Asst. AD Kenny Mossman on a Playoff

[MextheBulldog]

http://www.soonersports.com/genrel/121107aaa.html

So this is what it has come down to: The Rose Bowl Parade vs a Playoff. Hard to believe that both of these events cannot co-exist somehow.

[sanantoniosooner]

So this is what it has come down to: The Rose Bowl Parade vs a Playoff.


It boils down to more than just that. Anyone suggesting otherwise is wearing blinders.

and it's a pretty good article.

[TUSooner]

One must conclude that the Bowl Humpers care more about "fun" than determining a champion....just like U-6 girls soccer.
I'm amazed that anyone can make these same old anti-playoff arguments with a straight face -- Oh wait-- they are getting PAID to make them !! Silly me. Never mind.

:rolleyes:

[fwsooner22]

Don't you have to have 12 teams to even qualify for a playoff? Or did I make that up...................

[sanantoniosooner]

Don't you have to have 12 teams to even qualify for a playoff? Or did I make that up...................
That rule is pertaining to a Conference Championship game. Not a playoff.

[FlatheadSooner]

A 1-plus or 2-plus approach could still keep the bowls going - couldn't it?

:confused:

[sanantoniosooner]

A 1-plus or 2-plus approach could still keep the bowls going - couldn't it?

:confused:
Play the top four teams in the bowl format and add one more game

I wish more people would get behind this. If you are a person that likes the bowl system, it maintains it with as little change as possible, and if you are a playoff fan, it is the most likely stepping stone to get what you want.

Why is it so hard for people to budge just a little? The BCS was a compromise. This is the next step.

[stoopified]

You can use the major bowl sites for the 11 team playoff.That allows multiple games for each site(Orange,Rose,Sugar Fiesta).The six lowest seeds play to decide three winners to join the 5 bye teams for eight team plaoff.All games held at the 4 major istes.All other non playoff teams could still go to their games.Bowl games and traditions are left intact,playoffs take place,and we have a real champion.

[sanantoniosooner]

See what I mean.

No desire to take baby steps.

And I don't think that system maintains the bowl tradition at all.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I say we go back to the old conference tie-in bowl system and forget about it

Great read by the way. I thought he brought out some great points

[kevpks]

I'd be happy with a plus one. I can't think of a year where it wouldn't have eliminated almost all of the controversy. I am sure there have been a few deserving #5 teams, but there seems to be a deserving #3 or #4 every year. I love the bowl games. I just want them to move our playoff from a 2 team playoff to a four team playoff. I also think this is the only realistic change we could see in the near future.

[MextheBulldog]

As long as you limit the playoff to 4 or 8 teams, the regular season remains important.

As long as you keep the playoff small, the bowls are not entirely affected. Are the non-BCS bowls "special" even today?

The BCS has pushed us closer to a playoff by giving us better bowl match-ups. Mossman argues that this helps ratings/interest/etc. Why would even better made for TV matchups (playoff) not further increase ratings or interest?

Let the Rose Bowl folks have their parade without the game. Then let's see just how much interest there really is in the parade, outside of SoCal. Or, if the Rose does not want to play with the playoff system, fine, see ya later. Ask the Cotton Bowl how that decision to avoid the BCS worked out. I'm not a hater of the Rose Bowl, but what should have the highest priority - the game, or the parade?

College Hoops problem is that there are too many games, in addition to the silly one-year 'before you jump to the NBA' rule. Comparing hoops to football is apples to oranges.

[Dan Thompson]

Man, I have been fooled all this time. I thought the Rose Bowl game was much more important than the horse poo parade.

And then I was thinking the BCS was all about money, wow was I fooled.

[MextheBulldog]

See what I mean.

No desire to take baby steps.

And I don't think that system maintains the bowl tradition at all.

College football has taken baby steps over the past several years, and it's still not right. From the Bowl Alliance, to yearly tweaks in the BCS.

This is the crux of the issue - do you want a bona-fide champion who wins on the field, or do you want the bowl tradition? Granted, i would love love love to see the tradition integrated with the playoff, but i'm starting to wonder if that is possible.

Enjoy that tOSU-LSU "National Title" game. :cool:

[Tear Down This Wall]

You can't have a playoff. If you did, a "traditional power" might not win the championship every year.

[SoonerLB]

I could care less about the Rose Parade or any other hoopla for that matter. Nor do I care which stadium the games are played in or any hoopla outside the game itself. The bowls have nothing to do with championships, they are just venues for a game.
I just want to see football teams playing a game on the field and EARNING a championship! And using some common sense by having said games in a nuetral location equally distant from both school involved so that the fans might have a better chance of attending.
I'm sick and tired of mythical and 'split' champions that never provide a solution that a playoff would provide.
There are plenty of days in December and January (Ohio State for an example has 41 days between their last game and their bowl game) to play football, there is no law stating the games have to be crammed into, or around Jan. 1st.
Have the useless parades the weekend before or after, that way they don't interfere with our beloved football games. ;)

[SoonerLB]

One more thing, I have to disagree with my old friend (have not seen him in years though) Kenny Mossman on this...

"but don't lose sight of the fact that college football has a stranglehold on the period from September right through the BCS Championship in January."

Here it is mid December, and the only football available on the college level is the lower division PLAYOFFS. Nothing wrong with than mind you, some good football. The only problem with this situation is that most of us have never seen any of these teams play berfore (other than playoffs in other years possibly) and don't really know much about any of the participants.
The truth of the matter is I'd rather be watching our beloved Sooners marching through the playoffs! ;)

[FaninAma]

Mr. Mossman seems to have forgotten one small detail in his regurgitation of the strawmen arguments against a playoff....namely that the overwhelming majority of the people who pay his salary(ie. the fans) don't like the BCS and would like to see a playoff.

And he really loses credibility when he talks about there being no problems at the turnstiles. Perhaps he is referring only to the 2 dozen or so top-notch BCS programs that sell out every home game because I know he can't be referring to the attendance at osu's games or 95% of the bowl games. Maybe somebody should show him the aerial picture of the ACC CCG.

[Leroy Lizard]

I think Mossman is dead on.

Sure, some of you may not appreciate anything beyond the games; but others do. What Mossman is pointing out that there are a number of people out there that value these things and that think we can retain all the color and pageantry of a bowl game while embedding the bowl game into a playoff. Which is pure nonsense.

It's not always about what WE want. We have to think of the bigger picture. And the marching bands, parades, festivities are what separates college football from other sports and makes it wildly popular.

[FaninAma]

I think Mossman is dead on.

Sure, some of you may not appreciate anything beyond the games; but others do. What Mossman is pointing out that there are a number of people out there that value these things and that think we can retain all the color and pageantry of a bowl game while embedding the bowl game into a playoff. Which is pure nonsense.

It's not always about what WE want. We have to think of the bigger picture. And the marching bands, parades, festivities are what separates college football from other sports and makes it wildly popular.

He couldn't be more wrong. His observations and facts are wrong. He uses the same tired, worn-out arguments all of you playoff opponents use....emotional pleas to "preserve the traditions and pageantry of the bowl system".

Bullsh*t. If it was left up to the PAC 10, Big 10 and Rose Bowl Committee we would still have the conference tie-ins ...which, in retrospect, aren't any worse than the BCS.

And it is about what the fans want. The fans pay Mr. Mossman's salary. The fans pay for the ever-escalating season ticket prices. The fans pay for the trips to largely meaningless bowl games. And for all of their support, Mossman and his well-paid collegues expect the fans to swallow the BCS swill and like it.

If Mossman and his ilk want to have college football benefit the bowls and the college presidents/administrators while ignoring the wishes of the fans then tell them to quit expecting us fans to foot the bills!

[Leroy Lizard]

One must conclude that the Bowl Humpers care more about "fun" than determining a champion.

Maybe fun is actually more important in some cases. Why does everything have to be a duel to the death?

Sure, this can be overdone to the point where competition is relegated completely out of existence, like in youth sports. But college football does keep score. Fans do feel joy, anger, or depression after a game. It isn't like we are advocating doing away with all competition.

[TheUnnamedSooner]

Maybe fun is actually more important in some cases. Why does everything have to be a duel to the death?

Sure, this can be overdone to the point where competition is relegated completely out of existence, like in youth sports. But college football does keep score. Fans do feel joy, anger, or depression after a game. It isn't like we are advocating doing away with all competition.

I challenge you, sir, to a duel.

[Leroy Lizard]

He couldn't be more wrong. His observations and facts are wrong. He uses the same tired, worn-out arguments all of you playoff opponents use....emotional pleas to "preserve the traditions and pageantry of the bowl system".

Bullsh*t. If it was left up to the PAC 10, Big 10 and Rose Bowl Committee we would still have the conference tie-ins ...which, in retrospect, aren't any worse than the BCS.

What's wrong with conference tie-ins?


And it is about what the fans want. The fans pay Mr. Mossman's salary. The fans pay for the ever-escalating season ticket prices. The fans pay for the trips to largely meaningless bowl games. And for all of their support, Mossman and his well-paid collegues expect the fans to swallow the BCS swill and like it.

You completely misunderstood his argument.

He is stating that fans don't understand what they will lose if a playoff system comes into play. If fans are expected to get anything they want, then they should at least be informed of all that is at stake. He is making a point that fans need to reconsider their zest for a playoff because of what they will lose.

You are wrong, by the way. It isn't just about what the fans want. It never has been. College football is a big enterprise and the needs of a lot of people come into play, not just fans.


If Mossman and his ilk want to have college benefit benefit the bowls and the college presidents/administrtors then tell him to quit expecting us fans to foot the bills!

Actually, you are footing the bill and you will continue to foot the bill. As long as fans like you are willing to watch college football, then you are in essence footing the bill. The only way for you to refuse is to quit watching college football, and they know damn well you are not going to do that.

"College football is a sham! The BCS stinks!! I will not stand for that!!!! I'm a fan, and I refuse to foot the bill for such a crock!! Now, when is the next bowl game on..."

[MextheBulldog]

Maybe fun is actually more important in some cases. Why does everything have to be a duel to the death?
It isn't like we are advocating doing away with all competition.

No duel to the death. A simple, clean 4 or 8 team playoff will work.

Something other than 'Wheel of Fortune' BCS.

I too would prefer to keep the pagentry, tradition, etc etc. But it will never happen under the current system as long as the Bowls have power. Hence, let's build a newer and better system. I fully understand what I am asking for and accept the consequences.

[Leroy Lizard]

I fully understand what I am asking for and accept the consequences.

All fans say that. And then they begin to "long for the good old days."

[Civicus_Sooner]

All fans say that. And then they begin to "long for the good old days."
Especially ND, Minn., R-Kansas, Alabama, Mich. and untill quite recently, UT and tOSU fans.



















:D

[Desert Sapper]

I say we go back to the old conference tie-in bowl system and forget about it



I agree, but only if we get the mother****ing Orange Bowl back. The hell with the Arizona State Bowl.

[yermom]

the old system was lame though. imagine the cluster 2003 or 2004 would have been without the BCS... the top 3 teams would have all gone to different bowls. gosh, look at this year. of course, we still might have a shot to win this year under the old system. i do wish we would have kept our Orange Bowl tie-in though

part of what you guys are ignoring is the community impact as to why the bowls would be hesitant. they have a week's worth of tourism, they don't give a crap about ratings. if what used to be a bowl game was now a semi-final or quarter-final game, who would come for that? how long are they going to stay?

[Leroy Lizard]

the old system was lame though. imagine the cluster 2003 or 2004 would have been without the BCS... the top 3 teams would have all gone to different bowls.

Yeah, so what? That happened in the past as well.


part of what you guys are ignoring is the community impact as to why the bowls would be hesitant. they have a week's worth of tourism, they don't give a crap about ratings. if what used to be a bowl game was now a semi-final or quarter-final game, who would come for that? how long are they going to stay?

Actually, I have been pounding on that theme for quite a while in here as part of my anti-playoff rant. My popularity has not soared.

[sanantoniosooner]

Actually, I have been pounding on that theme for quite a while in here as part of my anti-playoff rant. My popularity has not soared.
I actually agree with you but would speculate that your dip in popularity might coincide with 4000 word essays that you post in response.

[yermom]

Yeah, so what? That happened in the past as well.



Actually, I have been pounding on that theme for quite a while in here as part of my anti-playoff rant. My popularity has not soared.

i just think the chances of disagreement on #1 at the end of the year is lessened with the current system. i prefer the current BCS over the previous method, except maybe for trading the Fiesta for the Orange

but yeah, i'm anti-playoff as well, and my popularity seems fine ;)

i kinda come at it from the selfish side though. making travel arrangements once a year with one week's notice can be kinda lame, and currently that's fairly regional. adding 2-3 games to that would suck for someone trying to make the games.

people spending the post-season on the couch probably have a different view

[Ash]

If you like the bowls, fine, but the sanctimonious tirades by bowl supporters are just funny.

There's no logic to the bowls - if you like the parades and enjoy guys in yellow blazers making millions off of you and deciding who gets to play where based on greased palms and second rate Big 10 teams in the MNC games, so be it. Some of us would like to see something different.

[sanantoniosooner]

If you like the bowls, fine, but the sanctimonious tirades by bowl supporters are just funny.

The constant whining by you playoff supporters is funny too. And if you look at the thread titles over the last month it's not the bowl supporters that are sanctimonious or "tirades". Words like "indefensible" thrown around like it's a fact instead of an opinion. Pot is calling the kettle funny.

[Ash]

The constant whining by you playoff supporters is funny too. And if you look at the thread titles over the last month it's not the bowl supporters that are sanctimonious or "tirades". Words like "indefensible" thrown around like it's a fact instead of an opinion. Pot is calling the kettle funny.

LOL. Case in point. This whole debate has people so on edge it's hilarious.

I used indefensible because I'm arrogant. Git yer facts straight. :D

[sanantoniosooner]

I don't have to get my facts straight.

I'm sanctimonious. ;)

[Curly Bill]

The constant whining by you playoff supporters is funny too. And if you look at the thread titles over the last month it's not the bowl supporters that are sanctimonious or "tirades". Words like "indefensible" thrown around like it's a fact instead of an opinion. Pot is calling the kettle funny.

Yep, I quit on the playoff threads because to say anything remotely anti-playoff had you branded with terms like: indefensible, blind, ignorant, and perhaps my favorite: braindead.

Anyone wonder why a lot of the long-time posters on here, many with vast amounts of respect (spek too probably) stay away from these threads? ...and no, I'm certainly not putting my little ol' self in that category.

[Ash]

Yep, I quit on the playoff threads because to say anything remotely anti-playoff had you branded with terms like: indefensible, blind, ignorant, and perhaps my favorite: braindead.

Anyone wonder why a lot of the long-time posters on here, many with vast amounts of respect (spek too probably) stay away from these threads? ...and no, I'm certainly not putting my little ol' self in that category.

Oh well. I don't pick threads to post in based on whether somebody who logged on a few years before me also posts in it.

[Curly Bill]

Oh well. I don't pick threads to post in based on whether somebody who logged on a few years before me also posts in it.

I was just sayin...:D

[Ash]

I was just sayin...:D

No prob and I wasn't trying to flame. In fact, I wish more of the disaffected long-timers would come back to the football board. I lurked on the board for a long time before I signed on and it was because of some of the long-timers posts and the atmosphere that was created by them that I decided to sign on. I'm probably one of the n00bs they're trying to avoid! :D

:cool:

[Curly Bill]

I think too many times the atmosphere on here is one of I'm right, you're wrong, and if you can't see that then you're an idiot. So, instead of being able to have a debate on the issues it breaks down into a mud-slinging contest. I was saying that a lot of the long-time posters seem to realize that and usually want to avoid it, or at least that's what I sort of gather.

I am not really anti-playoff. If they want to institute a playoff I say go right ahead. I often ended up on the other side of the debate in these threads just because of the almost maniacal rants about how the only right thing to do is a playoff, and anyone that can't see that is clueless, braindead, etc... Well, there are some good points in favor of a playoff, and probably as many against. I decided, as it seems others have, that this is a no-win issue to try and debate on here, and have left it to others to handle and fight out.

[Ash]

I think too many times the atmosphere on here is one of I'm right, you're wrong, and if you can't see that then you're an idiot. So, instead of being able to have a debate on the issues it breaks down into a mud-slinging contest. I was saying that a lot of the long-time posters seem to realize that and usually want to avoid it, or at least that's what I sort of gather.

I am not really anti-playoff. If they want to institute a playoff I say go right ahead. I often ended up on the other side of the debate in these threads just because of the almost maniacal rants about how the only right thing to do is a playoff, and anyone that can't see that is clueless, braindead, etc... Well, there are some good points in favor of a playoff, and probably as many against. I decided, as it seems others have, that this is a no-win issue to try and debate on here, and have left it to others to handle and fight out.

Well, I think the BCS is actually better than the old bowl system, but I'd still prefer a playoff of some kind. Hell, a plus one where the top 4 battle it out would satisfy me.

There are some compelling arguments against a playoff but I have a hard time seeing the "logic" of the bowl system. Like I said, if you like the bowl system, that's fine. If we never have any kind of playoff or plus one, I'll still be a huge CFB fan.

This topic has been rehashed so many times, I'm sure some people are just sick of reading or hearing about it. :cool:

[Curly Bill]

If we never have any kind of playoff or plus one, I'll still be a huge CFB fan.

This topic has been rehashed so many times, I'm sure some people are just sick of reading or hearing about it. :cool:

Exactly, if you're a huge college FB fan you're gonna continue that. One of the things about the vociferous playoff supporters that amazed me is they almost talked of doom and gloom for college FB if we don't do that! How long have we had college FB now without a playoff?

...and you're right, this is one dead horse! :D

[birddog]

a +1 would satisfy most people.

i really like the bowl season but there's nothing wrong with giving 4 teams a shot at being champion.

what people don't realize is you can't go from the top 2 to the top 8 or 16 in one step. these presidents and bowl sponsors are scared out of their wits about change.

you've got to treat em like a squirrel, if you want them to come to you, you've got to wave them in slow. you don't want to make any big, sudden movemements. you'll frighten em away!

[Leroy Lizard]

There are some compelling arguments against a playoff but I have a hard time seeing the "logic" of the bowl system.

Logic: The bowl game is an invitation to two teams from a city to come and put on an exhibition game as a reward for a good season. Initially, the teams were invited after final rankings and national titles were given out. The games were exciting, everyone was happy. Until...

... teams could not live with the fact that a national champion could lose a bowl game. So we had to change the rules to declare the national title after the bowl game

So far, no big deal.

But then the malcontents could not live with the fact that two teams might argue over which team was really best, so we had to create the Bowl Coalition, but that didn't make people happy, so we then had to create the Bowl Alliance. Finally, we end up with the BCS and (as you can guess) no one is happy.

Now there are those who think, "I will be happy with a +1." Yeah, right! And when we end up with a plus-one, they will demand a four-team playoff because their team got slighted. And then we will end up with an eight-team playoff, then a 16-team playoff. The craziness won't end until the fan of every major college team has a better than 50% chance of seeing his favorite team getting into the playoffs every year.

At that point, teams will simply have to schedule a few patsies, lose only one or two conference games, and they're in. Then everyone will complain that there are too many teams involved, but it will be too late; you can never go back.

The bowl games are perfectly logical. Our inability to be satisfied unless a system is unrealistically perfect is what is illogical.


really like the bowl season but there's nothing wrong with giving 4 teams a shot at being champion.

Did you read the article? Mossman highlighted many problems with a four-team playoff, but go on ahead and ignore everything he said.


what people don't realize is you can't go from the top 2 to the top 8 or 16 in one step. these presidents and bowl sponsors are scared out of their wits about change.

you've got to treat em like a squirrel, if you want them to come to you, you've got to wave them in slow. you don't want to make any big, sudden movemements. you'll frighten em away!

Well, when you are dealing with a past time that has tons of tradition surrounding it, change isn't always good. Sometimes the squirrel has good reason to be worried. Those want to start out with an itty-bitty playoff are just waving the squirrel in, then blam! We end up with a 16-team playoff and college football becomes a colorless semi-pro football league. So yeah, we are definitely worried about small changes.

But you guys are all going to assure us that everything will be okay, right?

[OUGuf]

I dont see why they cant just take the top 4 put them in bowls together using the current bowl scheme. Have 1play4 and 2play3
Then we get to have one more extra bowl after the fact between the winner of those..

A +1 system is completely doable and still leaves all the tradition and padgentry of the bowls intact. They can still have their Rose Parade and eat cake too...

For the traveling fan... if your team makes it to the big game then it is only one more trip to plan.
+1 needs to happen untill then all we have are paper titles.

[CORNholio]

I am all for having the teams that Deserve it determining it on the field. Most years that includes the top 5 at the most. My problem with letting it go to a 4 or 5 team playoff (though I would think this is the best format) goes back to that old adage "give them an inch and they'll take a yard". It merely opens the door for the people who want a 16 or 32 or 64 team playoff to eventually ruin CFB over time. "Come on its just 4 more teams, then its just 4 more, then its just 8 more, etc.." It is one hell of a slippery slope.

[CORNholio]

And the "greed" lies with the people behind the "playoff" agenda. (ESPN)
There is much more money to be made in a playoff format.

[CORNholio]

Logic: The bowl game is an invitation to two teams from a city to come and put on an exhibition game as a reward for a good season. Initially, the teams were invited after final rankings and national titles were given out. The games were exciting, everyone was happy. Until...

... teams could not live with the fact that a national champion could lose a bowl game. So we had to change the rules to declare the national title after the bowl game

So far, no big deal.

But then the malcontents could not live with the fact that two teams might argue over which team was really best, so we had to create the Bowl Coalition, but that didn't make people happy, so we then had to create the Bowl Alliance. Finally, we end up with the BCS and (as you can guess) no one is happy.

Now there are those who think, "I will be happy with a +1." Yeah, right! And when we end up with a plus-one, they will demand a four-team playoff because their team got slighted. And then we will end up with an eight-team playoff, then a 16-team playoff. The craziness won't end until the fan of every major college team has a better than 50% chance of seeing his favorite team getting into the playoffs every year.

At that point, teams will simply have to schedule a few patsies, lose only one or two conference games, and they're in. Then everyone will complain that there are too many teams involved, but it will be too late; you can never go back.

The bowl games are perfectly logical. Our inability to be satisfied unless a system is unrealistically perfect is what is illogical.



Did you read the article? Mossman highlighted many problems with a four-team playoff, but go on ahead and ignore everything he said.



Well, when you are dealing with a past time that has tons of tradition surrounding it, change isn't always good. Sometimes the squirrel has good reason to be worried. Those want to start out with an itty-bitty playoff are just waving the squirrel in, then blam! We end up with a 16-team playoff and college football becomes a colorless semi-pro football league. So yeah, we are definitely worried about small changes.

But you guys are all going to assure us that everything will be okay, right?

Exactly. (Guess I should've read the posts before I posted)
100% agreed. Alot of people don't seem to get this. It's just like every thing in politics. Look at what MADD did to a good idea now I can't even have a beer with my dinner without being put in the same context with a wreckless drunkard.

[CORNholio]

What they ought to do is go to a +1 format and make every college sign a waiver that they will not bitch when they wind up #4 and feel like crying. It should also state that this will be the format for the next 75 years with no exception and no possible way to add more teams to the format no matter what, air tight.

[birddog]

Logic:

Did you read the article? Mossman highlighted many problems with a four-team playoff, but go on ahead and ignore everything he said.





so i'm supposed to take it as gospel because mossman said it?:rolleyes:

there are flaws with the system now. are you so hard headed to think that one extra game will ruin the "pageantry and traditions" of the independence bowl?

[Leroy Lizard]

so i'm supposed to take it as gospel because mossman said it?

You should at least counter his points, instead of pretending that no one has refuted the pro-playoff arguments.


there are flaws with the system now.

The old "it can't get worse" fallacy. It can always get worse. Just because a system is flawed does not make the alternative better.


are you so hard headed to think that one extra game will ruin the "pageantry and traditions" of the independence bowl?


Once we end up with a 16-team playoff, there will be no bowl games. No bowl system can compete with that. And the regular season will nose-dive as well, just like in college basketball. Clemson could still be invited into the playoffs even after losing three regular season games.

Sure, you can call the playoff games "bowl games," but there will be no festivities, no parades, no nothing. Just like in the NFL and Div. 1AA.

[tommieharris91]

Now there are those who think, "I will be happy with a +1." Yeah, right! And when we end up with a plus-one, they will demand a four-team playoff because their team got slighted. And then we will end up with an eight-team playoff, then a 16-team playoff. The craziness won't end until the fan of every major college team has a better than 50% chance of seeing his favorite team getting into the playoffs every year.

Well here is a slope that is about as slippery as sandpaper. I think a 16-team playoff is sufficient enough for I-A with its 120 or so teams. It's large enough that all of the 11 conferences can send their champion to the playoffs and still have enough slots for 6 at-larges that don't win the conference. If your team finishes like 10th, too bad, don't lose 2 games next season, don't lose to a bad team, or schedule a team that has men who play football and not chicken-eatin babies.


I like how the NCAA sets up all of their other team sports the way basketball is set up. The basketball tournaments, IMO, are done really well, with the picking of teams down to a science that people without Ph.D.'s can understand (and make money off of). A system with ADs and university presidents, not just writers and "coaches" and computers, can use their eyes as well as numbers spit out by polls and calculators to pick the most deserving 5 non-conference champions. A system where teams would get a real reward for scheduling powerhouses in the non-con schedule and be rewarded even more if they knock one of those great teams off.

Under my plan, OU, Ohio State, USC, Va Tech, LSU, West Va, Fla Atl, Central Florida, Central Michigan, Hawaii, and BYU would get automatic bids for the playoff. Georgia, Kansas, Missouri, Arizona State and some random 9-3 team should get into the playoffs as at-larges. After that, it would be a fun affair. I'll even seed them for y'all:

#1: Ohio State, LSU, OU, Mizzou
#2: Va Tech, Kansas ,Georgia, Hawaii
#3: West Va, USC, ASU, BYU
#4: Florida, UCF, Fla Atl, CMU

Take a look at some of the likely matchups I just created. Florida@Mizzou and SoCal @Georgia for the first round. OU bringing the nation's leading rusher in for a playoff game. All of these games would certainly bring great viewing audiences and a lot of revenue for all involved.

Now, who here wouldn't want an extra game in Norman or 2? I sure would. Teams who have good seasons should get rewarded with extra home games and the revenue that comes from them. A playoff game in Norman or any other school would probably be the most insane gameday atmosphere the place has ever seen. Think about 85,000 people cheering their lungs out knowing that if OU loses, the season is over. That kind of finality would make March Madness basketball seem like June baseball.

Well, I haven't put my $.02 in this yet. Here y'all go.

[birddog]

You should at least counter his points, instead of pretending that no one has refuted the pro-playoff arguments.



The old "it can't get worse" fallacy. It can always get worse. Just because a system is flawed does not make the alternative better.



Once we end up with a 16-team playoff, there will be no bowl games. No bowl system can compete with that. And the regular season will nose-dive as well, just like in college basketball. Clemson could still be invited into the playoffs even after losing three regular season games.

Sure, you can call the playoff games "bowl games," but there will be no

festivities, no parades, no nothing. Just like in the NFL and Div. 1AA.

you're a weird dude. remember, i'm for a +1, not a 16 team playoff. that won't ever happen.

[TUSooner]

Play the top four teams in the bowl format and add one more game

I wish more people would get behind this. If you are a person that likes the bowl system, it maintains it with as little change as possible, and if you are a playoff fan, it is the most likely stepping stone to get what you want.

Why is it so hard for people to budge just a little? The BCS was a compromise. This is the next step.
HEAR HIM !!!

[TUSooner]

I challenge you, sir, to a duel.
Now THAT sounds like "fun"!

:D
:twinkies:

[TUSooner]

All I'm saying is this:
If you don't care about a true "champion" (and there are arguments in favor of not caring), then skip the BCS and just go back to the good old days. And they WERE good old days, in their way. Forget a playoff and be happy with mythical championships by argument, politics, and opinion. And acknowledge that the championship is indeed mythical.

BUT --- If you DO want a legitimate champion, you need some sort of playoff of at least 4 teams. I am disgusted that the 3rd or 4th best team in the nation will lift the crystal football and proclaim itself National Champion this year while OU & USC (et al.) play elsewhere. If the current BCS system would simply admit "we got nuthin" this year, I'd be happier.

I will continue to watch and love CFB without a playoff, but spare me the "champion" crapola if you're not willing to take further steps to produce a legitimate one.

[OklahomaTuba]

I say, let's go back to the original system where the Champ was picked BEFORE THE BOWL GAME!!

Bowls were never meant to choose a champion. They are just fun little events that are meaningless and stupid.

And I really feel sorry for our athletic department if the guy who wrote this article is our media guy. This guy has zero valid points.

[sanantoniosooner]

Bowls were never meant to choose a champion. They are just fun little events that are meaningless and stupid.

And I really feel sorry for our athletic department if the guy who wrote this article is our media guy. This guy has zero valid points.
B.

S.

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

Logic: The bowl game is an invitation to two teams from a city to come and put on an exhibition game as a reward for a good season. Initially, the teams were invited after final rankings and national titles were given out. The games were exciting, everyone was happy. Until...

... teams could not live with the fact that a national champion could lose a bowl game. So we had to change the rules to declare the national title after the bowl game

So far, no big deal.

But then the malcontents could not live with the fact that two teams might argue over which team was really best, so we had to create the Bowl Coalition, but that didn't make people happy, so we then had to create the Bowl Alliance. Finally, we end up with the BCS and (as you can guess) no one is happy.

Now there are those who think, "I will be happy with a +1." Yeah, right! And when we end up with a plus-one, they will demand a four-team playoff because their team got slighted. And then we will end up with an eight-team playoff, then a 16-team playoff. The craziness won't end until the fan of every major college team has a better than 50% chance of seeing his favorite team getting into the playoffs every year.

At that point, teams will simply have to schedule a few patsies, lose only one or two conference games, and they're in. Then everyone will complain that there are too many teams involved, but it will be too late; you can never go back.

The bowl games are perfectly logical. Our inability to be satisfied unless a system is unrealistically perfect is what is illogical.



Did you read the article? Mossman highlighted many problems with a four-team playoff, but go on ahead and ignore everything he said.



Well, when you are dealing with a past time that has tons of tradition surrounding it, change isn't always good. Sometimes the squirrel has good reason to be worried. Those want to start out with an itty-bitty playoff are just waving the squirrel in, then blam! We end up with a 16-team playoff and college football becomes a colorless semi-pro football league. So yeah, we are definitely worried about small changes.

But you guys are all going to assure us that everything will be okay, right?

Wow, I think this is the second time that I've agreed with you Lizard...at least in principle.

I'm not so much anti-playoff as much as I think everyone that is pro-playoff would like the see things change but then there would be about 40 different versions of what the playoffs should be.

PLEASE DO NOT use D-II football or formerly I-AA football as an example of settling it on the field. This years semi in DII had the 2-time defending national champ who was #1 and undefeated playing AT the #5 team that had a loss this year. Several years ago Central Mo beat Pitt St like 81-27 and had a better record but missed the playoffs while PSU hosted a game.

How would you like OU to go 10-2 and demolish Texas who finishes 9-3, only to have Texas make a playoff while OU didn't? All the people championing the playoffs in the smaller classes don't actually pay attention how it works.

[MextheBulldog]

Sure, you can call the playoff games "bowl games," but there will be no festivities, no parades, no nothing. Just like in the NFL and Div. 1AA.

Now it makes sense Leroy. You're the guy who would rather watch the Wave in the crowd than the game on the field. :cool:

Just kiddin' - I admire your tenacity here in defending the current system.

Some questions for you:
-Why should LSU and tOSU get to play for a national title this year vs. any other conference champion?
-Would you like to see this OU team in a four or eight team playoff, just to see what they can do? Or are you completely satisfied with a relatively meaningless Fiesta Bowl matchup?
-Are you really going to watch USC/Illinois or Hawaii/Georgia or VaTech/KU? '

Look at the AFC and NFC championships and Super Bowl. They have marathon pre-game shows with celebrities, halftime shows with rock stars and tons of hype within a playoff format. I believe this could easily translate into a college football playoff, just substitute all the pagentry/etc. you speak of within the overall TV production.

[Lott's Bandana]

And the "greed" lies with the people behind the "playoff" agenda. (ESPN)
There is much more money to be made in a playoff format.

No, no, no...

ESPN is resoundingly NOT behind a playoff. The only talking head on their "family of networks" that is for a playoff is Lou Holtz. How much weight do you think he carries?

ABC/ESPN has flipped on this issue. Their suits have informed their broadcasters that having suc #1 every year, and continuing to claim, "the SEC is the toughest conference", puts much more $$$ into their coffers than having an OU, Mizzou, WVA, Hawai'i playoff champion. It's all about demographics and geographics.

Rather unbelievable but apparently the actuaries have spoken.

[Desert Sapper]

No, no, no...

ESPN is resoundingly NOT behind a playoff. The only talking head on their "family of networks" that is for a playoff is Lou Holtz. How much weight do you think he carries?

ABC/ESPN has flipped on this issue. Their suits have informed their broadcasters that having suc #1 every year, and continuing to claim, "the SEC is the toughest conference", puts much more $$$ into their coffers than having an OU, Mizzou, WVA, Hawai'i playoff champion. It's all about demographics and geographics.

Rather unbelievable but apparently the actuaries have spoken.

I thought the only real beneficiary of the 'sec is the toughest' argument was CBS (and to some extent Jefferson Pilot or whatever it calls itself these days).

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I am disgusted that the 3rd or 4th best team in the nation will lift the crystal football and proclaim itself National Champion this year while OU & USC (et al.) play elsewhere.

Especially if that team is where you have to live. And you have to hear how wonderful that team is by all its delusional fans who spout off BS about not being beaten in 60 mins and other stupid ****.

btw, Kevin, I saw that lsu helmet your soccer group is auctioning off. I think it would look great on top of a Christmas bonfire.

[Curly Bill]

Look at the AFC and NFC championships and Super Bowl. They have marathon pre-game shows with celebrities, halftime shows with rock stars and tons of hype within a playoff format.

Do we really have to turn college football into the mini-NFL? Please tell me we don't want to do that.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

How many times does an undefeated team need to be ranked #2 at the end of the year before this guy gets it?

[yermom]

let's see how many times that actually happens with a 12 game season...

[MextheBulldog]

Do we really have to turn college football into the mini-NFL? Please tell me we don't want to do that.

The Super Bowl is only the most-watched event on the planet.

Nah, we do not want to emulate anything like it. Let's keep roulette college football in place forevar.

[TUSooner]

Especially if that team is where you have to live. And you have to hear how wonderful that team is by all its delusional fans who spout off BS about not being beaten in 60 mins and other stupid ****.

btw, Kevin, I saw that lsu helmet your soccer group is auctioning off. I think it would look great on top of a Christmas bonfire.
Exactly. :D

If I won the thing, I would hold it for ransom. "Pay up tigahs, or it goes in the flames!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. "

I'm curious, where did you see it? Lakeview market? I have not seen it (or bought a raffle ticket.)

[sanantoniosooner]

The Super Bowl is only the most-watched event on the planet.

Nah, we do not want to emulate anything like it. Let's keep roulette college football in place forevar.
and over hyped.

and more about the $ than the game.

and as much about the halftime show as the game itself.

and rarely pits the best two teams against each other (see Indy/NE, Dallas/San Fransisco)

It would provide new topics for the cry babies to whine about though.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

let's see how many times that actually happens with a 12 game season...

Well, it wasn't regular season, but in 2004 Auburn went 11-0 then won the sec and their bowl game. 13-0 and they were ranked #2.

Pretty sure OU didn't even play in a bowl game that year... as I recall.

[MextheBulldog]

and more about the $ than the game.

and as much about the halftime show as the game itself.



And the Bowls/BCS are not already about the $?

The halftime show backs into Leroy's pagentry/bands/fun argument. So you have your Rose Bowl parade at halftime. :cool:

[sanantoniosooner]

And the Bowls/BCS are not already about the $?

The halftime show backs into Leroy's pagentry/bands/fun argument. So you have your Rose Bowl parade at halftime. :cool:
Parade during the game is different from parade before the game. The Superbowl has sucked easily half the time over the last 10 years.

You want to emulate it? You'll get what you want and then whine about something new.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Throughout the entire '88 season the Sooners basketball team was the best team in the country, and it wasn't even close.

I wonder why there is no national championship banner hanging in the LNC?

:P

^^^^That's for you, Steve^^^^

:D

[FaninAma]

Throughout the entire '88 season the Sooners basketball team was the best team in the country, and it wasn't even close.

I wonder why there is no national championship banner hanging in the LNC?

:P

^^^^That's for you, Steve^^^^

:D

Comparing college basketball(or the NBA for that matter) to what college football could be with a playoff is akin to comparing the WWF champion to Chuck Norris. (So what if my analogy doesn't make sense....I worked Chuck Norris into the argument.)


Here are the numbers that dictate that at some point the PAC 10, the Big 10 and the Rose bowl will be brought kicking and screaming like little girls into a true college football playoff....87% of fans favor a playoff while the other 13% of fans are totaly clueless.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

I think that the coolest thing about a playoff would be the matchups. We'd get to play schools that we rarely, if ever, play.

I'd love to see us play Florida, Georgia, Ohio State, Michigan, etc.

I am pretty fired up to see us whip WV, but then it's over.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

I'll state up front that I am anti-playoff.

I agree with many of you that Mossman's article does reek of some BS.

Especially since I think you could preserve the bowl system if it were made an 8 team playoff with the four biggies (Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange) made the quarterfinals all played Jan 1, and then have neutral sites for the semis and final.

But I'm confounded by how many people think the system is "broken". Actually, I'm more confounded that people think it ever was broken and that we ever needed the stinking BCS.

How many split NC's have there ever been. Not many. How many undefeated teams from power conferences have there been not crowned national champs? None that I can think of. (Remember, back when ASU and Penn State had their undefeated seasons, ASU had not yet joined the Pac-10
Penn State was playing a powder puff independent schedule, and Terry Bowden's Auburn team was on probation.) By and large national champions have very rarely disputed. Well, unless you're Alabama. But I digress...

I think many of you are pro-playoff right now because you think we should be playing in the big game, or that we are playing the best football right now. And the latter is exactly my point as to why we shouldn't be playing in the NC game.

OUr two losses this year were wretched. They reeked. I know it's a backwards way to look at it, but IMO the quality of LSU's and Ohio State's losses were a pretty significant upgrade over ours. And I wouldn't say we had any more quality wins than either.

So what would happen if it was a +1 format? What if it's LSU, Ohio State, USC, and OU. What if OU and USC end up in the champ game? Did OU and USC play the best football start to finish? Isn't that who should really be crowned national champ, the team that plays the best overall start to finish? Do you feel the same if this year's four would've been LSU, Ohio State, USC, and Va Tech? For those of you thinking we're getting screwed now, just wait until something like that happened. And you think the poll jockeying and manipulation is bad now? Just you wait until 4 or 8 teams have to be selected for a playoff.

BTW, you can also go ahead and take down the 2000 national championship banner, because we now have to play Miami in a +1 format even though we're college footballs only unbeaten. Hope we can pull off two once-in-decade defensive masterpieces in a row, because our offense is in the toilet.

Same for you Texas. 2005 doesn't count, you still have to play Ohio State again, even though you beat them during the regular season and are college football's only unbeaten. (Did I mention tOSU is a much better team than they were in the early part of the season and are playing en fuego right now?) So, ya know, if you lose to them even though you went 1-1 with them you don't get any part of the national championship, even after your thrilling victory over SUC.

My point is, the one argument that pro-playoff folks can't really deny is that the regular season now is in effect a playoff. I don't know the degree to which it would be devalued if it became NCAA playoff only. But I think it would have some effect. For instance, what is a team's motivation for making a run at an undefeated season? Because we can drop a game or two now and we're still in the running, right? BTW, what is Colorado's or Stanford's motivation to dig down and pull a big upset? Neither is going to get a sniff of a playoff, and they don't have a lesser bowl to play for.

I know this, I'm very happy we made the Fiesta Bowl.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

So I'm clueless, Steve... so sue me! :D

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

Here are the numbers that dictate that at some point the PAC 10, the Big 10 and the Rose bowl will be brought kicking and screaming like little girls into a true college football playoff....87% of fans favor a playoff while the other 13% of fans are totaly clueless.


I won't dispute the percentages but the key part of that statement is "a playoff". What if the choices were something like:

Current system 13%
Old system no BCS/no playoffs 4%
+1 playoff using top 4 in BCS 20%
6-team using BCS conference champs 7%
8 team playoff using top 8 in BCS 10%
8-team playoff using BCS conference champs and 2 at large teams 8%
16-team playoff using BCS 10%
all other formats 28%

So I could be factually accurate if I said 80% of those polled did not favor the Plus one format even though it was the most popular.

I think we are definitely moving toward a playoff but 117 DI teams is too many for an ideal playoff format. Having 6 12-team BCS conferences with 72 teams would probably be the largest real workable number. Otherwise we would be trading one system for another that might be better but wouldn't necessarily be the best.

[sanantoniosooner]

97% percent of the statistics Faninama uses came out of his behind.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

I'll state up front that I am anti-playoff.



How many split NC's have there ever been. Not many. How many undefeated teams from power conferences have there been not crowned national champs?


OUr two losses this year were wretched. They reeked. I know it's a backwards way to look at it, but IMO the quality of LSU's and Ohio State's losses were a pretty significant upgrade over ours. And I wouldn't say we had any more quality wins than either.


My point is, the one argument that pro-playoff folks can't really deny is that the regular season now is in effect a playoff.


Auburn 2004 went 13-0 and did not get a title. During our 47 game winning streak there were a few years that OU was not voted number one.

Our losses were no worse than LSU's losses. You'll never convince me that Kentucky and Arky are better than TTech and Colorado. OSU has no quality wins. Michigan and Penn St aren't very good this year.

I can easily deny that the regular season isn't a playoff. If it was there wouldn't be an arguement.

[MextheBulldog]

1. OUr two losses this year were wretched. They reeked. I know it's a backwards way to look at it, but IMO the quality of LSU's and Ohio State's losses were a pretty significant upgrade over ours. And I wouldn't say we had any more quality wins than either.

2. My point is, the one argument that pro-playoff folks can't really deny is that the regular season now is in effect a playoff.

3. I don't know the degree to which it would be devalued if it became NCAA playoff only. But I think it would have some effect. For instance, what is a team's motivation for making a run at an undefeated season? Because we can drop a game or two now and we're still in the running, right?


1. Wrong. Texas and Mizzou twice are better than any tOSU wins. Kentucky/Arkansas = Texas Tech/Colorado. Very average across the board. Not to mention LSU's near losses to Auburn, Florida and Bama. LSU does get major credit for the VaTech whipping.
2. Wrong. If the regular season was a playoff, everyone would have been eliminated weeks ago.
3. Even in a 4 or 8 team playoff, the goal is still to win as many as possible.

[Curly Bill]

97% percent of the statistics Faninama uses came out of his behind.

Yeah, but those of us that don't agree with him are clueless. :D

...so maybe his statistics are correct and we're too clueless to recognize it. ;)

[Curly Bill]

The Super Bowl is only the most-watched event on the planet.

Nah, we do not want to emulate anything like it. Let's keep roulette college football in place forevar.

Roulette college football...nice. You thought hard on that one. :D

[Curly Bill]

Here are the numbers that dictate that at some point the PAC 10, the Big 10 and the Rose bowl will be brought kicking and screaming like little girls into a true college football playoff....87% of fans favor a playoff

What percent of college presidents support a playoff? :cool:

[stoops the eternal pimp]

The fans want a playoff?

Well the FANS keep selling out stadiums...and the FANS keep travelling to these bowl games...

In microeconomics a few weeks ago, we talked about dollar votes and how consumers vote for what they want by what they spend their money on. Fans can say they want a playoff, but their money is saying otherwise..

You really want a playoff, figure out a way to stop stadiums from selling out and quit buying the merchandise..

[MextheBulldog]

http://content.ytmnd.com/content/e/8/e/e8e86a67fdb7770914c42df3432aa2e6.jpg

[Jason White's Third Knee]

The fans want a playoff?

Well the FANS keep selling out stadiums...and the FANS keep travelling to these bowl games...

In microeconomics a few weeks ago, we talked about dollar votes and how consumers vote for what they want by what they spend their money on. Fans can say they want a playoff, but their money is saying otherwise..

You really want a playoff, figure out a way to stop stadiums from selling out and quit buying the merchandise..


Does that really apply here? I am pretty sure that everyone on this board is a fan of some kind and watching our team regardless of where they play is what we do.

[Desert Sapper]

Does that really apply here? I am pretty sure that everyone on this board is a fan of some kind and watching our team regardless of where they play is what we do.

Which is precisely why nothing will change based on fan opinion. As long as the $$ talks, nothing will change, and the fans won't stop talking with their $$.

[KingBarry]

I'm not a hater of the Rose Bowl, but what should have the highest priority - the game, or the parade?

Great question. Better yet -- to whom are you asking? To the Rose Bowl Committee, the answer might well be the parade. But they are trying to advertise southern California as a winter playground and generate dollars for the local travel industry.

But to the NCAA powers-that-be, the parade should be only a slight concern, and the SoCal travel industry should be COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

Look, there are good reasons to oppose a playoff, and I know that a playoff won't settle all the controversies in college football. However, a system that rewards a bunch of local minded suits with a fat cut of college football revenues should not be automatically considered inviolate.

And another thing -- Why is the bowl system considered sacrosanct? Are the bowls "unique," as is often stated? In fact, the football bowl system is very similar to college basketball's holiday tournaments. In fact, they developed at the same time for the same puposes, but by sheer accident the holiday happen to be at the end of the football season. That's the only "unique" feature.

[FaninAma]

97% percent of the statistics Faninama uses came out of his behind.


I may have misposted. It looks like only 85%, not 87% of fans prefer a playoff(refer to question 4):
http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/polling?event_id=3273&action=1&question24292=97186&question24293=97188&question24294=97194&question24295=97197&question24296=97207&question24297=97212&question24298=97216&question24299=97218&question24300=97220&question24301=97221

And by the way, I may be able to pull statistics out of my behind because I, unlike you, don't have other parts of my anatomy already there obstructing the way. Sorry, you brought the subject up and left it wide open, so to speak. :)

Rich, you are sharp on most other subjects and it saddens me that I have to label you as one of the ,now corrected, 15% of the clueless fans on this subject. :D

[birddog]

how did you find the time to vote 300,000 times, faninama? :D

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Rich, you are sharp on most other subjects and it saddens me that I have to label you as one of the ,now corrected, 15% of the clueless fans on this subject. :D

Clearly I've misrepresented myself. What I meant to convey is that I am sharp-tongued on most subjects and clueless on all subjects. :P

[Stoop Dawg]

http://www.soonersports.com/genrel/121107aaa.html

So this is what it has come down to: The Rose Bowl Parade vs a Playoff. Hard to believe that both of these events cannot co-exist somehow.

I stopped reading after he said:

The stadiums are mostly full, ratings are dynamite and every regular season game has some sort of post-season implication. By all means, let's implement change.

I get the sarcasm. Then he followed with:

Those of us who work in and follow college sports love to thump our chests about the game, "being for the student-athlete."

"It's all for the kids," we say.

So which is it? Is it for the full stadiums and high ratings, or is it for the student-athlete?

But many of the student-athletes that lean towards a playoff have never played in one at the expense of playing in a bowl. I'm not sure they understand what they 'd be giving up.

Oh, I see. You do it all for the players, but if the players disagree with you then you resort to "they don't really know what's best for them".

Here's a thought, maybe YOU don't know either.

[KingBarry]

The fans want a playoff?

Well the FANS keep selling out stadiums...and the FANS keep travelling to these bowl games...

In microeconomics a few weeks ago, we talked about dollar votes and how consumers vote for what they want by what they spend their money on. Fans can say they want a playoff, but their money is saying otherwise..

You really want a playoff, figure out a way to stop stadiums from selling out and quit buying the merchandise..

Well, as an economist, and former microecon teacher at OU -- this isn't an appropriate comparison. Consumer vote with their dollars when they make choices. In this case, they don't get to choose spending money for the bowl versus spending for a playoff -- so it's not a "dollar election."

[KingBarry]

The Super Bowl is only the most-watched event on the planet.

Nah, we do not want to emulate anything like it. Let's keep roulette college football in place forevar.

Isn't the soccer World Cup watched by a lot more people than the Super Bowl? At least that's what the Europeans telling me. Though I never really believed them.

[Stoop Dawg]

You'll get what you want and then whine about something new.

There will always be someone whining about something.

And you'll always be there to whine about the whining.

:yawn:

[soonerboy_odanorth]

1. Wrong. Texas and Mizzou twice are better than any tOSU wins. Kentucky/Arkansas = Texas Tech/Colorado. Very average across the board. Not to mention LSU's near losses to Auburn, Florida and Bama. LSU does get major credit for the VaTech whipping.
2. Wrong. If the regular season was a playoff, everyone would have been eliminated weeks ago.
3. Even in a 4 or 8 team playoff, the goal is still to win as many as possible.

1. Wrong-Wrong. MSU, Wisconsin, Penn State and Michigan is 4 quality wins vs. our 3. And would you seriously pick either the pirates or the buffs over Kentucky OR Arkansas? Maybe TT... But I think they'd get their clocks cleaned by either. And LSU's "near losses" were no more "near losses" than was Texas, our first game against Mizzou, and (for the love of God) IOWA FREAKING STATE.

2. Wrong-Wrong. Many teams were eliminated weeks ago.

3. Well, yeah. Cue Herm Edwards. "You play the game to win!" But some of the week-in week-out pressure to win would undoubtedly be removed. To what degree is the question.

And one question I haven't seen anybody address: What happens to regular season schedule quality if we move strictly to a playoff format? What motivation would schools have to schedule OOC games against Bama, Miami, FSU, Washington, LSU, Tennessee, etc.? How about bowl revenues. Sure the playoff games would get huge paydays. What happens to all the others? Why would a bowl want to shell out millions if they aren't the show anymore?

[sanantoniosooner]

I may have misposted. It looks like only 85%, not 87% of fans prefer a playoff(refer to question 4):
http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/polling?event_id=3273&action=1&question24292=97186&question24293=97188&question24294=97194&question24295=97197&question24296=97207&question24297=97212&question24298=97216&question24299=97218&question24300=97220&question24301=97221

And by the way, I may be able to pull statistics out of my behind because I, unlike you, don't have other parts of my anatomy already there obstructing the way. Sorry, you brought the subject up and left it wide open, so to speak. :)

Rich, you are sharp on most other subjects and it saddens me that I have to label you as one of the ,now corrected, 15% of the clueless fans on this subject. :D
Let me get this straight..........

We have posts constantly how stupid ESPN is and inaccurate the site is.

But now we are citing them as support for debate?

add yourself to the clueless.

and complainers compose most of the voting. People who are content don't feel the need to whine at every avenue possible.

[OUGuf]

There is an 80% chance that 75% of the NCAAF fans want a playoff.
40% of those want a +1 while 83% want a 16 team playoff.
Out off all people polled 72% of the people think Dean Blevins should be promoted to king of town, while 86% think polls are silly.

[Fraggle145]

Play the top four teams in the bowl format and add one more game

I wish more people would get behind this. If you are a person that likes the bowl system, it maintains it with as little change as possible, and if you are a playoff fan, it is the most likely stepping stone to get what you want.

Why is it so hard for people to budge just a little? The BCS was a compromise. This is the next step.

yes. All of this 8, 12, 16, 32 whatever stuff is garbage. 4 teams thats it, if you dont make it too bad. You shouldnt have lost twice in the regular season, because I remember right most of the time either the 3rd or 4th place team has 2 losses (except for 98, 00, & 04).

[Leroy Lizard]

Great question. Better yet -- to whom are you asking? To the Rose Bowl Committee, the answer might well be the parade. But they are trying to advertise southern California as a winter playground and generate dollars for the local travel industry.

Actually, they are putting on festivities designed to entertain thousands of people while generating revenue for the local economy. Only Communists have a problem with that.


But to the NCAA powers-that-be, the parade should be only a slight concern, and the SoCal travel industry should be COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

Except that the fans who go to the bowl games benefit from the festivities. It isn't like the bowl committees extort money from them; it is a fair deal that leaves both sides happy.

But we can't stand for that, can we? No, if some businessman manages to benefit somehow, that means it's bad.

For the first time in a long time, I am going to go to watch the Sooners play in a bowl game (until now, I simply have not been able to). I am meeting my family in Phoenix and we are going to go to a lot of the festivities. We have had a month to plan. My sister has managed to work out a deal with her boss to attend.

But you want ruin that, all so that you can have a silly debate about which team is best settled once and for all. I don't care about your debates. I want to go to Phoenix with my family and have a good time.

But since some business might benefit from my vacation, that makes it baaaaaad.


Look, there are good reasons to oppose a playoff, and I know that a playoff won't settle all the controversies in college football. However, a system that rewards a bunch of local minded suits with a fat cut of college football revenues should not be automatically considered inviolate.

Oh, so we are going to gut college football's tradition because some people manage to benefit financially from it, all the while not solving the complaints in the first place.

Great. Just great.


In fact, they developed at the same time for the same puposes, but by sheer accident the holiday happen to be at the end of the football season. That's the only "unique" feature.

This discussion is about the bowl system, which includes the festivities. The Rose Bowl parade is older than the Rose Bowl. It began in 1890. It is older than basketball itself.

But if you want to destroy a tradition that has lasted over 100 years because you cannot live with the fact there might be disagreements over which team is best, go ahead. Don't count on my support.

[FaninAma]

add yourself to the clueless.

and complainers compose most of the voting. People who are content don't feel the need to whine at every avenue possible.

We whiners will have our day! It's the old "squeaky wheel gets the grease" strategy. It works for wives and kids, why not college football fans who support a playoff!

Pro-playoff whiners of the world, unite!

[MextheBulldog]

1. Wrong-Wrong. MSU, Wisconsin, Penn State and Michigan is 4 quality wins vs. our 3.

2. Wrong-Wrong. Many teams were eliminated weeks ago.

3. Well, yeah. Cue Herm Edwards. "You play the game to win!" But some of the week-in week-out pressure to win would undoubtedly be removed. To what degree is the question.

And one question I haven't seen anybody address: What happens to regular season schedule quality if we move strictly to a playoff format? What motivation would schools have to schedule OOC games against Bama, Miami, FSU, Washington, LSU, Tennessee, etc.? How about bowl revenues. Sure the playoff games would get huge paydays. What happens to all the others? Why would a bowl want to shell out millions if they aren't the show anymore?

Dude, you don't know what you're talking about....

1. SRSLY, Michigan State at 7-5 is a quality win??? Michigan? Appy State and Oregon by 32, anyone? The Big 10 is widely recognized as one of the weaker power conferences.
2. You made my point. The regular season is not a playoff. With the exception of Hawaii, everyone has been 'eliminated', or shoulda been.
3. Not if you keep the playoff small, to 4 or 8. Margin of error is still extremely small.

Regular season scheduling: See Ohio State and KU this year. They played no one OOC and it seems to matter little.

Bowl revenues are already at a huge disparity!! 12-15MM for a BCS bowl vs. 1-5 million for regular bowls.

Irony here is that an OU fan is trying to justify why tOSU belongs. Bizarre. This BCS thing is great.

[Stoop Dawg]

People who are content don't feel the need to whine at every avenue possible.

While your verbiage is snide, your logic is sound. It is usually the case that the ones who want change are the ones who speak up for change.

What exactly is it that you are not content about, seeing as how you show up to do your own whining in EVERY SINGLE playoff thread? Are you really that discontented about other people wanting a playoff?

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Dude, you don't know what you're talking about....

1. SRSLY, Michigan State at 7-5 is a quality win??? Michigan? Appy State and Oregon by 32, anyone? The Big 10 is widely recognized as one of the weaker power conferences.
2. You made my point. The regular season is not a playoff. With the exception of Hawaii, everyone has been 'eliminated', or shoulda been.
3. Not if you keep the playoff small, to 4 or 8. Margin of error is still extremely small.

Regular season scheduling: See Ohio State and KU this year. They played no one OOC and it seems to matter little.

Bowl revenues are already at a huge disparity!! 12-15MM for a BCS bowl vs. 1-5 million for regular bowls.

Irony here is that an OU fan is trying to justify why tOSU belongs. Bizarre. This BCS thing is great.

I think we can all agree I never know what I'm talking about...

Nonetheless...

1. The assumption was that OU's wins were more impressive than tOSU's. How so? Texas lost to K-State and a bad aTm team. And I think we can all agree now that Mizzou was over-rated *clap*clap*clap-clap-clap*. And our losses were worse. 2 of them, to their one, btw. I don't disagree at all the the BigTenleven this year is viewed as one of the weaker power conferences. But nationally it is probably viewed as being about on par with the Big 12. We don't like it and would like to shout BS at the top of our lungs. But that's the perception nationally. If you don't think that's the case then YOU don't know what you're talking about so there! Ha! Nanny-nanny-boo-boo! :P

2. Did not. USC. Eliminated weeks ago because the regular season acts as a playoff of sorts. Thank you very much.

3. I would agree, but it seems to me most people screaming for playoffs want a 16 team field. Check out all the mock playoffs the various media organizations put out there.

I think the the tOSU and Kansas scheduling was a blip because of how freaky a year it was. In other years OOC schedule strength has meant a great deal. We're a prime example in 2003.

No question there is a huge disparity. But my point is there will be an even greater one with overall fewer large payouts. And probably some bowls just shuttin' 'er down. The Outback, Gator, Peach and those ilk provide pretty nice jack to conference coffers. My guess is playoffs would be a risk to those revenue streams, which is a large reason a playoff is not favored by university presidents and admins around the country.

Ah well, any way you slice it you're never going to make everyone happy.

And in my defense, it was a very bizarre year. That's the perfect word for it.

[MextheBulldog]

OK, last points on this:
1. My main objective was to demonstrate that tOSU or LSU is no better a candidate than OU/USC/VaTech for the title game. We can go back and forth on this, with data to back it up, and pick out good and bad points for each. But none of them are a clear cut lock to be in the BCS title game. Agreed?
2. Let me put it to you this way: If the reg. season acted as a playoff, tOSU and LSU woulda been eliminated a long time ago. You lose in a playoff, you go home. Regular season does not equal a playoff.

[Leroy Lizard]

Regular season does not equal a playoff.

I, for one, don't care. I don't want or need a playoff, so I don't care if the regular season acts as one.

If you want to find some way to determine the TRUE champion (whatever that means), fine. Just leave the bowls alone and don't turn them into semi-final games where fans only have one week to prepare travel arrangements and have to hop on the next flight home after the game.

For those fans who simply cannot tolerate watching a sport for the sheer beauty and excitement of each game, I suggest watching the NFL.

[sanantoniosooner]

What exactly is it that you are not content about, seeing as how you show up to do your own whining in EVERY SINGLE playoff thread? Are you really that discontented about other people wanting a playoff?
Two things.

Prove your first assertion and then I'll come up with a response. It wont be necessary though because I only reply in less than a third of the "playoff" whinefests.

Most of the people that want a playoff don't want to discuss it. They want to rant and ignore other opinions.

[FaninAma]

Two things.

Prove your first assertion and then I'll come up with a response. It wont be necessary though because I only reply in less than a third of the "playoff" whinefests.

Most of the people that want a playoff don't want to discuss it. They want to rant and ignore other opinions.

So which is it...are we whiners or ranters? I really need to know so I can do whichever irritates the anti-playoff types the most.

Eventually they are going to get tired of the whining or the ranting and will simply give in. I just want to do whatever causes them to give in sooner.

[Partial Qualifier]

Play the top four teams in the bowl format and add one more game

I wish more people would get behind this. If you are a person that likes the bowl system, it maintains it with as little change as possible, and if you are a playoff fan, it is the most likely stepping stone to get what you want.

Why is it so hard for people to budge just a little? The BCS was a compromise. This is the next step.

I didn't read the whole thread so excuse me if this is reiteration, but this is dead on.

Clearly a jump to an 8, 12 or 16 team playoff ain't gonna happen and I am okay with that. A 4-team playoff however ought to be easy. Keep EVERYTHING in place...BCS rating system, bowl games, everything. Just squeeze in one extra game at the end.

Seriously, how many times in history has there been a #5-or-lower team who had a truly legitimate gripe to be in the championship game?? This year may be the only one. Keep tweaking the BCS formulas, but add that extra game for f*ck's sake

[sanantoniosooner]

So which is it...are we whiners or ranters? I really need to know so I can do whichever irritates the anti-playoff types the most.

Eventually they are going to get tired of the whining or the ranting and will simply give in. I just want to do whatever causes them to give in sooner.
dude...you are versatile.

I wouldn't even limit your abilities to just those two.;)

And if you've paid attention to this thread, other than your own posts, you'd know that I have suggested a blending of the two that could pacify both sides.

I'm not anti-playoff. I'm anti destroying everything that is good about college football other than just an MNC.

[OUGuf]

A +1 System using the top 4 BCS teams wouldn't destroy football. It would give the top 4 teams as rated by the polls, and the computers a chance to see who can be the winner. It will be decided on the field much more convincingly than the way it is now especially this year.

The bowls would stay intact, you would have all the tradition and padgentry and one extra game. Not a big stretch in my opinion.
But that is what it is just my opinion.
A full 16 team playoff would not happen but a +1 is very very doable, and would solve most of the issues raised in the past several years.
#2s being left out of the MNC would not happen unless they lost in their bowl game, several 2 loss teams who have equal claim to the game would get to battle it out on the field.

Plus it gives me mroe Ncaa Football to watch.

They really need to extend the season a couple of months so the time between games isnt so long. I have nothing to do from January-August and that is the real shame here..

[Ash]

For those fans who simply cannot tolerate watching a sport for the sheer beauty and excitement of each game, I suggest watching the NFL.

This is what soccer fans tell me, too.

[Ash]

Logic: The bowl game is an invitation to two teams from a city to come and put on an exhibition game as a reward for a good season. Initially, the teams were invited after final rankings and national titles were given out. The games were exciting, everyone was happy. Until...

... teams could not live with the fact that a national champion could lose a bowl game. So we had to change the rules to declare the national title after the bowl game

So far, no big deal.

But then the malcontents could not live with the fact that two teams might argue over which team was really best, so we had to create the Bowl Coalition, but that didn't make people happy, so we then had to create the Bowl Alliance. Finally, we end up with the BCS and (as you can guess) no one is happy.

Now there are those who think, "I will be happy with a +1." Yeah, right! And when we end up with a plus-one, they will demand a four-team playoff because their team got slighted. And then we will end up with an eight-team playoff, then a 16-team playoff. The craziness won't end until the fan of every major college team has a better than 50% chance of seeing his favorite team getting into the playoffs every year.

At that point, teams will simply have to schedule a few patsies, lose only one or two conference games, and they're in. Then everyone will complain that there are too many teams involved, but it will be too late; you can never go back.

The bowl games are perfectly logical. Our inability to be satisfied unless a system is unrealistically perfect is what is illogical.



Did you read the article? Mossman highlighted many problems with a four-team playoff, but go on ahead and ignore everything he said.



Well, when you are dealing with a past time that has tons of tradition surrounding it, change isn't always good. Sometimes the squirrel has good reason to be worried. Those want to start out with an itty-bitty playoff are just waving the squirrel in, then blam! We end up with a 16-team playoff and college football becomes a colorless semi-pro football league. So yeah, we are definitely worried about small changes.

But you guys are all going to assure us that everything will be okay, right?

The old slippery slope argument? ROFLMAO!

You can go on believing that you can tell what will make me and thousands of other people happy, LOL.

Nothing, about your 16 playoff "worst case" scares me. And college football won't die or be meaningless or colorless, quite the opposite. It would be bigger than superbowl and march madness because of the passion of CFB fans and because something real is at stake.

You're beginning to sound like you work for one of the bowls or the BCS.

But anyway, my real point is: I can't believe this thread lasted this long, Curly Bill and I brokered the peace accords on page 3. Get with the program people.

[Curly Bill]

But anyway, my real point is: I can't believe this thread lasted this long, Curly Bill and I brokered the peace accords on page 3.

:D

[Leroy Lizard]

The old slippery slope argument? ROFLMAO!

Okay, let's examine it.

Here is the history of the NCAA tournament. Tell me if don't spot a trend:

* 1939–1950: eight teams
* 1951–1952: 16 teams
* 1953–1974: varied from 22-25 teams
* 1975–1978: 32 teams
* 1979: 40 teams
* 1980–1982: 48 teams
* 1983: 52 teams
* 1984: 53 teams
* 1985–2000: 64 teams
* 2001— : 65 teams

So it can't happen, heh?

But since you probably are unable to see the trend in the above, how about the history of the Div. 1AA playoffs?

1978-1980: 4 teams
1981: 8 teams
1982-1985: 12 teams
1986-present: 16 teams

I cannot understand how any playoff proponent can possibly think that college football fans will be satisfied with a +1 or four-team playoff and that it won't evolve into a 16-team playoff.

By the way, despite Div. 1AA containing 120 teams, Youngstown State and Georgia Southern have won the title 10 out of the last 21 years. And why? Because playing four extra games each year gives these teams what amounts to a full year's worth of game experience for each player on the team by the time they use up their eligibility. It is like giving the team's players a five-year scholarship instead of a four-year scholarship.

That is why smaller schools have no chance of competing in a playoff. Once recruits find out they can star in up to 16 extra televised games if they go to Powerhouse U, it will be all over for the smaller schools. They are dumb if they think otherwise.

And will playoff proponents understand this argument? No. I can show a brick wall the history of the NCAA and Div. 1AA tournaments and it would have a better chance of getting it.


You can go on believing that you can tell what will make me and thousands of other people happy, LOL.

You can be happy any way you want. Just don't pretend that there aren't any good anti-playoff arguments. There are plenty.


Nothing, about your 16 playoff "worst case" scares me. And college football won't die or be meaningless or colorless, quite the opposite. It would be bigger than superbowl and march madness because of the passion of CFB fans and because something real is at stake.

Read Mossman's article. He specifically details precisely what is wrong when bowl games turn into semifinal playoff games. If you want to refute it, go ahead. Just don't pretend the arguments aren't there.


You're beginning to sound like you work for one of the bowls or the BCS.

Doesn't matter who I work for. My arguments stand on their own. I could point out that you sound like you work for ESPN. Of what use is that sort of silly reasoning?

[Ash]

Okay, let's examine it.

Here is the history of the NCAA tournament. Tell me if don't spot a trend:

* 1939–1950: eight teams
* 1951–1952: 16 teams
* 1953–1974: varied from 22-25 teams
* 1975–1978: 32 teams
* 1979: 40 teams
* 1980–1982: 48 teams
* 1983: 52 teams
* 1984: 53 teams
* 1985–2000: 64 teams
* 2001— : 65 teams

So it can't happen, heh?

But since you probably are unable to see the trend in the above, how about the history of the Div. 1AA playoffs?

1978-1980: 4 teams
1981: 8 teams
1982-1985: 12 teams
1986-present: 16 teams

I cannot understand how any playoff proponent can possibly think that college football fans will be satisfied with a +1 or four-team playoff and that it won't evolve into a 16-team playoff.

By the way, despite Div. 1AA containing 120 teams, Youngstown State and Georgia Southern have won the title 10 out of the last 21 years. And why? Because playing four extra games each year gives these teams what amounts to a full year's worth of game experience for each player on the team by the time they use up their eligibility. It is like giving the team's players a five-year scholarship instead of a four-year scholarship.

That is why smaller schools have no chance of competing in a playoff. Once recruits find out they can star in up to 16 extra televised games if they go to Powerhouse U, it will be all over for the smaller schools. They are dumb if they think otherwise.

And will playoff proponents understand this argument? No. I can show a brick wall the history of the NCAA and Div. 1AA tournaments and it would have a better chance of getting it.



You can be happy any way you want. Just don't pretend that there aren't any good anti-playoff arguments. There are plenty.



Read Mossman's article. He specifically details precisely what is wrong when bowl games turn into semifinal playoff games. If you want to refute it, go ahead. Just don't pretend the arguments aren't there.



Doesn't matter who I work for. My arguments stand on their own. I could point out that you sound like you work for ESPN. Of what use is that sort of silly reasoning?

Again, nothing about this argument is a deterrent.

I think I must have hit home with the employment smack. LOL.

I've read everything I need to read...blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Go to page three and read the Curly Bill-Ash referendum and let this dead horse rest in peace.

Parades. LMAO.

BTW, there was a time when the NIT was bigger than the NCAA and counted as the champeenship to have. My have times have changed, yet March Madness is huge, bigger than the NIT ever was. You'd be the one guy that still refuses to watch the tourney and only watches the NIT. LOL

[Leroy Lizard]

Again, nothing about this argument is a deterrent.

Sure, if you are in favor of a 16-team playoff. But trying to discuss the tradition, academics, and the beauty of college sports with those that want a 16-team playoff is pointless. It is like arguing aesthetics with a person who likes Oregon's uniforms.

A lot of playoff proponents, however, are not in favor of a 16-team playoff. They hold on to the quaint notion that we can have an itty bitty playoff, thus preserving the bowl system. They honestly think that we can stop at a +1, four-team, or eight-team playoff, thus preserving (to some extent) the meaning of the regular season.

They are deluded. History proves it.

By the way, can you please quit placing "LOL" and "LMAO" at the end of every statement?

[Ash]

By the way, can you please quit placing "LOL" and "LMAO" at the end of every statement?

Sorry if most of what you say makes me laugh. ROFLMAO!

[Leroy Lizard]

Sorry if most of what you say makes me laugh. ROFLMAO!

Let me guess: You are about fifteen years old?

[CORNholio]

The old slippery slope argument? ROFLMAO!

You can go on believing that you can tell what will make me and thousands of other people happy, LOL.


I believe its called sociology. You see it's like somebody noticed patterns and whatnot in behavior of large groups of people and whatnot. It's like a science and whatnot. A bunch of really smart people like spend their whole lives like studying it and whatnot. True story.

[sanantoniosooner]

Actually these threads are starting to make me WeepOL.

[Stoop Dawg]

Okay, let's examine it.

Here is the history of the NCAA tournament. Tell me if don't spot a trend:

* 1939–1950: eight teams
* 1951–1952: 16 teams
* 1953–1974: varied from 22-25 teams
* 1975–1978: 32 teams
* 1979: 40 teams
* 1980–1982: 48 teams
* 1983: 52 teams
* 1984: 53 teams
* 1985–2000: 64 teams
* 2001— : 65 teams

So it can't happen, heh?

But since you probably are unable to see the trend in the above, how about the history of the Div. 1AA playoffs?

1978-1980: 4 teams
1981: 8 teams
1982-1985: 12 teams
1986-present: 16 teams

I cannot understand how any playoff proponent can possibly think that college football fans will be satisfied with a +1 or four-team playoff and that it won't evolve into a 16-team playoff.

Good info, thanks. I hope this happens.


By the way, despite Div. 1AA containing 120 teams, Youngstown State and Georgia Southern have won the title 10 out of the last 21 years. And why? Because playing four extra games each year gives these teams what amounts to a full year's worth of game experience for each player on the team by the time they use up their eligibility. It is like giving the team's players a five-year scholarship instead of a four-year scholarship.

That is why smaller schools have no chance of competing in a playoff. Once recruits find out they can star in up to 16 extra televised games if they go to Powerhouse U, it will be all over for the smaller schools. They are dumb if they think otherwise.

This already happens. People are dumb if they think otherwise. What recruiting advantage does any team really have over another? TV time, that's number 1. And that's why you see the same few teams playing for the so-called "National Championship" every year now.


And will playoff proponents understand this argument? No. I can show a brick wall the history of the NCAA and Div. 1AA tournaments and it would have a better chance of getting it.

I'm a playoff proponent and I understand it. I love it and hope it happens. What now?


Doesn't matter who I work for. My arguments stand on their own. I could point out that you sound like you work for ESPN. Of what use is that sort of silly reasoning?

That's what used car salesmen say too. "Don't worry about my commission, just trust me when I tell you this is a GREAT car!!"

Here's the bottom line. I personally don't give a rat's *** if any of you want a playoff or not. You can trot out all the reasons in the world why you don't want one. I don't have to convince you, I have to convince the people that matter. And as you've so astutely pointed out with your "trends analysis", it's already happening. Hooray for me!

[KABOOKIE]

Hey Kenny (and other bowl humpers).... I hope you thoroughly enjoyed that week long 'hype' and pageantry that was the Fiesta Bowl. :rolleyes:

[Leroy Lizard]

Hey Kenny (and other bowl humpers).... I hope you thoroughly enjoyed that week long 'hype' and pageantry that was the Fiesta Bowl.

As if a 20-point thumping in a playoff game is going to be any better.

Besides, if Kenny dined and partied for four or five days in Phoenix, he probably did have a good time. What's wrong with that?


This already happens. People are dumb if they think otherwise. What recruiting advantage does any team really have over another?

Staying close to home is a big one. How big when compared to 16 post-season tv appearances? Not very big.


I'm a playoff proponent and I understand it. I love it and hope it happens. What now?

My post was aimed clearly at those who favor playoffs because they think that we can keep a playoff limited to a small number of teams. If you want a 16-team playoff, that's a different argument.


That's what used car salesmen say too. "Don't worry about my commission, just trust me when I tell you this is a GREAT car!!"

I don't care if the salesman gets a commission; I am going to buy the car based on my own research and observations. Just like I am going to examine a playoff argument based on the logic of the ideas, not who the person works for.

Have you ever heard of the ad hominem attack? Do you know why it is a fallacy? (Of course he doesn't.)


Here's the bottom line. I personally don't give a rat's *** if any of you want a playoff or not.

You sure seem to.


You can trot out all the reasons in the world why you don't want one. I don't have to convince you, I have to convince the people that matter. And as you've so astutely pointed out with your "trends analysis", it's already happening. Hooray for me.

Great! You convinced the Div. 1AA to increase the number of teams in their playoff. Well done! You got what you wanted, so go off and watch Div. 1AA football and leave Div. 1A alone.

[KABOOKIE]

As if a 20-point thumping in a playoff game is going to be any better.

Besides, if Kenny dined and partied for four or five days in Phoenix, he probably did have a good time. What's wrong with that?


1) He dined and partied off the money earned by those players.

2) I work for a living and his job is stealing from the players.

3) He's too f'ing dumb to realize that if your team wins then you continue the party and pageantry for ANOTHER week. If you lose then BFD it's feels just like today (but, hey throw a party the week before and get a bunch of free sponsor gifts and WGAS right?).

[Leroy Lizard]

1) He dined and partied off the money earned by those players.

2) I work for a living and his job is stealing from the players.

:rolleyes:



3) He's too f'ing dumb to realize that if your team wins then you continue the party and pageantry for ANOTHER week. If you lose then BFD it's feels just like today (but, hey throw a party the week before and get a bunch of free sponsor gifts and WGAS right?).

Sounds like a little jealousy is clouding your argument.