CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

"I don't know that expanding -- if this is the best four teams and they played each other, I don't see the logic in it if we had more teams there would be better games," Saban said. "I don't know how that adds up."


………… thinking like that ain’t gonna get you invited to Disney World.



https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... t-adds-up/


.
.

He basically said...if you pick the top four in the country and play them against each other....and some games are lopsided...well, watch the the bowls instead.

The problem...Alabama and Georgia would have beaten any teams put before them......Cincinnati and Michigan lost the game a month before it was played.

I mostly agree with Saban.

Saban makes a good point, but while Saban is talk in’ football, the GORILLA IN THE ROOM, is thinking MONEY.

From a viewers perspective who’s favorite team is not in the playoff the CFP has not been all that exciting to watch. Only 6 game since the inception of the CFP have been decided by a touchdown (7 points) or less, while many of the games could be labeled as ‘blowouts’. (See attachment).

That may lead one to believe that many viewers are not watching because they’re a fan of either team, but rather because they want to see a competitive, well played AND exciting game……. They want entertainment, and if the game is not, those viewers reach for the remote and lean their recliner back and take a nap….. and ‘The Mouse’ doesn’t like that. It lowers the ‘ratings’ and ‘ratings’ means dollars.

So, to me, that raises a question in my mind about, ‘Who’s driving the expansion of the CFP???’

Considering ‘The Mouse’ through its subsidiary, ESPN, currently ‘Produces’ all but one of all Bowl Games, would those games produce more Mouse Money if they were part of a ‘National Playoff’.

But…… there’s a problem(s). What about the existing bowls, who gets to participate, how are the teams selected, how many teams, how are the teams seeded and how is the playoff bracketed, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24??????

Some want a ‘Committee’, others want ‘Conference Champs’, others want ‘All Inclusive’…… and that creates an issue for ‘The Mouse’, although the rodent does have an ‘inside man’ a.k.a. “RAT”, in Greg Sankey to advocate ‘Committee, Committee, Committee’, because Ole Greggie Poo has a lot of mouths to feed in a conference that has a number of very good teams.








https://collegefootballplayoff.com/spor ... story.aspx

To me as long as someone is controlling the teams that get in subjectively, it is a bad system amd it doesn’t matter if it is 2,4,6,8, 10 or whatever games.

Mountainman wrote:and that creates an issue for ‘The Mouse’, although the rodent does have an ‘inside man’ a.k.a. “RAT”, in Greg Sankey to advocate ‘Committee, Committee, Committee’, because Ole Greggie Poo has a lot of mouths to feed in a conference that has a number of very good teams.

He's also been an advocate for keeping the playoff at 4 teams ...

He doesn't want expansion, because, the Four Best teams could essentially showcase 3 teams from the SEC [with the inclusion of Oklahoma ... I wouldn't bank on Texas]

.
.
.

Cane from the Bend wrote:

Mountainman wrote:and that creates an issue for ‘The Mouse’, although the rodent does have an ‘inside man’ a.k.a. “RAT”, in Greg Sankey to advocate ‘Committee, Committee, Committee’, because Ole Greggie Poo has a lot of mouths to feed in a conference that has a number of very good teams.

He's also been an advocate for keeping the playoff at 4 teams ...

He doesn't want expansion, because, the Four Best teams could essentially showcase 3 teams from the SEC [with the inclusion of Oklahoma ... I wouldn't bank on Texas]

.
.
.

Doesn’t surprise me……. Sankey’s got Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Texas A&M, plus Oklahoma on the way with Florida and Tennessee with the resources if they will just get out of their own way, and Texas paying offensive lineman $50,000.00 NILS for signing with the Longhorns.

Ole Greggie Poo gonna have a time keeping them all happy…..

Spence wrote:To me as long as someone is controlling the teams that get in subjectively, it is a bad system amd it doesn’t matter if it is 2,4,6,8, 10 or whatever games.

They wanted ‘BRANDS’, because Brands have general fan appeal….. and committees can deliver what they want.

I think you and I continue to be on the same page, and believe it’s what’s best for the GAME. You gotta EARN IT.

………but the money changers see it differently, so we’ll probably lose this one.

We are on the same page for sure. As a fan of one of the "brands", I still think winning trumps most else. If you can't have an automatic for winning I see no reason to expand anything.

Not a thing in the world wrong with being a “brand” team, hell, it’s where any program that’s worth a hoot wants to be and is working like crazy to get there……… BUT, where we have to be prudent, in order to preserve the College Game, is to ensure that ALL Teams have a clearly defined pathway to WINNING the National Title.

The craziness of all this is, the Powers That Be……. CHOSE NOT TO DO IT!!!! That thinking needs to change, the tail has been wagging the dog long enough.

Mountainman wrote:Not a thing in the world wrong with being a “brand” team, hell, it’s where any program that’s worth a hoot wants to be and is working like crazy to get there……… BUT, where we have to be prudent, in order to preserve the College Game, is to ensure that ALL Teams have a clearly defined pathway to WINNING the National Title.

The craziness of all this is, the Powers That Be……. CHOSE NOT TO DO IT!!!! That thinking needs to change, the tail has been wagging the dog long enough.

I believe all teams should have a path. Not a guarantee, but a path. There are 6 teams in the nation that could schedule no one for 12 weeks and as long as they win they are in. That is wrong IMO. If there was a clear path - IE- conference champ auto bids, then I am good with whatever assinine rules they put in place to placate their brands and keep the TV money rolling in, but let everyone have a path to the top that isn't subjective.

All teams DO have a path...and that path is long and winding and not for those that demand "Justice" meaning "I want things my way".

The path involves decades of developing an athletic department base, fans, boosters, facilities, money raising etc. The path includes the development of recruiting, coaching and a continuity over time.

Good teams didn't just plop into the SEC like anvils dropped from the heavens.

The NCAA Basketball Tourney has a path...and it dupes those who take a shallow look at it...but what kind of path is it really? When the bottom half of those seeded for the dance have zero chnnce of winning... have less than 1% (.07) chance of making the Final Four.

Almost all (87%) of the Champions have come from seeds #1-#3 .

With 121 teams....it is a foolish fiction to believe that they are all playing for the same National Championship...and that there is a path that allows all a chance.

“With 121 teams....it is a foolish fiction to believe that they are all playing for the same National Championship...and that there is a path that allows all a chance.”


You’re absolutely right, in the current environment………. and that’s the result of what and how things have been done in the past, while also illustrating the environment and product it produced.

billybud wrote:All teams DO have a path...and that path is long and winding and not for those that demand "Justice" meaning "I want things my way".

The path involves decades of developing an athletic department base, fans, boosters, facilities, money raising etc. The path includes the development of recruiting, coaching and a continuity over time.

Good teams didn't just plop into the SEC like anvils dropped from the heavens.

The NCAA Basketball Tourney has a path...and it dupes those who take a shallow look at it...but what kind of path is it really? When the bottom half of those seeded for the dance have zero chnnce of winning... have less than 1% (.07) chance of making the Final Four.

Almost all (87%) of the Champions have come from seeds #1-#3 .

With 121 teams....it is a foolish fiction to believe that they are all playing for the same National Championship...and that there is a path that allows all a chance.

In the scenario you describe- the system in place now- there little chance for a team to catch lightning in a bottle. Cincinnati this year would be an exception, but it took a perfect storm and political rumbling to get it done.

If a team from the group of 5 or even a non “brand” power 5 team is ever going to win a championship, they are going to have to have to have an automatic seat at the table or hit on a perfect storm situation like we had this year.

Very few of those teams have a shot to do it like you described. It may not have happened for Miami or Florida State if they hadn’t been blessed into such an fertile recruiting territory.

Even then, as in the case of the NCAA basketball tourney, it will be a rare occurrence for one of those teams to make it. But they did get the shot with a clear path to the finish line. Just not an easy path.

in the current and any future environment....unless you pick a champ by lottery out of a hat. Or handicap. Give the weaker team 10 points.

Team strength is distributed, as most things are, on an arc of a Bell Curve....There will be 15% of the teams that are the strongest, 15% the weakest, and 70% that make up the range between the two. The Champion will come from the 15% of the curve and everybody else is dreaming or whining "not fair". Want to be Champion? Become a stronger team.

In the basketball tourney, the bottom half of the seeds that make up the 65 teams who make it the tourney, historically have had zero chance of winning, zero chance of making a Final...and less than 1 % chance of making a Final Four.

I'd love it if basketball played 13 games (like football) and then had to seed their tournament...Can you imagine the wailing?