Yeah but the fact that it happened to ND and OU made it awesome!
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Yeah but the fact that it happened to ND and OU made it awesome!
^ Hates college football.
College football is appealing because it's not like every other sport. If you think other sports have it right, go watch them and quit trying to ruin college football.
I'm just not sure what the answer is. Now that we have gone into a playoff system I don't see how we can ever go back to the old bowl system. We tried the 2 team playoff and people bitched enough that we went to 4. Now they want to go to 8. The bad thing is once you advance to that number you can never go back. This year would have been better just having the 2. For those wanting 8 teams this year the 4 that were in play would have been Ohio State, Georgia, Michigan and UCF. For those demanding conference champions than Washington would have been in there in place of one of those. All those teams lost with the exception of Ohio State who was playing one of the other considered teams.
My point being.....arguing that those other 4 teams should be able to challenge Clemson or Alabama is foolish when they can't even win their bowl games against lesser teams.
My point being.....arguing that those other 4 teams should be able to challenge Clemson or Alabama is foolish when they can't even win their bowl games against lesser teams.
Every college football division except Div 1 has a playoff too. The only reason why Div 1 hasn’t adopted a true larger field for a playoff is the idiotic bowl system and tie ins that Conferences STILL have. It’s an idiotic system that serves very little purpose.
I think what you fail to see is that if there are more playoff teams and each conference gets in plus say, 3 wild cards, it makes it much more likely that Hs players will be more open to going to other colleges that can get into the playoffs. It makes it more likely that the 3-8 teams will get better and more teams than that. As it is right now, many players like to go to the Al/Clemson because they make it to the CFP almost every year.
It's amusing to me that when teams reach an elite level like Clemson and Alabama people say the refs "favor" them or blame the refs when their team gets beat by one of them. It doesn't matter who the refs are when they play. They are just great football teams right now.
They won't stay on top forever. It will change eventually.
I'm tired of seeing those two teams at the top every year as well. I don't plan on watching the championship game for that reason.
They won't stay on top forever. It will change eventually.
I'm tired of seeing those two teams at the top every year as well. I don't plan on watching the championship game for that reason.
I won't be watching the BCS final game either. It just doesn't present anything I find interesting, plus in my mind it has to overcome the drumbeat that TV has pounded about it for six weeks. ESPN has really added to the increasing misery of college football by trying to mastermind everything.
I long for days that will never return - when conference championship met something and were generally the end of the season; when a half dozen PR games for southern cities were then played, and when sportswriters who didn't see 80% of the teams play voted who was the best that year. No one really cared that much about national championships - conference championships were important however.
The reaons I liked that system were many: (1) bowl games were clusstered around new years day and they were all lumped together for a membroable day of college football watching; (2) each game in the season was important ; (3) conferences represented people and schools similar in interest and therefor similar in how they supported their teams; (4) college ball with all its folderall of homecoming, rivalries, etc.was more imporant thatn the game played by professional. I liked that system a lot; this one not so much.
I long for days that will never return - when conference championship met something and were generally the end of the season; when a half dozen PR games for southern cities were then played, and when sportswriters who didn't see 80% of the teams play voted who was the best that year. No one really cared that much about national championships - conference championships were important however.
The reaons I liked that system were many: (1) bowl games were clusstered around new years day and they were all lumped together for a membroable day of college football watching; (2) each game in the season was important ; (3) conferences represented people and schools similar in interest and therefor similar in how they supported their teams; (4) college ball with all its folderall of homecoming, rivalries, etc.was more imporant thatn the game played by professional. I liked that system a lot; this one not so much.
They aren't going to Alabama and Clemson because they are making it into the playoffs. They are going because they are winning it. Getting curb stomped like Notre Dame and Oklahoma didn't help their recruiting class anymore than what they were already getting for being undefeated or a 1 loss team. By expanding the playoff you are just minimizing the importance of it and repeating what happened to the bowl games. It used to be something special and now so many teams are in that guys are choosing to not participate.
Everyone seems to want to change the system just because they think Clemson and Alabama are getting favored.
MartyHuskerFan
Tired and True
This whole conversation is too complicated.
I loved many things about the bowl game season we knew in the second half of the 20th century.
I tend to put all the blame on ESPN one way or another. Others cant see anything at all wrong with the ESPN dynasty. I think my hatred starts with the marriage between ESPN and the region of the country they reside in, but it is reinforced with the way they bought up all the bowl games and made them all just seem like a series of ESPN events. Nothing special about any one of them. They have monopolized college football.
I also struggle with the 'mythical national champion' discussions. It used to be the greatest rage to argue and fight about who's the champion at the end of the season. I dont think many are able to understand what a champion is - and the old bowls structure seldom left us with a feeling that we knew who is the champion. I agree that was kind of charming. A few teams each year could carry on the legend that they were deserving the championship for this year or that year, and so on. I have always clamored for a 16 team play-off. Its always been a debate between 'knowing' in your heart and mind who is the 'best' team as all the 'experts' claim they know, verses a system that could crown a champion. Granted, a tournament could incur an upset along the way and cause the 'best' team to not get crowned the champion. But the one thing that will always occur in a tournament, a champion will be crowned.
This season it seems very clear to everybody that the top two teams are Clemson and Alabama, and today as I am writing, most would say Alabama is the best. So, perhaps this season is the outlier. The arguments that a tournament only clouds up the fact that Alabama is the best team, are good arguments if a tournament is only about naming the 'best' team. I have been arguing in favor of a 16 team tournament all these years, not only to identify who is the best, but to provide all those teams that have worked so hard to reach their own pinnacles an opportunity to compete for a championship. I have always hated that the 'smart' guys would always just name who they think is best every year. How much fun is it for everybody if we just sit back and acknowledge that Alabama is the best team this year. Done.
I wont be watching Alabama and Clemson on Monday for two reasons. I already know Alabama is the best team because you 'smart' guys have already told me, and I hate ESPN and all that it has done to belittle college football. I am saddened that you 'smart' people cannot see that a tournament not only lets everybody participate in the process, but it also allows the greatest teams to shine even more.
I loved many things about the bowl game season we knew in the second half of the 20th century.
- spread through out December
- fewer of them
- more emphasis on each event as it occurred
- much fewer other options for our entertainment eye
- various TV venues, not all ESPN cookie cutter events
- the Huskers were unvolved
I tend to put all the blame on ESPN one way or another. Others cant see anything at all wrong with the ESPN dynasty. I think my hatred starts with the marriage between ESPN and the region of the country they reside in, but it is reinforced with the way they bought up all the bowl games and made them all just seem like a series of ESPN events. Nothing special about any one of them. They have monopolized college football.
I also struggle with the 'mythical national champion' discussions. It used to be the greatest rage to argue and fight about who's the champion at the end of the season. I dont think many are able to understand what a champion is - and the old bowls structure seldom left us with a feeling that we knew who is the champion. I agree that was kind of charming. A few teams each year could carry on the legend that they were deserving the championship for this year or that year, and so on. I have always clamored for a 16 team play-off. Its always been a debate between 'knowing' in your heart and mind who is the 'best' team as all the 'experts' claim they know, verses a system that could crown a champion. Granted, a tournament could incur an upset along the way and cause the 'best' team to not get crowned the champion. But the one thing that will always occur in a tournament, a champion will be crowned.
This season it seems very clear to everybody that the top two teams are Clemson and Alabama, and today as I am writing, most would say Alabama is the best. So, perhaps this season is the outlier. The arguments that a tournament only clouds up the fact that Alabama is the best team, are good arguments if a tournament is only about naming the 'best' team. I have been arguing in favor of a 16 team tournament all these years, not only to identify who is the best, but to provide all those teams that have worked so hard to reach their own pinnacles an opportunity to compete for a championship. I have always hated that the 'smart' guys would always just name who they think is best every year. How much fun is it for everybody if we just sit back and acknowledge that Alabama is the best team this year. Done.
I wont be watching Alabama and Clemson on Monday for two reasons. I already know Alabama is the best team because you 'smart' guys have already told me, and I hate ESPN and all that it has done to belittle college football. I am saddened that you 'smart' people cannot see that a tournament not only lets everybody participate in the process, but it also allows the greatest teams to shine even more.
Division 1 does have a playoff system.
I just love the guys that get on here and announce they aren't watching the CFP because there wasn't enough teams in it to make it fair. Or because so many people recognized how good the final 2 teams were prior to the playoffs and now they are mad at the people who told them that. ESPN was not the culprit here. It was the fans driving the bus for a playoff game pitting the best 2 teams. And then the fans drove the bus for expanding to 4 teams and now they want 8, 16 or 32. For the most part the coaches and colleges fought it the whole time. They don't want to stretch the season out nor reduce the regular season to accommodate a 4 or 5 deep playoff bracket.
Then go watch FCS or something. People need to quit screwing up Division I-A (FBS) by trying to make it like everything else.
And yet those teams still only have 85 players on scholarship, just like everyone else.
Clemson just became a big deal the last 3 seasons. They were good for a few seasons prior, but they averaged 4 losses per season under Dabo until 2015. They have yet to finish a season undefeated during his tenure (though that may change this season).
Alabama has certainly been a very powerful team under Saban, but they have had just one undefeated season since he took the helm (with a chance for their second this year).
The point is that these teams are certainly beatable.
Also keep in mind that with the old bowl system, or even the BCS, Alabama would not have been your champion last year.
