Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board

BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  RE: The new CFP proposal

Topic:  RE: The new CFP proposal
Author
Message
Bobcat1996
General User

Member Since: 1/2/2017
Post Count: 616

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 9:19:37 AM 
The length of the televised games are dragging out the time to spend at the stadium to over three hours per game in most cases. However, I do think that the college regular season in football is so much more important than basketball.
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 7,328

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 12:12:39 PM 
Pataskala wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


The goal of the other major D1 team sports isn't to get just the best teams in their playoff/tournament. It's to placate smaller conferences by giving their conference champs a shot at the national title. Occasionally, those conference champs surprise the big guys with a deep run into the tourney. Gonzaga did it, then became a perennial power. Coastal Carolina won the College World Series a few years ago. All the conference champs in basketball, volleyball, softball and baseball get automatic bids, and there are as many as 32 of those. I'm not sure about the other sports. The 1AA/FCS playoff includes automatic bids for all but, I believe, the three conferences that choose not to participate. That's the difference between NCAA-run playoffs and the CFP-run mini-playoff. Yeah, most G5 conference champs don't have much of a chance of winning it all, but they should at least have a shot.


Football is NOT basketball!
Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 6,478

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 12:54:30 PM 
This article is very much related to the topic at hand. In the last 16 months, people have found other things to do with their time and money.

https://www.axios.com/resignations-companies-e279fcfc-c8e...
Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,320

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 1:28:29 PM 
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,113

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 2:01:22 PM 
cc-cat wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.


What is the goal?
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 7,328

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 3:20:30 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
cc-cat wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.


What is the goal?



BLSS - EXACTLY!!!!! And if people want to say the goal is to keep all the money, they need to show, where the MAC Champion or AAC, CUSA champs really are one of the 12 best teams in the nation.
Back to Top
  
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 7,950

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 3:39:41 PM 
BillyTheCat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
cc-cat wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.


What is the goal?



BLSS - EXACTLY!!!!! And if people want to say the goal is to keep all the money, they need to show, where the MAC Champion or AAC, CUSA champs really are one of the 12 best teams in the nation.


It's obvious that the goal of the CFP management is to (1) have a way to milk even more money from cash-depleted ESPN and (2) keep the "P" conferences happy. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the playoff system or whether the teams involved, or even the winner, are the best.


We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.

Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,320

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/14/2021 6:55:29 PM 
Pataskala wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
cc-cat wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.


What is the goal?



BLSS - EXACTLY!!!!! And if people want to say the goal is to keep all the money, they need to show, where the MAC Champion or AAC, CUSA champs really are one of the 12 best teams in the nation.


It's obvious that the goal of the CFP management is to (1) have a way to milk even more money from cash-depleted ESPN and (2) keep the "P" conferences happy. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the playoff system or whether the teams involved, or even the winner, are the best.


EXACTLY!!!!! The primary interest in expanding the playoff is to expand eyeballs and clicks.... i.e., money!!!! No one thinks the #12 (let alone #7) team has a legit shot at winning the championship. But you expand the number of games and thus expand the TV contract. The audience also likes drama, the "what if" - so put in a UCF, a W. Mich., Boise St. in the mix. No one is saying they'll win it all, but maybe pull an upset of the #5 or #6 team. People would rather watch that then the 4th place SEC Miss St play USC.

Also, by throwing a G5 team in (instead of the 3rd place Big Ten Mich St.), the NCAA can act like they really care about giving all players a shot (even though they only care about the players making them money). So its good PR - keeps the media and Congress from getting all up in their face.

"Best Teams" - no - but we all know only 4. 5. 6 teams really have a shot. So flavor the mix.

As an aside, the coach of Coastal Carolina was on the radio the other day and said he was all in. Said he would be walking into recruits' homes and talking about how they can make the playoffs (once it gets closer).

Last Edited: 6/14/2021 7:04:28 PM by cc-cat

Back to Top
  
GoCats105
General User

Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Austin, TX
Post Count: 5,866

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/16/2021 9:37:31 AM 
cc-cat wrote:
Pataskala wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
cc-cat wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.


What is the goal?



BLSS - EXACTLY!!!!! And if people want to say the goal is to keep all the money, they need to show, where the MAC Champion or AAC, CUSA champs really are one of the 12 best teams in the nation.


It's obvious that the goal of the CFP management is to (1) have a way to milk even more money from cash-depleted ESPN and (2) keep the "P" conferences happy. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the playoff system or whether the teams involved, or even the winner, are the best.


EXACTLY!!!!! The primary interest in expanding the playoff is to expand eyeballs and clicks.... i.e., money!!!! No one thinks the #12 (let alone #7) team has a legit shot at winning the championship. But you expand the number of games and thus expand the TV contract. The audience also likes drama, the "what if" - so put in a UCF, a W. Mich., Boise St. in the mix. No one is saying they'll win it all, but maybe pull an upset of the #5 or #6 team. People would rather watch that then the 4th place SEC Miss St play USC.

Also, by throwing a G5 team in (instead of the 3rd place Big Ten Mich St.), the NCAA can act like they really care about giving all players a shot (even though they only care about the players making them money). So its good PR - keeps the media and Congress from getting all up in their face.

"Best Teams" - no - but we all know only 4. 5. 6 teams really have a shot. So flavor the mix.

As an aside, the coach of Coastal Carolina was on the radio the other day and said he was all in. Said he would be walking into recruits' homes and talking about how they can make the playoffs (once it gets closer).



The thing I find funny about this: had this system been in place last year there is no way in hell that both Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina get in the playoff. When the final rankings would have been revealed they would have found a BS explanation for why CC didn't get in. They have ZERO, NONE, NADA interest in letting more Group of Five teams in this thing than they have to.

Pull back the curtain and look at the real issue. Is this a step in the right direction to include everyone? Yes. Will we ever see it...it being full inclusion? Absolutely the hell not.

Last Edited: 6/16/2021 9:38:25 AM by GoCats105

Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 1,936

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/18/2021 7:27:42 AM 


Saw this just now:

Why are these men smiling? Because they're in familiar surroundings. (Todd Kirkland/Getty Images)
By Jay Busbee

Today I'm going to talk about the 12-team College Football Playoff. But first, a declaration: I hate the Steve Miller Band.

Steve Miller and his various bandmates may be wonderful people. I wouldn't know, I've never met them. But what I can say is this: if I never hear "The Joker," "Fly Like An Eagle," "Jet Airliner" or any other of their room-temperature-oatmeal rock, I'll be just fine.

And it's not just the Steve Miller Band. The Eagles, John Mellencamp, Fleetwood Mac*, Boston package 'em all on a reunion tour and then send that tour to the moon.

(*-Except "Silver Springs." That song rules.)

Why do I hate all these Greatest Hits-peddling bands so much? Familiarity. Constant, numbing familiarity. The first piano chords of "Cold As Ice" or the first syllables of "Carry On My Wayward Son" make me mad enough to grind my teeth. I spent my formative years hearing all them and more being played nonstop on the radio.

(For those under the age of 35: a "radio" was kind of like Spotify, except it was attached to your car, you couldn't control the playlist, and you didn't own that music either.)

ANYway. Why this long divergence into classic rock in a sports newsletter? Because for all the hype the new 12-team College Football Playoff plan is drawing, I fear it's going to end up a whole lot like classic rock: great the first couple times you hear it, but eventually you'll long for a trip to the dentist to avoid seeing Clemson, Alabama or Ohio State yet again.

Granted, a 12-team playoff is much better than a four-team one, since those three teams have a stranglehold to quote classic rocker Ted Nugent on the playoff as it is. But assuming these programs continue on their current trajectory, and there's no reason to expect they'll fall off, you're going to see Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Georgia and Oklahoma lurking or clogging every playoff for the foreseeable future. All the other teams are likely to be interchangeable side dishes on a Thanksgiving table.

And then there's Notre Dame, which, as our Dan Wetzel notes, somehow managed to work a triple benefit out of this: it retains access to the playoff without having to join a conference, it keeps its ability to recruit nationwide in play, and it gains the possibility of a ridiculously lucrative first-round game at home. The Irish may not hold the elite on-field status of the Tide or the Tigers, but their ability to remain in the college football conversation remains unmatched.

Look, the College Football Playoff is going to be tremendous fun, and maybe someone will even score an upset now and then. But the blue bloods tend to spend a whole lot more money (cue Pink Floyd) than anyone else, on everything from facilities to coaches to PR. And that means that once we get to the semifinals, we're likely to see a bracket that looks a whole lot like it does right now ... again and again and again.

Have a great weekend, friends, and we'll see you back here Monday. Play whatever music you like, I promise I won't judge.
Back to Top
  
Mark Lembright '85
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Lyndhurst, OH
Post Count: 2,391

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/18/2021 9:02:35 AM 
I think the new 12 team system's a definite improvement. At least a qualified G5 team has a chance under this proposal.

And what's the goal, at least for Ohio? The MACC. And a bowl win. And maybe finishing ranked in the bottom rung of the Top 25. That's it, nothing more. Why should Ohio have a legitimate shot at the FBS championship? Seriously?? At best Ohio University devotes a minimum amount of resources to football. The team can't draw flies (heck, only the Miami game drew over 20,000 fans in 2019, and that by only 500), the stadium is small, old and antiquated, at least compared to P5 stadiums. If Solich manages to win a MACC before he retires, I would say Ohio has then achieved the goal.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not indicting Ohio football. Personally I'm happy with the way things are. I'd like to see a MACC but all in all, for the resources Ohio puts towards football, I think what Ohio is doing is great. Ohio seems to avoid the scandals that hit a lot of the P5 teams. The student enthusiasm could stand some improvement but going to a game in the Fall on a nice sunny Saturday win Athens with the Marching 110 performing is almost as good as it gets. As I've said before, being a major football power is not in Ohio's DNA and that's okay with me.

Yes the FBS champs get monotonous. I hate seeing Alabama, OSU, Clemson, blah blah blah every year. But I find the argument that hoops is different laughable. Hoops is the same thing! Its the same old blue bloods winning it every year. Granted, it's great seeing a George Washington University, a Loyola of Chicago, and a Butler advancing to the later rounds (Butler did even better than that) but for the most part the No.1 or the No. 2 seeds win the whole thing. When was the last time a #4 seed or lower actually won the championship? It's the first week/weekend of the NCAA tourney that's the most exciting and draws everyone's excitement. Occasionally a 1 seed, ala Illinois this year or a 2 seed loses that weekend and that's what everyone, myself included, love to see. But for the most part, the Final Four consists of the #1 and #2 seeds.

Last Edited: 6/18/2021 9:03:56 AM by Mark Lembright '85

Back to Top
  
Club Hyatt
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,216

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: The new CFP proposal
   Posted: 6/18/2021 10:44:05 AM 
GoCats105 wrote:
cc-cat wrote:
Pataskala wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
cc-cat wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
If the goal is to get the best teams in the playoffs, 98% of the time the G5 does not deserve a spot.


That is not the goal.


What is the goal?



BLSS - EXACTLY!!!!! And if people want to say the goal is to keep all the money, they need to show, where the MAC Champion or AAC, CUSA champs really are one of the 12 best teams in the nation.


It's obvious that the goal of the CFP management is to (1) have a way to milk even more money from cash-depleted ESPN and (2) keep the "P" conferences happy. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the playoff system or whether the teams involved, or even the winner, are the best.


EXACTLY!!!!! The primary interest in expanding the playoff is to expand eyeballs and clicks.... i.e., money!!!! No one thinks the #12 (let alone #7) team has a legit shot at winning the championship. But you expand the number of games and thus expand the TV contract. The audience also likes drama, the "what if" - so put in a UCF, a W. Mich., Boise St. in the mix. No one is saying they'll win it all, but maybe pull an upset of the #5 or #6 team. People would rather watch that then the 4th place SEC Miss St play USC.

Also, by throwing a G5 team in (instead of the 3rd place Big Ten Mich St.), the NCAA can act like they really care about giving all players a shot (even though they only care about the players making them money). So its good PR - keeps the media and Congress from getting all up in their face.

"Best Teams" - no - but we all know only 4. 5. 6 teams really have a shot. So flavor the mix.

As an aside, the coach of Coastal Carolina was on the radio the other day and said he was all in. Said he would be walking into recruits' homes and talking about how they can make the playoffs (once it gets closer).



The thing I find funny about this: had this system been in place last year there is no way in hell that both Cincinnati and Coastal Carolina get in the playoff. When the final rankings would have been revealed they would have found a BS explanation for why CC didn't get in. They have ZERO, NONE, NADA interest in letting more Group of Five teams in this thing than they have to.

Pull back the curtain and look at the real issue. Is this a step in the right direction to include everyone? Yes. Will we ever see it...it being full inclusion? Absolutely the hell not.


If a team can finish in the Top 12 they can play for a title no matter where they are from. That is a realistic shot for almost everyone in FBS while Top 4 was improbable aside from the very top G5 programs with a slim chance if the conditions were right.

Finishing in the Top 12 is one way to get in. The second way is to be a Top 6 rated conference champion which the MAC offers up from time to time. This is not for a New Year's bowl but to actually play for a national title.

Under the Top 2 and Top 4 formats there are P5 programs that never could quite get to play for a NC that can do so now. Think West Virginia or TCU very close in a few seasons but not quite.

The playoff record of a coach at places like Michigan and LSU could be used as grounds for firing. Coach 5 years and go 0-2 in the playoff spells failure. If that happens at Ohio you'll have a stadium named after you. For the extra large programs playoff failures could hurt like it does for an NFL coach.

I don't see how having the MAC Champion in the playoffs every year just to get clobbered helps the MAC. If the MAC starts to build a super poor record in the playoff that will hurt recruiting. If instead it places a team in the playoff every 5 years and plays competitively it won't be as rough on recruiting.


Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  26 - 37  of 37 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             




Copyright ©2021 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties