If College Football goes to playoffs (1 Viewer)

[Captain Spaulding]

Over the last 2 years, my interest and enjoyment of college football has really increased more than in all of the decades and years past (I've been watching college and pro football religiously since around 1984 or so). Primarily for 2 reasons. Last year was very intriguing when top ranked teams kept getting knocked off with major upsets from the unranked or lowly ranked teams week after week. It made for alot of interesting scenarios all season long and left the national championship wide open. This year, there has been so many huge matchups of top 10 teams because the Big 10 and SEC have so many teams highly ranked and playing each other ever week. Historically in college football, you're lucky to get a highly ranked matchup maybe 2 or 3 times the whole season...you know the "game of the century/game of the decade" type hype. This year, there has been games of that sort of magnitude nearly every week. This new parody in the college game similiar to the NFL is really making it much more interesting. Right now I'd say I enjoy college almost about equal to pro football, but if they go to a playoff format, most surely I would enjoy the college game more than pro. What do you guys feel/think about that subject?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

in some parts of the country it already is more popular. But overall I dont think so.

not only that with the dea lthat the NCAA is about to sign with ESPN the BCS will continue as is until that contract is up

 

[Chase Stuart]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.

An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

Its not about what will drive more chatter in the office-place, its about would their be an increase in watching a meaningful playoff game more than a standalone bowl game (the non-championship game). If you had an 8 team playoff (no byes) that would equate to 4 games in week 1 of playoffs....2 games next week and 1 champion game in third week. So that is 7 games spread over 3 weeks. It seems like a slam dunk that this format would be a major increase in TV viewship over the current top bowl game format (7 BCS bowl games spread over a little more than 1 week period of time) I would guess a minimum of 300% increase in total game viewership for this change. That translates to significant increase in TV revenue $$$...how those huge profit increases get divided up to colleges and such is a whole other lenghty discussion, but we all know the $$$ is what its all about anyway despite anything else.

 

[H.K.]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.

An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

On the flip side, a playoff creates March Madness with football.Office pools and brackets would be huge with an 8 or 16 team playoff system....then its everyone talking CFB at the water cooler, not just the sports fans.

 

[Phil Elliott]

While I have been for a playoff system, the BCS controversies add to the interest. But I would rather they get rid of the conference title game.

Regardless, we don't need the government telling the colleges what to do.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I've always been for a playoff system, and if these fuddy duddy old men won't change, then I'm all for the Govt intervening.

One problem I see with a playoff system is, how do you expect fans of a team to go to 3 straight games? Do you really believe that if Penn St. is playing Virginia Tech in the Rose Bowl, that the locals are going to fill the stadium if it's the 2nd or 3rd playoff game played by both schools? Yes, if it's the National Championship game there would be local interest, but if it's the semi final game, I highly doubt it. I can see it now, you would have a National semi-final game with only 5,000 fans at the game. Basketball can absorb that happening to them for an earlier game, because they play a lot more games, but football cannot IMO. Yes, you can force fans to buy a set of tickets if they want to attend one of them, but when they don't show up for the 2nd game because they can only afford to take off work for one week, how does that look on National TV?

 

[Chase Stuart]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.

An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

On the flip side, a playoff creates March Madness with football.Office pools and brackets would be huge with an 8 or 16 team playoff system....then its everyone talking CFB at the water cooler, not just the sports fans.

March Madness with football is great, except college football is popular for more than one month of the year. College basketball is not.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

Its not about what will drive more chatter in the office-place, its about would their be an increase in watching a meaningful playoff game more than a standalone bowl game (the non-championship game). If you had an 8 team playoff (no byes) that would equate to 4 games in week 1 of playoffs....2 games next week and 1 champion game in third week. So that is 7 games spread over 3 weeks. It seems like a slam dunk that this format would be a major increase in TV viewship over the current top bowl game format (7 BCS bowl games spread over a little more than 1 week period of time) I would guess a minimum of 300% increase in total game viewership for this change. That translates to significant increase in TV revenue $$$...how those huge profit increases get divided up to colleges and such is a whole other lenghty discussion, but we all know the $$$ is what its all about anyway despite anything else.

What do you think the OU-TT game would be like on Saturday if we had a playoff?

 

[H.K.]

I've always been for a playoff system, and if these fuddy duddy old men won't change, then I'm all for the Govt intervening. One problem I see with a playoff system is, how do you expect fans of a team to go to 3 straight games? Do you really believe that if Penn St. is playing Virginia Tech in the Rose Bowl, that the locals are going to fill the stadium?

You bring up a good point. A playoff system can regionalize the events to some degree to alleviate travel for the fan base and off set any potential for HFA for a lower ranked team.As far a filling seats, corporate sponsorships for these games would be huge, bringing in lots of people just based on entertainment value for non-affiliated fans. There are enough domes in the various parts of the country to put these games out for bid and keep things regional and somewhat neutral. Cities and businesses would pay good money to host the games. It probably wouldn't always work out perfectly with respect to travel and neutrality, but everything is still decided on the field and the money/fan interest would be huge.To answer the original question, a playoff would not result in CFB surpassing the NFL in popularity or ratings, but it would make a considerable leap in popularity based on bringing in new interest based on the format.

 

[grind]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.

Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

 

[grind]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.

Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

 

[Frank Black]

College football already has a playoff system.

Umm, no.

 

[AAABatteries]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

I hear plenty of people say this, but I don't buy it. When Oklahoma played Texas and Texas Tech played Texas earlier this year were those playoff games? If so, then how does Texas and Oklahoma still have a shot at the NC? Florida and USC lost but they still have a shot. Also, why if TT loses to Oklahoma this weekend will they be penalized for "losing late" and Oklahoma gets the benefit of "losing early"? As for the controversy making folks talk about the game more - I could care less and why should we worry about a flawed system drumming up interest? The interest over a playoff will be as much or more than any controversy over the current BCS and it will be in a positive way, not a negative way as it is now.Now if you want to argue that for some people it will reduce the meaning of the regular season then I'm willing to agree that that will happen for some. But for most of us, we want a playoff and decide it on the field. My preference would be a 16 team tournament, but maybe that's a little greedy. 8 would work and as others have pointed out you can have the first round be home games for the higher seeds or what I would like to see is the first 4 games be the 4 BCS bowls. Then the semi and finals would be neutral field sites. It's very simple and although government has much more important things to be doing, I don't see anything wrong with them giving the NCAA a little nudge and say "fix this or we will".

 

[Smeagol]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year.

That's the regular season brah.Have that stupid BCS computer pick the top 12 teams. Give the top 4 teams a bye. Then the playoffs can decide who is the best.

 

[shader]

I want to slam my head against a wall anytime some ####### says " the playoff is the whole regular season".

Oh yeah? How come Florida can lose to Ole Miss. LSU lost 2 games last year and still won the NC.

Football has parity and there is no way to determine the best team when they all play in different conferences.

This year is an absolute rarity with two huge games (T.Tech vs Oklahoma, and Bama vs Florida).

This just doesn't happen normally.

And for all those saying "The SEC Championship will be a national semi-final and a playoff system wouldn't allow that"....Again, ######ED.

The SEC Championship has never had two teams play, in which the winner goes to the BCS game. And if you like the "semi-final' that this game will be, imagine how much more you'll like having semi-finals EVERY YEAR.

Also, it just makes sense that the more teams in a playoff, the higher number of meaningful games you'll have.

The college football season basically comes down to the following games:

Texas Tech-Oklahoma

Alabama-Auburn

Florida-FSU

SEC Championship game

Big 12 championship game

If there was an 8 team playoff, there would still be 15 meaningful games left, as opposed to 5.

 

[Bill S]

I love NFL football, but don't follow college football at all. I think a playoff would generate much more interest in college football. I don't watch the bowl games and might tune in for a quarter or two of the National Championship game.

I don't follow college bball at all either. However, come tournament time, I do a good amount of research for my bracket and am glued to the TV throughout the entire tournment. I usually go to the whatever round is played in DC. I think that March Madness is my favorite sporting event of the year despite not even following college bball during the regular season and conference tournament.

Having a playoff would create a great deal of interest from casual fans, NFL fans, and reguar joes who only tune in for big time events. The only ones who seem to be against the playoff are the old-schoolers and the tradionalist. BTW, a tradionalist is someone who goes against all change without any ratoinal thought being given.

 

[jurb26]

I want to slam my head against a wall anytime some ####### says " the playoff is the whole regular season".

Oh yeah? How come Florida can lose to Ole Miss. LSU lost 2 games last year and still won the NC.

Football has parity and there is no way to determine the best team when they all play in different conferences.

This year is an absolute rarity with two huge games (T.Tech vs Oklahoma, and Bama vs Florida).

This just doesn't happen normally.

And for all those saying "The SEC Championship will be a national semi-final and a playoff system wouldn't allow that"....Again, ######ED.

The SEC Championship has never had two teams play, in which the winner goes to the BCS game. And if you like the "semi-final' that this game will be, imagine how much more you'll like having semi-finals EVERY YEAR.

Also, it just makes sense that the more teams in a playoff, the higher number of meaningful games you'll have.

The college football season basically comes down to the following games:

Texas Tech-Oklahoma

Alabama-Auburn

Florida-FSU

SEC Championship game

Big 12 championship game

If there was an 8 team playoff, there would still be 15 meaningful games left, as opposed to 5.

Pretty much agree. People are out of their mind if they don't think a playoff in college football would boost ratings. Look at the actual fan votes each year on the matter. Just a few weeks ago there was one on ESPN asking if fans wanted to see a playoff and it was over 90% yes. It's like that every single time the question is asked.I disagree with bold section however. Basically the National Champ comes down to this:

SEC Champ game

Big 12 Champ game

*so long as the winner has no more than 1 loss more than the winner of the Big 10 and SC.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Over the last 2 years, my interest and enjoyment of college football has really increased more than in all of the decades and years past (I've been watching college and pro football religiously since around 1984 or so). Primarily for 2 reasons. Last year was very intriguing when top ranked teams kept getting knocked off with major upsets from the unranked or lowly ranked teams week after week. It made for alot of interesting scenarios all season long and left the national championship wide open. This year, there has been so many huge matchups of top 10 teams because the Big 10 and SEC have so many teams highly ranked and playing each other ever week. Historically in college football, you're lucky to get a highly ranked matchup maybe 2 or 3 times the whole season...you know the "game of the century/game of the decade" type hype. This year, there has been games of that sort of magnitude nearly every week. This new parody in the college game similiar to the NFL is really making it much more interesting. Right now I'd say I enjoy college almost about equal to pro football, but if they go to a playoff format, most surely I would enjoy the college game more than pro. What do you guys feel/think about that subject?

The quality of football is of a different level in the NFL.The game is different in collegiate football. Rules are different (1 foot in bounds, clock stoppages, overtime, etc.).Some people love NCAA hoops and detest the NBA. Some are the opposite.I like both but I prefer the NFL, but I cannot help but to stop and watch when two very good teams collide like this Saturday night.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I've always been for a playoff system, and if these fuddy duddy old men won't change, then I'm all for the Govt intervening. One problem I see with a playoff system is, how do you expect fans of a team to go to 3 straight games? Do you really believe that if Penn St. is playing Virginia Tech in the Rose Bowl, that the locals are going to fill the stadium if it's the 2nd or 3rd playoff game played by both schools? Yes, if it's the National Championship game there would be local interest, but if it's the semi final game, I highly doubt it. I can see it now, you would have a National semi-final game with only 5,000 fans at the game. Basketball can absorb that happening to them for an earlier game, because they play a lot more games, but football cannot IMO. Yes, you can force fans to buy a set of tickets if they want to attend one of them, but when they don't show up for the 2nd game because they can only afford to take off work for one week, how does that look on National TV?

Teams can travel quite well, and if the Round of 8 was a home game they need not travel.Also the championship game would be well attended and may be almost like the Super Bowl with corporate-style tickets and relatively few school attendees.I don't think attendance would be an issue - it certainly isn't for the Final Four or the Sweet 16.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I've always been for a playoff system, and if these fuddy duddy old men won't change, then I'm all for the Govt intervening. One problem I see with a playoff system is, how do you expect fans of a team to go to 3 straight games? Do you really believe that if Penn St. is playing Virginia Tech in the Rose Bowl, that the locals are going to fill the stadium if it's the 2nd or 3rd playoff game played by both schools? Yes, if it's the National Championship game there would be local interest, but if it's the semi final game, I highly doubt it. I can see it now, you would have a National semi-final game with only 5,000 fans at the game. Basketball can absorb that happening to them for an earlier game, because they play a lot more games, but football cannot IMO. Yes, you can force fans to buy a set of tickets if they want to attend one of them, but when they don't show up for the 2nd game because they can only afford to take off work for one week, how does that look on National TV?

Teams can travel quite well, and if the Round of 8 was a home game they need not travel.Also the championship game would be well attended and may be almost like the Super Bowl with corporate-style tickets and relatively few school attendees.I don't think attendance would be an issue - it certainly isn't for the Final Four or the Sweet 16.

What I said was based on using the current bowls in the playoff system, not awarding home games to anyone. Also, you can't use the Final Four compared to a college football playoffs with regards to travel, because the Final Four can be done over a long weekend. You can't play 2 football games in 3 days. Not everyone can afford to take off work a whole week for 2 games, or travel twice in a week.

 

[CalBear]

I think that virtually everyone who supports the idea of a college football playoff system is more of a fan of the NFL than of college football. That will not change if college football adopts a playoff system; all you'll do is lose the advantages college football has (like the Rose Bowl, which has a much better pedigree as a football game than the Super Bowl).

 

[jurb26]

I think that virtually everyone who supports the idea of a college football playoff system is more of a fan of the NFL than of college football. That will not change if college football adopts a playoff system; all you'll do is lose the advantages college football has (like the Rose Bowl, which has a much better pedigree as a football game than the Super Bowl).

 

[teamroc]

What do you think the OU-TT game would be like on Saturday if we had a playoff?

Would be huge, the loser probably misses the playoffs.

 

[CalBear]

I think that virtually everyone who supports the idea of a college football playoff system is more of a fan of the NFL than of college football. That will not change if college football adopts a playoff system; all you'll do is lose the advantages college football has (like the Rose Bowl, which has a much better pedigree as a football game than the Super Bowl).

How many interesting Super Bowls have there been? How many people at the game are even football fans? The Super Bowl is about the ads, and the prop bets, and the halftime show, and the fireworks; it's almost never about the football.

 

[teamroc]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year.

That's the regular season brah.Have that stupid BCS computer pick the top 12 teams. Give the top 4 teams a bye. Then the playoffs can decide who is the best.

I love how some college football fans think it’s impossible to make it better. It's so perfect; they keep changing the system every year. *lol*Losing 1 game, especially late would probably mean missing the playoffs. Then you have seeding. People think because a team is set for the playoffs, fans just check out. News flash, the Titans will sell out the rest of the season. People LOVE FOOTBALL. It doesn't matter what's on the line. Crappy teams sell out ALL THE TIME. Somehow a playoff destroys the fabric of college football is laughable. Every other division in ncaa football uses a playoff. There's no valid reason not to do it. Oh wait, yes there is, money. It's all about money, that’s why they have this system. It's not because its better, it’s because it makes more money.I know lots of guys who refuse to invest any time in college football because it’s a fraud. Lets say we had a playoff system. You don't think UGA would have sold out week 1? You think people would have said, hell we're #1, we can lose and still make it. Wooops. UGA would be out of the playoffs. There's no given. 2 loses is probably a nail in the coffin. The Titans are a lock for the playoffs, boat loads will still watch them. Oh Texas Tech is unbeaten, why even bother watching if you're a TT fan, they got it locked up. It's ######ed. If we had a playoff, every TT fan would still be going nuts over this season. Maybe they lose, and get jobbed and end up 9th. People don't want because a title is on the line. For most schools, they have NO SHOT at the championship. 95% have no shot after week 3. Why do people in Hawaii still watch their college team? They will NEVER play for a title. People still love college football up there. It's not about a national title. It's about loving football. So if your team goes 2-2, you can stop watching how because they got "eliminated" from the "playoffs" that start Sept 1st? It's a fraud. Trust me; there would be PLENTY of debate about who makes the top 8. That wouldn't end. Seeding would also cause a lot of debate. Where the games are played. Trying to figure out the best 8 teams in the country is HARDER then figuring out the top 2. The whole "water cooler talk" going away is dumb. In fact, most of the "water cooler" talk now is about how stupid college football is, and how they need a playoff. I'm not sure how you can defend it. It's a system designed to milk the most money for school presidents. It has nothing to do with the fans, or the teams, or the integrity of the sport. It's a fraud. Wake up. Stop defending millionaire presidents who just look out for themselves.

 

[CalBear]

I'm not sure how you can defend it. It's a system designed to milk the most money for school presidents. It has nothing to do with the fans, or the teams, or the integrity of the sport. It's a fraud. Wake up. Stop defending millionaire presidents who just look out for themselves.

Do you have any evidence at all that the bowl system generates more money than a playoff system would?

 

[Ice Cream Man]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

Very

 

[Magnus_CA]

in some parts of the country it already is more popular. But overall I dont think so.

not only that with the dea lthat the NCAA is about to sign with ESPN the BCS will continue as is until that contract is up

2014 I think???

 

[Chachi]

I enjoy both college and the NFL, if college gets the playoffs it's not like I'm going to turn the NFL off.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

Very

:whoosh:

 

[Captain Spaulding]

Here's a novel idea....current BCS bowls are only 4 bowls (Sugar, Orange, Rose and Fiesta)...expand the BCS to 7 bowls total (bring in the Cotton bowl and 2 others Bowls into the BCS) and then you have all of the traditional Bowls to have you're 8 team playoff format covered as well. From the 7 BCS bowl/playoff games use a round robin format each year so after 7 years all bowls get rights to the championship game, 2nd round playoff game etc. Profit sharing system between all 8 schools and bowls would have to be established since 2 colleges would end up playing in 3 bowl games, so you can't have some rediculous profits go to those 2 schools that get to play in 3 bowls games in a given year.

There would be no problem filling those neutral site stadiums....as long as the tickets are priced properly to fill it. If its not already standard procedure, students of the schools playing in the Bowl/playoff games should get lower ticket price options to be able to cost effectively travel to neutral site locations and fill the staduim. Part of what makes the college game more special than the pros is the enthusiam of the college kids and marching band and such. Make sure they can be at the bowl games to market the college game.

It would probably be best to start in mid-December for rounds 1 and 2...give 2 weeks off during X-mas holiday and play the championship game on New Years day to maintain some tradition of New Year's bowl games (or Jan 2nd or 3rd at night...whatever day gets the biggest TV ratings and such). Tons of options here really, all would be better for everyone involved than the current system.

 

[Phurfur]

No because even with a playoff system there will be disputes as to what teams make the playoffs.

 

[CalBear]

It would probably be best to start in mid-December for rounds 1 and 2...give 2 weeks off during X-mas holiday and play the championship game on New Years day to maintain some tradition of New Year's bowl games (or Jan 2nd or 3rd at night...whatever day gets the biggest TV ratings and such). Tons of options here really, all would be better for everyone involved than the current system.

They'd be better for "everyone", except the schools and the kids involved. You can't play football games during finals.

 

[Phurfur]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

Thanks for posting this, it is exactly how I feel.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

It would probably be best to start in mid-December for rounds 1 and 2...give 2 weeks off during X-mas holiday and play the championship game on New Years day to maintain some tradition of New Year's bowl games (or Jan 2nd or 3rd at night...whatever day gets the biggest TV ratings and such). Tons of options here really, all would be better for everyone involved than the current system.

They'd be better for "everyone", except the schools and the kids involved. You can't play football games during finals.

How does college baseball and other spring sports do it? Post season extends into the summer through final exams doesn't it? After 1st week of playoffs your sitting around Dec 15th. 4 teams (losers) can take exams the following week. That leaves only 4 teams out of thousands of colleges that you have a dilema on. Then there would be the 2 weeks off during X-mas holiday. Somehow exams could be pushed back. Look at all of the other fraud and shinanigans that goes on with these football kids taking basket weaving classes, having "tutors" sit in classes with them and such. It could easily be figured out.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

Thanks for posting this, it is exactly how I feel.

Who watches college basketball before March? If Michigan St. and NC are highly ranked when they face each other, the TV viewership will be astronomically higher than for any of the the #16 seed playing the #1 seed games "that matter" in the NCAA tournament. Ignorant statement...in fact I'd go out on a limb and say that the meaningless Mich St. / NC regular season game will have more TV viewership than any single game of the 1st round of the NCAA tourney. So to answer your question, sports fans watch great games between 2 powerhouse teams whether everything is on the line or not.....if something is on the line though it will always get even bigger interest (i.e. a playoff football game should have more interest than just a big bowl game of #3 vs. #5 ranks...that has no national championship implications)

 

[Phurfur]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.

Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

Thanks for posting this, it is exactly how I feel.

Who watches college basketball before March? If Michigan St. and NC are highly ranked when they face each other, the TV viewership will be astronomically higher for any of the the #16 seed playing the #1 seed games "that matter" in the NCAA tournament. Ignorant statement...in fact I'd go out on a limb and say that the meaningless Mich St. / NC regular season game will have more TV viewership than any single game of the 1st round of the NCAA tourney. So to answer your question, sports fans watch great games between 2 powerhouse teams whether nothing is on the line or not.....if something is on the line though it gets even bigger interest (i.e. a playoff football game vs. just a big bowl game that is not for National championship)

You are comparing the worst tournament games to the best regular season games, what is that? I look at it like this, more people watch the worst tournament games than the worst season games.

 

[CalBear]

It would probably be best to start in mid-December for rounds 1 and 2...give 2 weeks off during X-mas holiday and play the championship game on New Years day to maintain some tradition of New Year's bowl games (or Jan 2nd or 3rd at night...whatever day gets the biggest TV ratings and such). Tons of options here really, all would be better for everyone involved than the current system.

They'd be better for "everyone", except the schools and the kids involved. You can't play football games during finals.

How does college baseball and other spring sports do it? Post season extends into the summer through final exams doesn't it? After 1st week of playoffs your sitting around Dec 15th. 4 teams (losers) can take exams the following week. That leaves only 4 teams out of thousands of colleges that you have a dilema on. Then there would be the 2 weeks off during X-mas holiday. Somehow exams could be pushed back. Look at all of the other fraud and shinanigans that goes on with these football kids taking basket weaving classes, having "tutors" sit in classes with them and such. It could easily be figured out.

The College Baseball World Series happens in the academic summer. March Madness happens in March. It is certainly true that it's possible to find ways to make football more important than academics. But I don't think that's a better thing for the student-athletes or the institutions involved. And I really don't see why schools should be interested in participating.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

No because even with a playoff system there will be disputes as to what teams make the playoffs.

Teams gripe about not making it into the NCAA Touranment even with 65 teams - yet we all get over it.Why?Because the winner and champion wins the tournament on the court, not in a poll.So despite people who would still gripe about Team #9 or #17 that gets excluded from a playoff system, no one would eventually care because the winner would be decided on the field.

 

[Phurfur]

No because even with a playoff system there will be disputes as to what teams make the playoffs.

Teams gripe about not making it into the NCAA Touranment even with 65 teams - yet we all get over it.Why?

Because the winner and champion wins the tournament on the court, not in a poll.

So despite people who would still gripe about Team #9 or #17 that gets excluded from a playoff system, no one would eventually care because the winner would be decided on the field.

I think that happens now.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

No because even with a playoff system there will be disputes as to what teams make the playoffs.

Teams gripe about not making it into the NCAA Touranment even with 65 teams - yet we all get over it.Why?

Because the winner and champion wins the tournament on the court, not in a poll.

So despite people who would still gripe about Team #9 or #17 that gets excluded from a playoff system, no one would eventually care because the winner would be decided on the field.

I think that happens now.

Not hardly...Boise St. and Utah are not going to have any chance to prove they are best in the country and yet both might go undefeated and win their bowl game against a major school. Unfortunately we'll never know how far they could have made it. Sure, both could get stomped in their bowl game by an SEC or Big 12 school and prove they were nothing more than a mid-major fraud, but then Boise St. has won BCS bowl games in the past against powerhouse teams and that was the end of the line for them. Penn St. as a national power team has gone undefeated several times in years past, and I think only once got to prove they were the best in the country. Even if they went undefeated this year, they might have gotten snubbed again from the championship game....it was looking highly likely.When Texas traveled to Texas Tech, they barely loss at the last second. If the schedule gods would have had Texas Tech traveling to Texas this season, who's to say Texas wouldn't have won that game by 10 pts. or more and be #1 ranked team still. Homefield is much more significant in the college game than pro. Playoffs fixes all many of these ills.

Who's to say that Georgia, LSU, Ohio State, Missouri might still only have 1 loss instead of their 2 or 3 this season if they knew that if they could climb back into the top 8 ranking they could redeem theselves as best in country through a playoff? I'm not excusing their lack of motivation or heart after a deflating 1st loss that eliminates them from championship contention, but I want to see the best teams in the country going head-to-head at the end. I want to see if an undefeated mid-major can run the table against the big-dogs. Right now, there are no Cinderella stories in college football, but there could be with playoffs.

 

[Sinrman]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

Who watches college basketball before March? Plenty of people. Those who love college sports and/or basketball (either college and/or NBA, just like college football and the NFL). If no one did, you wouldn't see games on TV for some 4+ months.

 

[Christo]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

Could be. If there was a playoff with say 8 teams, this week's OU/TTU probably wouldn't have nearly the same interest nationwide. If the playoff involved 16 teams, no one outside of the Big 12 South would care since it would have no effect on who made the playoffs, just seeding.

 

[Christo]

While I have been for a playoff system, the BCS controversies add to the interest. But I would rather they get rid of the conference title game. Regardless, we don't need the government telling the colleges what to do.

I've always thought the BCS conferences should be required to go to 12 teams and have the conference title games be the first round of the playoffs. That would give 12 BCS teams a shot at the NC. Then have the top 4 non-BCS schools in two other first round games.

 

[BR33ZE]

I've always been for a playoff system, and if these fuddy duddy old men won't change, then I'm all for the Govt intervening.

One problem I see with a playoff system is, how do you expect fans of a team to go to 3 straight games? Do you really believe that if Penn St. is playing Virginia Tech in the Rose Bowl, that the locals are going to fill the stadium if it's the 2nd or 3rd playoff game played by both schools? Yes, if it's the National Championship game there would be local interest, but if it's the semi final game, I highly doubt it. I can see it now, you would have a National semi-final game with only 5,000 fans at the game. Basketball can absorb that happening to them for an earlier game, because they play a lot more games, but football cannot IMO. Yes, you can force fans to buy a set of tickets if they want to attend one of them, but when they don't show up for the 2nd game because they can only afford to take off work for one week, how does that look on National TV?

I think you are highly underestimating college team fans/followings.

 

[BR33ZE]

The move to a playoff has the potential of decreasing interest, too.An incredibly high percentage of the water cooler talk about college football is the BCS/eliminating the BCS.

Its not about what will drive more chatter in the office-place, its about would their be an increase in watching a meaningful playoff game more than a standalone bowl game (the non-championship game). If you had an 8 team playoff (no byes) that would equate to 4 games in week 1 of playoffs....2 games next week and 1 champion game in third week. So that is 7 games spread over 3 weeks. It seems like a slam dunk that this format would be a major increase in TV viewship over the current top bowl game format (7 BCS bowl games spread over a little more than 1 week period of time) I would guess a minimum of 300% increase in total game viewership for this change. That translates to significant increase in TV revenue $$$...how those huge profit increases get divided up to colleges and such is a whole other lenghty discussion, but we all know the $$$ is what its all about anyway despite anything else.

What do you think the OU-TT game would be like on Saturday if we had a playoff?

I know what it would be like. It would be insane. Do you realize how fired up the Tech faithful are right now to be ranked #2?They have never been this good before. Their fans are savoring every moment.It is a HUGE game for them, playoff, no playoff, whatever.

 

[BR33ZE]

College football already has a playoff system. It starts about Sept. 1st every year. Earlier this year, Ohio State was knocked out of contention with a loss at USC. USC was knocked out of contention later with a loss to Oregon State. The loser of the upcoming Florida/Alabama game will be knocked out of contention. I'd much rather have a four month playoff system (Sept-December) then three weeks. Every Saturday there are a lot of elimination games. Lose and you're most likely out of National Championship consideration.

Like who really watches college basketball before March? These games are meaningless no matter what the matchup. For example, Michigan State and North Carolina play this year. Does the game matter? NOPE. Both teams will make the tournament and the only thing people remember from a college basketball season is the tournament.

I love this argument. Did you watch last year when LSU was not eliminated from Championship consideration in either of their two losses?

It's not a playoff system. It's not close. Stop calling it one.

 

[Christo]

I've always been for a playoff system, and if these fuddy duddy old men won't change, then I'm all for the Govt intervening.

One problem I see with a playoff system is, how do you expect fans of a team to go to 3 straight games? Do you really believe that if Penn St. is playing Virginia Tech in the Rose Bowl, that the locals are going to fill the stadium if it's the 2nd or 3rd playoff game played by both schools? Yes, if it's the National Championship game there would be local interest, but if it's the semi final game, I highly doubt it. I can see it now, you would have a National semi-final game with only 5,000 fans at the game. Basketball can absorb that happening to them for an earlier game, because they play a lot more games, but football cannot IMO. Yes, you can force fans to buy a set of tickets if they want to attend one of them, but when they don't show up for the 2nd game because they can only afford to take off work for one week, how does that look on National TV?

I think you are highly underestimating college team fans/followings.

It wouldn't be like March Madness anyway concerning the location of the games. Seed the teams, let the higher seeds play at home just like in the NFL. Have the NC game at a neutral site.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

Right now I'd say I enjoy college almost about equal to pro football, but if they go to a playoff format, most surely I would enjoy the college game more than pro. What do you guys feel/think about that subject?

i think you'd enjoy it less, actually, because we wouldn't be able to have these types of conversations all season long. and a lot of the media guys would be out of a job. controversy is good in sports imo, gives us armchair qb's something to talk about all day. all of you make a great point, some of the great matchups and upsets we enjoyed so far this season would mean far less for the teams and would be far less enjoyable for us fans if there was a playoff. imo BCS and the vagueness of it makes me watch more just so i can criticize it to death.