Can we stop the expand the playoff talk??

[Bad seed]

Things always change. Nothing ever stays the same. That’s the one constant in history. But I get it, you are just someone who doesn’t like change period.

In post #59 I said , "...change and new things aren't always bad, but it usually is in college football."

But change for change's sake isn't a good thing. And change that loses the Pitt - WVU and OU - Nebraska rivalry isn't good. And change that has UGA wearing black jerseys or what BYU did to their classic blue and white several years ago isn't good. Next thing you know, they'll be wanting to put an elephant on Alabama's helmets. We've already lost Col. Rebel and some vermin want to shut down The Eyes of Texas. What's next, replacing the Vol Navy with a public transit barge and having Penn State wear polka dot helmets? Where does it end?

 

[king ward]

College football hasn’t always been big money. That was a 90’s movement. When coaches and schools started making millions, all while telling players they couldn’t profit off their name was wrong. At that point the system became “corrupt” so to say. If a athlete can make money off his name why shouldn’t he be able to do so. Other kids can work and make money what is the difference? I don’t agree with the transfer portal and that was a decision in my opinion that didn’t have to be made. Right or wrong scotus made it’s decision and college football will have to evolve with it.

If your asking my personal opinion, SCOTUS got it right. For the NCAA to tell players they can’t make money off their name while not compensating them monetarily is a conflict of interest at least. Tuition does not count that is not money in their pocket. I am all for cutting the scholarships and making them pay their way with the money they make off playing.

I believe it will get to a point where you will have not option but to pay them and have a salary cap type system to keep the talent at a reasonably distributed stance. That’s the only way not to have the same teams every year. As long as Georgia and Alabama are recruiting like they are nothing will be changed. Then it will be Someone else for a decade. There needs to be more roll over in my opinion.

The option would be to get out of intercollegiate athletics beyond the club level. I'd love to observe the anguished outcry

 

[king ward]

I have not seen a season where the 9th ranked team has any legitimate complaint that they are a national championship contender. I have seen plenty where the 5th ranked team can make that claim.

But not always credibly.

 

[usaguy40]

at this point we need to figure out how to stop this "opt out" crap....and yeah i know Matt Corral got hurt, but this is getting ridiculous.....someone smarter than me, tell me how to stop that....plzzzz....i defer to the "KING"

 

[BattleshipTexas]

But not always credibly.

I agree, usually they can't. But an 8 team playoff deals with an undefeated Oregon who is Pac-10 champ, an undefeated FSU or Clemson that is ACC champ, an undefeated Ohio State or Michigan that is Big Ten champ, an undefeated SEC champ, an undefeated Baylor, TCU or Oklahoma State that is Big 12 champ, and an undefeated Notre Dame. You can have up to six teams, maybe 7 if you have an undefeated Cincinnati or UCF, that can unabashedly claim they clearly deserve a playoff spot. I can't make up a scenario where there are nine like that. Maybe you can get to 8 if an undefeated BYU is seen as strong enough, but they would need some strong out of conference wins for that.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

at this point we need to figure out how to stop this "opt out" crap....and yeah i know Matt Corral got hurt, but this is getting ridiculous.....someone smarter than me, tell me how to stop that....plzzzz....i defer to the "KING"

Opt out by teams should be a forfeit and recorded as a loss.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

That was a fool's decision by SCOTUS. I can't believe it, but now SCOTUS has a hand in the further degradation of college football. The transfer portal is another iceberg in the hull of college football. A player should have to sit out a year, unless their coach left the team. I never really cared for the two year rule if you transferred within your conference. The CFP was a non-starter with me. We already have an NFL, and I don't care if Division 1-AA did it. Good for them. If you wanted a national championship game, a Bowl Coaltion/BCS type solution where teams were released to play in the higher ranked team's conference bowl tie-in would've worked. But it's so much more than all of that. It's things like allowing an overtime, except possibly in the MNC game. It's destroying the Big East, which also rurnt a great basketball league. It's Nebraska in the Big 10 and WVU in the Big 12. It's the demise of the Southwest Conference and Tennessee wearing grey uniforms sometimes. It's just been building for decades and change and new things aren't always bad, but it usually is in college football.

But nobody listens to me when I tell them to get off my lawn.

The Supreme Court ruling was based on antitrust and anticompetitive laws, not constitutional reasons. So Congress could change the law if it wanted to. Doesn't seem like they have any inclination at all to try.

 

[king ward]

I agree, usually they can't. But an 8 team playoff deals with an undefeated Oregon who is Pac-10 champ, an undefeated FSU or Clemson that is ACC champ, an undefeated Ohio State or Michigan that is Big Ten champ, an undefeated SEC champ, an undefeated Baylor, TCU or Oklahoma State that is Big 12 champ, and an undefeated Notre Dame. You can have up to six teams, maybe 7 if you have an undefeated Cincinnati or UCF, that can unabashedly claim they clearly deserve a playoff spot. I can't make up a scenario where there are nine like that. Maybe you can get to 8 if an undefeated BYU is seen as strong enough, but they would need some strong out of conference wins for that.

The committee is able to detect and assess nuance. And they've done a heck of a job. I say let them keep on doing it and let everyone keep arguing about who ought to get in. It's part of the fun and part of the drama.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

The committee is able to detect and assess nuance. And they've done a heck of a job. I say let them keep on doing it and let everyone keep arguing about who ought to get in. It's part of the fun and part of the drama.

I don't think it is fun to have an undefeated team, destroy someone in a Bowl, and claim they are the real champs shafted by the politicized committee whose choices looked sloppy in the NC game. 4 team playoff allows that, but 8 doesn't.

 

[king ward]

I don't think it is fun to have an undefeated team, destroy someone in a Bowl, and claim they are the real champs shafted by the politicized committee whose choices looked sloppy in the NC game. 4 team playoff allows that, but 8 doesn't.

Teams can look sloppy anytime. It's about a lot more than that. As far as I'm concerned, while there might have been occasions where an excluded team had a decent argument for inclusion, there was a team that got in which had an equally valid argument for inclusion. The clearly deserving teams have always gotten in. As long as you have the top two teams in there someplace, you have averted a miscarriage of justice. They've achieved that every time.

 

[jedi_mike]

No it's not. It's a disaster. Might as well make it 64 teams.

Do people think that march madness needs to be cut down to 4 teams? since the top teams is going to win anyways right? If it was,we wouldn’t have had our little run a few years ago. For me I’d love to see a lower ranked team Cinderella there way to a title game and possibly win it.

 

[king ward]

Do people think that march madness needs to be cut down to 4 teams? since the top teams is going to win anyways right? If it was,we wouldn’t have had our little run a few years ago. For me I’d love to see a lower ranked team Cinderella there way to a title game and possibly win it.

Ought to be cut to 24 teams.

 

[DarkCock]

Do people think that march madness needs to be cut down to 4 teams? since the top teams is going to win anyways right? If it was,we wouldn’t have had our little run a few years ago. For me I’d love to see a lower ranked team Cinderella there way to a title game and possibly win it.

Yeah, I would love to grow $100 bills in my backyard. That ain't happening.

#KeepItReal

 

[DarkCock]

Ought to be cut to 24 teams.

I don't know if I agree, but I like your energy.

 

[Flameout12]

Do people think that march madness needs to be cut down to 4 teams?

Matt Corral....
How many FCS or March Madness teams have guys risking NFL draft money?

 

[DarkCock]

Matt Corral....
How many FCS or March Madness teams have guys risking NFL draft money?

Exactly. And it's mostly the Bama/Georgia players who are risking everything. Not the players on the "Cinderella" teams.

 

[jedi_mike]

Yeah, I would love to grow $100 bills in my backyard. That ain't happening.

#KeepItReal

My wife and others around here thinks money is grown on trees. lol.. every once in a while, ill tell them "let me go out back and get a couple hundred off the tree".

 

[jedi_mike]

Matt Corral....
How many FCS or March Madness teams have guys risking NFL draft money?

0% of the march madness teams.FCS teams , few i would guess.

 

[usaguy40]

maybe we should be able to opt out of being married with no consequences(no alimony/child support)....saves one spouse some money, but my wife makes more money than me.....so there's that....lol

 

[usaguy40]

Now that these kids can actually make $ while playing cfb, contracts/scholarships could be restructured. But seriously, many of these kids are looking at life-changing money for them and their families. Why would you jeopardize that to play in another game where you don't get paid?

i get it, but we never had this problem until the last 7/8yrs? this is all relatively new and getting worse.....i wonder what it's going to be like in another 10yrs.....are we gonna have the scout team playing in the bowl games

 

[Lurker123]

In the last 7-8 years, this country has been dominated by a me-first attitude that continues to run rampant. And that attitude doesn't start with these kids. It's too easy to sit back and say, "What's wrong with these kids! They don't have any integrity! They've let down their team".... all while questioning science, refusing to get vaccinated, believing in wild conspiracies (such as the election was stolen), obstructing any attempt at rebuilding the broken parts of this country, and simply shredding any and all "norms" for acceptable behavior.

"Team" spirit is gone in this country and these kids are just part of the culture that's been created. They are not responsible for it.

So instead of complain about how these kids aren't there for your entertainment, maybe look at what you're doing to support a culture that builds instead of destroys and looks at greater good rather than what you can get for yourself.

I was tempted to agree, but the examples put forth seem to be very one sided, as if a single political party is at fault.

My apologies if that's not the way you intended it.

 

[RattleCock]

I remember a time when folks would have responded to a dominant team by trying to make themselves better. Now we just want to change the rules to try stopping them instead. You used to have kids play sports so they learned about teamwork and competition and persevering and all that. Now they’re just learning they can get the rules changed if they can’t win.

 

[wycombecock]

To me it's as simple as the winner of each P5 Conference, with the highest ranked team getting a pass, them playing the lowest seed next round.

The rematch between Alabama and UGA will be boring for me.

 

[RattleCock]

It used to be that everyone, players and fans alike, accepted the meritocracy of the sport. If you got a couple losses, you might believe you’re better than your record, but it was accepted that you’d been weeded out. Now folks reject the meritocracy. “Two losses? So what. We still deserve a shot at the title.” Worse than just rejecting the meritocracy, they expect everyone else to indulge their delusions.