Would you prefer college football return to the bowls-only era?

Mad_Son

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

SECDAWG said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

Not surprising 60 percent of doogs want to go back to pre BCS era. They'd rather have worthless voted half natties than to have to win it on the field

I’ll go one further obk and watch my post get buried as well, I wouldn’t expect any different outcome on most PAC message boreds to this pole including here.... Ask this same question/pole on most any other P5 school message bored other than PAC 10’s. Would be vastly different outcome on most of the other P5 forums. There’s reasons for this hate.

Correct, P12 and B10 are the only conferences with alumni who have brain cells. SEC, B12, and ACC don't understand the fallacy.

SECDAWG

No, I like what they're trying to do to crown a true champion with a playoff

Mad_Son said:

SECDAWG said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

Not surprising 60 percent of doogs want to go back to pre BCS era. They'd rather have worthless voted half natties than to have to win it on the field

I’ll go one further obk and watch my post get buried as well, I wouldn’t expect any different outcome on most PAC message boreds to this pole including here.... Ask this same question/pole on most any other P5 school message bored other than PAC 10’s. Would be vastly different outcome on most of the other P5 forums. There’s reasons for this hate.

Correct, P12 and B10 are the only conferences with alumni who have brain cells. SEC, B12, and ACC don't understand the fallacy.

TommySQC

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

MikeDamone said:

PurpleJ said:

Houhusky said:

PurpleJ said:

Houhusky said:

PurpleJ said:

My favorite part of this thread was the people that equate promotion/relegation with communism/socialism, just because it is used in Europe. It’s actually used throughout the world, but I digress.

It is purely merit based so...like...uhhhh....the polar opposite of commie shit you crayon eating fucktards. And one more thing...the professional teams over there are privately owned and don’t operate on a protectionist franchise model like our? leagues. There is no salary cap or revenue sharing or draft. Make money, win, scout better, get a rich ownership group and better sponsorship deals or fuck off and go play in the little leagues. Only in America do they let the losers get first pick in the draft and remain in the big leagues. The NFL even gives them an easier schedule the next year. Bunch of red fucking commie losers in America!

Anyone paying mild attention understands that international soccer is full boner, competitive, open free market capitalist based.

I enjoy a bunch of anti capitalist shit tier countries embracing the raw capitalist competitive system.

The commie stuff was just a bit of tongue-in-cheek. Relax. Don’t be so sensitive and easily triggered J.

If your response is some obscure soccer related rage commie copypasta. Then woosh me.

MikeDamone said:

PurpleJ said:

My favorite part of this thread was the people that equate promotion/relegation with communism/socialism, just because it is used in Europe. It’s actually used throughout the world, but I digress.

It is purely merit based so...like...uhhhh....the polar opposite of commie shit you crayon eating fucktards. And one more thing...the professional teams over there are privately owned and don’t operate on a protectionist franchise model like our? leagues. There is no salary cap or revenue sharing or draft. Make money, win, scout better, get a rich ownership group and better sponsorship deals or fuck off and go play in the little leagues. Only in America do they let the losers get first pick in the draft and remain in the big leagues. The NFL even gives them an easier schedule the next year. Bunch of red fucking commie losers in America!

Calm down turbo

Look at all the obese Cousin-fucking Trump trash run to defend their precious protectionist markets.

The international soccer open market system >>> any dreck US monopoly sports system

Which is a big part why soccer is more popular worldwide despite the shit sport.

JFC you're on the rag today.

Do I have to spoon feed you ? Like @MikeDamone caregiver 10 years from now?

10 years from now? More like 10 years ago.

pics?

coronabruin

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

I miss the ROSE BOWL dammit.

No really. I do.

TTJ

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

ESPN has reduced the entire CFB season to an elaborate ad campaign for its playoff spectacle. All the oxygen gets sucked up by the top 8-10 teams, and the committee intrigue. The other 90+% of the sport--where most of the fun happens--gets drowned out.

College football is never going to be the NFL. It's inescapably lumpy and provincial and full of inequities and biases. That's what makes it great. Because there are so many teams, and so few games, you will never design a playoff format that can escape the influence of polls and computers and committees and subjectivity.

The playoff, like the BCS before it, has proved great for the profiteers and terrible for the sport. In fifty years, tOSU and Bammer fans probably won't even remember which of their teams won the 2015 beauty contest. But you can bet your ass BYU and UW fans will still be debating who should have been the mythical National Champion in 1984. Gimme back my Rose Bowl, dammit.

YellowSnow

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

oregonblitzkrieg said:

Keep the playoff system at four teams to keep it elite. Auto bids for conference champions is dumb. Having only 4 spots ensures only the teams who play the best ball are represented in the final four at the end of the season. It's a big motivation factor.

I’m a TUFF Luddite. Not a sissy one like you @oregonblitzkrieg.

PurpleJ

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

oregonblitzkrieg said:

SECDAWG said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

Not surprising 60 percent of doogs want to go back to pre BCS era. They'd rather have worthless voted half natties than to have to win it on the field

I’ll go one further obk and watch my post get buried as well, I wouldn’t expect any different outcome on most PAC message boreds to this pole including here.... Ask this same question/pole on most any other P5 school message bored other than PAC 10’s. Would be vastly different outcome on most of the other P5 forums. There’s reasons for this hate.

UW fans know their program has virtually no chance to ever win a championship on the field. Hell, they can't even get onto that field to try, and haven't in their program's 130 year history. Makes sense that inferior programs would want to go back to the good old days of heavily biased voting and no true championship game, which favored programs like USC.

LOL blitz is extra bitter that his Ducks had two cracks at a title and failed both times.

whuggy

No, I like what they're trying to do to crown a true champion with a playoff

TTJ said:

ESPN has reduced the entire CFB season to an elaborate ad campaign for its playoff spectacle. All the oxygen gets sucked up by the top 8-10 teams, and the committee intrigue. The other 90+% of the sport--where most of the fun happens--gets drowned out.

College football is never going to be the NFL. It's inescapably lumpy and provincial and full of inequities and biases. That's what makes it great. Because there are so many teams, and so few games, you will never design a playoff format that can escape the influence of polls and computers and committees and subjectivity.

The playoff, like the BCS before it, has proved great for the profiteers and terrible for the sport. In fifty years, tOSU and Bammer fans probably won't even remember which of their teams won the 2015 beauty contest. But you can bet your ass BYU and UW fans will still be debating who should have been the mythical National Champion in 1984. Gimme back my Rose Bowl, dammit.

I'm curious. So why does every other NCAA sport have a playoff and it works, yet you think football is the one exception? Honestly interested in where people are coming from. An 8 team playoff just seems the simplest thing in the world to me and it would greatly improve the regular season. That's my motivation. Getting the regular season
back to interesting games instead of scheduling walkovers that you can beat by 50.

TTJ

Yes, I liked it the way it was before the BCS and playoff format

whuggy said:

TTJ said:

ESPN has reduced the entire CFB season to an elaborate ad campaign for its playoff spectacle. All the oxygen gets sucked up by the top 8-10 teams, and the committee intrigue. The other 90+% of the sport--where most of the fun happens--gets drowned out.

College football is never going to be the NFL. It's inescapably lumpy and provincial and full of inequities and biases. That's what makes it great. Because there are so many teams, and so few games, you will never design a playoff format that can escape the influence of polls and computers and committees and subjectivity.

The playoff, like the BCS before it, has proved great for the profiteers and terrible for the sport. In fifty years, tOSU and Bammer fans probably won't even remember which of their teams won the 2015 beauty contest. But you can bet your ass BYU and UW fans will still be debating who should have been the mythical National Champion in 1984. Gimme back my Rose Bowl, dammit.

I'm curious. So why does every other NCAA sport have a playoff and it works, yet you think football is the one exception? Honestly interested in where people are coming from. An 8 team playoff just seems the simplest thing in the world to me and it would greatly improve the regular season. That's my motivation. Getting the regular season
back to interesting games instead of scheduling walkovers that you can beat by 50.

I’ve already explained it: Too many teams, too few games. In basketball, you have a 68-team tourney to mitigate the influence of subjectivity. But you can’t do that in football.

An 8-team tourney solves nothing. The selection process and seeding would still be heavily dependent on subjectivity. There’s always gonna be a #9. And no fanbase can possibly travel cross-country in stadium numbers on short notice three weeks in a row. So you’re either going to play first-round games in half-empty neutral stadiums *or* you’ve going to bestow home field advantage in the selection process—thus even further compounding your subjectivity problem. There’s no escaping it.

The bowls were perfect for everyone but the profiteers. The Playoff, like the old BCS, is a solution in search of a problem.

whuggy

No, I like what they're trying to do to crown a true champion with a playoff

TTJ said:

whuggy said:

TTJ said:

ESPN has reduced the entire CFB season to an elaborate ad campaign for its playoff spectacle. All the oxygen gets sucked up by the top 8-10 teams, and the committee intrigue. The other 90+% of the sport--where most of the fun happens--gets drowned out.

College football is never going to be the NFL. It's inescapably lumpy and provincial and full of inequities and biases. That's what makes it great. Because there are so many teams, and so few games, you will never design a playoff format that can escape the influence of polls and computers and committees and subjectivity.

The playoff, like the BCS before it, has proved great for the profiteers and terrible for the sport. In fifty years, tOSU and Bammer fans probably won't even remember which of their teams won the 2015 beauty contest. But you can bet your ass BYU and UW fans will still be debating who should have been the mythical National Champion in 1984. Gimme back my Rose Bowl, dammit.

I'm curious. So why does every other NCAA sport have a playoff and it works, yet you think football is the one exception? Honestly interested in where people are coming from. An 8 team playoff just seems the simplest thing in the world to me and it would greatly improve the regular season. That's my motivation. Getting the regular season
back to interesting games instead of scheduling walkovers that you can beat by 50.

I’ve already explained it: Too many teams, too few games. In basketball, you have a 68-team tourney to mitigate the influence of subjectivity. But you can’t do that in football.

An 8-team tourney solves nothing. The selection process and seeding would still be heavily dependent on subjectivity. There’s always gonna be a #9. And no fanbase can possibly travel cross-country in stadium numbers on short notice three weeks in a row. So you’re either going to play first-round games in half-empty neutral stadiums *or* you’ve going to bestow home field advantage in the selection process—thus even further compounding your subjectivity problem. There’s no escaping it.

The bowls were perfect for everyone but the profiteers. The Playoff, like the old BCS, is a solution in search of a problem.

So why does it work for Division 3 with 16 teams? And what's the incentive to win your conference if it doesn't guarantee you a spot? And why risk a loss in regular season by scheduling strong? And why not try to eliminate the ESPN/SEC bias in selecting the four?