2014 College Football Playoff

[tschu]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree, also I dont want to diminish the bowl games. While #5 had a valid complaint this year, so would #9, as would 17 etc. Keep it at four, and make sure the SEC never wins again.

 

Bowl games? How would it diminish the bowl games if they would be rotating. 8 teams makes sure the Power 5 conference champions get in and at larges. I don't get how the regular season is watered down though. N

 

 

College Football wants us to watch the 'NY6' bowls in the same way we used to watch all the Jan 1st major bowls. Problem is as they expand the playoff, the other bowls are playing for less and less. Also this year the timing was troublesome, if you were on the West Coast, the Peach Bowl kicked off at 9:30am on a Wednesday.

 

How so? The BCS system used one game to decide it's champion. All the other major bowls like the Rose or Fiesta that weren't the NC game were basically meaningless when it came down choosing a NC. These major bowl games are being absorbed into the playoff system. I hardly see how that would diminish their value.

 

 

Yeah I love the stupidity of that argument. It would be like back in 1939, saying "Well if we create this official NCAA basketball tournament, then the NIT won't mean as much!!!!!!"

 

Yeah, but the games that replace it, or in this case, those same games (Rose/Sugar etc) mean even more. We aren't losing meaning or viewership or excitement at all...it's being shifted around slightly, and the end result is that we're gaining it.

[Mavric]

College Football wants us to watch the 'NY6' bowls in the same way we used to watch all the Jan 1st major bowls. Problem is as they expand the playoff, the other bowls are playing for less and less. Also this year the timing was troublesome, if you were on the West Coast, the Peach Bowl kicked off at 9:30am on a Wednesday.

Which "other" bowls meant less this year than they have in previous years?

[Notre Dame Joe]

 

College Football wants us to watch the 'NY6' bowls in the same way we used to watch all the Jan 1st major bowls. Problem is as they expand the playoff, the other bowls are playing for less and less. Also this year the timing was troublesome, if you were on the West Coast, the Peach Bowl kicked off at 9:30am on a Wednesday.

Which "other" bowls meant less this year than they have in previous years?

 

 

Huskers should remember when the Orange Bowl was always must see tv and often the winner was the national champion. Now they have to use their contracts to select teams worth watching. In the future there will be some Oranges pitting Notre Dame vs ACC #2 (who is already on ND's regular schedule). Boring.

 

The Rose will take a hit when it isn't a playoff, this year would have been Arizona vs Wisconsin, compared to TCU vs Wisconsin where the Frogs were playing for a credible share of the national title even if not the official argue (and probably playing for a conference invite).

 

The Peach and Cotton should be better, as they are being promoted. Still it's not like the old NYD when any bowl could affect the national title.

 

AND Drunkoffpunch teams played for their final AP ranking since it was a viable talking point since things were not run by computer/committee. Even in the BCS bowls like Oregon-KSU they played for a top 3 ranking and the right to claim they should have played for the title.

[Mavric]

 

 

College Football wants us to watch the 'NY6' bowls in the same way we used to watch all the Jan 1st major bowls. Problem is as they expand the playoff, the other bowls are playing for less and less. Also this year the timing was troublesome, if you were on the West Coast, the Peach Bowl kicked off at 9:30am on a Wednesday.

Which "other" bowls meant less this year than they have in previous years?

 

 

Huskers should remember when the Orange Bowl was always must see tv and often the winner was the national champion. Now they have to use their contracts to select teams worth watching. In the future there will be some Oranges pitting Notre Dame vs ACC #2 (who is already on ND's regular schedule). Boring.

 

The Rose will take a hit when it isn't a playoff, this year would have been Arizona vs Wisconsin, compared to TCU vs Wisconsin where the Frogs were playing for a credible share of the national title even if not the official argue (and probably playing for a conference invite).

 

The Peach and Cotton should be better, as they are being promoted. Still it's not like the old NYD when any bowl could affect the national title.

 

AND Drunkoffpunch teams played for their final AP ranking since it was a viable talking point since things were not run by computer/committee. Even in the BCS bowls like Oregon-KSU they played for a top 3 ranking and the right to claim they should have played for the title.

 

 

So basically the Orange Bowl is in the same boat it's been for the last decade. The Rose Bowl is in the same boat it's been for the last half-century. And the Peach and Cotton probably have better match-ups than they've had in 20 years.

 

Got it.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

College Football wants us to watch the 'NY6' bowls in the same way we used to watch all the Jan 1st major bowls. Problem is as they expand the playoff, the other bowls are playing for less and less. Also this year the timing was troublesome, if you were on the West Coast, the Peach Bowl kicked off at 9:30am on a Wednesday.

Which "other" bowls meant less this year than they have in previous years?

 

 

Huskers should remember when the Orange Bowl was always must see tv and often the winner was the national champion. Now they have to use their contracts to select teams worth watching. In the future there will be some Oranges pitting Notre Dame vs ACC #2 (who is already on ND's regular schedule). Boring.

 

The Rose will take a hit when it isn't a playoff, this year would have been Arizona vs Wisconsin, compared to TCU vs Wisconsin where the Frogs were playing for a credible share of the national title even if not the official argue (and probably playing for a conference invite).

 

The Peach and Cotton should be better, as they are being promoted. Still it's not like the old NYD when any bowl could affect the national title.

 

AND Drunkoffpunch teams played for their final AP ranking since it was a viable talking point since things were not run by computer/committee. Even in the BCS bowls like Oregon-KSU they played for a top 3 ranking and the right to claim they should have played for the title.

 

The Orange bowl only meant something because there was a contract between the Big 8 and what ever conference the florida teams were in and they happened to be good teams that were playing for a championship. That is the ONLY reason. It wasn't some grand scheme that made this great Orange Bowl game one of the deciding factors in the NC. If the winner of the Big 8 was ranked 25, they were still in that game and it meant nothing.

 

The Rose bowl for decades meant nothing (most years) because the champions of the Pac 10 and the Big 10 weren't anywhere close to winning anything substantially. But...hey...everyone watched because we would turn it on and hear constantly how it was the "Grand Daddy of them all". But, the game meant nothing.

 

So, I fail to see how these bowls have all of a sudden become meaningless just because a playoff system was put in place. In fact, NONE of the bowl games have reduced in meaning. for 99% of them, it only meant something to the players, the fans of that team and maybe the fans of that conference that wanted to see their conference do well. Other than that, they are literally meaningless.

 

This entire argument about OMG....the bowl system was so miraculous that we shouldn't put a play off system in place because it will ruin it is total hog wash and anyone trying to still argue that is either delusional or refuses to see reality.

I think I saw where the first round of the playoffs was extremely highly ranked TV as far as viewership. The last few years, the viewership of the championship game (if I remember right) had fallen.

 

I honestly can not believe there is someone still trying to argue that this year's bowl season and playoffs weren't the most exciting post season in college football in a very very very long time. There is no reason why that should change if not get even better in the future years.

[DrunkOffPunch]

 

 

 

College Football wants us to watch the 'NY6' bowls in the same way we used to watch all the Jan 1st major bowls. Problem is as they expand the playoff, the other bowls are playing for less and less. Also this year the timing was troublesome, if you were on the West Coast, the Peach Bowl kicked off at 9:30am on a Wednesday.

Which "other" bowls meant less this year than they have in previous years?

Huskers should remember when the Orange Bowl was always must see tv and often the winner was the national champion. Now they have to use their contracts to select teams worth watching. In the future there will be some Oranges pitting Notre Dame vs ACC #2 (who is already on ND's regular schedule). Boring.

 

The Rose will take a hit when it isn't a playoff, this year would have been Arizona vs Wisconsin, compared to TCU vs Wisconsin where the Frogs were playing for a credible share of the national title even if not the official argue (and probably playing for a conference invite).

 

The Peach and Cotton should be better, as they are being promoted. Still it's not like the old NYD when any bowl could affect the national title.

 

AND Drunkoffpunch teams played for their final AP ranking since it was a viable talking point since things were not run by computer/committee. Even in the BCS bowls like Oregon-KSU they played for a top 3 ranking and the right to claim they should have played for the title.

That's exactly my point. They weren't playing for hardware they were playing so they could complain they weren't in the NC game. The winner of this years game would've been Bama or FSU and Oregon and OSU would've been playing for a 'ranking.'

[Notre Dame Joe]

You're equating "not playing for a declared national title" as 'meaningless' which I've explained is not the case for the schools that played and won Jan 1st bowls. Hardly something I'd expect from Huskers. Ask the Sooners if their recent Sugar Bowl meant anything.

 

FYI, the NY6 ratings for the 4 other bowls were down, not up, from the BCS years. There's a lot of factors that go into tv ratings, such as playing on Dec 31st when many fans have to go to work, but it's hardly a reason to declare the experiment a resounding success. Finally, the playoff devalues the regular season more than the bowls [the BCS did that] because there are fewer must win games.

[Mavric]

Finally, the playoff devalues the regular season more than the bowls [the BCS did that] because there are fewer must win games.

 

This is completely untrue but try to keep selling this story.

[Notre Dame Joe]

 

Finally, the playoff devalues the regular season more than the bowls [the BCS did that] because there are fewer must win games.

 

This is completely untrue but try to keep selling this story.

 

 

Tell me why.

[Mavric]

 

 

Finally, the playoff devalues the regular season more than the bowls [the BCS did that] because there are fewer must win games.

 

This is completely untrue but try to keep selling this story.

 

 

Tell me why.

 

 

How many more losses did any of the Playoff participants have than most National Championship Game participants over the last 10 years?

[Notre Dame Joe]

 

 

 

Finally, the playoff devalues the regular season more than the bowls [the BCS did that] because there are fewer must win games.

 

This is completely untrue but try to keep selling this story.

 

 

Tell me why.

 

 

How many more losses did any of the Playoff participants have than most National Championship Game participants over the last 10 years?

 

 

Because 1 loss teams won titles most of the decade, their losses are not diminished? okay. How many more losses did they have then most excluded from the BCS national title game (that they would play in but for that loss)?

[Mavric]

Not diminished any more than one loss any other year.

 

I really don't know what you're asking with your second question. They had the same or fewer. ???

[Notre Dame Joe]

Not diminished any more than one loss any other year.

 

I really don't know what you're asking with your second question. They had the same or fewer. ???

 

The national title chances were diminished (often destroyed) by a loss more in the BCS era than any other time. The BCS story is a litter of 1 loss teams that were frozen out of the BCSCG. That's why I said the BCS didn't really hurt the regular season as much as the other bowls.

 

The playoff does the opposite by taking value from the regular season. In the first playoff year, two teams got a mulligans. And if/when they water down the playoff to 8, then teams like Sparty will get their 3rd shot.

[ZRod]

 

Not diminished any more than one loss any other year.

 

I really don't know what you're asking with your second question. They had the same or fewer. ???

 

The national title chances were diminished (often destroyed) by a loss more in the BCS era than any other time. The BCS story is a litter of 1 loss teams that were frozen out of the BCSCG. That's why I said the BCS didn't really hurt the regular season as much as the other bowls.

 

The playoff does the opposite by taking value from the regular season. In the first playoff year, two teams got a mulligans. And if/when they water down the playoff to 8, then teams like Sparty will get their 3rd shot.

 

Or did we see that an undefeated team, and a one loss team maybe weren't as good as their record (or conference clout) reflected when they met equal or greater competition?

[Mavric]

 

Not diminished any more than one loss any other year.

 

I really don't know what you're asking with your second question. They had the same or fewer. ???

 

The national title chances were diminished (often destroyed) by a loss more in the BCS era than any other time. The BCS story is a litter of 1 loss teams that were frozen out of the BCSCG. That's why I said the BCS didn't really hurt the regular season as much as the other bowls.

 

The playoff does the opposite by taking value from the regular season. In the first playoff year, two teams got a mulligans. And if/when they water down the playoff to 8, then teams like Sparty will get their 3rd shot.

 

 

But you're only looking at one side of the coin. The games coming down the stretch this year for Ohio State, TCU, Baylor and Oregon would have meant basically nothing in years past. Now they were still playing for a chance at a National Championship.