What were Harvey's oppositions to the new format?

[ladyhawke]

Did anyone else read this article? I did but it wasn't clear as to Harvey's opposition to a 4-team playoff. I know he wanted to keep the old format, but it didn't say why he wanted that. I did read that he thought it would be better for the teams but how so?

If this has already been discussed could someone please point me in the direction of the discussion. Thanks!

 

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120626/BIGRED/306269839/-1#perlman-4-team-playoff-was-big-ten-s-third-choice

[NUance]

We don't want to

 

This snippet of a quote from Harvey in the middle of the article explains it all.

[ladyhawke]

Here are the major objections to the college playoffs. I found one quote from Harvey (but didn't find any other of his objections to the playoffs)

 

 

I finally found out what the objections were to the college playoffs:

 

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games.

[/left]

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff.

[/left]

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel.

[/left]

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long.

[/left]

*This was one of Harvey's objections:

[/left]

• "The bowl system provides rewarding postseason experiences for far more student-athletes than will ever play in a playoff. We should continue to nurture that system and to permit our student-athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."

[/left]

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls.

[/left][/left]

http://realcollegefootballplayoff.com/objections.html

[/left]

[LouisianaHuskerFan]

He just makes me sick and is such an embarrassment to the University of Nebraska. All these old dolts need to get 'out of bed' with these bowls. So a playoff will destroy the 'long standing history of bowl games'?? I can only hope it does. The bowls benefit no one but the bowls themselves and these Athletic Directors, conference commissioners and university presidents that are getting handouts underneath the table. And the regular season wouldn't be devalued. I hate that stupid argument. It will only enhance the regular season. And a playoff will require an unacceptable amount of travel? Um, so if that was the case then why are the semis being held in the bowls instead of on campus where at least one team won't have to travel. The fans of the participating teams are the ones that suffer in using the bowls for semis. I've so had it with these old out of touch dullards. Hopefully in 12 years they are gone and we have some people that are in touch and we get a real playoff.

 

/end rant

[bshirt]

Hey, Harv......haven't you sucked enough free $$$ for doing nothing? How about you just STFU. There's trillions of brain-dead bureaucrats who have accomplished nothing...just like you.

[da skers]

He just makes me sick and is such an embarrassment to the University of Nebraska. All these old dolts need to get 'out of bed' with these bowls. So a playoff will destroy the 'long standing history of bowl games'?? I can only hope it does. The bowls benefit no one but the bowls themselves and these Athletic Directors, conference commissioners and university presidents that are getting handouts underneath the table. And the regular season wouldn't be devalued. I hate that stupid argument. It will only enhance the regular season. And a playoff will require an unacceptable amount of travel? Um, so if that was the case then why are the semis being held in the bowls instead of on campus where at least one team won't have to travel. The fans of the participating teams are the ones that suffer in using the bowls for semis. I've so had it with these old out of touch dullards. Hopefully in 12 years they are gone and we have some people that are in touch and we get a real playoff.

 

/end rant

I disagree about the regular season not being devalued and thats been my biggest reason. As it stands you have to almost run the season wire to wire without a loss. It makes you focus for every game even the southern texas state school for the deaf because even one loss kills your chance for the NC game. I also worry it will make fan apathy greater and that might eventually hurt attendance.

 

I hate the NFL. I won't watch it because you don't get max effort out of a team until their playoff chances are on the line or they are actually in the playoffs. They play hard for parts of a game but if someone gets out ahead by 2-3 touchdowns the other team kind of writes the week off as a loss and moves on. That is less likely to happen in college ball because they are playing for a lot more pride, a better bowl game and a chance at a championship.

[Polarhusker]

Hey, Harv......haven't you sucked enough free $$$ for doing nothing? How about you just STFU. There's trillions of brain-dead bureaucrats who have accomplished nothing...just like you.

 

Pathetic Post!!!!!!

 

.

[ladyhawke]

Interesting comments. For those of you who feel 'embarrassed' by Harvey-take a look at this article by Shatel.

 

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120626/BIGRED/706269835/0

[ladyhawke]

He just makes me sick and is such an embarrassment to the University of Nebraska. All these old dolts need to get 'out of bed' with these bowls. So a playoff will destroy the 'long standing history of bowl games'?? I can only hope it does. The bowls benefit no one but the bowls themselves and these Athletic Directors, conference commissioners and university presidents that are getting handouts underneath the table. And the regular season wouldn't be devalued. I hate that stupid argument. It will only enhance the regular season. And a playoff will require an unacceptable amount of travel? Um, so if that was the case then why are the semis being held in the bowls instead of on campus where at least one team won't have to travel. The fans of the participating teams are the ones that suffer in using the bowls for semis. I've so had it with these old out of touch dullards. Hopefully in 12 years they are gone and we have some people that are in touch and we get a real playoff.

 

/end rant

Those objections were from folks in general, not specifically Harvey. #4 was the one he spoke about-Taking care of the student athlete.

[ladyhawke]

Here are the major objections to the college playoffs. I found one quote from Harvey (but didn't find any other of his objections to the playoffs)

 

 

I finally found out what the objections were to the college playoffs:

 

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games.

[/left]

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff.

[/left]

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel.

[/left]

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long.

[/left]

*This was one of Harvey's objections:

[/left]

• "The bowl system provides rewarding postseason experiences for far more student-athletes than will ever play in a playoff. We should continue to nurture that system and to permit our student-athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."

[/left]

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls.

[/left]

http://realcollegefo...objections.html

[/left]

 

I hope everyone will read the entire article. It goes on to explain why folks felt this way. Prior to this list it shares why there should be a playoff. I didn't post that part because I had heard them before. I just wanted to know why folks didn't think a play off was a good idea.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

He just makes me sick and is such an embarrassment to the University of Nebraska. All these old dolts need to get 'out of bed' with these bowls. So a playoff will destroy the 'long standing history of bowl games'?? I can only hope it does. The bowls benefit no one but the bowls themselves and these Athletic Directors, conference commissioners and university presidents that are getting handouts underneath the table. And the regular season wouldn't be devalued. I hate that stupid argument. It will only enhance the regular season. And a playoff will require an unacceptable amount of travel? Um, so if that was the case then why are the semis being held in the bowls instead of on campus where at least one team won't have to travel. The fans of the participating teams are the ones that suffer in using the bowls for semis. I've so had it with these old out of touch dullards. Hopefully in 12 years they are gone and we have some people that are in touch and we get a real playoff.

 

/end rant

I disagree about the regular season not being devalued and thats been my biggest reason. As it stands you have to almost run the season wire to wire without a loss. It makes you focus for every game even the southern texas state school for the deaf because even one loss kills your chance for the NC game. I also worry it will make fan apathy greater and that might eventually hurt attendance.

 

I hate the NFL. I won't watch it because you don't get max effort out of a team until their playoff chances are on the line or they are actually in the playoffs. They play hard for parts of a game but if someone gets out ahead by 2-3 touchdowns the other team kind of writes the week off as a loss and moves on. That is less likely to happen in college ball because they are playing for a lot more pride, a better bowl game and a chance at a championship.

 

There are 123 teams that are potentially eligible for playoffs. Unlike the NFL, the college regular season is only 12 games (13 if you're in a conference championship). Chances are, the teams that will be in the playoffs will (barring a topsy-turvy season where everyone loses to everyone) feature at most 4 teams with 1 loss.

 

Whereas in the NFL, there are 2 conferences of 16 teams and 6 of those teams from each division make the playoffs in a regular season of 16 games. Chances are, teams aren't going to have to try hard if they get behind by 21 in the 3rd quarter, because it is just one loss, and they can make it to the postseason sometimes with 1/2 of their games ending in losses.

 

The regular season will in no way be devalued.

[Notre Dame Joe]

I think you guys have a good President. I like how he stated his case without reference to the Sisters of the Poor.

[Foppa]

Here are the major objections to the college playoffs. I found one quote from Harvey (but didn't find any other of his objections to the playoffs)

 

 

I finally found out what the objections were to the college playoffs:

 

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games.

[/left]

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff.

[/left]

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel.

[/left]

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long.

[/left]

*This was one of Harvey's objections:

[/left]

• "The bowl system provides rewarding postseason experiences for far more student-athletes than will ever play in a playoff. We should continue to nurture that system and to permit our student-athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."

[/left]

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls.

[/left]

http://realcollegefo...objections.html

[/left]

 

 

Thanks for the rundown, ladyhawke. My retort:

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games.

The bowl games were meant to be a reward to show student-athletes a way to see the U.S. Some of the kids back in the 50's and 60's would never leave their backyard if it wasn't for bowl games. Back in the day, that was nice. But athletes these days could really care less. They want National Championships and NFL recognition. These athletes travel anywhere they want to on recruiting visits, so playing in the Fiesta Bowl when they've visited ASU, or the Orange Bowl when they've visited the U of Miami...do they really care? If athletes aren't going to UCLA or LSU on recruiting trips, they're already hitting these locations or close to it for spring break. The fossils that think this is a treat for these athletes are completely out of touch with today's society.

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff.

Tell any coach or player you can lose more than one game in the regular season and still be talked about for the 4-team playoff. I dare you. Not to say that it can't happen, especially in the SEC where teams are treated like platinum covered in gold no matter how many games they lose, but this falls back to what you really want from your team. What is the 'end all be all' of your season? Conference championship? BCS game (or soon to be playoff game?) National Championship? If you have a legitimate program, and you're not shooting for the top, this argument is such crap.

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel.

This is true, and especially for fans, but the B1G laid an egg on this one and will only have themselves to blame for it.

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long.

Why? Because there are 478 meaningless bowl games like pitting Michigan Tech and Florida Atlantic clogging December and keeping real teams from competing every week rather than giving them a month to stare at Shamoo at Sea World and sit on the beach staring at their Best Buy gift cards for 3 weeks while wating to play a game?! Is there a rule keeping the Charmin Ultra Bowl between Toledo and Houston playing at the same time as a legitimate playoff game?

*This was one of Harvey's objections:

[/left]

• "The bowl system provides rewarding postseason experiences for far more student-athletes than will ever play in a playoff. We should continue to nurture that system and to permit our student-athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."

[/left]

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls.

Sorry Harvey...but 1)The bowls aren't going anywhere? They probably should've at least for the semi-finals, but you and your cavemen were too busy trying to reinvent the wheel rather than do what is best for the conference. 2) I think you just slapped players and fans squarely across the face if you think it's more important to go shopping courtesy of the bowls and lay on the beach in SEC territory rather than play in front of the greatest fans in the country and have them perform on a national stage at home. If I was a player, I'd pass up a f'ing gift card to play on the big stage in Memorial Stadium and put my team on a pedastal. And the projected numbers for the playoffs were multi-millions above the current system. Maybe instead of sipping Brandy and slapping each other on the back while watching replays of Sandy Koulfax pitch, you should have paid attention to the SEC getting the easy drop on you.

[zoogs]

I think we have a good president too. I think his views represented the views of the entire conference as well.

 

What the heck did he do to you, bshirt, kick your puppy?

[ladyhawke]

Here are the major objections to the college playoffs. I found one quote from Harvey (but didn't find any other of his objections to the playoffs)

 

 

I finally found out what the objections were to the college playoffs:

 

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games.

 

[/left]

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff.

 

[/left]

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel.

 

[/left]

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long.

 

[/left]

*This was one of Harvey's objections:

 

[/left]

• "The bowl system provides rewarding postseason experiences for far more student-athletes than will ever play in a playoff. We should continue to nurture that system and to permit our student-athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."

 

[/left]

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls.

 

[/left]

http://realcollegefo...objections.html

 

[/left]

 

 

Thanks for the rundown, ladyhawke. My retort:

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games.

 

The bowl games were meant to be a reward to show student-athletes a way to see the U.S. Some of the kids back in the 50's and 60's would never leave their backyard if it wasn't for bowl games. Back in the day, that was nice. But athletes these days could really care less. They want National Championships and NFL recognition. These athletes travel anywhere they want to on recruiting visits, so playing in the Fiesta Bowl when they've visited ASU, or the Orange Bowl when they've visited the U of Miami...do they really care? If athletes aren't going to UCLA or LSU on recruiting trips, they're already hitting these locations or close to it for spring break. The fossils that think this is a treat for these athletes are completely out of touch with today's society.

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff.

 

Tell any coach or player you can lose more than one game in the regular season and still be talked about for the 4-team playoff. I dare you. Not to say that it can't happen, especially in the SEC where teams are treated like platinum covered in gold no matter how many games they lose, but this falls back to what you really want from your team. What is the 'end all be all' of your season? Conference championship? BCS game (or soon to be playoff game?) National Championship? If you have a legitimate program, and you're not shooting for the top, this argument is such crap.

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel.

 

This is true, and especially for fans, but the B1G laid an egg on this one and will only have themselves to blame for it.

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long.

 

Why? Because there are 478 meaningless bowl games like pitting Michigan Tech and Florida Atlantic clogging December and keeping real teams from competing every week rather than giving them a month to stare at Shamoo at Sea World and sit on the beach staring at their Best Buy gift cards for 3 weeks while wating to play a game?! Is there a rule keeping the Charmin Ultra Bowl between Toledo and Houston playing at the same time as a legitimate playoff game?

*This was one of Harvey's objections:

 

[/left]

• "The bowl system provides rewarding postseason experiences for far more student-athletes than will ever play in a playoff. We should continue to nurture that system and to permit our student-athletes to enjoy the many benefits of the bowl experience without requiring them to play what is, in effect, the equivalent of an NFL season."

 

[/left]

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls.

 

Sorry Harvey...but 1)The bowls aren't going anywhere? They probably should've at least for the semi-finals, but you and your cavemen were too busy trying to reinvent the wheel rather than do what is best for the conference. 2) I think you just slapped players and fans squarely across the face if you think it's more important to go shopping courtesy of the bowls and lay on the beach in SEC territory rather than play in front of the greatest fans in the country and have them perform on a national stage at home. If I was a player, I'd pass up a f'ing gift card to play on the big stage in Memorial Stadium and put my team on a pedastal. And the projected numbers for the playoffs were multi-millions above the current system. Maybe instead of sipping Brandy and slapping each other on the back while watching replays of Sandy Koulfax pitch, you should have paid attention to the SEC getting the easy drop on you.

Thanks for responding. Here is what I personally think:

Objection #1: A playoff system destroys the long-standing tradition of bowl games: This may sound cruel but do we really need all of the bowls we currently have? I remember when I was a kid we had the Rose/Fiesta/Orange and Cotton bowls. Then as time went by and corporate sponsors started taking over the bowls by way of their sponsorship. We then started having more and more bowls until present where it feels like we have a bowl for every team out there. It's like getting a participation ribbon. Blah! If we use the traditional bowls like the ones I listed above as the playoff sites (unless there is a 'home field advantage') then I think the bowls would be exciting again and very relevant.

Objection #2: The regular season would be devalued by a playoff: Are you kidding me? Football is America's favorite pastime! We watch it continuously and go into deep depression when the season is over. I agree with you! I don't think it will be devalued in the least. In fact, I think it's going to be more exciting!

Objection #3: A playoff would require an unacceptable amount of travel. True. The author of the article shared this: "

That is why a playoff system should consider how much travel teams have to undertake, and consider ways to minimize the financial impact on universities in that regard." So hopefully, the powers that be will take this into consideration when they start discussing the financial issues of the playoff.

Objection #4: A playoff would make the season unacceptably long. This was Harvey's objection. As an educator, I can see his point. Again, the powers that be will have to make sure that they schedule so that the student athletes can have time to study for their finals and take them without too much stress. (For the fans: Since we love college football so much, we're going to LOVE having a longer season! ) Could we take care of a longer season by getting rid of some of those games that we play before our actual conference games start?

Objection #5: The economics of a playoff pale in comparison to the bowls. How they determine this since we haven't had a playoff yet. However, this is the biggest hurdle that will have to be jumped in this whole deal. But you can bet that tv advertisers are going to jump all over the air time for these games. People are going to tune in to the playoffs whether their team is in it or not just like they do during March Madness.

 

Anyway, I've wanted a play off for a long time. I'm glad to see it's happened. The next step will be to see how they choose the committee to oversee all of this. I've heard that the committee will be made up of commissioners and athletic directors along with some coaches. Who would you like to see on that committee?