What are we playing for?

[philduckworth]

The college football playoff has really changed college football for me. I used to enjoy the regular season and wanted to get to a good bowl game. It meant something. You could build a program thru bowl trips and maybe win your division if things fell right. We won it once. Competed another time or two. Now, all of the bowl games are completely meaningless except for the playoffs. Top prospects are skipping bowl games and that's becoming more the norm than the exception.

Best case scenario, we go 8-4 and go to the outback bowl? Yay. And there are 120 other teams in the same boat as us.

Attendance is down. Bowl game attendance is way down. In the NFL, every team thinks they can make the playoffs. The ones that don't, think they are only a couple of moves away. In college, it's pretty hopeless for all the teams with the exception of about 12. Maybe those 12 can keep driving the revenue bus and keep the TV ratings up, I don't know.

But I think College football needs major reform or interest will continue to wane. College football needs a commissioner. Playoffs need to be expanded, scholarships need to be reduced. More teams need to at least be under the illusion(delusion) that they can contend for the CFP. Otherwise, what's the point?

 

[Diggin Out Yo Wife]

This was already discussed: https://forums.sixpackspeak.com/sho...ectations-thread-Why-do-we-even-play-football

...albeit with more doom and gloom.

To answer your question though, yeah it sucks. I prefer the old system.

 

[BlueRidgeMtns]

I mean this was kinda cool and during the playoff era:

View attachment 13799

 

[11thEagleFan]

Cut scholarships to 65 per FBS team, expand playoffs to 8 teams. Eliminate 5 lower tier bowls.

 

[civildawg88]

College football for 95% of the teams will die slowly unless they do what you outlined

 

[Seinfeld]

Playoff has to be expanded. Period

People will want to point to 2014 as evidence that anything can happen, but I’ll say again... there was a distinct chance that an 11-1 team from the SEC with its only loss being a close one to Bama on the road was going to get left out of the CFP. The current format is a step in the right direction, but it’s still trash

 

[CookieMonster.sixpack]

The college football playoff has really changed college football for me. I used to enjoy the regular season and wanted to get to a good bowl game. It meant something. You could build a program thru bowl trips and maybe win your division if things fell right. We won it once. Competed another time or two. Now, all of the bowl games are completely meaningless except for the playoffs. Top prospects are skipping bowl games and that's becoming more the norm than the exception.

Best case scenario, we go 8-4 and go to the outback bowl? Yay. And there are 120 other teams in the same boat as us.

Attendance is down. Bowl game attendance is way down. In the NFL, every team thinks they can make the playoffs. The ones that don't, think they are only a couple of moves away. In college, it's pretty hopeless for all the teams with the exception of about 12. Maybe those 12 can keep driving the revenue bus and keep the TV ratings up, I don't know.

But I think College football needs major reform or interest will continue to wane. College football needs a commissioner. Playoffs need to be expanded, scholarships need to be reduced. More teams need to at least be under the illusion(delusion) that they can contend for the CFP. Otherwise, what's the point?

Normally this is where I'd put a gif or some snarky comment but here's a serious suggestion. What if there was a limit on how much each university could put toward football? Like a salary cap, but for the football program as a whole (including coach's salary)? The salary cap mandates parity in the NFL. We haven't had a 1st time champion in College Football for 38 years (Washington 1991). And only two other schools without a title have even made it to the championship (Virginia Tech & Oregon).

In that same time frame how many teams have won their first Super Bowl? SEVEN! (Patriots, Rams, Ravens, Seahawks, Eagles, Bucs, Saints). Also SIX teams without a title have played in the game (Bills, Falcons, Panthers, Chargers, Titans & Cardinals). That's 13 of 32 teams (41%) who've had a legitimate chance to win their first title since 1991 vs. 3 of 65 (5%) Power Five schools (XII, SEC, PAC12, BIG, ACC & ND) have had the same opportunity. It's legitimately depressing.

 

[philduckworth]

My bad, I missed that thread. I just can't get over the absurdity of the Big TEN having 14 teams, or the Big 12 having 10 teams. Some conferences play 9 conference games, some play 8. You can go 4 years to a school in the SEC and not play every team at least once, lol. Why is Missouri in the SEC? Maryland and Nebraska in the Big 10, wtf? Why are we playing Abilene Christian? I mean does any give a f about that game? Alabama is playing Western Carolina. Something is wrong about that.

Coastal Carolina can win the national title in baseball. Butler and Wichita State can make the Final 4 in basketball. In college football it's completely rigged and no one seems to care that much. I keep listening to talk radio talking about paying players and allowing transfers or whatever, but this is the biggest issue in college football. Most teams are playing for nothing really. It's a nihilistic view, but accurate.

 

[aTotal360]

It's 17n entertainment. If you don't like it, don't support it. Not sure what else to tell you. Here's a newsflash, we'll probably never finish the year in the position to make the playoffs unless they expand it to 16. Sounds like you need to start pulling for Bama.

 

[Diggin Out Yo Wife]

It's 17n entertainment. If you don't like it, don't support it. Not sure what else to tell you. Here's a newsflash, we'll probably never finish the year in the position to make the playoffs unless they expand it to 16. Sounds like you need to start pulling for Bama.

It's more than that to a lot of people. You have 11,000 posts on this board, obviously you take a little more interest in it than "entertainment".

Don't be a dick.

 

[Diggin Out Yo Wife]

My bad, I missed that thread. I just can't get over the absurdity of the Big TEN having 14 teams, or the Big 12 having 10 teams. Some conferences play 9 conference games, some play 8. You can go 4 years to a school in the SEC and not play every team at least once, lol. Why is Missouri in the SEC? Maryland and Nebraska in the Big 10, wtf? Why are we playing Abilene Christian? I mean does any give a f about that game? Alabama is playing Western Carolina. Something is wrong about that.

Coastal Carolina can win the national title in baseball. Butler and Wichita State can make the Final 4 in basketball. In college football it's completely rigged and no one seems to care that much. I keep listening to talk radio talking about paying players and allowing transfers or whatever, but this is the biggest issue in college football. Most teams are playing for nothing really. It's a nihilistic view, but accurate.

I think if you let anyone go pro anytime, you'd get a lot more parity. And many players are ready.

Some people would say that this would be bad for college football. Maybe for the casual viewer, but the casual viewers aren't who make the college game great. The die-hards (like you and I) do that, and they do that through their passion for the school. And that will still be there.

 

[RPOdawg]

I agree it’s rigged to favor blue bloods but part of that is our own fault. We should have taken football more serious back in the early years of college football like Alabama, Notre Dame, USC, etc. also, sharing a state with ole miss sucks. I believe if ole miss and MSU formed one school/team, we could compete for championships. That will obviously never happen. Expanding the playoffs to 8 teams gives us hope though.

 

[philduckworth]

Here's how I would fix it:

1. Reduce scholarships to 70. If the NFL can make it with a 53 man roster, college football can make with it with 70.

2. A hard cap of 20 signees in a calendar year. Only exception is that you can add a signee for every player that enters the transfer portal. All other loopholes(grayshirting, counting back with early enrollees, etc) closed

3. Reduce the regular season to 11 games: 9 mandated conference games for all Power 5 schools + 2 non conference games. At least 1 non conference game has to be against a Power 5.

4. Eliminate divisions in the conferences. Eliminate the conference championship games. No more bowl games.

5. Expand the playoff to 16 teams. First 2 rounds are played on campus of the higher seeded team. Final 2 rounds on neutral sites. Final 2 teams end up playing 15 total games- exact same as it is now.

6. Group of 5 schools have their own, separate playoff- so no Group of 5 schools would be eligible for the Power 5 playoff. Join a conference or compete for the Group of 5 Championship.

 

[maroonmadman]

The only way to achieve parity in college football would be to institute a draft system like pro football uses. That is the only way to keep the blue bloods of the collegiate world from snapping up all the best available high school talent year after year and leaving the dregs and diamonds in the rough for the rest.

I don't ever envision this happening though.

 

[aTotal360]

I learned a long time ago to not let a bunch of 19-21 year old kids ruin my weekend. It's purely entertainment to me. I want to be entertained. And honestly, hanging out with my old college friends (even though they are all monumental dooshbags) is a lot more entertaining than the game itself. If it was all about winning and losing, I'd stay at home.

 

[aTotal360]

History is written. Period. Unless you have an astronomical influx of cash (ie Oregon/Nike), you stand no chance of being a legit "contender". The good news is that MSU is a borderline blue blood in baseball.

 

[11thEagleFan]

Again, reducing scholarships to 65 and expanding the playoff to 8 teams is the best fix, IMO. The only schools that should oppose that are the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world. The drawback is that yes, you’ll occasionally have the loss to a school like UL-Lafayette or USM, but you’ll be able to more regularly defeat a school like Alabama. Undefeated seasons will become more rare, which again, should happen. The only fight should be over which teams get in. I favor the idea of 5 auto-bids for Power 5 champions, plus highest ranked 3 at-large teams, or one auto-bid for the highest ranked G5 champ (probably always the 8 seed).

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

I will say if you expand conference games to 9, you might as well make it 10. Reason being, the years that State and Ole Miss have 5 road games and 4 home games, I guarantee you they will find a way to screw us big time. Or, what the hell. Just go ahead and have a 13 game season and play all 13 other SEC teams. No one can convince me State will not get screwed with a 9 game SEC schedule. Bama and Georgia sure don’t want it, because ain’t no way they would agree to 5 SEC Road games every other year.

 

[CookieMonster.sixpack]

The good news is that MSU is a borderline blue blood in baseball.

Emphasis on borderline since we've never won it all and Vanderbilt basically runs the sport until their scholarship situation is corrected.

 

[codeDawg]

The only way to achieve parity in college football would be to institute a draft system like pro football uses. That is the only way to keep the blue bloods of the collegiate world from snapping up all the best available high school talent year after year and leaving the dregs and diamonds in the rough for the rest.

I don't ever envision this happening though.

If we wanted parity, it's clear how to achieve it. There are just too many people in power who protect the system as it is and convince people it's in the interest of "preserving the purity of college football". The only thing pure about college football is that it takes decades of investment and an understanding of how to break the rules in the "right way" to change you place in the pecking order.

It's not a fair fight, but for whatever reason, we choose for it to not be.

 

[msstate7]

I'm fine with 70 scholarship limit, but do wonder how you start if off? Seems you end up with a mass processing of players, which would be a really bad look for the ncaa.

 

[L4Dawg]

It's always been this way. The only difference is the atttitude of fans. It used to be that people could be happy with a good year even if your team didn't win the natty. Now if you don't win the natty then you are a failure even if you did have a really good year.

 

[philduckworth]

It's always been this way. The only difference is the atttitude of fans. It used to be that people could be happy with a good year even if your team didn't win the natty. Now if you don't win the natty then you are a failure even if you did have a really good year.

It hasn't "always been this way". There was no playoff in the past. Bowl games used to matter. Now they don't. So your post is incorrect.

 

[philduckworth]

I'm fine with 70 scholarship limit, but do wonder how you start if off? Seems you end up with a mass processing of players, which would be a really bad look for the ncaa.

There would have to be a 3 year period of 5 per year. So 85-80 in year 1, 80-75 year 2, and 75 to 70 year 3. The hard cap of 20 signees would help.

 

[philduckworth]

I learned a long time ago to not let a bunch of 19-21 year old kids ruin my weekend. It's purely entertainment to me. I want to be entertained. And honestly, hanging out with my old college friends (even though they are all monumental dooshbags) is a lot more entertaining than the game itself. If it was all about winning and losing, I'd stay at home.

College football is literally the only team sport where 90% of the teams competing have no chance to at least compete for a championship.

 

[CookieMonster.sixpack]

Now if you don't win the natty then you are a failure even if you did have a really good year.

Talk about oversimplification. It's not about winning the whole thing. No one even has a chance to win the whole thing. 2 teams have even had a game to win their first title in 38 years. It's not fun to go 2 decades knowing that no matter how well you scout, recruit, hire, game plan, etc., you don't even have a chance. Quit trying to make it some spoiled brat garbage it isn't.

 

[Diggin Out Yo Wife]

Again, reducing scholarships to 65 and expanding the playoff to 8 teams is the best fix, IMO. The only schools that should oppose that are the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world. The drawback is that yes, you’ll occasionally have the loss to a school like UL-Lafayette or USM, but you’ll be able to more regularly defeat a school like Alabama. Undefeated seasons will become more rare, which again, should happen. The only fight should be over which teams get in. I favor the idea of 5 auto-bids for Power 5 champions, plus highest ranked 3 at-large teams, or one auto-bid for the highest ranked G5 champ (probably always the 8 seed).

I don't like auto bids because conferences aren't created equally. Plus, I already think we get 'natural' bias towards conference champs anyway because their records are better, albeit in easier conferences.

 

[Diggin Out Yo Wife]

It's always been this way. The only difference is the atttitude of fans. It used to be that people could be happy with a good year even if your team didn't win the natty. Now if you don't win the natty then you are a failure even if you did have a really good year.

It's because the bowls don't matter, and rivalries have been diluted. There's no prize for 80% of the teams.

For us, it's a Sugar Bowl trophy at best, then likely losing most/all our coaching staff.

For say, USM, it's a C-USA trophy at best, some crappy bowl, then likely losing your WHOLE coaching staff.

That **** sucks.

 

[was21]

Don't worry about it. Basketball season will be here soon enough

 

[Diggin Out Yo Wife]

If we wanted parity, it's clear how to achieve it. There are just too many people in power who protect the system as it is and convince people it's in the interest of "preserving the purity of college football". The only thing pure about college football is that it takes decades of investment and an understanding of how to break the rules in the "right way" to change you place in the pecking order.

It's not a fair fight, but for whatever reason, we choose for it to not be.

If you pay players, the exact same teams that are winning now, will win again. That is not a solution to college football parity, sorry.

Salary caps on coaches may be an answer, however.

 

[was21]

Depends on perspective. Bowl games "do" matter to some fans. OTOH if the only thing that matters is winning the natty, then maybe football is just not your game..and better to stick to basketball which probably won't produce a natty at State either. Hell man, enjoy the moment.

 

[johnson86-1]

It hasn't "always been this way". There was no playoff in the past. Bowl games used to matter. Now they don't. So your post is incorrect.

I don't think the playoff is what has changed things. It's that there are so many bowls and so very little distinction between bowls. You always had only a bowl game or two that had national title implications, but people still cared about the other bowl games.

The reason they don't now is that going to a bowl game is no longer a treat. Cut back on bowls to where you have to have 7 wins to be eligible and you will see people more excited about bowl games. What if we hadn't gotten to go to a bowl game in 2011, 2013, and 2016?

The other issue is that it's basically CFP, NY6, and everything else now. I get why the SEC did it, but if they hadn't lumped most of our bowl games in the same tier, you'd see people still getting excited about making it to the bowl behind the capital one, or the bowl behind the (I guess Outback). But once you're past the Capital one, it's just meh. Equalizing the money didn't bring the value of the liberty bowl up, it devalued the Outback and gator, so fans just aren't as excited about those bowls.

 

[philduckworth]

I don't think the playoff is what has changed things. It's that there are so many bowls and so very little distinction between bowls. You always had only a bowl game or two that had national title implications, but people still cared about the other bowl games.

The reason they don't now is that going to a bowl game is no longer a treat. Cut back on bowls to where you have to have 7 wins to be eligible and you will see people more excited about bowl games. What if we hadn't gotten to go to a bowl game in 2011, 2013, and 2016?

The other issue is that it's basically CFP, NY6, and everything else now. I get why the SEC did it, but if they hadn't lumped most of our bowl games in the same tier, you'd see people still getting excited about making it to the bowl behind the capital one, or the bowl behind the (I guess Outback). But once you're past the Capital one, it's just meh. Equalizing the money didn't bring the value of the liberty bowl up, it devalued the Outback and gator, so fans just aren't as excited about those bowls.

I agree with everything you said, but I think we are past the point of any kind of bowl relevance or resurgence.

 

[StarkVegas Steve]

Right now with a 4 team playoff there's realistically 10-12 programs that can make the playoffs in a given year. I think by going to 8 you open it to 20-25 teams and I think we're in that second tier of teams. I think 8 is where it would need to be capped. 16 seems like a bit of overkill and at that point there's nothing from stopping you from playing 9 games a season and having a 64 team playoff.......which I wouldn't be totally opposed to. I think the TV people would salivate at the thought of a 64 team CFP FWIW. Again, not advocating for it because I think it would be overkill, but we'd have a chance in that type of system.

 

[BiscuitEater]

Here's how I would fix it:

Reduce scholarships to 70. If the NFL can make it with a 53 man roster, college football can make with it with 70.

Nope, while NFL can waive, add, and trade players before, after AND during the season CFB lives with opening day rosters.

 

[philduckworth]

Right now with a 4 team playoff there's realistically 10-12 programs that can make the playoffs in a given year. I think by going to 8 you open it to 20-25 teams and I think we're in that second tier of teams. I think 8 is where it would need to be capped. 16 seems like a bit of overkill and at that point there's nothing from stopping you from playing 9 games a season and having a 64 team playoff.......which I wouldn't be totally opposed to. I think the TV people would salivate at the thought of a 64 team CFP FWIW. Again, not advocating for it because I think it would be overkill, but we'd have a chance in that type of system.

Nah, 16 is the sweet spot. 8 isn't enough for us, or the majority of college football. Remember in basketball there are 351 teams. 68 teams make the tourney, that's 19%. There are 130 in football so 16 teams give you 12%. Or 24% if you just look at Power 5 schools.

We are always going to be around the #25 number in recruiting so 16 gives us a chance to be in the conversation.

 

[philduckworth]

Nope, while NFL can waive, add, and trade players before, after AND during the season CFB lives with opening day rosters.

Thus the extra 17 spots. That's a bingo.

 

[mstateglfr]

The only way to achieve parity in college football would be to institute a draft system like pro football uses. That is the only way to keep the blue bloods of the collegiate world from snapping up all the best available high school talent year after year and leaving the dregs and diamonds in the rough for the rest.

I don't ever envision this happening though.

Reducing scholarships to 65 would effectively force for 20 players from each 'blue blood' to go elsewhere. That alone would help level the playing field a good bit. So no- a draft isnt the only way.

 

[Dawg1976]

I don't see much difference than 20-30 years ago. State has always played to get in the lower tier bowls. Occasionally we have a great year and got in a nice bowl like the Cotton. Recently we got in the Orange and Outback just last year. These are still possibly going forward under the same system. So I don't see where today's playoff system has kept us from doing anything any different. Now if the goal is to try and even the playing field so more could truly have a chance for a NC then yes....lower the scholarships as already mentioned and expand the playoff field. I have no problem with those suggestions.

 

[L4Dawg]

It hasn't "always been this way". There was no playoff in the past. Bowl games used to matter. Now they don't. So your post is incorrect.

Bowl games "don't matter" because the attitude toward them changed, that's why we have a playoff.