

Alabama lost to Auburn in part because of injuries. Auburn lost to Georgia the 2nd time around mostly because of injuries. Hello? Are any of you paying attention to that! Add that extra game and you cut significantly into the recuperation period that we now have between conference championships and the playoffs.

It's simply a no go and it's not even close to being a consideration.

I can completely buy that administrators weren't interested up until this point. But if the prospect of consistently being left out arises then that could change minds.

There used to be a lot of resistance to any form of playoff whatsoever and then the dynamics changed. I'm not saying everybody will be on board with it, but I have to believe there are a lot of individuals today who are starting to think about a world where their conference gets consistently left out in exchange for multiple reps from one league or another...or in a situation where Notre Dame gets in perhaps. This sort of dynamic alone was enough to weaken support for maintaining the Big 12 from within its own ranks.

There are a variety of creative ways to handling these issues. The key will be administrators who think outside the box a little bit.

1. Starting the season earlier and utilizing what is now Week Zero. It's a simple adjustment and you won't have to worry about winter weather keeping people from games.

2. If we're going to play FCS or G5 teams then they could utilize the Spring game and get some gate out of that. I'm sure fans would love to have a decent competitive match-up in the middle of the offseason.

3. So if you start the regular season earlier and remove one game from the latter part of the season and move it to the Spring then that starts to free up some space. Everybody can play 11 games and get 2 BYE weeks during the season. Then we could play the conference championship games during Thanksgiving weekend instead of the first Saturday in December.

4. I completely understand the concern about the need for a recuperation period, but this is also a reason against playing an all P5 schedule. Removing a few cupcakes and everyone playing 12 tough games will lead to more injuries.

5. If they want to add another round then everyone gets roughly one month off before you start the round of 8.

Heck, they could make some of these adjustments anyway even if they don't add a round to the playoffs.

The conference commissioners don't really care about that. All five power conferences get the same share of the CFP whether they have a representative or not. In fact it might be argued that by not having a school involved you actually stand to make more because of the available number of schools to the normal bowl payouts.

This is the reason they don't put up a fuss. They get their dough either way.

I don't disagree with your suggestions to overcome objections, but the primary objection you can't overcome, bracket creep. At least 4 of the commissioners are more worried about the expansion of the season than they are of being left out. I don't know about Bowlsby since OU got in it isn't as much of an issue this year. Access has been a big issue for the XII only because OU was concerned about it and it related to their long term ability to survive as a conference. No other P conference has this issue.

What I'm trying to tell you is that there is no interest. If you don't believe me ask Alabama's A.D. or Greg Sankey.

It's not a dead issue, it's a non issue as it has never had a life as an idea.
(This post was last modified: 12-06-2017 04:25 PM by JRsec.)
12-06-2017 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,559
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 139
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #12
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 08:48 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  5+1+2 is perfect. This year we'd have something like:

Wisconsin @ Clemson
Ohio State @ Alabama

Southern Cal @ UGA
UCF @ Oklahoma

This really doesn't cheapen the regular season at all. The G5 becomes more important as games like USF/UCF, Fresno/Boise, and Memphis/UCF suddenly have huge playoff implications. The Pac 12 title game suddenly determines a playoff spot. The ACC and SEC championship games still are de facto play in games and don't lose any significance. The only game that loses some importance is the Big Ten Championship games as Wisconsin is probably guaranteed in either way.

If "playing too many games" is suddenly a factor to the powers that be then shorten the season to 11 games and remove the FCS games. Rivalry weekend the week before thanksgiving, CCGs the week after, Heisman ceremony the first week in December, and First Round games the week before Christmas.
I agree. Four playoff games on New Years Day make the bowls much more relevant. Rotate four games into the big six bowls, kind like we do now.
12-06-2017 08:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,263
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  What I'm trying to tell you is that there is no interest. If you don't believe me ask Alabama's A.D. or Greg Sankey.

I would ask them, but I don't think they're taking my phone calls. Something about "leave me alone, I've got work to do." 03-lmfao

But seriously, I don't doubt you. I just wonder how this week's developments will impact the long term. Yes, the leagues do get an equal share of the CFP revenue, but if certain leagues keep getting left out then that's going to impact their ability to compete. Top athletes will go elsewhere so they can win. Coaches will do the same.

That's already happening to some degree in the B1G and the Big 12 isn't recruiting nearly as well as they used to either. Right now, it's just a trend, but it could become insurmountable if a league or two comes to be associated with mediocrity rather than "Power" status.

I think it would behoove administrators to take a look at their options.
12-06-2017 11:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Win5002 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 202
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Big 12 & B1G
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 08:39 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  Please skip 8 team playoffs and go straight to 64 teams as bothbwill just ruin the one thing that makes college football great; a meaningful regular season

The idea that an expanded playoffs from 4 will make the regular season meaningless has to be one of the biggest red herrings thrown out against a playoff. Its the complete opposite. Lets only use the 64 teams in P5, and we are fitting 8 potential teams at the end of the year into 4 playoff spots. The season is not meaningful for 88% of the teams in college football! It doesn't matter whether it is 12-16 chasing 8 spots or 20-24 chasing 16 spots. By my math the regular season just got meaningful for a lot more teams! Also, the teams that are in would be playing for seeding and home field advantage in a round or two.

Even if the premise an expanded playoff devalues a regular season (which it does not!) Whats better with a great product to focus on a regular season with no real ending? Or to have a real ending to that product with a legitimate playoff?

While we are at it. Can we quit 1 month layoff so these teams can play when they are in playing condition. Give 1 week off before the playoffs and then start them.
12-07-2017 01:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,926
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 73
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 10:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  So I'm sorry guys, and don't mean to be a killjoy but there is no support among college officials of any kind to expand the playoffs.

There was no support whatsoever for a 4 team playoff either until there was.

If injuries or "too many games" are really a big concern (which I kind of doubt as only two teams would actually be playing a 16th game) there are several work arounds. Move the season up a week for a second bye and/or drop an OOC and go to 11. The current set up need not be set in stone.
(This post was last modified: 12-08-2017 09:29 AM by Gamecock.)
12-08-2017 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-06-2017 11:19 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  What I'm trying to tell you is that there is no interest. If you don't believe me ask Alabama's A.D. or Greg Sankey.

I would ask them, but I don't think they're taking my phone calls. Something about "leave me alone, I've got work to do." 03-lmfao

But seriously, I don't doubt you. I just wonder how this week's developments will impact the long term. Yes, the leagues do get an equal share of the CFP revenue, but if certain leagues keep getting left out then that's going to impact their ability to compete. Top athletes will go elsewhere so they can win. Coaches will do the same.

That's already happening to some degree in the B1G and the Big 12 isn't recruiting nearly as well as they used to either. Right now, it's just a trend, but it could become insurmountable if a league or two comes to be associated with mediocrity rather than "Power" status.

I think it would behoove administrators to take a look at their options.

The recruiting problems of the Big 10 are demographic in nature, hence Harbaugh's Southern football camps. Nothing is going to help that in numbers significant enough to make a large difference. Look at the ACC. The farther North you go in their conference the harder it is to compete. Ditto the Big 12 where the issue is that there are too danged many Texas schools that have been elevated to P status.

Sure there are plenty of Texas recruits but they have 5 P schools in Texas plus the two Oklahoma's and that's more P schools by far than California has. In the ACC having 4 P schools in North Carolina is a killer. Sure their area and Virignia have good recruits but the number of them pales by comparison to Florida and then between the two states there are now 6 P schools. This is why Florida and Florida State prefer not to see UCF an USF promoted.

Even in our SEC I challenge you to find great football North of Knoxville, in fact we don't really have great football North of Athens in most years and you can draw a line across from Athens through the Western part of the SEC and the truth remains. Why? Recruits.

So the ability to compete has more to do with where we are located than it does with how many slots the CFP gains. But that's not all. The South is where kids are still playing football in the most numbers. Let that sink in. There are more people in the North, on the West Coast, and on the East Coast, but we have more kids that play. And not coincidentally that's how the attendance at events breaks as well.

The SEC outdraws the other conferences with the nearest one averaging 11,500 fewer people in attendance at every event.

So right now when I suggest four P conferences with the champs of each playing it off that means most years 2 of the better teams will make the playoffs. Gee frigging whiz that's just about how many actually have shown up for the CFP games in most years thus far. If we expand the damn playoffs to 8 we'll get three or four more crappy teams because they danged sure won't all come from the deep South (counting the ACC with the SEC and including Texas and Oklahoma). Look at the CFP this year where everyone is expecting better games and what do you find: Clemson, Georgia, Alabama, and .....Oklahoma.

You say those being left out will want to expand the CFP. Well those being left out are nowhere near playing championship football at the highest level for all the reasons we've covered and lack of attendance equals lack of interest which equals lack of investment and other than 5 or 6 Big 10 schools nobody anywhere really invests the amount of money we do in the South. Go look at the numbers posted in the pinned threads at the top of this forum and then rethink this.

Delaney realizes that on any given year Ohio State, and maybe Penn State, Michigan or Wisconsin might be able to hold their own with the Florida State, Alabama, Auburn, Oklahoma, Clemson, or this year the Georgia's of the world.

Look at the just the number of national champions since the BCS era began and for kicks and giggles include Clemson, Texas, Florida State, and Oklahoma in the mix with the SEC schools and then count the number of championships that have gone elsewhere.

Had it not been for the AP poll where the vast majority of sportswriters who voted were in the large cities of the Big 10 and Northeast and on the West Coast this trend would have been established long ago (but not during Jim Crow).

Quite frankly as football diminishes in the West and in the Northern Midwest the SEC could expand by adding Texas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma, and Ohio State with Michigan and we would have a 20 team conference that produced the Champion about 95 to 97% of the time and that's being kind to give Michigan a slot.

So if we expand to 8 to include West coast and Big 10 schools other than Ohio State we are just adding more low quality games and the A.D.'s know this.

Why do you think that ESPN has loved pointing to Ohio State and the ACC rivalry week with the SEC to put us down? Or played up Oklahoma beating SEC teams? Because they need to perpetuate the notion that football matters outside of the SEC so they use Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma and Ohio State to make that case to keep the public more invested when in reality 3 of those 4 could be SEC schools and 2 of them almost were and the third OU has been invited.

The reason we stay at 4 is for my previously stated reasons and because if we expand to 8 and include "fairly" the best 8 then half of them will come from the SEC most years and quite frankly that makes our regular season less meaningful.

As the popularity of football recedes in the American psyche, ESPN would really save money, and still provide a wanted product by moving Clemson, Florida State, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Notre Dame and Miami into the SEC and let the conference year and semis produce the national champ. And with the exceptions of Nebraska and USC where it is dying they would have virtually all of the champions of the last 30 plus years.
(This post was last modified: 12-08-2017 12:57 PM by JRsec.)
12-08-2017 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,510
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 180
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-08-2017 12:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 11:19 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  What I'm trying to tell you is that there is no interest. If you don't believe me ask Alabama's A.D. or Greg Sankey.

I would ask them, but I don't think they're taking my phone calls. Something about "leave me alone, I've got work to do." 03-lmfao

But seriously, I don't doubt you. I just wonder how this week's developments will impact the long term. Yes, the leagues do get an equal share of the CFP revenue, but if certain leagues keep getting left out then that's going to impact their ability to compete. Top athletes will go elsewhere so they can win. Coaches will do the same.

That's already happening to some degree in the B1G and the Big 12 isn't recruiting nearly as well as they used to either. Right now, it's just a trend, but it could become insurmountable if a league or two comes to be associated with mediocrity rather than "Power" status.

I think it would behoove administrators to take a look at their options.

The recruiting problems of the Big 10 are demographic in nature, hence Harbaugh's Southern football camps. Nothing is going to help that in numbers significant enough to make a large difference. Look at the ACC. The farther North you go in their conference the harder it is to compete. Ditto the Big 12 where the issue is that there are too danged many Texas schools that have been elevated to P status.

Sure there are plenty of Texas recruits but they have 5 P schools in Texas plus the two Oklahoma's and that's more P schools by far than California has. In the ACC having 4 P schools in North Carolina is a killer. Sure their area and Virignia have good recruits but the number of them pales by comparison to Florida and then between the two states there are now 6 P schools. This is why Florida and Florida State prefer not to see UCF an USF promoted.

Even in our SEC I challenge you to find great football North of Knoxville, in fact we don't really have great football North of Athens in most years and you can draw a line across from Athens through the Western part of the SEC and the truth remains. Why? Recruits.

So the ability to compete has more to do with where we are located than it does with how many slots the CFP gains. But that's not all. The South is where kids are still playing football in the most numbers. Let that sink in. There are more people in the North, on the West Coast, and on the East Coast, but we have more kids that play. And not coincidentally that's how the attendance at events breaks as well.

The SEC outdraws the other conferences with the nearest one averaging 11,500 fewer people in attendance at every event.

So right now when I suggest four P conferences with the champs of each playing it off that means most years 2 of the better teams will make the playoffs. Gee frigging whiz that's just about how many actually have shown up for the CFP games in most years thus far. If we expand the damn playoffs to 8 we'll get three or four more crappy teams because they danged sure won't all come from the deep South (counting the ACC with the SEC and including Texas and Oklahoma). Look at the CFP this year where everyone is expecting better games and what do you find: Clemson, Georgia, Alabama, and .....Oklahoma.

You say those being left out will want to expand the CFP. Well those being left out are nowhere near playing championship football at the highest level for all the reasons we've covered and lack of attendance equals lack of interest which equals lack of investment and other than 5 or 6 Big 10 schools nobody anywhere really invests the amount of money we do in the South. Go look at the numbers posted in the pinned threads at the top of this forum and then rethink this.

Delaney realizes that on any given year Ohio State, and maybe Penn State, Michigan or Wisconsin might be able to hold their own with the Florida State, Alabama, Auburn, Oklahoma, Clemson, or this year the Georgia's of the world.

Look at the just the number of national champions since the BCS era began and for kicks and giggles include Clemson, Texas, Florida State, and Oklahoma in the mix with the SEC schools and then count the number of championships that have gone elsewhere.

Had it not been for the AP poll where the vast majority of sportswriters who voted were in the large cities of the Big 10 and Northeast and on the West Coast this trend would have been established long ago (but not during Jim Crow).

Quite frankly as football diminishes in the West and in the Northern Midwest the SEC could expand by adding Texas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma, and Ohio State with Michigan and we would have a 20 team conference that produced the Champion about 95 to 97% of the time and that's being kind to give Michigan a slot.

So if we expand to 8 to include West coast and Big 10 schools other than Ohio State we are just adding more low quality games and the A.D.'s know this.

Why do you think that ESPN has loved pointing to Ohio State and the ACC rivalry week with the SEC to put us down? Or played up Oklahoma beating SEC teams? Because they need to perpetuate the notion that football matters outside of the SEC so they use Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma and Ohio State to make that case to keep the public more invested when in reality 3 of those 4 could be SEC schools and 2 of them almost were and the third OU has been invited.

The reason we stay at 4 is for my previously stated reasons and because if we expand to 8 and include "fairly" the best 8 then half of them will come from the SEC most years and quite frankly that makes our regular season less meaningful.

As the popularity of football recedes in the American psyche, ESPN would really save money, and still provide a wanted product by moving Clemson, Florida State, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Notre Dame and Miami into the SEC and let the conference year and semis produce the national champ. And with the exceptions of Nebraska and USC where it is dying they would have virtually all of the champions of the last 30 plus years.

It is incumbent on the NCAA and ESPN to involve all areas of the country, which is why we need champions only for the playoffs. It's the only way we can involve teams from all over the country, instead of seeing the same teams over and over.
Besides it will enhance the conference championship games.
12-08-2017 01:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-08-2017 01:09 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 12:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 11:19 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(12-06-2017 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  What I'm trying to tell you is that there is no interest. If you don't believe me ask Alabama's A.D. or Greg Sankey.

I would ask them, but I don't think they're taking my phone calls. Something about "leave me alone, I've got work to do." 03-lmfao

But seriously, I don't doubt you. I just wonder how this week's developments will impact the long term. Yes, the leagues do get an equal share of the CFP revenue, but if certain leagues keep getting left out then that's going to impact their ability to compete. Top athletes will go elsewhere so they can win. Coaches will do the same.

That's already happening to some degree in the B1G and the Big 12 isn't recruiting nearly as well as they used to either. Right now, it's just a trend, but it could become insurmountable if a league or two comes to be associated with mediocrity rather than "Power" status.

I think it would behoove administrators to take a look at their options.

The recruiting problems of the Big 10 are demographic in nature, hence Harbaugh's Southern football camps. Nothing is going to help that in numbers significant enough to make a large difference. Look at the ACC. The farther North you go in their conference the harder it is to compete. Ditto the Big 12 where the issue is that there are too danged many Texas schools that have been elevated to P status.

Sure there are plenty of Texas recruits but they have 5 P schools in Texas plus the two Oklahoma's and that's more P schools by far than California has. In the ACC having 4 P schools in North Carolina is a killer. Sure their area and Virignia have good recruits but the number of them pales by comparison to Florida and then between the two states there are now 6 P schools. This is why Florida and Florida State prefer not to see UCF an USF promoted.

Even in our SEC I challenge you to find great football North of Knoxville, in fact we don't really have great football North of Athens in most years and you can draw a line across from Athens through the Western part of the SEC and the truth remains. Why? Recruits.

So the ability to compete has more to do with where we are located than it does with how many slots the CFP gains. But that's not all. The South is where kids are still playing football in the most numbers. Let that sink in. There are more people in the North, on the West Coast, and on the East Coast, but we have more kids that play. And not coincidentally that's how the attendance at events breaks as well.

The SEC outdraws the other conferences with the nearest one averaging 11,500 fewer people in attendance at every event.

So right now when I suggest four P conferences with the champs of each playing it off that means most years 2 of the better teams will make the playoffs. Gee frigging whiz that's just about how many actually have shown up for the CFP games in most years thus far. If we expand the damn playoffs to 8 we'll get three or four more crappy teams because they danged sure won't all come from the deep South (counting the ACC with the SEC and including Texas and Oklahoma). Look at the CFP this year where everyone is expecting better games and what do you find: Clemson, Georgia, Alabama, and .....Oklahoma.

You say those being left out will want to expand the CFP. Well those being left out are nowhere near playing championship football at the highest level for all the reasons we've covered and lack of attendance equals lack of interest which equals lack of investment and other than 5 or 6 Big 10 schools nobody anywhere really invests the amount of money we do in the South. Go look at the numbers posted in the pinned threads at the top of this forum and then rethink this.

Delaney realizes that on any given year Ohio State, and maybe Penn State, Michigan or Wisconsin might be able to hold their own with the Florida State, Alabama, Auburn, Oklahoma, Clemson, or this year the Georgia's of the world.

Look at the just the number of national champions since the BCS era began and for kicks and giggles include Clemson, Texas, Florida State, and Oklahoma in the mix with the SEC schools and then count the number of championships that have gone elsewhere.

Had it not been for the AP poll where the vast majority of sportswriters who voted were in the large cities of the Big 10 and Northeast and on the West Coast this trend would have been established long ago (but not during Jim Crow).

Quite frankly as football diminishes in the West and in the Northern Midwest the SEC could expand by adding Texas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma, and Ohio State with Michigan and we would have a 20 team conference that produced the Champion about 95 to 97% of the time and that's being kind to give Michigan a slot.

So if we expand to 8 to include West coast and Big 10 schools other than Ohio State we are just adding more low quality games and the A.D.'s know this.

Why do you think that ESPN has loved pointing to Ohio State and the ACC rivalry week with the SEC to put us down? Or played up Oklahoma beating SEC teams? Because they need to perpetuate the notion that football matters outside of the SEC so they use Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma and Ohio State to make that case to keep the public more invested when in reality 3 of those 4 could be SEC schools and 2 of them almost were and the third OU has been invited.

The reason we stay at 4 is for my previously stated reasons and because if we expand to 8 and include "fairly" the best 8 then half of them will come from the SEC most years and quite frankly that makes our regular season less meaningful.

As the popularity of football recedes in the American psyche, ESPN would really save money, and still provide a wanted product by moving Clemson, Florida State, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Notre Dame and Miami into the SEC and let the conference year and semis produce the national champ. And with the exceptions of Nebraska and USC where it is dying they would have virtually all of the champions of the last 30 plus years.

It is incumbent on the NCAA and ESPN to involve all areas of the country, which is why we need champions only for the playoffs. It's the only way we can involve teams from all over the country, instead of seeing the same teams over and over.
Besides it will enhance the conference championship games.

Absolutely X. It is why I've been for a champs only in a P-4 conference orientation since the CFP was first talked about. It is necessary to keep the entire nation involved if we want the revenue to stay up. It is why Texas and Oklahoma have liked being the Big 2 with the little 8. And that's been part of the hangup in getting to a P4. But what we don't need is to double up the number of PAC & Big 10 schools in the playoffs that would likely come with an expanded field. Everybody can send their champ and that increases the importance of the regular season and conference championship game. Ohio State getting in over Penn State was a mind blower for me.

************************

BTW since the inception of the BCS teams from the Deep South have won 14 of the 19 National Championships. Add in Texas and Oklahoma and it's 16 of 19 with Ohio State winning 2 and USC vacating one.

So 16 of the last 19 national championships have been won by the Southern Schools of the Big 12/ACC/& SEC.

Prior to that the numbers are radically skewed to the North by %. Why? AP voters were predominantly from the large cities of the Northern Midwest, West Coast, and Northeast.

The other handicap in the late 50's, 60's and early 70's was the failure of the South to integrate its programs.
(This post was last modified: 12-08-2017 01:55 PM by JRsec.)
12-08-2017 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,263
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
A P4 with champs only would be ideal, but I don't see it happening unless the Power leagues form their own division.

The politicians would be able to argue that the G5s don't have any access in that scenario and then we've got a whole new set of problems.
12-08-2017 05:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,485
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 820
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Dennis Dodd is wrong and there will eventually be 8 teams in the CFP
(12-08-2017 05:44 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  A P4 with champs only would be ideal, but I don't see it happening unless the Power leagues form their own division.

The politicians would be able to argue that the G5s don't have any access in that scenario and then we've got a whole new set of problems.

We've covered this ground many times. There would be no problems as along as application to P conferences were accepted when the minimum standards for P inclusion were established: minimum athletic endowments, facilities standards, requisite number of sports offered, minimum attendance figures met, and minimum academic standing obtained.

Every level of sports from Jr. High on up has gradations of play based upon specified minimums, usually in enrollment. It is absolutely not a violation of anti trust to have minimum standards for inclusion when the applicants or would be applicants still have a league to compete in. Anti trust is when they are locked out without regard to minimum standards for competition and have no other way to compete.
(This post was last modified: 12-08-2017 09:42 PM by JRsec.)
12-08-2017 09:40 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.