Pelini strongly opposes playoff of any sort

[NUance]

.

 

The jackasses at shaggybevo.com weigh in on Pelini's opinion. The thread is good for about 3 minutes of entertainment:

 

 

Playoffs?! Perturbed Pelini Pisses Pants LINK

 

 

.

[Count 'Bility]

I simply do not understand Bo's logic here. Every level of football, except major D1-A, from Pop Warner to the NFL has a play-off to truly determine the champion at the end of the season. What in the hell is so special about FBS college football that a play-off wouldn't work? And why is it such an incomprehensible notion to incorporate a play-off and utilize the existing bowl system? I sincerely do not understand why it has to be an either | or situation. Bo, and people who think like he does, act like we're trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

Maybe because he knows as well as everyone here, the first year the playoff is in play and we dont make it, his ass is grass. No sarcasm here. Think I'm kidding? just wait. by the way, I am in huge favor of a playoff, but I would prefer 8 teams. 6 champions and 2 wildcards (sorry Boise, these would be for SEC #2 and 3.) What I fear however is the playoffs, weather being a 4 team, 8 or god help us 16 and 32, will become the measuring stick for success. now it's amek abowl, make a big bowl, make a bcs bowl etc. With playoffs, it's either make or brake for many many programs, regardless of a particular season's situation, such as young team, new coaches etc. i agree with Hunter94, that college football is taking a more and more business like NFL approach to anything, win at all costs, and that could come back to really hurt the uniqueness of the game.

[Jeremy]

 

They're Texas. (and they STILL claim that national title share in '70. Really?)

[Count 'Bility]

Meh, there is no logic or thought to anything that goes on at the shag. I can read that crap for hours for laughs only. It's hilarious, but I can easily bet money that 75% of the posters over there have never seen a football game. FWIW, check out the OU week mspaint/gif threads of dominance in the classics section. Epic stuff.

[bshirt]

Meh, there is no logic or thought to anything that goes on at the shag. I can read that crap for hours for laughs only. It's hilarious, but I can easily bet money that 75% of the posters over there have never seen a football game. FWIW, check out the OU week mspaint/gif threads of dominance in the classics section. Epic stuff.

 

 

Yep, it is funny as hell. But any real content worth reading simply isn't there.

[zoogs]

The month-long NCAA tourney and 68-team bracket (along with other smaller tournaments for the teams that don't make it? I don't know too much about this) is a good illustration of the differences both between basketball and football as sports, and between the needs/scale of the NBA and NCAA.

 

FCS football has a 20-team field (a number for which there is a proposed increase to 24) in order to more fairly accommodate its 124-team field, although I suspect that arbitrary "fair" number will keep increasing until it simply is no longer scalable. I suspect the FCS is able to do this because not a whole lot of people pay attention to their playoffs, and the issue of moving large fanbases or keeping up a top national following, really isn't one.

 

The NFL illustrates how a football playoff can be done for a field of 32 teams. When that number is well over a hundred, it isn't the same. And as EZ has mentioned, any playoff field transforms the unique college football FBS season from a short, every-game-counts, mad dash experience to a contracted long haul of a season. I'm sure money of logistics issues could be functionally ironed out for a playoff of 8, 12, 16, 20, 24,... teams, but the college football season is a distinct experience and one worth protecting.

 

It's one of many claims college football has to the "more exciting than the NFL" argument.

[bshirt]

The month-long NCAA tourney and 68-team bracket (along with other smaller tournaments for the teams that don't make it? I don't know too much about this) is a good illustration of the differences both between basketball and football as sports, and between the needs/scale of the NBA and NCAA.

 

FCS football has a 20-team field (a number for which there is a proposed increase to 24) in order to more fairly accommodate its 124-team field, although I suspect that arbitrary "fair" number will keep increasing until it simply is no longer scalable. I suspect the FCS is able to do this because not a whole lot of people pay attention to their playoffs, and the issue of moving large fanbases or keeping up a top national following, really isn't one.

 

The NFL illustrates how a football playoff can be done for a field of 32 teams. When that number is well over a hundred, it isn't the same. And as EZ has mentioned, any playoff field transforms the unique college football FBS season from a short, every-game-counts, mad dash experience to a contracted long haul of a season. I'm sure money of logistics issues could be functionally ironed out for a playoff of 8, 12, 16, 20, 24,... teams, but the college football season is a distinct experience and one worth protecting.

 

It's one of many claims college football has to the "more exciting than the NFL" argument.

 

That'a true enough and well said. But it comes with the massive high price of an asinine procedure for determining the champion. There's got to be a better way.

[Sargon]

I wish Bo would just focus on winning 11 plus games a year and not think or talk much about anything else. As for the current system, it sucks so unless one offers up a clear good alternative then I am deaf to complaints about alternatives.

['SkersRule]

I simply do not understand Bo's logic here. Every level of football, except major D1-A, from Pop Warner to the NFL has a play-off to truly determine the champion at the end of the season. What in the hell is so special about FBS college football that a play-off wouldn't work? And why is it such an incomprehensible notion to incorporate a play-off and utilize the existing bowl system? I sincerely do not understand why it has to be an either | or situation. Bo, and people who think like he does, act like we're trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

Maybe because he knows as well as everyone here, the first year the playoff is in play and we dont make it, his ass is grass. No sarcasm here. Think I'm kidding? just wait. by the way, I am in huge favor of a playoff, but I would prefer 8 teams. 6 champions and 2 wildcards (sorry Boise, these would be for SEC #2 and 3.) What I fear however is the playoffs, weather being a 4 team, 8 or god help us 16 and 32, will become the measuring stick for success. now it's amek abowl, make a big bowl, make a bcs bowl etc. With playoffs, it's either make or brake for many many programs, regardless of a particular season's situation, such as young team, new coaches etc. i agree with Hunter94, that college football is taking a more and more business like NFL approach to anything, win at all costs, and that could come back to really hurt the uniqueness of the game.

 

What is so "unique" about D1-A (FBS) football? The screwball way a psuedo national champion is picked by espn and other sports writers? The lame way bowl opponents are picked? Or maybe it's the sense of "tradition" in continuing to do things the way they've always been done simply for the sake of preserving an antiquated system?

 

You're assuming that if there are play-offs that not making them means doom and gloom. Why? Why is it impossible to believe a play-off system and bowl games can not go together?

 

 

Personally I believe that any play-off in college football should have 16 teams. Play an 11 game regular season schedule and give all conference champions an automatic berth into the play-offs. There are 11 FBS conferences and that would leave 5 "at-large" bids for other teams (in the current AQ conferences don't win their conference title). So the second place SEC, Big 10, Pac 12, ACC team would probably all receive at-large bids.

 

Teams that don't make the play-offs would still be able to go to a bowl game.

[Marf]

I wish Bo would just focus on winning 11 plus games a year and not think or talk much about anything else.

 

Its comments like this that drive me to smoking bath salts and eating peoples' faces. Give the dude a break. The Bo-hating that is rampant around here is just dumb.

 

I wish you would focus on whatever your job is, and not think or talk much about anything else. See, it's not as nice when someone directs it at you now is it?

[Moiraine]

FIRE HIM!

[HuskerThor]

I strongly oppose Pelini strongly opposing a playoff.

[T_O_Bull]

.

 

The jackasses at shaggybevo.com weigh in on Pelini's opinion. The thread is good for about 3 minutes of entertainment:

 

 

Playoffs?! Perturbed Pelini Pisses Pants LINK

 

 

.

Thanks for the link NUa. I had almost forgotten just how utterly stupid the inbreed fans of Tex-a$$ are.

Wonder how they feel about the slap in the face they got from T AnM.

T_O_B

G>B>R

[NUance]

.

 

The jackasses at shaggybevo.com weigh in on Pelini's opinion. The thread is good for about 3 minutes of entertainment:

 

 

Playoffs?! Perturbed Pelini Pisses Pants LINK

 

 

.

Thanks for the link NUa. I had almost forgotten just how utterly stupid the inbreed fans of Tex-a$$ are.

Wonder how they feel about the slap in the face they got from T AnM.

T_O_B

G>B>R

Yeah, it's sort of entertaining to browse that place once in a while. You get about the same banter as you'd expect to hear in an 8th grade boys lockerroom.

[Count 'Bility]

I simply do not understand Bo's logic here. Every level of football, except major D1-A, from Pop Warner to the NFL has a play-off to truly determine the champion at the end of the season. What in the hell is so special about FBS college football that a play-off wouldn't work? And why is it such an incomprehensible notion to incorporate a play-off and utilize the existing bowl system? I sincerely do not understand why it has to be an either | or situation. Bo, and people who think like he does, act like we're trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

Maybe because he knows as well as everyone here, the first year the playoff is in play and we dont make it, his ass is grass. No sarcasm here. Think I'm kidding? just wait. by the way, I am in huge favor of a playoff, but I would prefer 8 teams. 6 champions and 2 wildcards (sorry Boise, these would be for SEC #2 and 3.) What I fear however is the playoffs, weather being a 4 team, 8 or god help us 16 and 32, will become the measuring stick for success. now it's amek abowl, make a big bowl, make a bcs bowl etc. With playoffs, it's either make or brake for many many programs, regardless of a particular season's situation, such as young team, new coaches etc. i agree with Hunter94, that college football is taking a more and more business like NFL approach to anything, win at all costs, and that could come back to really hurt the uniqueness of the game.

 

What is so "unique" about D1-A (FBS) football? The screwball way a psuedo national champion is picked by espn and other sports writers? The lame way bowl opponents are picked? Or maybe it's the sense of "tradition" in continuing to do things the way they've always been done simply for the sake of preserving an antiquated system?

 

You're assuming that if there are play-offs that not making them means doom and gloom. Why? Why is it impossible to believe a play-off system and bowl games can not go together?

 

 

Personally I believe that any play-off in college football should have 16 teams. Play an 11 game regular season schedule and give all conference champions an automatic berth into the play-offs. There are 11 FBS conferences and that would leave 5 "at-large" bids for other teams (in the current AQ conferences don't win their conference title). So the second place SEC, Big 10, Pac 12, ACC team would probably all receive at-large bids.

 

Teams that don't make the play-offs would still be able to go to a bowl game.

 

Gee, I dont know. Maybe it's because of the numerous fans, probably near half, that hold this program and Bo to unreasonable and assenine expectations. It should be pretty obvious. Am I personally satisfied with 9 wins/season, No. I want more just like the next guy. It's simply human nature. But I'm not calling for his head either. And no, I am not including yourself into this bunch. They know who they are.

 

your idea for 16 teams in order to award conference champs is feasible. I'm a big fan of the conference champs only idea. It is and always will be common sense to me. Division/conference/district champs are awarded in every sport at every level by more than just a title or a trophy with their name on it. I just dont think 16 teams is doable at any point in time in the near future.