Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jumbopackage 
Did he watch the first 4 or 5 weeks of the NFL? Did he watch New England - Dallas last week? I haven't seen a SINGLE game through 7 weeks that really meant anything. That's ~40% of your season that's meaningless games. Sure you can look back and see that some teams are bad and some teams are good, but going into every game, they are less and less relevant until you get close the the playoffs. I used to be a pretty big NFL fan, but it's just boring to watch these days.
You are right. I don't care how many hours of coverage the Monday Night Football Networ...err...ESPN trys to use to build up to these MNF games, they have been a snooze fest. Call me in December for the NFL. The same would go for a bracket playoff in NCAA football.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cy'sMatters
So, the college football season will still matter because we play one or two rivalry games a season? And I know that comparing a league of 30 teams to a league of 120 makes a lot of sense.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
I highly doubt that a NCAA Football playoff would devalue the regular season, but I'll play that argument. I'd rather have a season that means absolutely nothing but a postseason where the majority if not all the games actually mean something and an undisputed National Champion at the end of the year as opposed to the system that we have right now where the regular season means something, but you have about 30 bowl games that mean absolutely nothing (including 3-4 BCS games that are mean absolutely nothing but as a fundraising scheme) and have 1-2 meaningful BCS games (depending whether the AP poll is different from the BCS poll, such as it was in 2003 when USC was #1 in the AP, was left out of the BCS championship game, won its bowl game, and split the National Championship with LSU) run the risk every year of having computers put two teams that realistically don't belong in that National Championship game, and run the risk every year of having two National Champions. Excuse me - as long as NCAA D I-A football exists under these conditions I'll find it very hard year in and year out to legitimately believe the team that is crowned as the National Champion actually should be the National Champion.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
travman23 I like it because I can now use his name in place of curse words. For example...
*****bag
*****head
*****hole
Go ***** yourself
:biglaugh:
That's *****d up.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdoggivjc I highly doubt that a NCAA Football playoff would devalue the regular season, but I'll play that argument. I'd rather have a season that means absolutely nothing but a postseason where the majority if not all the games actually mean something and an undisputed National Champion at the end of the year as opposed to the system that we have right now where the regular season means something, but you have about 30 bowl games that mean absolutely nothing (including 3-4 BCS games that are mean absolutely nothing but as a fundraising scheme) and have 1-2 meaningful BCS games (depending whether the AP poll is different from the BCS poll, such as it was in 2003 when USC was #1 in the AP, was left out of the BCS championship game, won its bowl game, and split the National Championship with LSU) run the risk every year of having computers put two teams that realistically don't belong in that National Championship game, and run the risk every year of having two National Champions. Excuse me - as long as NCAA D I-A football exists under these conditions I'll find it very hard year in and year out to legitimately believe the team that is crowned as the National Champion actually should be the National Champion.
THERE IS NO NATIONAL CHAMPION. Plain and simple. It's a totally fictitious thing. It has never existed in 1A football, and probably won't in the foreseeable future. There are AP "champions" there are BCS "champions" there are conference champions, but there is no true national champion, and D1A college football doesn't need one.
Why are you an ISU football fan when we've never come remotely close to even qualifying for a fictional playoff? You're basically saying we've been playing meaningless football for the last 100+ years. If you could trade all 100+ years of ISU football, for ONE national championship, would you do it?
I value the regular season in NCAA football more than I value any other sport. I think it's the most exciting, most interesting, most fun thing in all of athletics.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Why does everyone think the playoff system has to have so many teams. If you look back over the BCS years tell me where a 4 team play off would not have stopped all of the debates? Pick 2 New Years day bowls a year for the 1 vs 3 and the 2 vs 4 games. Then have a Championship game 1 week later like they do now.
:realmad:Problem solved!!!
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
You guys against a playoff have a legitimate argument if you also dismiss other leagues' champions as not being true champions (NCAA Basketball, NFL, MLB, NBA). You're basically saying that each sport should just have one big league with all the teams in it and determine the champion by who has the best record over the course of the whole season. Since you enjoy shooting holes into the proposed playoff system in college football, please let us know how these other leagues should restructure their systems to determine a true champ. All MLB teams play each other 5 times or something? How exciting, each game would mean sooo much!!!
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jumbopackage Why are you an ISU football fan when we've never come remotely close to even qualifying for a fictional playoff? You're basically saying we've been playing meaningless football for the last 100+ years. If you could trade all 100+ years of ISU football, for ONE national championship, would you do it?
1. Because I think ALL games are important, whether they occur in the regular season or postseason.
2. In a sense, haven't we been playing meaningless football for 100+ years? Only the most enlightened fans and experts actually know who we are (instead of confusing us with the Hawkeyes, Illinois St, Indiana St, or Idaho). On top of that, the program has had to have been jumpstarted something like 10 times over the last 50 years, one of those times coming after a meaningless death penalty that bottom line had no effect on our football program because quite frankly our program was that bad before we had those infractions put on us anyway. We daily have raging debates about who was our best football coach ever when basically every candidate in this conversation, whether it's Bruce, Walden, Criner, McCarney, or Chizik, all have losing records at ISU, and the debate happens to usually revolve around who would have done what if they had which facilities. And speaking of coaching and facilities, if football was really that important here, would JP have had to clean house like he has, come up with a Master Plan to get our facilities at least within shooting range of the rest of the conference, and basically get on his hands and knees to the entire Cyclone world in order to get them to donate to the NCC, as well as trying to install just a little bit of passion into what is largely still a listless, passionless fan base?
Quite frankly, football, and the majority of ISU athletics for that matter, HAS NOT MATTERED UNTIL VERY RECENTLY.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TOMMYBOY Why does everyone think the playoff system has to have so many teams. If you look back over the BCS years tell me where a 4 team play off would not have stopped all of the debates? Pick 2 New Years day bowls a year for the 1 vs 3 and the 2 vs 4 games. Then have a Championship game 1 week later like they do now.
:realmad:Problem solved!!!
Boise State would have been excluded from this last year, so no, it doesn't solve any problems, but it is probably a step in the right direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wonkadog You guys against a playoff have a legitimate argument if you also dismiss other leagues' champions as not being true champions (NCAA Basketball, NFL, MLB, NBA). You're basically saying that each sport should just have one big league with all the teams in it and determine the champion by who has the best record over the course of the whole season. Since you enjoy shooting holes into the proposed playoff system in college football, please let us know how these other leagues should restructure their systems to determine a true champ. All MLB teams play each other 5 times or something? How exciting, each game would mean sooo much!!!
I'm not saying they aren't true champions. What I'm saying is that all they had to do to become champions is to win a tournament. It also rewards teams who are playing best at the END of the season, not over the course of the whole season. Just because you were tearing things up at the end of the year, doesn't mean you were good at the beginning, and that doesn't make you the best team that whole year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdoggivjc 1. Because I think ALL games are important, whether they occur in the regular season or postseason.
I think that's exactly what the BCS emphasizes, except that there isn't a post season in NCAA football. The battle for the post season occurs during the regular season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdoggivjc 2. In a sense, haven't we been playing meaningless football for 100+ years? Only the most enlightened fans and experts actually know who we are (instead of confusing us with the Hawkeyes, Illinois St, Indiana St, or Idaho). On top of that, the program has had to have been jumpstarted something like 10 times over the last 50 years, one of those times coming after a meaningless death penalty that bottom line had no effect on our football program because quite frankly our program was that bad before we had those infractions put on us anyway. We daily have raging debates about who was our best football coach ever when basically every candidate in this conversation, whether it's Bruce, Walden, Criner, McCarney, or Chizik, all have losing records at ISU, and the debate happens to usually revolve around who would have done what if they had which facilities. And speaking of coaching and facilities, if football was really that important here, would JP have had to clean house like he has, come up with a Master Plan to get our facilities at least within shooting range of the rest of the conference, and basically get on his hands and knees to the entire Cyclone world in order to get them to donate to the NCC, as well as trying to install just a little bit of passion into what is largely still a listless, passionless fan base?
Quite frankly, football, and the majority of ISU athletics for that matter, HAS NOT MATTERED UNTIL VERY RECENTLY.
Since when does mattering on a national scale define what is meaningful? Does it make a difference who you cheer for? NCAA football isn't about the national championship. It really really isn't. It's the easiest thing to look at, and that's why people talk about it so much, but it really isn't what it's all about, IMO. It's about rivalries and tradition and history. It's about carrying all of that forward and maintaining it. It's about finding an excuse to go to some warm weather place in December or January.
This is the argument that I made when my home state (Indiana) went to class basketball. Everyone complained that it wasn't fair that the small schools had to compete against the 5A schools for one championship. It's true. It's not fair. It'd be like Iowa having to play against Texas or Florida straight up every year in Football with only homegrown kids. My argument was that the important thing wasn't winning the championship, it was playing the season. Maybe beating someone you weren't supposed to - a bigger conference rival for instance - and enjoying watching it all unfold after you get knocked out. Class basketball ruined Indiana high school basketball, and I think a playoff would similarly ruin 1A college football.
If there was a playoff this year, would anyone care about Appy State over Michigan? Or Stanford beating USC? Those games wouldn't have mattered in the least. USC can still win the Pac-10 and still go to a mythical playoff. Michigan could still win the Big 10 and still go to a mythical playoff.
Those games all become meaningless. It would encourage teams to schedule even worse non-conference opponents. It would devalue traditional rivalries, IMO. All for the sake of crowning a "champion" which isn't representative of all of D-1A football since there is no conceivable way that you can make a "fair" tournament with 119 teams and 10 or so games.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TOMMYBOY Why does everyone think the playoff system has to have so many teams. If you look back over the BCS years tell me where a 4 team play off would not have stopped all of the debates? Pick 2 New Years day bowls a year for the 1 vs 3 and the 2 vs 4 games. Then have a Championship game 1 week later like they do now.
:realmad:Problem solved!!!
I've said all along that playing all the bowl games and then having a +2 playoff system with the Rose, Fiesta, Orange, and Sugar Bowl winners would eliminate the whole "National Champion" debate.
And everyone who keeps saying, "Well, MLB does it and NCAA BB does it!!!", do you understand that you can only play soo many football games in a year??? The NFL plays all the way until the end of January and that is a league with only 30 teams!!! NCAABB has a comparable number of teams and has a tournament of 64!!! That would take 2 months in football. I know most argue that of course you are only going to include a 16 team playoff. OK. So, the top 16 teams in the nation move on to a playoff. That's great what about the other 100 teams -- many of which probably had good seasons??? Oh, that's right, keep the 'NIT' bowl games for them.
If everyone is sooo obsessed with having a NATIONAL CHAMPION, do the +2 system after all bowl games are played. None of this even gets into the arguement of fans traveling and all the players who love the bowl system because they get a week somewhere to celebrate as a team before the game is played. Let's eliminate all of that just so we can crown a TRUE NATIONAL CHAMPION in a round robin competition.
I prefer the bowl system for the sole fact that it has benefited ISU financially more in the past than a playoff system would have and will most likely benefit them more in the future. I do expect a Cotton/Fiesta Bowl trip before too long though.
I think the most frustrating thing to those that don't want a playoff is that it seems like everyone in the sports media thinks that ALL fans DO want a playoff. I think it's pretty evident that is not the case.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rogue52 NCAABB has a comparable number of teams and has a tournament of 64!!!
Actually, NCAABB has 200 more schools than D1A NCAAFB. It's a lot easier to maintain a D1 BBall program than a D1A FBall program.
Regardless, the tournament puts 65 teams in (out of 327 ~20 %). 20% of the football teams would be a 24 team cut.
You've also got 32 conferences in college basketball. These get automatic berths into the tournament, leaving ~half the tournament slots open to at-larges. If you were to give every conference in 1A football an automatic playoff berth, you'd fill up 12 slots, leaving only 4 at-large open if you were to do a 16 team playoff. Tell me someone wouldn't whine about Troy making it to a playoff and Ohio State or Michigan not.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rogue52 I think the most frustrating thing to those that don't want a playoff is that it seems like everyone in the sports media thinks that ALL fans DO want a playoff. I think it's pretty evident that is not the case.
No, not ALL fans want a playoff system, just 90% of fans want one.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wonkadog No, not ALL fans want a playoff system, just 90% of fans want one.
Well part of the problem is that nobody ever presents the other side of the argument in a thought-out and logical way. If all the pundits are saying that a playoff is the only way, what do you think the casual fans are going to think? I've actually changed quite a few minds on the subject over the years. People I know are roughly %50-%50 on the idea, with maybe a few more favoring keeping it the way it is with some tweaks than going to a all-out playoff.
Of course most of the debate on Gameday and sports center revolves around which mascot hat Lee Corso is going to put on and which SEC team is the best that particular week.
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wonkadog No, not ALL fans want a playoff system, just 90% of fans want one.
Sorry, it might seem like 90% thanks to the boys at ESPN, but it's not even close. Listen to sports talk radio around the nation and you get a completely different look at things. The major sports networks have the most to gain from a playoff, more money. Oh no! Could it be that someone wants a playoff for more money??? I thought that was only what the big bad Bowl Games did!
Re: ***** on Miller: Playoff System Would Render This Exciting Meaningless
I don't hardly ever watch ESPN other than during games and it has nothing to do with my thoughts on the issue. Maybe in a poll of guys over 50, then it's a split at 50/50 because they love the good ol' boys bowl system but it's time for a freaking change. Go BC!!!
