|
Post by cjmjones008 on Dec 13, 2008 2:28:33 GMT -5
Right now there are 4 at large spots. Other than money, adding a 5th BCS game gave mid majors a realistic chance to get a game every year if they go undefeated. A 8 team playoff would have 1 at large taken and 1 mid major a lot of the time and that is going to cause just as much controversy
|
|
|
Post by easy on Dec 13, 2008 2:29:03 GMT -5
hahah id fuck the bitch
|
|
Ducky
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,215
|
Post by Ducky on Dec 13, 2008 14:21:38 GMT -5
4 teams is enough. A 4 team playoff seems easy enough, easier to implement, and doesn't open up it up for every team like Ducky's idea. A 16 team playoff would be terrible. Adding 3 games makes no sense, that's another 1/4th of a season added on to a team's schedule. College football does NOT need to be like basketball, we don't need Cinderella's. The beauty of college football is the importance of the regular season, giving 16 teams a chance at the championship ruins that completely. It also ties up bowl games and hurts smaller school's revenue by forcing them to smaller bowls or out of bowl season at all. It's the most unrealistic idea in the thread. Thing I like about the 4 team idea is it still leaves in the amount of controversy about who should be in and out, but gives those 4 teams a chance to settle it on the field. They can keep the 4 major bowls, just have 3 of them rotate as semi-final bowls and the other as the championship. Realistically, there will be no playoff for college football anytime in the next 5-10 years. If you think Obama is going to do it, you're delusional. The BCS controls the post-season process too much to try to make it a playoff rather than their sponsored bowl games, and the NCAA is the wrong organization you want to look for if you expect change of anything. I'd actually be alright by a 4 team playoff. A 4 or 16. 8 just seems like it'd draft more controversy. But Jay with a 4 team playoff, what do the other teams play for?
|
|
Jay
Starter
Ex-GM
Bang...Bang...
Posts: 3,220
|
Post by Jay on Dec 13, 2008 14:24:54 GMT -5
4 teams is enough. A 4 team playoff seems easy enough, easier to implement, and doesn't open up it up for every team like Ducky's idea. A 16 team playoff would be terrible. Adding 3 games makes no sense, that's another 1/4th of a season added on to a team's schedule. College football does NOT need to be like basketball, we don't need Cinderella's. The beauty of college football is the importance of the regular season, giving 16 teams a chance at the championship ruins that completely. It also ties up bowl games and hurts smaller school's revenue by forcing them to smaller bowls or out of bowl season at all. It's the most unrealistic idea in the thread. Thing I like about the 4 team idea is it still leaves in the amount of controversy about who should be in and out, but gives those 4 teams a chance to settle it on the field. They can keep the 4 major bowls, just have 3 of them rotate as semi-final bowls and the other as the championship. Realistically, there will be no playoff for college football anytime in the next 5-10 years. If you think Obama is going to do it, you're delusional. The BCS controls the post-season process too much to try to make it a playoff rather than their sponsored bowl games, and the NCAA is the wrong organization you want to look for if you expect change of anything. I'd actually be alright by a 4 team playoff. A 4 or 16. 8 just seems like it'd draft more controversy. But Jay with a 4 team playoff, what do the other teams play for? The same as they play for now, pride and notoriety. All I'm saying is add a +1 game. The idea has been around, but conference loyalty to certain bowl games kills it.
|
|