Thank Nick Saban and Alabama for playoff expansion

[selmaborntidefan]

I get that. More teams in the playoffs just makes the regular season less important, see CBB.

Ultimately, it would not surprise me to see this set up:

Top 24 teams in the tournament, ala March Madness.

Teams 25-60 play in the bowl games, basically football version of the N.I.T.

I think the bowl games will be going by the wayside with this because I don't think folks are going to fork over money for such games between two teams from a gazillion miles away in a game that doesn't matter.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

I do not believe there will be more drama down to the last regular season game than there is now. Some think it won't be settled until December 5th. Great drama about 12th place? After the initial fever is over I doubt even the Media can make it exciting. The real drama will always be about the four who get the bye.

 

[CraigD]

I will say this now (feel free to bring this up again if I am wrong), no 7-12 seed will ever win the playoff

Think “2010 Bama”. That team lost 3 games (and therefore would have possibly been a low playoff seed, had a 12-team playoff existed) but had the potential to win any game or get hot and win a few games back to back.

I’m not really meaning to disagree, because I think you are right. But a team like 2010 Bama might be able to pull it off.

 

[TideEngineer08]

I think the bowl games will be going by the wayside with this because I don't think folks are going to fork over money for such games between two teams from a gazillion miles away in a game that doesn't matter.

I'm also trying to figure out how fans are going to travel to 3 straight bowl games. Quarters, Semis, and then the championship. We already see dips in attendance in the two current semis.

 

[Ole Man Dan]

Well to be fair to Boise… they didn’t start the nonsense of “we deserve to play for the national championship” even after beating Oklahoma. Utah did and threatened lawsuits and federal legislation. Boise fans really didn’t become a nuisance until the BCS screwed them in 2009. And no I’m not talking about screwing them out of a title game, I’m talking about screwing them out of a big matchup in a BCS game. Really 2010 is when they changed their tune to “ let us play for the NC”.

I'm probably wrong, but I see cup cake games as something that adds to the Win, but hurts peoples strength of schedule. I see quality match ups being a factor when they start naming the 12 team playoffs.
I think this reasoning is why Alabama is now scheduling a few bigger games. I know paying cupcakes helps them, but it isn't worth it if it hurts your strength of schedule, and you don't get a shot at the playoffs because of it.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Should we thank Saban or is he to blame? This lame committee should stick to their contract and redo the deal after it's done. Have we not learned anything from college bball? Nobody cares about the regular season, only march madness. The same will happen to football.

The same has already happened to football. In the old days, ANY loss was bad and a November loss was utter devastation. Now, Clemson can lose to Pitt, and it's framed in the context of "will they drop below fourth in the playoff poll?"

 

[selmaborntidefan]

If they would ever get rid of the group of 5 and go to a system that was universal in rules then this thing would probably solve itself. College football was mortally wounded the moment Utah beat Alabama in 2008.

And more so by the postgame coverage than the actual on-the-field result.

Somewhere in my never-ending collection of sports games on tape converted to DVD, I have the postgame of the 1991 Orange Bowl, and the whole ESPN controversy over whether Colorado or Georgia Tech should be number one. The key argument for Georgia Tech was: a) they were undefeated; b) they had blown out Nebraska while Colorado had struggled against Nebraska. But Lee Corso, himself a former coach, didn't buy the argument. He pointed out that Tech had had five weeks to get ready for a Nebraska team that had five starters missing while Colorado had played the toughest schedule in the nation - which included beating Oklahoma and Nebraska in consecutive weekends, one helluva accomplishment back in those days.

My point isn't who was the right choice but the simple fact even coaches realized that there's a HUGE difference between winning one in the grind and winning one with 5-8 weeks to get ready. And my constant look backs are giving me the reality from old sportswriters that once upon a time EVERYONE understood this truth. That's part of why Big Ten folks (in particular) did not want the bowl games counted in the final results: it's a whole lot easier for the underdog to get up for a bowl game than a team that was firing on all cylinders and now has six weeks off.

But that reality got set by the wayside with Utah in 2008. They finished number two in the polls, and we heard nonsense like, "They beat Alabama by more points than Florida did." OF COURSE THEY DID! Alabama's best offensive lineman didn't even play in the game. If Alabama beats Utah, nobody cares. Utah went into that game knowing that if they lost by 50 points, it would be forgotten by everyone including them. (There's also long been the story out there that Urban Meyer sent "these are Alabama's weaknesses you can exploit" info to Kyle Whittingham).

The one thing Boise did was act like Utah on steroids in 2009, but you are correct. That game more than any created the illusion of Group of Five equivalency.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I do not believe there will be more drama down to the last regular season game than there is now. Some think it won't be settled until December 5th. Great drama about 12th place? After the initial fever is over I doubt even the Media can make it exciting. The real drama will always be about the four who get the bye.

I disagree.

Right now any of us could say that the top four next year for the playoffs will be Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Alabama and even the dumbest poster on this board who said that will (probably) get AT LEAST TWO OF THOSE correct.

There will be a truckload of excitement in places that would not otherwise make a playoff. Like say a one-loss Iowa (2015) or a UCF (2017/2018). Ames, Iowa will have a cow tipping gathering if the Cyclones could just win one more game and make it.

I agree that in general it's not going to change the final four teams more than possibly one occasional upset. The next whine is "we need 16 because it's not fair that the top four get bye weeks to recover while these other 4-loss teams have to play a football game."

 

[Elefantman]

I like the way Jason Gray put it in his article from the WSJ:

There’s no assurance the playing field will level, however. An expanded tournament might simply mean that more schools will now have a shot…to lose to Alabama.

LINK

 

[TideEngineer08]

I like the way Jason Gray put it in his article from the WSJ:



LINK

For now. I get everyone else's frustration. But this melodramatic meltdown over Alabama that so many seem to be having needs to go away. As much as I hate the thought, Nick Saban will retire someday. Everything is going to change when that day comes. As Alabama fans we need to cherish these times. But the rest of the world needs to chill out and appreciate greatness. And... GET BETTER. I know a few programs are trying their best. But there are a few out there that seem to want reality to alter in order to accommodate their feelings.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I like the way Jason Gray put it in his article from the WSJ:



LINK

Wait. I'm told by a bunch of internet morons EVERY YEAR that "Alabama never plays anybody," so this ought to help out all the everybodys we've supposedly been dodging since 2008.

 

[colbysullivan]

I guarantee it, a group of 5 team WILL win a playoff...berth