brian wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 4:17 pm
There’s five rounds in FCS and Division III.
And two less regular season games. Good luck getting the big schools to forfeit two homes games of revenue.
And actually it isn’t he big teams. It’s the teams like Kentucky with no real championship aspirations who would balk at less revenue.
Think the regular season could be cut down to 11 games and get rid of conference championship games (most of the revenue for which goes to the conferences and not the schools anyway) and there you are. Most perennial Top 25 type teams would love to trade one less home game every other year for the opportunity to host several playoff games, sometimes multiple ones in a year. There would be at least 16 teams every year that get at least one playoff game. The revenue for which in most cases would probably be double a typical home game, maybe more.
In my plan, the schools would probably go for it, but the conferences wouldn't since it could eat into their TV revenue.
Yeah. I just disagree. There are 6-8 teams who would likely be guaranteed in every year. So yes for them it’s probably net positive. But again for teams like Kentucky, who this year would have a shot at a bid, it’s a once in a decade at best. So even if you double it one year you lose out nine years.
Hold on, I'm trying to see if Jack London ever gets this fire built or not.
A_B wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:01 pm
Yeah. I just disagree. There are 6-8 teams who would likely be guaranteed in every year. So yes for them it’s probably net positive. But again for teams like Kentucky, who this year would have a shot at a bid, it’s a once in a decade at best. So even if you double it one year you lose out nine years.
Except Kentucky will have a chance to play for a national title on the regular (assuming the program continues trending up) whereas now they don't have a chance unless they win the SEC.
I mean, I'm not arguing for arguing's sake. There's holes in any plan. I just tend to want to be more on the inclusive side. It's pretty ridiculous that only four teams get to play for a national title every year and it took 150 years just to get that.
A_B wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:06 pm
That’s what I’m saying. There are only 6-8 teams who realistically could say they are likely to be in top -6 EVERY year. For rest it’s a crapshoot.
While I would enjoy the tournament tremendously it would just gut the regular season. Fans of every team on that list wouldnt care until November. Losses would be pretty much meaningless. 4-4 sec teams would still get in. On the plus side you would probably see some terrific interconference scheduling. If losses don't hurt then teams would probably schedule elite nonconference games just to get ready for November. 24 is way too much but it is getting boring to see the same games every year.
A_B wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:06 pm
That’s what I’m saying. There are only 6-8 teams who realistically could say they are likely to be in top -6 EVERY year. For rest it’s a crapshoot.
HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:32 pm
While I would enjoy the tournament tremendously it would just gut the regular season. Fans of every team on that list wouldnt care until November. Losses would be pretty much meaningless. 4-4 sec teams would still get in. On the plus side you would probably see some terrific interconference scheduling. If losses don't hurt then teams would probably schedule elite nonconference games just to get ready for November. 24 is way too much but it is getting boring to see the same games every year.
Patriots fan says playoff format where 18.5 percent of the field gets to the postseason is meaningless
(Percentage-wise, twice as many teams make the NFL playoffs every year)
"We're not the smartest people in the world. We go down the straightaway and turn left. That's literally what we do." -- Clint Bowyer
I thought Bama looked invincible earlier this season when Tua was 100% healthy. He looked to be banged up for at least a few games even before they played UGA. Now that he got his ankle fixed they look ridiculous again.
That game played out pretty much exactly how every one figured it would. Kyler was impressive after the first quarter but Oklahoma’s defense is soooo bad.
Tired of listening to fans whine about how bad the games were. I look at it the other way and thank heavens there is a 4-team playoff at least because can you imagine the whining from Notre Dame fans if they were left out of a two-team playoff while undefeated? My god, we’d be hearing about that until Kingdom Come.
brian wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:34 pm
Tired of listening to fans whine about how bad the games were. I look at it the other way and thank heavens there is a 4-team playoff at least because can you imagine the whining from Notre Dame fans if they were left out of a two-team playoff while undefeated? My god, we’d be hearing about that until Kingdom Come.
I don’t even think the Bama-OU game was that bad. It wasn’t a talent mismatch in the sense of Clemson-ND but OU’s offense just played a bad first quarter which they couldn’t afford. The three times Bama and Clemson have played in the final it’s been a 1 v. 2 matchup where they both cruised in the semis. But the other two years the 4-seed won the title, so I think the 4-team playoff definitely adds value. It’s easy to say that OSU or UGA would’ve been better picks than ND, but ND beat enough decent opponents that there was no way they should’ve gotten the UCF treatment.