College Football - Bowl Games

[OleMissCub]

[ConstableRabbit]

He was 12/27 for 114 yards and 2 picks in the big ten championship. I’m not convinced he’s a first round talent.

Carolina may have cost itself 5 draft positions with a stupid win over Washington, but the silver lining is they won't have a chance to talk themselves into Fields. He may well end up being great but he's had a few too many of these.

He's literally had 3. And that's counting this 0 turnover game as 1 of them.

 

Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

So he’s good against Nebraska, Penn State, Rutgers, and Michigan State (a collective 12-21 record), is effective but throws a bunch of picks against Indiana, is complete trash against Northwestern, is great against Clemson, and doesn’t turn the ball over but is neutralized against Alabama. It’s not an inspiring body of work.

[raw]

Carolina may have cost itself 5 draft positions with a stupid win over Washington, but the silver lining is they won't have a chance to talk themselves into Fields. He may well end up being great but he's had a few too many of these.

He's literally had 3. And that's counting this 0 turnover game as 1 of them.

 

Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

So he’s good against Nebraska, Penn State, Rutgers, and Michigan State (a collective 12-21 record), is effective but throws a bunch of picks against Indiana, is complete trash against Northwestern, is great against Clemson, and doesn’t turn the ball over but is neutralized against Alabama. It’s not an inspiring body of work.

 

Yes. All after a 40 TD, 1 INT regular season last year with wins and fabulous performances against #8 Wisconsin, 13 Michigan, 8 Penn State (in consecutive weeks, mind you), 13 Wisconsin, 25 Michigan St, the same IU defense that gave him trouble this year and brought back every starter but one, and a Cincinnati team that went 20-2 the following 22 games after facing Fields.

[UMFan83]

I'm a huge fan of expanding the CFP to 8 teams or even 12/16 teams, but I'm starting to even consider that maybe 2 teams is better than 4. It seems like with 4, its virtually guaranteed that 2 of Clemson, Ohio State and Alabama gets in every single year. If I am a 5 star talent and I want to go somewhere with the most exposure, I am going to a school that gets into the CFP 75% of the time. Clemson earned their way into the elite, but now they are pulling ridiculous recruiting classes. Ohio State often drawfs the rest of the Big Ten in recruiting. And of course Bama has so much talent that when their 5 star QB struggles in the first half of the title game they can bring another 5 star in to help the team come back and win.

 

I also hate to cave into this theory because it annoyed me so much when the NCAA wouldn't cave on a playoff but the other Bowls games including the NY6 have reached complete irrelevance. I didn't even watch the last time Michigan was in one (2018 vs. Florida in the Peach Bowl), and it seems the only schools excited about them are the G5 teams that get in because its their one chance to show they can compete with P5 schools. Im not sure how the CFP would cause these games to lose luster...it just seems that way.

 

That's just my unresearched hypothesis. It could be other factors that have shifted the parity of the sport to 3 teams unrelated to the CFP, but either way this horsefeathers is boring. In the first 10 years of the CFP, 9 different schools won the title (Tennessee, FSU, OU, Miami, Ohio St., LSU, USC, Texas, Florida). In the first 7 years of the CFP just 4 teams have (Bama, Clemson, OSU, LSU)

[OleMissCub]

I'm a huge fan of expanding the CFP to 8 teams or even 12/16 teams, but I'm starting to even consider that maybe 2 teams is better than 4. It seems like with 4, its virtually guaranteed that 2 of Clemson, Ohio State and Alabama gets in every single year. If I am a 5 star talent and I want to go somewhere with the most exposure, I am going to a school that gets into the CFP 75% of the time. Clemson earned their way into the elite, but now they are pulling ridiculous recruiting classes. Ohio State often drawfs the rest of the Big Ten in recruiting. And of course Bama has so much talent that when their 5 star QB struggles in the first half of the title game they can bring another 5 star in to help the team come back and win.

 

I also hate to cave into this theory because it annoyed me so much when the NCAA wouldn't cave on a playoff but the other Bowls games including the NY6 have reached complete irrelevance. I didn't even watch the last time Michigan was in one (2018 vs. Florida in the Peach Bowl), and it seems the only schools excited about them are the G5 teams that get in because its their one chance to show they can compete with P5 schools. Im not sure how the CFP would cause these games to lose luster...it just seems that way.

 

That's just my unresearched hypothesis. It could be other factors that have shifted the parity of the sport to 3 teams unrelated to the CFP, but either way this horsefeathers is boring. In the first 10 years of the CFP, 9 different schools won the title (Tennessee, FSU, OU, Miami, Ohio St., LSU, USC, Texas, Florida). In the first 7 years of the CFP just 4 teams have (Bama, Clemson, OSU, LSU)

 

Good post.

 

I'm definitely in the 8 game playoff camp. Play all 4 quarterfinals on New Years Day. Just think about how absolutely insane something like this would be on New Years Day (all times Central and bowls can be interchangeable). That would be the greatest sports day in America

 

Noon - Peach Bowl playoff

3 - Sugar Bowl playoff

6 - Fiesta Bowl playoff

9 - Rose Bowl playoff

 

5 Conference Title winners

2 At Large

1 G5 team

[Derwood]

I'm still down with the 8-team playoff, first round is at home stadiums of the 1-4 seeds. Real homefield advantage, gets rid of the "too much travel" argument (for half the teams, at least) and then puts the final four on New Year's Day

[Andy]

This is more of a theoretical exercise because it clearly won't happen, but I sort of like the idea of reverting to the more traditional bowl tie-ins (with a clear path for great G5 teams like Cincinnati to be included somewhere), then having the top 2 teams following the bowls play for the national title. This year you could've had something like Clemson vs Texas A&M in the Orange Bowl, ND vs Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, Cincinnati vs Oklahoma in the Fiesta or the Cotton, Georgia vs Iowa State in the other one, etc. (The turd in the punch bowl would likely have been Ohio State vs Oregon in the Rose, though.)

 

In reality, we're obviously going to 8. I just hope all the people who've sworn up and down that 8 solves everything don't start complaining again after it becomes obvious that the SEC disproportionately gobbles up the at-large spots and the final 2 are still coming from the group of 4 or 5 schools dominating now.

[Andy]

I'm a huge fan of expanding the CFP to 8 teams or even 12/16 teams, but I'm starting to even consider that maybe 2 teams is better than 4. It seems like with 4, its virtually guaranteed that 2 of Clemson, Ohio State and Alabama gets in every single year. If I am a 5 star talent and I want to go somewhere with the most exposure, I am going to a school that gets into the CFP 75% of the time. Clemson earned their way into the elite, but now they are pulling ridiculous recruiting classes. Ohio State often drawfs the rest of the Big Ten in recruiting. And of course Bama has so much talent that when their 5 star QB struggles in the first half of the title game they can bring another 5 star in to help the team come back and win.

 

I also hate to cave into this theory because it annoyed me so much when the NCAA wouldn't cave on a playoff but the other Bowls games including the NY6 have reached complete irrelevance. I didn't even watch the last time Michigan was in one (2018 vs. Florida in the Peach Bowl), and it seems the only schools excited about them are the G5 teams that get in because its their one chance to show they can compete with P5 schools. Im not sure how the CFP would cause these games to lose luster...it just seems that way.

 

That's just my unresearched hypothesis. It could be other factors that have shifted the parity of the sport to 3 teams unrelated to the CFP, but either way this horsefeathers is boring. In the first 10 years of the CFP, 9 different schools won the title (Tennessee, FSU, OU, Miami, Ohio St., LSU, USC, Texas, Florida). In the first 7 years of the CFP just 4 teams have (Bama, Clemson, OSU, LSU)

 

Good post.

 

I'm definitely in the 8 game playoff camp. Play all 4 quarterfinals on New Years Day. Just think about how absolutely insane something like this would be on New Years Day (all times Central and bowls can be interchangeable). That would be the greatest sports day in America

 

Noon - Peach Bowl playoff

3 - Sugar Bowl playoff

6 - Fiesta Bowl playoff

9 - Rose Bowl playoff

 

5 Conference Title winners

2 At Large

1 G5 team

8 is only happening if ESPN pays for it, and they're never going to go for a system where games are guaranteed to bleed into each other. More likely you're getting 2 days of quarterfinals, and those would probably take place before New Year's Day, with NYD serving as the semifinal day.

 

If I'm college football czar and told I have to design an 8-team playoff, I'm killing the conference title games ('unpaid' kids don't ever need to be playing 16 games, and those games serve little purpose besides money, which an 8-team playoff should theoretically replace). I'm making all the power leagues kill their divisions so the conference schedules are more equitable. I don't care how many conference games anyone plays, but every Power 5 team has to play 10 Power 5 opponents (ND included); most teams are doing that now anyway and the few that aren't will figure it out.

[CubColtPacer]

The issue you guys are talking about is the reason I have lost most of my interest in the sport. The charm of college football was knowing there were these teams that were favored to win, but any given Saturday that could all come crashing down and a new team join the party. Now not only are these teams very unlikely to lose, but even if they do lose during the season they still will make it.

 

I almost feel like the only solution is for several of these schools to form a different division and only play each other and then a couple rivals from the lower division each year. Then you could maybe have some sort of promotion/relegation between divisions. I don't think that will ever happen, but that's the only real way to bring drama back into the sport.

[raw]

I don't understand how 3 straight blowouts in the championship games means the playoff should be expanded. Maybe an extra game makes it more likely an injury evens the playing field some but I agree 2 makes more sense than even 4 at this point.

[Soul]

There’s less than a handful of stacked programs and everyone else fights for scraps. The CFB playoff is a snore, not because the playoff needs to be expanded but because it’s like eating the same thing for dinner every night.

[UMFan83]

I don't understand how 3 straight blowouts in the championship games means the playoff should be expanded. Maybe an extra game makes it more likely an injury evens the playing field some but I agree 2 makes more sense than even 4 at this point.

 

Based on my OP above, my point is that 5 star players want to get the most exposure and play in the biggest games. By far the most exposure is with the CFP. Since Alabama only needs to be a top 4 team, they can sell every recruit on the possibility of playing in the CFP 2-3 times guaranteed. Other fringe CFP type teams cant sell that. Previously with 2 teams, I think there was more emphasis on the prestige of playing in games like the Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl among others. Now it seems like CFP or bust. With 8 teams the hope is that 5 stars will take a closer look at some of those fringe teams that have a much better shot of getting in...and a clearer path, just win your conference. I guess the counter argument is Bama can virtually guarantee making the CFP every year now, but maybe now they aren't the only school that can sell that dream.

 

An example is Najee Harris. Committed to Alabama, but ended up visiting Michigan and was serious enough about the school that Michigan had assigned a dorm room and roommate to him as an early enrollee, which doesn't happen if a prospect is only a possibility. But ultimately he took that plane to Alabama, in large part because of the opportunity to play for championships.

 

Other reasons for expanding the CFP:

 

-Gives conference titles a heck of a lot more meaning, and gives schools with 1-2 losses an incentive to keep playing for a championship. You might need to readjust conference divisions though since the BT West is currently sending teams like an 8-4 Northwestern.

-Allows it so that you can now realistically say every team actually has a shot to win a title going into a year. About 50% of college football goes into every season with 0 shot of making it even if they go undefeated. If the argument is that they aren't on the same level as P5 schools, then create a subdivision and let them play for a title

-Overall just widening the net of schools that can actually make the playoffs...increases excitement, increases the odds for upsets. What I love about college basketball is that there are so many ways to consider a season fulfilling besides winning a championship. If Michigan made the CFP as a wild card and got blown out 77-0 to Alabama, that would still be a more enjoyable season than basically any season since 1997.

 

As college football stands today, I've never had less interest and I think others are starting to feel that way.

[Soul]

You make some good points. Why not limit the number of top prospects a school can get, or put stronger limits on them? That’s basically what the NFL does through the cap.

[WrigleyField 22]

You make some good points. Why not limit the number of top prospects a school can get, or put stronger limits on them? That’s basically what the NFL does through the cap.

One of the final hurdles to just admitting they're a minor league development system?

[ConstableRabbit]

He's literally had 3. And that's counting this 0 turnover game as 1 of them.

 

Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

So he’s good against Nebraska, Penn State, Rutgers, and Michigan State (a collective 12-21 record), is effective but throws a bunch of picks against Indiana, is complete trash against Northwestern, is great against Clemson, and doesn’t turn the ball over but is neutralized against Alabama. It’s not an inspiring body of work.

 

Yes. All after a 40 TD, 1 INT regular season last year with wins and fabulous performances against #8 Wisconsin, 13 Michigan, 8 Penn State (in consecutive weeks, mind you), 13 Wisconsin, 25 Michigan St, the same IU defense that gave him trouble this year and brought back every starter but one, and a Cincinnati team that went 20-2 the following 22 games after facing Fields.

Yes! Fields was awesome last season! But he was decidedly less impressive this year. I guess NFL teams may disagree but I don’t see him as a first round guy and I’d be disappointed if my team took him in the first.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

This wouldn't happen, but if it were up to me I'd expand to 8 and eliminate at larges. Power 5 winners are guaranteed, and a committee owned by the Group of 5 conferences would pick their 3 best champs. Existing selection committee can still do the 1-8 seeding, home sites in mid december for round 1, existing format for the semis and championship.

 

That tips the scales on the super elite teams a little, since they have to win their way through a narrower path. Bama has missed the SEC title game 2 of the last 4 years, Ohio State missed 2 of the last 8 and lost a 3rd. Small schools have a legitmate path now even if they'll always be playing a road game and will rarely win, but that may be enough to tip some recruiting scales with those teams v. bottom of Power 5 teams. And since conference results will be all that matters, you'd probably see more openness in out of conference scheduling(or possibly even more conference games to even out schedules).

 

Alternatively, if you want a similar spirit but more wackiness, take every Power 5 division winner and every Group of 5 conference winner + the best indpendent and follow the same pattern with 16.

[Andy]

You make some good points. Why not limit the number of top prospects a school can get, or put stronger limits on them? That’s basically what the NFL does through the cap.

One of the final hurdles to just admitting they're a minor league development system?

Why do people keep suggesting this? You can't tell 18-year-old kids where they are and aren't allowed to go to school. It's a ridiculous concept. Similarly, I've seen cutting football scholarships again as a suggestion, and that's just not going to happen. The optics of yanking 1,300 scholarships (10 x 130 FBS schools) overnight are awful, and even if the NCAA mandated those 10 scholarships go to other sports instead, it's just not going to get through the court of public opinion.

[WrigleyField 22]

You make some good points. Why not limit the number of top prospects a school can get, or put stronger limits on them? That’s basically what the NFL does through the cap.

One of the final hurdles to just admitting they're a minor league development system?

Why do people keep suggesting this? You can't tell 18-year-old kids where they are and aren't allowed to go to school. It's a ridiculous concept. Similarly, I've seen cutting football scholarships again as a suggestion, and that's just not going to happen. The optics of yanking 1,300 scholarships (10 x 130 FBS schools) overnight are awful, and even if the NCAA mandated those 10 scholarships go to other sports instead, it's just not going to get through the court of public opinion.

I don't think it's a realistic proposal, but I think if the Ncaa wanted to get behind it, they'd get it over the public opinion hump. So I'd say them not wanting to just become a minor league is the hurdle.

Edited January 12, 2021 by WrigleyField 22

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

[UMFan83]

You make some good points. Why not limit the number of top prospects a school can get, or put stronger limits on them? That’s basically what the NFL does through the cap.

One of the final hurdles to just admitting they're a minor league development system?

Why do people keep suggesting this? You can't tell 18-year-old kids where they are and aren't allowed to go to school. It's a ridiculous concept. Similarly, I've seen cutting football scholarships again as a suggestion, and that's just not going to happen. The optics of yanking 1,300 scholarships (10 x 130 FBS schools) overnight are awful, and even if the NCAA mandated those 10 scholarships go to other sports instead, it's just not going to get through the court of public opinion.

 

You aren't telling them where they can and can't go to school. If Bama doesn't have room, they can still attend the school they just won't be able to play football. They probably won't because they want to play football. Just like if a normal high school student doesn't get into the med program of their choice, they can still attend that school if they get accepted into a different program, they just can't study medicine. They probably won't because they want to study medicine. But regardless schools have enrollment limits just like football programs have scholarship limits.

 

That said, I dont think the idea will work for a few other reasons.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

One of the final hurdles to just admitting they're a minor league development system?

Why do people keep suggesting this? You can't tell 18-year-old kids where they are and aren't allowed to go to school. It's a ridiculous concept. Similarly, I've seen cutting football scholarships again as a suggestion, and that's just not going to happen. The optics of yanking 1,300 scholarships (10 x 130 FBS schools) overnight are awful, and even if the NCAA mandated those 10 scholarships go to other sports instead, it's just not going to get through the court of public opinion.

 

You aren't telling them where they can and can't go to school. If Bama doesn't have room, they can still attend the school they just won't be able to play football. They probably won't because they want to play football. Just like if a normal high school student doesn't get into the med program of their choice, they can still attend that school if they get accepted into a different program, they just can't study medicine. They probably won't because they want to study medicine. But regardless schools have enrollment limits just like football programs have scholarship limits.

 

That said, I dont think the idea will work for a few other reasons.

 

You better start paying the players appropriately if you want to do this [expletive].

 

(You should pay them anyways.)

[Andy]

Oddly enough the tweet that crazy person replied to sums up my thoughts pretty nicely. People can have diversity in which teams play in the biggest games or they can have a 'true' national champion. They probably aren't going to get both.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Oddly enough the tweet that crazy person replied to sums up my thoughts pretty nicely. People can have diversity in which teams play in the biggest games or they can have a 'true' national champion. They probably aren't going to get both.

What is funny about that tweet is that I read the outraged responce first. So when I went back and read what he was replying to, I was predisposed to incorrectly read it the same way. So I was confused for a few moments before I realized that the internet tricked my brain into being racist.

[Soul]

Why do people keep suggesting this? You can't tell 18-year-old kids where they are and aren't allowed to go to school. It's a ridiculous concept. Similarly, I've seen cutting football scholarships again as a suggestion, and that's just not going to happen. The optics of yanking 1,300 scholarships (10 x 130 FBS schools) overnight are awful, and even if the NCAA mandated those 10 scholarships go to other sports instead, it's just not going to get through the court of public opinion.

 

You aren't telling them where they can and can't go to school. If Bama doesn't have room, they can still attend the school they just won't be able to play football. They probably won't because they want to play football. Just like if a normal high school student doesn't get into the med program of their choice, they can still attend that school if they get accepted into a different program, they just can't study medicine. They probably won't because they want to study medicine. But regardless schools have enrollment limits just like football programs have scholarship limits.

 

That said, I dont think the idea will work for a few other reasons.

 

You better start paying the players appropriately if you want to do this [expletive].

 

(You should pay them anyways.)

People have to choose one school over another for a myriad of reasons and not all of them are merit. Athletes and non-athletes alike. And if you make other programs more attractive they aren’t going to feel slighted because they can’t get into the couple programs that have a chance. I don’t think it’s as ridiculous an idea as apparently some do.

 

Pay the athletes, I’ve got no problem with that.

 

Ultimately the most ridiculous thing is watching Bama, Clemson, and OSU play on a different level and destroy everything in their path towards an inevitable showdown.

 

B1G even changed their rules mid-stream just to get their one team in the playoffs. It was dumb. Everyone knows that.