12-Team Playoff On the Way; 14-Team to Follow

I am I said:
so far so fine…I don’t even want to pay attention to it until 2030. 
I’ll be 53 by then. 

back story….got into a heated argument on the way to the Mich v N game when Robinson was their QB.  So quite a while ago. We won that game when Robinson got hurt. I think Pelini was the coach. 
my dad and brother were on the side of paying players, playoffs, “who cares bowl games” etc…

got 3 more sentences from physical. Stopped for gas in York from Denver and we all cooled off. I maintained college football specifically would never be the same…errrrr ummmm 
now they kinda are like…all the NIL, playoff stuff, 4-8-12,, playoff stuff progression. They see it now.  

you know what, doesn’t even matter. The 120 yrs of college pageantry is gone and the regional rivalries has been gone and the idea of conferences is gone and the important bowl games are gone.  Everything that kinda sorta mattered is gone. 
it’s new and it’s exciting and it’ll move on. But the tradition is gone.  And that stings to me. 
 

whatever comes next just won’t have the same feeling to me. Win or lose. Success or failure. The feeling of doing of we do and the way way we do it is gone. 
I hope we win a lot and get to bowls and compete. Hit it just doesn’t feel the same if we don’t beat OU and CU and Iowa,-‘and KState and Wisc. Instead we gotta beat USC and Oregon and and Washington. Just weird and sad 
Click to expand...
 100% agree with the bolded part.

 
runningblind said:
I think 12 is fine. Reward some with a bye and have a great chance for competitive first round, on campus games.
Click to expand...


100% agree.  And I love 12 because it keeps some meaningfulness to the regular season for teams you know are going to make it.  Makes winning your conference a big deal.

If you get to 16, may as well do away with conference championship games.  Teams playing in those would almost be at a disadvantage as it would be an extra game of wear and tear on the players.

 
Red Five said:
100% agree.  And I love 12 because it keeps some meaningfulness to the regular season for teams you know are going to make it.  Makes winning your conference a big deal.

If you get to 16, may as well do away with conference championship games.  Teams playing in those would almost be at a disadvantage as it would be an extra game of wear and tear on the players.
Click to expand...
The trick will be to either win your conference or somehow be second best in your division and still be in the top 12. To get a bye or skip the CCG respectively. 

 
Red Five said:
100% agree.  And I love 12 because it keeps some meaningfulness to the regular season for teams you know are going to make it.  Makes winning your conference a big deal.

If you get to 16, may as well do away with conference championship games.  Teams playing in those would almost be at a disadvantage as it would be an extra game of wear and tear on the players.
Click to expand...
8+ team playoffs end a lot of the meaningfulness of the regular season. All that 12 teams does is give a biased committee a chance to "reward" 4 teams. At least powers of 2 mean every team plays the same number of playoff games.

 
RedDenver said:
8+ team playoffs end a lot of the meaningfulness of the regular season. All that 12 teams does is give a biased committee a chance to "reward" 4 teams. At least powers of 2 mean every team plays the same number of playoff games.
Click to expand...
I don't get at all how it makes the regular season any less meaningful.  It is basically the same it's always been, you need to have a really good regular season to get to your goals.  If by that you mean a team must go undefeated in order to have a meaningful regular season, then I have never agreed with that argument and never will.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
runningblind said:
I don't get at all how it makes the regular season any less meaningful.  It is basically the same it's always been, you need to have a really good regular season to get to your goals.  If by "you must go undefeated in order to have a meaningful regular season", then I have never agreed with that argument and never will.
Click to expand...
If a team can lose regular season games and still win the championship, then by definition it makes the regular season less meaningful than if they could not. You might like it better, but the regular season is still less meaningful. And being able to lose multiple games means the regular season is even less meaningful than if a team could only lose 1 game, etc.

 
RedDenver said:
If a team can lose regular season games and still win the championship, then by definition it makes the regular season less meaningful than if they could not. You might like it better, but the regular season is still less meaningful. And being able to lose multiple games means the regular season is even less meaningful than if a team could only lose 1 game, etc.
Click to expand...
That argument is flawed though.  The rules are the same for everyone to win a championship, regardless of if qualifying for a playoff is easier or harder.  The regular season still means the same, and so does winning a championship, based on the criteria of the sport.  The regular season is part of the season, so is the playoff, they aren't separate entities in any sport.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver said:
If a team can lose regular season games and still win the championship, then by definition it makes the regular season less meaningful than if they could not. You might like it better, but the regular season is still less meaningful. And being able to lose multiple games means the regular season is even less meaningful than if a team could only lose 1 game, etc.
Click to expand...


I mean ... technically yes.

But that was already the case before we had any playoff.  So it really amounts to no difference.

 
Back
Top