Expanded playoffs proposed as a "cure" for low ratings for the College Football Championship.

[WinterBorn]

Better than what we currently have. It still doesn't solve the one of (IMO) biggest problems. 130 teams in Div 1 FBS. Maybe 20 have any chance of competing for let alone winning a championship. And that's not in any individual year that's ever. So 85% of the teams in the "league" will never even sniff a chance at even making the playoffs even if you expanded it to 16.

While I agree that only 15% of the teams have a prayer of competing in the playoffs, what do you propose to do to limit the number of teams?

Cincinnati would have been part of the 85% on most people's list. But this year they earned a spot.

There have always been bowl games that are meaningless, except for the teams participating. But it means exposure and money for those teams.

After decades of seeing the National Championship be a popularity contest, we finally decide who earns the title on the field.

 

[WinterBorn]

It could be no one wants to see bama win again.

They should have had Michigan and Cincinnati play for bronze.

otherwise college football is perfect. At least it worked out perfectly this year. I could see a scenario where a couple teams get screwed.

Alabama fans are the only ones who want to see Bama win another national championship. I understand that. But unless other teams step up and beat us, that is the way it will be. Unless, of course, you want to ban the Crimson Tide from the playoff for being too good.

 

[Couchpotato]

While I agree that only 15% of the teams have a prayer of competing in the playoffs, what do you propose to do to limit the number of teams?

Cincinnati would have been part of the 85% on most people's list. But this year they earned a spot.

There have always been bowl games that are meaningless, except for the teams participating. But it means exposure and money for those teams.

After decades of seeing the National Championship be a popularity contest, we finally decide who earns the title on the field.

3-4 posts above this one.

 

[candycorn]

While I agree that only 15% of the teams have a prayer of competing in the playoffs, what do you propose to do to limit the number of teams?

Cincinnati would have been part of the 85% on most people's list. But this year they earned a spot.

There have always been bowl games that are meaningless, except for the teams participating. But it means exposure and money for those teams.

After decades of seeing the National Championship be a popularity contest, we finally decide who earns the title on the field.

You bring up a good point at the end. Wasn't it great to have a clear winner as opposed to the polls deciding who the national champion was?

That is the point of my system... The six major (heritage) bowls would regain a position of prominence..... Perhaps it won't mean as much but--and this is where we differ--few outside of some alums a recall who won the 1995 Peach Bowl, the 2005 Peach Bowl, the 2015 Peach Bowl or even last year's Peach Bowl. So in my plan, the champions of these bowl games would mean as much as they ever meant. Having a trophy in the case is nice though...

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The ratings were certainly down, due to the fact that it was 2 SEC teams. It becomes a de facto regional game.

And I am all for an expanded playoff. Mainly because it means more college football. But will it help ratings for the final game? Playing it on a Monday night didn't help the ratings. And if there had been 8 teams in the playoff, I seriously doubt anyone else would have won and made the final game. Low ratings or not, it was the two best teams playing for the championship.

Extra Points: College football fans are tuning out the Playoff. There’s a simple solution

Georgia-Alabama was great if you're an SEC fan, but TV numbers were miserable. How much longer will power brokers bicker before resolving the issue?

www.saturdaydownsouth.com

One thing that stands out in the article is:
"The game averaged 22.6 million viewers and was ahead of only last year’s championship game between Alabama and Ohio State – which drew 18.7 million at the end of a taxing pandemic season."

If the problem is that it was two SEC teams, why were the ratings lower for the Championship game between Alabama and Ohio State?

And yes, the season was taxing because of covid. But also, the viewers were far more likely to be home than they would have in previous years.

What makes you think that? I watched the game while working from home.

 

[P@triot]

And I am all for an expanded playoff. Mainly because it means more college football.

Reminds me of socialism…

1. Never want to have to earn anything. Always want it handed out.

2. No matter how much it fails, it was just because there wasn’t enough of the failed idea

The college football playoffs were the dumbest goddamn idea in the history of the sport. And now that the ratings prove as much, the proposed solution by the idiots who wanted it is: “just do more”.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nowadays there are too many pointless bowl games in college football, and college football was a lot more popular before they had a national championship.

A number of teams could end the season on a high note and that would be that.

Going back to a 10 game season with 8 or 10 bowl games that end of 1 January would be fine in my view.

Yes, let's go back to 1988 when my college team was ranked number 3 going into an equally high ranked team. At the end of New Years Day, my team was the only team in the top 6 teams to win their bowl games. Our final ranking? Number 3!

 

[P@triot]

After decades of seeing the National Championship be a popularity contest, we finally decide who earns the title on the field.

It was always decided on the field. Always.

 

[P@triot]

So 85% of the teams in the "league" will never even sniff a chance at even making the playoffs even if you expanded it to 16.

It’s been that way since 1901 my friend. If you think there was EVER a time that Kent State could “even sniff a chance” at a National Championship, then you’ve clearly never watched college football.

 

[P@triot]

Yes, let's go back to 1988 when my college team was ranked number 3 going into an equally high ranked team. At the end of New Years Day, my team was the only team in the top 6 teams to win their bowl games. Our final ranking? Number 3!

I’ll take “things that never happened for $500, Alex”

In 1988, Notre Dame went into the Fiesta Bowl ranked #1. They defeated West Virginia (with QB Major Harris).

So no ART, #1 and #2 did not both lose that year. In fact, Miami was #2 and they beat Nebraska. That is why your #3 team finished #3.

Oh, and not for nothing, but #3 West Virginia lost their bowl game. So you got 100% of your post wrong.

 

[WinterBorn]

It was always decided on the field. Always.

No, it was not. Before the BCS and Playoffs it was decided by sports writers and coaches voting on who they wanted to be #1.

In 1964, Alabama went undefeated and was voted the #1 team in both the AP and the UPI polls. Alabama then lost to Texas in the Orange Bowl. But Bama was still #1 in the record books.

In 1966 the Crimson Tide finished the season and the bowl games as the only unbeaten and untied team in the country. In the final rankings we were #3.
After the Packers won Super Bowl 1, Vince Lombardi was asked what it felt like to have the world's best team in football. His reply was "I don't know. We haven't played Alabama yet."

 

[candycorn]

Reminds me of socialism…

1. Never want to have to earn anything. Always want it handed out.

2. No matter how much it fails, it was just because there wasn’t enough of the failed idea

The college football playoffs were the dumbest goddamn idea in the history of the sport. And now that the ratings prove as much, the proposed solution by the idiots who wanted it is: “just do more”.

Oh lord...shut the fuck up.

 

[WinterBorn]

Reminds me of socialism…

1. Never want to have to earn anything. Always want it handed out.

2. No matter how much it fails, it was just because there wasn’t enough of the failed idea

The college football playoffs were the dumbest goddamn idea in the history of the sport. And now that the ratings prove as much, the proposed solution by the idiots who wanted it is: “just do more”.

Who is asking for anything to be "handed out"? The places in the playoffs are earned, unlike the championships in the days when polls created them.

 

[Couchpotato]

It’s been that way since 1901 my friend. If you think there was EVER a time that Kent State could “even sniff a chance” at a National Championship, then you’ve clearly never watched college football.

When did I say Kent state ever had a chance to win a NC? Did you read the post you quoted?

 

[P@triot]

No, it was not. Before the BCS and Playoffs it was decided by sports writers and coaches voting on who they wanted to be #1.

And that "voting" was based on what occurred on the field. So yes, it was absolutely settled on the field.

Show me a single team in the voting era that won a National Championship with 4 losses. How about 3? Hell, show me two! The closes you could come would be 10-1-1 Colorado.

The fact is, you lost, and you were likely out. You lost twice, you were definitely out. Which made the participation-trophy crowd cry. It's always "give me another chance" (and another and another until I get a trophy too).

 

[P@triot]

Oh lord...shut the fuck up.

The kind of response we've all come to expect from you once you've been defeated with facts.

 

[P@triot]

Who is asking for anything to be "handed out"? The places in the playoffs are earned, unlike the championships in the days when polls created them.

WTF are you talking about?!? When you're crying for the playoffs to be "expanded" because your team didn't make it, you are literally crying for a handout.

The beauty of the pre-playoff system was that the entire season was one bad-ass playoff. Lose once and you were almost certainly out. Hell, teams would go undefeated and still not win the National Championship because they played a cupcake schedule and the voters weren't going to reward inferior teams for playing weak schedules.

It was the greatest system ever. Even perfection wasn't good enough. And that's what made all of the socialist participation-trophy generation cry.

 

[P@triot]

When did I say Kent state ever had a chance to win a NC? Did you read the post you quoted?

When did I say that you said Kent State ever had a chance? Struggling with literacy?

 

[WinterBorn]

And that "voting" was based on what occurred on the field. So yes, it was absolutely settled on the field.

Show me a single team in the voting era that won a National Championship with 4 losses. How about 3? Hell, show me two! The closes you could come would be 10-1-1 Colorado.

The fact is, you lost, and you were likely out. You lost twice, you were definitely out. Which made the participation-trophy crowd cry. It's always "give me another chance" (and another and another until I get a trophy too).

And the two or three teams vying for the championship never played each other. It was not decided on the field.

 

[WinterBorn]

WTF are you talking about?!? When you're crying for the playoffs to be "expanded" because your team didn't make it, you are literally crying for a handout.

The beauty of the pre-playoff system was that the entire season was one bad-ass playoff. Lose once and you were almost certainly out. Hell, teams would go undefeated and still not win the National Championship because they played a cupcake schedule and the voters weren't going to reward inferior teams for playing weak schedules.

It was the greatest system ever. Even perfection wasn't good enough. And that's what made all of the socialist participation-trophy generation cry.

You seem to be confused on my feelings about the championship game. I am a lifelong Bama fan. But we do lose games. I have been predicting Kirby Smart would win a national championship.
I was speaking in favor of an expanded playoff before this season even started. It is not because of one loss.