College Football 2013 Season

[Tupac Shakur]

Nebraska

Perlman has long opposed a college football playoff and hasn't changed his position, saying Thursday, "I can't figure out a good reason to have a playoff to start with." But like many, he acknowledges changes will be made, and in his view, the plus-one is the simplest option and the best option. It preserves the bowl system and keeps player welfare in mind.

"We play enough football games," he said.

Nebraska's Perlman: Plus-one still preferred

[Tuberski]

Why is the reading comprehension level on this forum so low? Ming claims the BCS "hurt" college football, I show why that claim is retarded, and then Tubes sarcastically questions whether the BCS spurred interest in college football, a claim no one made...

If that isn't your claim, then why would it matter if they switched to a playoff?

ACK!

[Tupac Shakur]

I ignored that question the first time you posted it because it doesn't make any sense. I'd be happy to answer if you were to rephrase your question in such a way that I could determine what the hell you're asking.

[Tuberski]

If the BCS didn't spur college football's gain popularity, then why would it matter if they switch to a playoff?



Read it in an Elmo voice, maybe that will help.

ACK!

[Tupac Shakur]

I honestly don't get your point, even in an Elmo voice.

[-Jrabbit]

I believe he's suggesting that a basic 4-team playoff won't adversely affect the sport's popularity.

[Tupac Shakur]

I never suggested it would, which may be why I don't understand what point he's trying to make.

[Ming]

I never suggested it would, which may be why I don't understand what point he's trying to make.

No... but you still hold to the moronic claim that it will make the regular season less meaningful... And yet again, I ask why it would.
Exactly what difference will a four team playoff vs a 2 team playoff make that will translate to less meaningful regular season games.

[Tupac Shakur]

No... but you still hold to the moronic claim that it will make the regular season less meaningful... And yet again, I ask why it would.
Exactly what difference will a four team playoff vs a 2 team playoff make that will translate to less meaningful regular season games.

Since I'm feeling generous, I'm going to assume that you missed this post the first time around.

[Ming]

Since I'm feeling generous, I'm going to ask how that post addresses the point of how a four team playoff makes regular season games more meaningless

[Tupac Shakur]

Because it clearly shows that a four-team playoff would've greatly increased the chances of title game matchups that were rematches of regular season games? Surely even you can understand this.

[-Jrabbit]

Can't believe I'm wading into this tired old discussion again. Apparently I do not learn from history and am therefore doomed.

It clearly shows that a four-team playoff would've greatly increased the chances of title game matchups that were rematches of regular season games

Sorry, but so what? Seems like the logical conclusion of this line of thought would be "depends on the matchup." If anything, I would think that the playoffs would mediate any public outcry because it validates the need for a rematch, rather than forcing a single game by committee acclamation. "1of 4" is much easier to navigate than "just these 2."

[Tupac Shakur]

Sorry, but so what?

Many college football fans don't like rematches, probably because they seem out of place in a sport where regular season games generally have a do-or-die aspect to them. See the reaction to LSU-Alabama II for evidence of this.

If anything, I would think that the playoffs would mediate any public outcry because it validates the need for a rematch, rather than forcing a single game by committee acclamation. "1of 4" is much easier to navigate than "just these 2."

We won't know until the playoff starts, but I suspect you're wrong on this. Adding two more teams isn't going to stop the public outcry, especially since those teams still have to be picked somehow, whether by the hated polls, the hated BCS formula, or a hated committee.

[Tupac Shakur]

To quote a wise man...

No one here is denying the unappealing nature of this year's BCS title game matchup, as far as I can tell. Rematches have no place in college football, and a game at the end of the season shouldn't count more than a game at the start of the season. College football generally isn't like the NFL, where the regular season doesn't matter once the playoff starts, but this year's BCS title game was another disheartening step in that direction.

A four-team playoff is yet another step in that direction, and probably not the last.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oy, this debate again. I think that it is undeniable that a greater number of teams in the playoffs will in SOME WAY devalue the regular season. The question for playoff advocates (and the argument they should be making) is whether or not that devaluation of the regular season is worth it for the benefits they believe it will garner (national championship more open to smaller conference champs, a more exciting ending, a perceived greater fairness of "winning it on the field"). Now arguments can be made either way, but to claim that an increase in teams in a playoff (from the 2 of the BCS) won't devalue the regular season in some way is being ridiculous... esp when the same people who are making the claim of no devaluation are, IIRC, arguing than an extra Wild Card in the MLB will devalue baseball's regular season somewhat.