🏈 Great point on Outside the Lines on the playoffs in college football. It's one I hadn't considered.

[TerryP]

Travel.

Consider the traveling fan base. How many would be able, or willling, to travel to three, maybe four, games in the playoff season?

If we were playing in New Orleans one week. Sure, we get a following. But, let's assume it's a week later and we are playing Oregon in Arizona. How many are going then? Enough to fill the stadium if it's game just to get to the semi's?

Am I going to hear "corporate sponsorships" and "free tickets" as the reason the stadium is full? That's a pretty boring venue if you ask me.

 

[Southern Bama]

In theory, a playoff system is the "fix all" to college football. My opinion is that its another Pandoras box just waiting......not unlike paying student athletes. My biggest complaint is this....just how many games can be asked of a student athlete ? Do we want to ask these kids to play 15 or 16 games ? The traveling fanbase issue is also one that I havnt thought of either.....legit point. College football is not professional football......and i look forward to the day when people quit trying to make it that way.

 

[BigAl]

In theory, a playoff system is the "fix all" to college football. My opinion is that its another Pandoras box just waiting......not unlike paying student athletes. My biggest complaint is this....just how many games can be asked of a student athlete ? Do we want to ask these kids to play 15 or not forget 16 games ? The traveling fanbase issue is also one that I havnt thought of either.....legit point. College football is not professional football......and i look forward to the day when people quit trying to make it that way.

And lets not forget the student athletes have to be able to perform in the classroom as well Monday thru Friday. This is not a perfect world we live in. These kids are students first and athletes second the older i get the more i realize that.

 

[LBS]

"Too many games" has never held water. High School state champions play more games. Every other division in college football plays more games. Pro football plays more games. All spend as much time in class as "D1", and the pros spend even more. Why are D1 players for fragile?

Playoffs at campus stadiums is difficult at best. Consider this, how would a small rural town cope if one Saturday night they are watching a round one game, and if they win they will host the next week with 85k people will show up. The town has not planned for, nor budgeted for that event, and 7 days notice is not enough time to do it safely. NFL cities have that capability. Auburn Alabama, Clemson S.C., Ames Iowa, Pullman Washington, Boise Idaho...have no chance.

Travel is not easy, but it can be done by the fan. How do BAMA fans cope with not know if we will be playing in Atlanta a week after the Auburn game? When figure it out and still pack the house. How do we cope with the attending both a Conference Championship Game and a Bowl game? Most what both on tv. Many attend one or the other. Few attend both. We cope. Bama copes. But the issue is how would the fan bases for an entire playoff field cope?

Currently we have over 60 teams' fan bases sustain over 30 bowls, granted that's one one game and they have 3-5 weeks to pull it off. This is why any playoff format must remain small, to reduced the number of weeks of play which increases the likelihood of sustained support on short notice.

No more than one round could be held on campus, lest they over tax the local town. (This is where Corperate help can make it possible for these towns). After that College Football would have to lean on larger cities who can pull off supporting the games.

 

[russb8903]

"Too many games" has never held water. High School state champions play more games.

Do they travel across the country to do so? Are high school academics even half as demanding as college? This argument doesn't hold water either.

 

['65 Cobra]

I have mixed emotions about a playoff system. On the one hand, it seems unreasonable that an SEC school - having already played a half dozen playoff level games during the regular season - should have to play more. On the other hand, a battle tested but one or two loss SEC school would then have the opportunity to run the table. Perhaps an interim step of a "plus one" system where the winners of the top two bowls play one more game would make some sense to start.

Either way, having a month between the last game of the regular season and the bowl game is ridiculous and that part of all of this needs to be somehow squeezed.

 

[LBS]

Do they travel across the country to do so? Are high school academics even half as demanding as college? This argument doesn't hold water either.

If you're going to make an APPLES TO APPLES arguement, keep it that way. If its APPLES TO OREANGES, bring out all the points.

APPLES TO ORANGES
High Schools arguable have the hardest road in that their games are mostly played on a school day, meaning every visiting team will almost certainly miss class time. Plus, as a head count, there are many more High Schoolers who are impacted than would be impacted with a FBS playoff system. And, (in theory) every FBS player is vetted as a student as someone who in college material with the potential to graduate. True, the academic is more junior, but so also are the students, and the those students stand struggle more than the college students for many reason. First, by being in college they are much more apt at learning whatever the next subject is. Second, the universities provide academic support on levels that High Schoolers never get from their school.

APPLES TO APPLES
FCS players, again many more than would make the FBS playoffs, don't often take a 3 hr flight to their next game. They are more likely to take 5 hour bus ride in playoff situations. But planes, train, or automobile is not the point. The point is the impact on academics. Both levels try to schedule classes at times that accomedate practice, meeting, and travel. Both levels are purposeful of keeping their STUDENT-Athletes academically eligable, with tutors and dedicated study times. I'm calling this APPLES TO APPLES, but if anything the FBS schools would have an advantage because the schools have more motivation (i.e. $$$) riding on keeping the players eligable, and the resources to do it.

APPLES TO (to be honest I don't know how to describe Pros here)
Professional football is on a whole different level. Every player is at least the equivelant of a fulltime student - in football. This is their job and there are no limits places on them about how long they can focus on football. The only reason that I bring this out is that the Pros do play a really long season and successful study (not Biology or History, but Football) is not a hindered. Other than staying healthy, being smart in your subject is key to success. The Teams have Millions invested in this truth. If study was worthless, then they would not invest so much time in to. Right the opposite, study during a long season is possible and is a way of life...just like it is with the FCS...just like in High School.

 

[LBS]

I have mixed emotions about a playoff system. On the one hand, it seems unreasonable that an SEC school - having already played a half dozen playoff level games during the regular season - should have to play more. On the other hand, a battle tested but one or two loss SEC school would then have the opportunity to run the table. Perhaps an interim step of a "plus one" system where the winners of the top two bowls play one more game would make some sense to start.

Either way, having a month between the last game of the regular season and the bowl game is ridiculous and that part of all of this needs to be somehow squeezed.

I am so with you on these issues '65.

If SEC Teams make up a third the field in a playoff (which they might), I would bet that one of us would win it all(and potenially have an all SEC NC Game). However, the more games that we play the less likely any one of us will be to be the one. The Playoff system favors our numbers, but not our individuals.

As I understand it, in a Plus One situation the best two winners of BCS level bowls would play one more for the title. We stand to lose big time in that we have routinely received a second BCS birth because our champion was in the title game, and in a Plus One the SEC champ would have to play and win both for the conference to get the title. This bumps "last season's Arkansas" down, and in the end the SEC has a member sit at home because the champ is playing a double hitter.

Plus One is a consession to those who think a man-kind will die if the FBS joins the rest of competitive football. The Playoff scares rest of college football because the polls will still determine who can win it, and the Bowl game money bonanza will be threatened (although I don't understand that arguement).

 

[russb8903]

I could not disagree more with the idea that high schools have the hardest road. For better or worse, high school demands very little outside work, essentially nothing compared to most college majors. You also need to remember that many of those high school players would not be going home and studying were it not for football. It's more likely in some cases that the time commitment with football is keeping them out of trouble. With that said, I feel that since most high school games are played in district, on Friday night, there is minimal academic impact at this level.


"And, (in theory) every FBS player is vetted as a student as someone who in college material with the potential to graduate."

As a fan, I love our team, and the effort out players put in, but come on. We were recruiting a guy at one point that had a 900 on his SAT. Lets be honest, were it not for football, many players at every school would not be in school.

The FCS is the only aspect you've raised that I would say has some merit. All I'll say here is just because it can be done, doesn't mean it should be done, or that it is in the player's best interests. Even with the far greater availability of training services and the like in the event of injury, I feel that more games at the D1 level is far more taxing that FCS. The players are simply far more powerful. As we well know, so many are injured every year. If you add 4 games a year, how many more players are going to receive career, or life, changing injuries? Just statistically speaking it will happen, not even considering that the bodies have been worn down by a season of play. This risk doesn't warrant what is in my opinion, little return.

Regarding the NFL, I'm dubious of your argument about the study of football. Granting it though, that doesn't change the fact that NFL players pitched a fit at the prospect of adding any more games to their schedule, asserting it as fully taxing already.

 

[Joe]

Travel.

Consider the traveling fan base. How many would be able, or willling, to travel to three, maybe four, games in the playoff season?

If we were playing in New Orleans one week. Sure, we get a following. But, let's assume it's a week later and we are playing Oregon in Arizona. How many are going then? Enough to fill the stadium if it's game just to get to the semi's?

Am I going to hear "corporate sponsorships" and "free tickets" as the reason the stadium is full? That's a pretty boring venue if you ask me.

Travel is not a problem if the games are played on the highest seeds campus.The same 10,000 fans don't travel every week to away games anyway. The championship game can be at a neutral site. The arguments for a playoff in the book Death to the BCS has still not been answered in my opinion.

I am for a playoff where only BCS conference champions make it to the playoffs. The non-BCS schools can have their own separate playoff. It seems absurd to me that a team can be national champion and yet finish second in their conference like Oklahoma attempted to do a few years back.

 

[LBS]

I could not disagree more with the idea that high schools have the hardest road. For better or worse, high school demands very little outside work, essentially nothing compared to most college majors. You also need to remember that many of those high school players would not be going home and studying were it not for football. It's more likely in some cases that the time commitment with football is keeping them out of trouble. With that said, I feel that since most high school games are played in district, on Friday night, there is minimal academic impact at this level.


"And, (in theory) every FBS player is vetted as a student as someone who in college material with the potential to graduate."

As a fan, I love our team, and the effort out players put in, but come on. We were recruiting a guy at one point that had a 900 on his SAT. Lets be honest, were it not for football, many players at every school would not be in school.

Most High School games are indeed played relatively close, but this was never about most games. It was about weeks 13, 14, 15...which some states play to win a championship. In those late weeks it is almost certainly a long bus ride and often an overnight stay vice a flight back the night of.

To the point, I coached High School football for a number of years and I can tell you that I have seen academic impact as very real. I can tell you that there is significant impact for a student who misses half a day of school for travel in the fall, because there are no Bryant Hall Academic centers, or staffs of tutors available for every subject. These kids don't live on or near campus so that they can participate in study groups virtually at will. If the teenager, his parents (who more than likely are not educators themselves), and the teachers are not on their A-game, the players often struggle. That's the academic impact of playoffs. On the flip side, I have seen grades spike in the spring. The only factor that changes is the football.


If FBS teams and other elite level sports did not have a good thing going academically, and if there was not a misconception about academics and athletics, the NCAA would not be running commercials boasting about the fact that the average college athlete carries a high GPA than the average students. That academic efforts make a difference, and high school don't enjoy the same advantages.

I'll not base my point on a single "guy" example, but cite all those players who don't make it academically at all, and consequently we never hear about. If a kid is not taking care of his grades to a certain level in high school, they don't get much press because Colleges are not offering him. If that kid had an even lower SAT score than 900, we would never had heard of him, but he still would have been suiting up in High School. No doubt that part of the recruiting pitch was providing him academic help that he currently is not getting.

 

[Crimson14Tide]

If the playoff format is done correctly (ie 16 teams, Round 1 & 2 at higher seed's home stadium) then it won't be a problem at all. If Team X is going to bring 9k fans to Bryant-Denny for a regular season game, then it's a pretty safe bet that they will bring a minimum of 8k to the playoff game.

Also, as for the "too many games" "argument", I'm going to go out on a limb say that if college students have shown that they can handle it...then college students at other universities should be able to struggle through it.

 

[shipley00]

It's an interesting proposition. Someone did bring up my "next step" solution in the "Plus one". None of this "only if there are two undefeated teams" crap. A true 1-4.
It's the least amount of change to get implemented. It's only one extra game. You can recycle anoter BCS bowl if you want. It allows a team that lost early in the season to still have a chance (especially if they had major players injured). It gives the non BCS schools a chance (so they'll stop whining), but it still makes them have a somewhat challenging schedule to get there. Why try and impliment a full system, instead of start off with something small, and manageable, that will improve the system we have? Besides, statistically speaking, how many teams outside the top 4 ever really have a chance of beating the consensus #1 team? Over the last 25 years, I'd say its rather small.

 

[psychojoe]

Divisions 2 and 3 as well as the non bowl portion of D-1 have had 16 team playoffs for a good while now, so if it would be too many games for a bowl subdivision team it would be too many for them as well. I have not heard any of them complaining about ill effects.

Plus one is ok, for a start, but I don't like the idea of a sixteen game playoff. I think eight teams involved would preserve a higher level of competition, and get everyone who had a reasonable chance of being the best into the tournament. You could use the bigger bowls of the first round of this, and the lesser bowls could do as they are already doing.

 

[Bo]

My only problem with a playoff is that if it gets over 8 teams, it's going to dilute the regular season to much. A 4 - 8 team playoff would be great, anything more than 8, I don't want. And, realistically, if you are ranked lower than 8, you ain't got a chance of winning it anyway unless a lot of luck is involved.

And once the NCAA starts having a playoff, even if it starts with the Plus 1, sooner or later it's going to grow because of #5 or #9 bitching about being left out. Add in the fact that when the NCAA sees how much money is being made, they're gonna want to make more.

 

[shipley00]

Divisions 2 and 3 as well as the non bowl portion of D-1 have had 16 team playoffs for a good while now, so if it would be too many games for a bowl subdivision team it would be too many for them as well. I have not heard any of them complaining about ill effects.

Plus one is ok, for a start, but I don't like the idea of a sixteen game playoff. I think eight teams involved would preserve a higher level of competition, and get everyone who had a reasonable chance of being the best into the tournament. You could use the bigger bowls of the first round of this, and the lesser bowls could do as they are already doing.

Don't D2 and D3 have the "early" games as actual home games for the higher seed? That would seem like the logical approach for the early rounds if it goes to 8.

 

[RollTideinGA]

Sorry, but that's a cop out. How do you explain playoffs for all other NCAA sports? I know they do not draw nearly as many as CFB, but come on. Its no different than the fan base attending the NFL playoffs, NCAA March Madness, bowl season, or heck even NASCAR. We will never see a college Div 1 playoff because these old geezers are to rooted down and love the money they get form their bowls and the BCS. Bottom line. Plus it would negate ESPN, AP, Coaches Poll, and any other service that wants to rank them. The drama and controversy they create goes away.

 

[Southern Bama]

Sorry, but that's a cop out. How do you explain playoffs for all other NCAA sports? I know they do not draw nearly as many as CFB, but come on. Its no different than the fan base attending the NFL playoffs, NCAA March Madness, bowl season, or heck even NASCAR. We will never see a college Div 1 playoff because these old geezers are to rooted down and love the money they get form their bowls and the BCS. Bottom line. Plus it would negate ESPN, AP, Coaches Poll, and any other service that wants to rank them. The drama and controversy they create goes away.[/QUOTE]

I dont think we will ever do away with polls....playoff or not. Somebody still has to vote to decide who plays and from what ranking. Here is the clip from Blue print for change....note what Urban says about the SEC schedule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWQjDxmqerQ

 

[russb8903]

I still disagree with most of your points, however since you support a playoff, and I support a +1 at most, neither of us will be changing our minds.

 

[LBS]

I still disagree with most of your points, however since you support a playoff, and I support a +1 at most, neither of us will be changing our minds.

All good brother. Just thoughts and opinions.

The BLue Print series on ESPN brought out some points about the Plus One that I found sound...and of course it was our coach that led the way. I struggled to think of an example of where a plus one would have left a question out there. It would require some pre-BCS engineering to pair up the top four teams. The intent was three-fold: 1) make the NC teams earn their way in. 2) to eliminate half of the top 4 along the way, and 3) leave only the #5 team to argue that they should have had a shot. The #5 team's case is weak for two reasons: 1) Given the entire season they earned a #5 ranking (or in other words they proved that they were not top four), and 2) their 13th game (their bowl game) was against no better that the #6 team. Plus One could work. At least it would be an interesting change and give us another game.