Is anyone AGAINST a college football playoff?

[Brian Fein]

Frankly, I don't think the league gives a crap whether or not you are interested.  I didn't watch because the Panthers played the same night against the Canucks.  I found that far more interesting, personally, so I spent my sports attention on that game.

[bsmooth]

That is my question. Would it take away games? It is widely recognized that any playoff format would only include a limited number of teams. Would they then be doing away with the remaining bowl games. If so, I'm not in favor of it.

You are not a fan of the game then either. You are a fan of a couple of teams and a bowl title. A true fan would want to know who is the true champion without any doubts. A playoff would accomplish this.
Also if you were a fan, you would be informed that the most common playoff concept brought up would include the major bowls as part of the equation with the remaining top two teams advancing to a championship.
The current bowl system is a joke. It is based on fan draw as opposed to the best teams or match-ups. I see you conveniently leave out the fact that the bowl games are full of 6-6 or 7-5 teams to fill up the ridiculous amount of bowls there are.

[Spider-Dan]

That is my question. Would it take away games? It is widely recognized that any playoff format would only include a limited number of teams. Would they then be doing away with the remaining bowl games.

I don't see any reason why it would.  You could still continue to have 20+ meaningless bowls every year, and they would be totally unaffected by the playoffs.

This year, there are 35 bowls.  The championship would still be the championship, you would have the Sugar/Orange/Rose/Fiesta Bowls rotate hosting the semi-finals, and take the two leftovers from that group and add two more (maybe Gator and Cotton) as the quarterfinals; top 8 should be plenty.

That still leaves you with over 25 pointless bowls to watch each year.  The tradition is preserved.

[Phishfan]

You are not a fan of the game then either. You are a fan of a couple of teams and a bowl title. A true fan would want to know who is the true champion without any doubts. A playoff would accomplish this.
Also if you were a fan, you would be informed that the most common playoff concept brought up would include the major bowls as part of the equation with the remaining top two teams advancing to a championship.
The current bowl system is a joke. It is based on fan draw as opposed to the best teams or match-ups. I see you conveniently leave out the fact that the bowl games are full of 6-6 or 7-5 teams to fill up the ridiculous amount of bowls there are.

It's your opinion and you can have it but it feels a bit more personal than fact based. How do you think I am a fan of a few teams and a bowl title when I say I watch a lot of college football and enjoy it? Yep I certainly know that one plan involves the major bowls in a playoff. That does not address the other bowl games that I have said I like to watch. Why would I conveniently leave out that the bowl schedule involves many 6-6 or 7-5 teams, I enjoy watching those games. I don't want them gone. I think that makes me a pretty good fan of college football.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

The primary argument against a playoff system is TRADITION.

The same argument used against ending segregation, to oppose women from voting, instituting instant replay, and the opposition to same sex marrigage.   

[masterfins]

I think the NCAA actually likes the debates every year over this topic.  It helps keep college football in the news, and probably generates more revenue across the board.  I think if you had a mini playoff system many of the other bowls would lose sponsors and money.

[Dave Gray]

The primary argument against a playoff system is TRADITION.

I disagree.  I think that tradition might be the primary justification, but I think the real reason is money.  It makes too much money for the non-elite schools.

[shamrock]

Suppose you have a playoff and your all-everything QB or receiver gets hurt in the first round.Or a controversial call causes a huge upset in the first or second round.....you are right back to where we are today------argueing over who is really number 1.The system as flawed as it is right now 9 times out of 10 works.
Plus,if I'm a kid who is unuestionably headed to the next level,why would I want to risk a career ending injury for the sake of winning a title?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Suppose you have a playoff and your all-everything QB or receiver gets hurt in the first round.Or a controversial call causes a huge upset in the first or second round.....you are right back to where we are today------argueing over who is really number 1.The system as flawed as it is right now 9 times out of 10 works.
Plus,if I'm a kid who is unuestionably headed to the next level,why would I want to risk a career ending injury for the sake of winning a title?

So are we argueing about who was the best team in 2008 because Brady got injured?  Or if the Colts should have made the playoffs?

Nobody argues who is the #1 NFL team or #1 NCCA basketball team. 

[EKnight]

I think we should do a +1 and get rid of HALF of the bowls. Sorry, but 35 Bowl games is ridiculous. The Rose Bowl was the only major college bowl game in 1930. By 1940, there were five. By 1950, eight. By 1970, 11. By 1980, 15. 1990, 19. 2000, 25. Where does it end? This is the college football equivalent of a "participation trophy" in little league and it's out of hand. Add 2-4 more weeks of "playoff" games, and- I know this may be a shocker to many of you- at some point it will start effecting students' classes. A very select few of these kids are playing to hope to get to the NFL- most are there to get an education. They can't do that of they are gone the entire month of January. -EK

[Pappy13]

Note, I am not against instituting a playoff but if it takes away many of the games I watch in the month of December I wouldn't be very happy with it.

You wouldn't be interested in the games that replaced them?  Sounds like the best of both worlds, keep the NCAA college football fan while adding those people who just like to watch NCAA tournament games like March Madness.

[Spider-Dan]

Add 2-4 more weeks of "playoff" games, and- I know this may be a shocker to many of you- at some point it will start effecting students' classes. A very select few of these kids are playing to hope to get to the NFL- most are there to get an education. They can't do that of they are gone the entire month of January.

Of the 70 teams that currently participate in the college football "postseason":

66 of them will play exactly the same number of games they play today.
2 of them will play exactly one extra game.
2 of them will play two extra games.

The argument from academic integrity rings quite hollow when these teams aren't even declining invites to meaningless bowl games as it is.  If teams were really that concerned about their student athletes, there wouldn't be 68 teams in exhibition bowls this year.

[Brian Fein]

The argument from academic integrity rings quite hollow when these teams aren't even declining invites to meaningless bowl games as it is.  If teams were really that concerned about their student athletes, there wouldn't be 68 teams in exhibition bowls this year.

Disagree.  Bowl games are 1 game being played when school is not in session anyway.  How do you intend to play a tournament in the course of 2 weeks between final exams and Christmas?  Oh, F Christmas, right because these kids are professionals and have a job to do.  Oh, wait, right, they're not.

There is no way you can add a tournament and NOT affect academics.  Please give your proposal.

[EKnight]

Did you seriously just delete my post? Anyway- I said to begin with that there are too many bowl games as it is. Don't cherry pick my quote. Put the whole thing in there if you're going to argue with me. Cut half of those games out, make it the way it used to be- Bowl games all day Jan 1, when winter break is still on, and not have them traveling all over January because more games are added. -EK

[Spider-Dan]

Did you seriously just delete my post?

I don't even have admin rights in this forum.  Your message is two posts above mine.  Slow down with the accusation hurling.

Anyway- I said to begin with that there are too many bowl games as it is. Don't cherry pick my quote. Put the whole thing in there if you're going to argue with me.

I presume this entire line of objection is because you (wrongly) believed that I deleted your post.

I quote the part of a post that I'm responding to.  Your original post is automatically linked in the very first line of a quote.