OT: D1

[IUPNation]

I don’t “want” the old way. I just want the games in the regular season to matter. And down the lines games to decide the 11th or 12th team, to me, don’t make up for Notre Dame losing to Northern Illinois not mattering at all.

I don’t think you’ll see different teams in this format. I think you’ll see more of the teams everybody had fatigue from.

I want what you want too. Balanced scheduling. Regionalized conferences. Etc. But there’s too much money as it currently exists to ever get us to a sensible model. I didn’t love the BCS or the 4-team playoff either. But I liked those better because the regular was unique and it mattered.

But the games in the regular season DO matter. That Meatchicken loss cost the Bucknuts the BIG title game. That would have given them a chance for a bye had they beat Oregon. They could have lost to Tennessee-astan and be sent home.

Had the Bucknuts lost to Penn State too...they would have been playing a useless bowl.

One game should not make or break your whole season. Your whole resume should be in play. Notre Dame got a lower seed...because they can't win a conference title and then their early season loss probably pushed them further down. Had they beaten Northern Illinois they would have been the 5 seed.

I think you will see different teams at least for the lower seeds.

This format gave Fake Indiana a seat....and they may be able to build off of that. Same with SMU.

This gives programs a real incentive to try to up their game. The 4 team format was not going to let that happen.

[IUPNation]

Yes we can. Apples to oranges. A regionalized playoff structure that exists in Division 2 football where every conference is represented isn’t remotely comparable to the format that exists at the level we are discussing.

Acknowledging that Ohio State, who had the best odds to win the national championship at the start of the season, won four games, doesn’t change that their loss to Michigan would have disqualified nearly every other team not of their status. And the “punishment” allowed Ohio State an opportunity to make additional money from a home game they can now turn into an NIL check, further widening their gap.

The sport has fundamentally changed in favor of the teams that just reached the final four, and we’re using, “they won four games” as the data point to justify the devaluation of what was once the greatest regular season of any sport.

It was even more unfair in the era you think was so magical.

Penn State had undefeated teams in 1968, 1969, 1973 and 1994 and didn't get to be called National Champions. Who is to say who the polls crowned got it right? Is this what you want back?

The 1994 team was never given that chance to play for a title. They got stuck playing a crappy Oregon team in the Rose Bowl and not the team of criminals from Nebraskastan.

That is the system you seem to be defending.

I found it to be even far more unfair....more susceptible to bias and not the way to crown a champion. I don't remember the first three times the Nits got hosed because I was 2, 3 and 7. But I was in my late 20's in 1994 and they were hosed by the polls. Those players deserved a chance to play for a title and they were denied because of the bull**** bowl system.

Teams that couldn't sniff a bid in the 4 team format got a seat at the table year. Money is spread out now and programs can't stack starters on 2nd and 3rd teams like Saban did when he had the biggest unfair advantage in the sport of all time. He bailed as soon as that was taken away from him.

Now if you argue that the playoffs took too long..I agree. The Army/Navy Game needs to be moved to a weekend before Conference Championship Weekend. Then the playoffs start the weekend the Army/Navy Game would have been on campuses. Then move the "Bowl Games" used for the next two rounds up...they don't have to be on New Years Weekend Every Year. The title game should be just after New Years...not deep into January.

Then get rid of most of the useless bowls filled with teams with 6-7 wins. That is a joke. 40 years ago there were 18 bowls...now there are 47. They need to go.

You bag on the Bucknuts getting extra money from a home playoff game and losing a game to Meatchicken? Really? Your Pitt Panthers got a bowl game despite losing 5 straight games to end the season. Do you think in say 1980..if they went 7-5 they'd get a bowl bid? No...but they got one this year...got paid for it...and then lost their 6th game in a row. You want to talk about devaluation...there it is right there.

The system is set up nicely now. Win your conference...get a higher seeding. If you are the runner up...you get at least a chance to host the first week on your home field. If you are a G5 team having the year of their lives...you now get a chance...a chance Central Flori-duh didn't get. If this year's system was in place...Flori-duh State doesn't get hosed.

FCS, D2 and D3 don't fully punish teams for losing in the regular season...well only IUP gets punished but that's another story.

I didn't fully care about the 4 team playoffs because it felt like only the privileged got invited. This year I watched because programs were getting chances and that was interesting to watch. Maybe the first round wasn't the greatest but so what..TCU getting disemboweled by Jawja was a waste of time.

The only change I would have made is that any conference champion who was not in the top 4 gets the home game in round 1. That would have given Clemson a home game and a seed in the 4-8 level.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

The only reason the ones calling the shots have a different vision of what they want is because it lines their pockets more. Starts and ends there.

And Bingo was his name

[IUP24]

By getting two bids in when the second team didn’t win the conference. The BIG didn’t deserve it either.

I don’t understand why you want the old way. It sucked. One loss should not tank your chances. Schedules aren’t even. Polls are crap and committees choosing who gets to play is even worse. This opened it up..and gave everyone a chance. The old way felt the same teams were always getting the chances while teams who had great seasons had. I **** because the pedigree was less.

I don’t “want” the old way. I just want the games in the regular season to matter. And down the lines games to decide the 11th or 12th team, to me, don’t make up for Notre Dame losing to Northern Illinois not mattering at all.

I don’t think you’ll see different teams in this format. I think you’ll see more of the teams everybody had fatigue from.

I want what you want too. Balanced scheduling. Regionalized conferences. Etc. But there’s too much money as it currently exists to ever get us to a sensible model. I didn’t love the BCS or the 4-team playoff either. But I liked those better because the regular was unique and it mattered.

[IUP24]

I get it. I realize you are very passionate about this topic.

My point is relax. In the big picture it's meaningless college football.

Three months from today the average fan wouldn't be able to name 8 of the 12 playoff teams.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you. We've known each other a long time. The reality however is the people calling the shots disagree with you.

My personal opinion as you know is I thought some real good teams got left out. I don't value Boise's record like you do. That's OK. We don't have to agree. We aren't changing anything anyway.

The only reason the ones calling the shots have a different vision of what they want is because it lines their pockets more. Starts and ends there.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

The root of my issue is that I have a fundamental disagreement with the justification of the state of college football pertaining to the class system as it currently exists with the expanded playoff.

NIL magnifying college football into tiers isn’t necessarily anything new. Those classes have always existed. But it would be far more tolerable if when those who were in the upper class slipped up, it meant something.

It no longer does. Plenty of people are okay with that. I am not.

I like having these conversations, because I like talking football. But I have mostly have a problem with the masses everywhere unknowingly supporting a format that’s just going to continue to build the divide, when nearly all of them root for a team who won’t ever have a seat at the table.

I get it. I realize you are very passionate about this topic.

My point is relax. In the big picture it's meaningless college football.

Three months from today the average fan wouldn't be able to name 8 of the 12 playoff teams.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you. We've known each other a long time. The reality however is the people calling the shots disagree with you.

My personal opinion as you know is I thought some real good teams got left out. I don't value Boise's record like you do. That's OK. We don't have to agree. We aren't changing anything anyway.

[IUPNation]

Okay, so you have no other examples. Got it.

The four team playoff existed for 10 years. Only 2 times did the SEC have more than one team in. The B1G was provided that opportunity one time as well. All other years there was only one representative from each of the conferences in the field.

So I will ask again, how was the SEC “given preferential treatment?”

By getting two bids in when the second team didn’t win the conference. The BIG didn’t deserve it either.

I don’t understand why you want the old way. It sucked. One loss should not tank your chances. Schedules aren’t even. Polls are crap and committees choosing who gets to play is even worse. This opened it up..and gave everyone a chance. The old way felt the same teams were always getting the chances while teams who had great seasons had. I **** because the pedigree was less.

[IUP24]

Actually I could give a F. Keep that in mind. You get all anal anytime somebody doesn't agree with your belief. That's fine.

It's just fun board banter because it gets reactions. It is what it is. Get used to it.

I could care less who they put in. Makes no difference.

Do I think the ACC was a weak conference? Yes. Did I disagree with Boise getting a bye? Yes.

My opinion and a dime will give you 10 cents.

OSU was the best team in the country at the right time. People can debate how or why they got there. End of the day nobody cares. They won.

The root of my issue is that I have a fundamental disagreement with the justification of the state of college football pertaining to the class system as it currently exists with the expanded playoff.

NIL magnifying college football into tiers isn’t necessarily anything new. Those classes have always existed. But it would be far more tolerable if when those who were in the upper class slipped up, it meant something.

It no longer does. Plenty of people are okay with that. I am not.

I like having these conversations, because I like talking football. But I mostly have a problem with the masses everywhere unknowingly supporting a format that’s just going to continue to build the divide, when nearly all of them root for a team who won’t ever have a seat at the table.

[IUP24]

But then they had to play a 4 game gauntlet. You cannot deny the took out 4 good teams.

We can’t sit here and say Slimey had a great run but bag on D1. Slimey didn’t play in the Stste Game..win the region and took the eventual champion to the 4th qtr on their home field.

The punishment is now you get a four game route instead of the bye.

Yes we can. Apples to oranges. A regionalized playoff structure that exists in Division 2 football where every conference is represented isn’t remotely comparable to the format that exists at the level we are discussing.

Acknowledging that Ohio State, who had the best odds to win the national championship at the start of the season, won four games, doesn’t change that their loss to Michigan would have disqualified nearly every other team not of their status. And the “punishment” allowed Ohio State an opportunity to make additional money from a home game they can now turn into an NIL check, further widening their gap.

The sport has fundamentally changed in favor of the teams that just reached the final four, and we’re using, “they won four games” as the data point to justify the devaluation of what was once the greatest regular season of any sport.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

I get it. You prefer an invitational tournament for the pleasure of seeing the helmets you prefer while watching at the holidays, regardless of what they did during the season, as we’ve previously established.

Why do we celebrate that Ohio State got a mulligan? Outside of Ohio State fans I cannot understand why people think it’s great that they got a do over.

Actually I could give a F. Keep that in mind. You get all anal anytime somebody doesn't agree with your belief. That's fine.

It's just fun board banter because it gets reactions. It is what it is. Get used to it.

I could care less who they put in. Makes no difference.

Do I think the ACC was a weak conference? Yes. Did I disagree with Boise getting a bye? Yes.

My opinion and a dime will give you 10 cents.

OSU was the best team in the country at the right time. People can debate how or why they got there. End of the day nobody cares. They won.

[IUP24]

They got most of the slots. It was a terrible way to crown a title. This was the best year of top
level college foosball. Who is to say that if there 12 teams all these years the SEC would have dominated the titles?

Okay, so you have no other examples. Got it.

The four team playoff existed for 10 years. Only 2 times did the SEC have more than one team in. The B1G was provided that opportunity one time as well. All other years there was only one representative from each of the conferences in the field.

So I will ask again, how was the SEC “given preferential treatment?”

[IUPNation]

Basketball and football are fundamentally different sports. In terms of “opening up the field,” it’s not even an apples to apples comparison.

In what world was the SEC “given preferential treatment” in the four team playoff? Give me actual examples and real data points. I can start you off with one… Florida State was left out in favor of Alabama.

They got most of the slots. It was a terrible way to crown a title. This was the best year of top
level college foosball. Who is to say that if there 12 teams all these years the SEC would have dominated the titles?

[IUPNation]

I get it. You prefer an invitational tournament for the pleasure of seeing the helmets you prefer while watching at the holidays, regardless of what they did during the season, as we’ve previously established.

Why do we celebrate that Ohio State got a mulligan? Outside of Ohio State fans I cannot understand why people think it’s great that they got a do over.

But then they had to play a 4 game gauntlet. You cannot deny the took out 4 good teams.

We can’t sit here and say Slimey had a great run but bag on D1. Slimey didn’t play in the Stste Game..win the region and took the eventual champion to the 4th qtr on their home field.

The punishment is now you get a four game route instead of the bye.

[IUP24]

No other sport punishes teams for losing one game and tanking a season like college football did…

Why should March Madness open it up to so many but foosball can only be undefeated teams where schedules aren’t the same strength?

Inthink it worked well. It made conference title games important. It made the regular season more about jockeying for a playoff spot and seeding. It might force OOC games not to be so cupcakey.

Im not so sure The Overrsted Stste University will dominate. 3-4 game tournaments..anything can happen.

This also proved the SEC was given preferential treatment when it was at four teams and possibly better teams were left out,

Basketball and football are fundamentally different sports. In terms of “opening up the field,” it’s not even an apples to apples comparison.

In what world was the SEC “given preferential treatment” in the four team playoff? Give me actual examples and real data points. I can start you off with one… Florida State was left out in favor of Alabama.

[IUP24]

It was unique. But, that's over.

These teams can only play in the current system.

I much prefer this set-up. I didn't love all 12 teams or some of the seeds, but, baby steps.

I get it. You prefer an invitational tournament for the pleasure of seeing the helmets you prefer while watching at the holidays, regardless of what they did during the season, as we’ve previously established.

Why do we celebrate that Ohio State got a mulligan? Outside of Ohio State fans I cannot understand why people think it’s great that they got a do over.