Stage is being set for playoff expansion

[selmaborntidefan]

I want to quote a column here from a disgusting hack political crony head of a bowl committee and discuss it so that you can see what has evolved in the discussion. This was published just days before Georgia won got lucky and got voted the 1980 national championship. The author is a fella named Nick Crane, and he is listed as the "president of the Orange Bowl committee with the agenda of opposing a playoff because of how much money Miami makes on the Orange Bowl. His column appeared two days before the New Year's Day bowl games via the AP wire.

I will intersperse my comments with his, select quotation only.

Basically, fans want to know, 'Isn't it time that college football had a playoff to determine the national champion?

To which the answer is an unequivocal, "Yes," even in 1980.

I don't think so.

Of course you don't. You're part of the problem.

a college playoff system cannot coexist within the bowl system.

In other words, you just admitted you're a hack for the job you have, which is fine, but cut the crap.

There are many reasons. Perhaps the biggest is finances.

He could have left the word "perhaps" out but apparently nobody wants to admit to liking money. At this point, his column should be complete.

The bowl and playoff systems also could not coexist because the success of bowl festivals is dependent upon the 'live' audience. Participation in all bowl activities by the teams and their followers is vital to success. Without this participation, the bowls could not attract local community support.

In a word, money.

This proposal, which was defeated, would make the Jan. 1. bowls quarterfinal games. That would hurt the Orange Bowl Festival.

Again, money, which is fine. You have an interest and until the day your interests intersect with the fans' interest or you get put out of business by the guy who builds something bigger, screw the fans. I get it.

Most fans use bowl games for family vacations.

Is this true? Serious question - was this actually true in 1981?

To be meaningful, the playoffs would have to include more than the top four teams
Why?

start immediately after the regular season
Why?

and continue until the middle of January.
Again, why?

I mean, I see a bunch of assertions but this is nothing more than the opinion of a guy with his own agenda. Nothing wrong with your own agenda, but everyone has one.

Another reason I favor bowl games over playoffs is to avoid the further dominance of just a few teams.
From 1961 to 1979 - remember, this was written BEFORE UGA won the title -
Alabama - 6 national championships
USC - 5 national championships
Notre Dame - 3 national championships
Oklahoma - 2 national championships
Nebraska - 2 national championships
Texas - 3 national championships

Yes, I see what you mean. A different champion every single year!

Under the bowl system, there are 15 champions every year, each ending its season on a positive note. A playoff system would eliminate these benefits to all except a few teams.

Actually, only one team would win a playoff. But using your logic, we could argue that half of college football ends the season as winners if they just win the final regular season game but DO NOT go to a bowl, right?

The advocates of the playoff - mostly the media and a few coaches

Like I said, "Screw you, fans who pay the money to see the games! Up yours! You don't know what's best for you, WE the bowl committee will tell you what you like and don't need. And what I need is a nice job title with some side benefits and a cushy retirement and HOW DARE YOU threaten my livelihood!"

(After making a somewhat valid point regarding the NFL playoffs, he ends with....)

In college football, you are dealing with more than 140 teams, seven major conferences, scores of Independents, no method to control recruiting to maintain parity, and the fact the players are student athletes who should not be exploited more than they already are.

(Ever notice when these morons make this argument, NEVER ONCE do they EVER propose any kind of "here's what we can do for the athletes specifically" stuff. Never. Nobody was forcing the Orange Bowl to keep all that money).

 

[81usaf92]

I want to quote a column here from a disgusting hack political crony head of a bowl committee and discuss it so that you can see what has evolved in the discussion. This was published just days before Georgia won got lucky and got voted the 1980 national championship. The author is a fella named Nick Crane, and he is listed as the "president of the Orange Bowl committee with the agenda of opposing a playoff because of how much money Miami makes on the Orange Bowl. His column appeared two days before the New Year's Day bowl games via the AP wire.

I will intersperse my comments with his, select quotation only.

Basically, fans want to know, 'Isn't it time that college football had a playoff to determine the national champion?

To which the answer is an unequivocal, "Yes," even in 1980.

I don't think so.

Of course you don't. You're part of the problem.

a college playoff system cannot coexist within the bowl system.

In other words, you just admitted you're a hack for the job you have, which is fine, but cut the crap.

There are many reasons. Perhaps the biggest is finances.

He could have left the word "perhaps" out but apparently nobody wants to admit to liking money. At this point, his column should be complete.

The bowl and playoff systems also could not coexist because the success of bowl festivals is dependent upon the 'live' audience. Participation in all bowl activities by the teams and their followers is vital to success. Without this participation, the bowls could not attract local community support.

In a word, money.

This proposal, which was defeated, would make the Jan. 1. bowls quarterfinal games. That would hurt the Orange Bowl Festival.

Again, money, which is fine. You have an interest and until the day your interests intersect with the fans' interest or you get put out of business by the guy who builds something bigger, screw the fans. I get it.

Most fans use bowl games for family vacations.

Is this true? Serious question - was this actually true in 1981?

To be meaningful, the playoffs would have to include more than the top four teams
Why?

start immediately after the regular season
Why?

and continue until the middle of January.
Again, why?

I mean, I see a bunch of assertions but this is nothing more than the opinion of a guy with his own agenda. Nothing wrong with your own agenda, but everyone has one.

Another reason I favor bowl games over playoffs is to avoid the further dominance of just a few teams.
From 1961 to 1979 - remember, this was written BEFORE UGA won the title -
Alabama - 6 national championships
USC - 5 national championships
Notre Dame - 3 national championships
Oklahoma - 2 national championships
Nebraska - 2 national championships
Texas - 3 national championships

Yes, I see what you mean. A different champion every single year!

Under the bowl system, there are 15 champions every year, each ending its season on a positive note. A playoff system would eliminate these benefits to all except a few teams.

Actually, only one team would win a playoff. But using your logic, we could argue that half of college football ends the season as winners if they just win the final regular season game but DO NOT go to a bowl, right?

The advocates of the playoff - mostly the media and a few coaches

Like I said, "Screw you, fans who pay the money to see the games! Up yours! You don't know what's best for you, WE the bowl committee will tell you what you like and don't need. And what I need is a nice job title with some side benefits and a cushy retirement and HOW DARE YOU threaten my livelihood!"

(After making a somewhat valid point regarding the NFL playoffs, he ends with....)

In college football, you are dealing with more than 140 teams, seven major conferences, scores of Independents, no method to control recruiting to maintain parity, and the fact the players are student athletes who should not be exploited more than they already are.

(Ever notice when these morons make this argument, NEVER ONCE do they EVER propose any kind of "here's what we can do for the athletes specifically" stuff. Never. Nobody was forcing the Orange Bowl to keep all that money).

The bowls were made originally because people couldn’t travel as easily and they effectively became regional accomplishments. College football always needed a playoff if they really wanted “one true champion”. There are way too many teams with way too many varying schedules.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The bowls were made originally because people couldn’t travel as easily and they effectively became regional accomplishments. College football always needed a playoff if they really wanted “one true champion”. There are way too many teams with way too many varying schedules.

Well, the reason the bowls were in warm weather climes was largely because folks don't go on vacation in rural Pennsylvania during the Christmas holidays. They might go see family, but they're not going on "vacation." But we could again, if we wanted to make an issue of it, point the finger at television for making these things so important, too.

When did "the true champion" matter? When did it begin to matter? I mean, in all honesty, a lot of this can be laid at the feet of Alabama and Coach Bryant (for better or worse). As Bill McCartney noted in 1990, you simply cannot plan to win a national championship if you're most schools. You can plan to win your conference and their bowl game, but a national title depends on a bunch of things nobody can control (especially when bowl game contracts are involved).

The key issue, though, is NOW...there's no turning back. We can't resuscitate the old system if we wanted.

 

[81usaf92]

Well, the reason the bowls were in warm weather climes was largely because folks don't go on vacation in rural Pennsylvania during the Christmas holidays. They might go see family, but they're not going on "vacation." But we could again, if we wanted to make an issue of it, point the finger at television for making these things so important, too.

When did "the true champion" matter? When did it begin to matter? I mean, in all honesty, a lot of this can be laid at the feet of Alabama and Coach Bryant (for better or worse). As Bill McCartney noted in 1990, you simply cannot plan to win a national championship if you're most schools. You can plan to win your conference and their bowl game, but a national title depends on a bunch of things nobody can control (especially when bowl game contracts are involved).

The key issue, though, is NOW...there's no turning back. We can't resuscitate the old system if we wanted.

I think Coach Bryant should have advocated for a playoff after 66. With Notre Dame and Michigan St winning political national championships it really showed the flaws in the bowls and the polls.

But like everything else, when you leave a major decision to someone as corrupt and incompetent like Roy Kramer… you are going to expose the business and bring it down. The BCS should have never happened and we should have had small playoff format years ago with a handful of bowls. Now we have the fat cats looking at ways that they can make even more money.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I think Coach Bryant should have advocated for a playoff after 66. With Notre Dame and Michigan St winning political national championships it really showed the flaws in the bowls and the polls.

But like everything else, when you leave a major decision to someone as corrupt and incompetent like Roy Kramer… you are going to expose the business and bring it down. The BCS should have never happened and we should have had small playoff format years ago with a handful of bowls. Now we have the fat cats looking at ways that they can make even more money.

Yeah, but it would have cost:
- the bowls money
- the bowl cities money
- the universities money

AT THAT TIME

We really did get a playoff the moment that they could make more money with it and not one second prior.

And Kramer might make a good bogeyman, but the same thing would have happened, it just would have been somebody else. Bryant always said he was "for a limited playoff" and he also said that while he would not be around to see it, it was going to happen inevitably, too.

You have to remember a key component here: when SCOTUS ruled in 1984 that TV could show any game they wanted, the money the schools brought in plunged by half in less than five years. John Hancock Insurance basically held a gun to the heads of El Paso and told them, "Rename the Sun Bowl or find yourself another sponsor." The TV ruling had as much to do with delaying a playoff as anything else did.

 

[81usaf92]

Yeah, but it would have cost:
- the bowls money
- the bowl cities money
- the universities money

AT THAT TIME

We really did get a playoff the moment that they could make more money with it and not one second prior.

And Kramer might make a good bogeyman, but the same thing would have happened, it just would have been somebody else. Bryant always said he was "for a limited playoff" and he also said that while he would not be around to see it, it was going to happen inevitably, too.

You have to remember a key component here: when SCOTUS ruled in 1984 that TV could show any game they wanted, the money the schools brought in plunged by half in less than five years. John Hancock Insurance basically held a gun to the heads of El Paso and told them, "Rename the Sun Bowl or find yourself another sponsor." The TV ruling had as much to do with delaying a playoff as anything else did.

My point is that everyone that has good football knowledge knows only a handful of teams have a shot at a national championship in each year. Creating an algorithm to decide two teams to play for it was by far the dumbest thing because it exposes that truth. It also exposes the fact that voters sandbag to get matchups too. Too many Alabama fans talk about how great the BCS was, but too few are willing to acknowledge that if you swap Okie St for Texas or Oklahoma in 2011 that Alabama is playing Michigan or Virginia Tech in New Orleans instead of LSU.

The BCS was basically the Monday Night Wars of wrestling. Yes it was good for its initial run, but it’s lasting effects effectively killed the sport because it exposed the back room dealings and how the business operated. The ultimate problem is that the BCS exposed how national champions were determined and who couldn’t be a national champion. It also gave the G5 more exposure in big games and even resulted in big upsets in which they started lawsuits and federal legislation over their non inclusion.

 

[TideEngineer08]

At this point my only request is to get all college football playoff games OFF of Monday night. If we are running into NFL Saturday playoff games, move them to Friday evening. I don't think we will either.

Get the national championship game off Monday night. That's my protest. That's the hill I've chosen to die on.

 

[81usaf92]

At this point my only request is to get all college football playoff games OFF of Monday night. If we are running into NFL Saturday playoff games, move them to Friday evening. I don't think we will either.

Get the national championship game off Monday night. That's my protest. That's the hill I've chosen to die on.

Well like everything it’s due to the NFL. Yes I know someone will say “ well the Falcons”. No disrespect to @selmaborntidefan or @DzynKingRTR but how many times are the Falcons really looking at a home game during January? And like previously stated, NFL ratings are way superior to college. But with the 17 game season there maybe a possibility for Friday games. But I doubt it.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Well like everything it’s due to the NFL. Yes I know someone will say “ well the Falcons”. No disrespect to @selmaborntidefan or @DzynKingRTR but how many times are the Falcons really looking at a home game during January? And like previously stated, NFL ratings are way superior to college. But with the 17 game season there maybe a possibility for Friday games. But I doubt it.

I believe twice in the 24 years that I have lived here

 

[TideEngineer08]

Well like everything it’s due to the NFL. Yes I know someone will say “ well the Falcons”. No disrespect to @selmaborntidefan or @DzynKingRTR but how many times are the Falcons really looking at a home game during January? And like previously stated, NFL ratings are way superior to college. But with the 17 game season there maybe a possibility for Friday games. But I doubt it.

I get it. It's totally the NFL and not wanting to go up against them in the ratings. CFB will lose that battle every time although it would compete well, but its going to lose.

So move it to Friday night. That would be a million times better than a Monday night. If the NFL starts playing Friday night games, well then, throw a rock through Roger Goodell's office window.

 

[81usaf92]

I get it. It's totally the NFL and not wanting to go up against them in the ratings. CFB will lose that battle every time although it would compete well, but its going to lose.

So move it to Friday night. That would be a million times better than a Monday night. If the NFL starts playing Friday night games, well then, throw a rock through Roger Goodell's office window.

It still really is going to depend on what weekend the CFPNCG falls on in the NFL season. If it’s on WC weekend or divisional weekend then it’s going to be Monday. No NFL executive will allow a 24 hr field change affect a game. If it’s a regular season weekend then I’m sure they would allow it.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

My point is that everyone that has good football knowledge knows only a handful of teams have a shot at a national championship in each year.

And that is precisely why I laid out the case on this board, too.

It has ALWAYS been this way. The Non-Northern/Non-Midwestern teams need not apply until Auburn stuffed the ballot box. Then it was the South voting as a bloc while the North voted against them because "segregation."

As I noted, too, what happened is you have a group of complete morons about my age to 20 years older than I who either:
a) never got a whole lot of smarts OR
b) play like they're idiots so they can create a ruckus OR
c) both

and who still look and say, "But Miami built a team and BYU won a title and Colorado and Georgia Tech." It never has dawned on these dolts that the only reason that happened was because of the bowls.

Some people (insert Tim Brando reference right here) will complain no matter what.

Creating an algorithm to decide two teams to play for it was by far the dumbest thing because it exposes that truth. It also exposes the fact that voters sandbag to get matchups too. Too many Alabama fans talk about how great the BCS was, but too few are willing to acknowledge that if you swap Okie St for Texas or Oklahoma in 2011 that Alabama is playing Michigan or Virginia Tech in New Orleans instead of LSU.

Well, I'll admit that but the same is probably true if Ohio State is facing Texas or OU rather than Baylor and TCU in 2014, too.

The BCS was basically the Monday Night Wars of wrestling. Yes it was good for its initial run, but it’s lasting effects effectively killed the sport because it exposed the back room dealings and how the business operated. The ultimate problem is that the BCS exposed how national champions were determined and who couldn’t be a national champion. It also gave the G5 more exposure in big games and even resulted in big upsets in which they started lawsuits and federal legislation over their non inclusion.

Which is why I think the big teams should simply not schedule them.

 

[81usaf92]

And that is precisely why I laid out the case on this board, too.

It has ALWAYS been this way. The Non-Northern/Non-Midwestern teams need not apply until Auburn stuffed the ballot box. Then it was the South voting as a bloc while the North voted against them because "segregation."

As I noted, too, what happened is you have a group of complete morons about my age to 20 years older than I who either:
a) never got a whole lot of smarts OR
b) play like they're idiots so they can create a ruckus OR
c) both

and who still look and say, "But Miami built a team and BYU won a title and Colorado and Georgia Tech." It never has dawned on these dolts that the only reason that happened was because of the bowls.

Some people (insert Tim Brando reference right here) will complain no matter what.

But that’s the issue. The bowls embraced chaos while the BCS showed a narrow path. While many applaud the latter, let’s not act like the BCS hasn’t produced controversial champions. The moment that USC and LSU shared a championship because a dumb computer was too dumb to punish Oklahoma we should have gone to a playoff. Imagine if Alabama had gone undefeated in 2005… i seriously doubt many on here would be making threads in support of the BCS when that would’ve resulted in 3 straight seasons in which the true champion was disputed.

But it goes back to the biggest issue. You can’t have meaningful bowl games with a true national championship setup. Had these morons accepted this back in the early 90’s then Roy Kramer wouldn’t have had the opportunity to ruin college football with “a true national championship”

Well, I'll admit that but the same is probably true if Ohio State is facing Texas or OU rather than Baylor and TCU in 2014, too.

True but again if we are keeping score the BCS has gotten it wrong way more times than the playoffs in terms of participants.

Also, Okie St’s resume was far more impressive in 2011 than 2014 TCU. The gap between TCU and Ohio St wasn’t that far and Ohio St had an additional data point with the conference championship. Okie St was straight sandbagged by the human voters and really the only argument was Alabama’s roster.

Which is why I think the big teams should simply not schedule them.

No but you can’t fix stupid.

 

[TideEngineer08]

It still really is going to depend on what weekend the CFPNCG falls on in the NFL season. If it’s on WC weekend or divisional weekend then it’s going to be Monday. No NFL executive will allow a 24 hr field change affect a game. If it’s a regular season weekend then I’m sure they would allow it.

I did not consider the venue. If it's an NFL venue you are correct, and I guess there is a 100% chance it will be...

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I did not consider the venue. If it's an NFL venue you are correct, and I guess there is a 100% chance it will be...

It's funny given I'm old enough to remember:

January 1, 1982 - Clemson beats Nebraska in the Orange Bowl to win the national championship
January 2, 1982 - Miami and San Diego play one of the greatest games in NFL history on the same field.

 

[81usaf92]

I did not consider the venue. If it's an NFL venue you are correct, and I guess there is a 100% chance it will be...

The problem is that major college football is full of a bunch of people who complain about things not being fair and that’s why we can’t agree on home playoff games. Now we have gotten to the point in which the national championship game rotates like the old way Super Bowls did.

The national championship should be in Dallas and the semifinals should rotate between the Rose and Sugar and then Fiesta and Peach every year. That way no one could whine about the site being too advantageous for some, and the game wouldn’t affect a NFL team that isn’t accustomed to sharing weeks with college crowds.

 

[81usaf92]

It's funny given I'm old enough to remember:

January 1, 1982 - Clemson beats Nebraska in the Orange Bowl to win the national championship
January 2, 1982 - Miami and San Diego play one of the greatest games in NFL history on the same field.

But what you are leaving out is that the NFL wasn’t quite as big or analytical as it is today. Belichick was seriously asking a ref before his last super bowl if they could postpone kickoff 30 minutes just because they briefly opened the roof for a fly over. Many NFL teams and executives are deeply superstitious about ground conditions and how the fields look on tv. It’s why the multi purpose stadiums are becoming a thing of the past.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

But what you are leaving out is that the NFL wasn’t quite as big or analytical as it is today. Belichick was seriously asking a ref before his last super bowl if they could postpone kickoff 30 minutes just because they briefly opened the roof for a fly over. Many NFL teams and executives are deeply superstitious about ground conditions and how the fields look on tv. It’s why the multi purpose stadiums are becoming a thing of the past.

Nah, I get that. It's just stupid all the way around.

 

[81usaf92]

Nah, I get that. It's just stupid all the way around.

Like I said. If they just found a permanent central location like Dallas that is used to having college football and NFL games on the same weekend then it would be a lot better and easier.

 

[PaulD]

I see that the Pac-12 wants to change the proposal from the top 6 conference champions to automatic bids for the Power 5 conferences. The only one that helps is the Pac-12. What do you do if you have a 7-5 division champion upset a 12-0 division champion? Under the original proposal, the conference champion likely wouldn't make it, but the now-12-1 team probably would. With the Pac-12 idea, an 8-5 team would also get a slot.