Are they better? The bowl games were absolutely better pre playoff and I'd venture to guess margin of victory was lower pre-expansion
because why watch a 32 team NFL feeder system when you could just watch a superior product in the NFL
Trying to claim 3 more regular season games that would be in conference are the same as bowl games is real dumb
that's just the difference between fans like you and me who love(d) college football for its weird quirks, wild characters, and compelling rivalries vs people who root for a team because they win a lot
In conference doesn't necessarily mean better. If you expand to 20+ there's going to be a ton of shitty games added to the schedule
also notice that most people clamoring for a super league seem to not have diplomas from these schools and therefore already treat it like some abstract thing anyway
Me too and that’s what super conferences do. No one is going stop playing those games without being forced because they are afraid if they do that they’ll be at a massive competitive disadvantage because their competitors won’t(true). 12 game season of all power 4 teams would be awesome. Throw the smaller regional schools a bone and make spring games a pre season type thing where you play a smaller regional school. Gets the smaller school some money and the bigs schools another pseudo home game.
I personally would rather have no playoff and go back to the BCS, but it’s here and the money is in more big matchups and it’s trending to that so might as well try and get a seat at the table CFB has been on a steady decline since the introduction of the playoff and I see that continuing, unfortunately.
I'm ok with the playoff, but would prefer a BCS* style seeding instead of the silly playoff committee *Assuming the formula makes sense and isn't some BS ESPN style ranking
Yeah but where else are we going to list out every possible scenario, regardless of how stupid it is?
The 4 team playoff was the worst system we’ve had, including voters deciding champions. I’m just hoping it wasn’t around long enough to completely kill the sport. I have some hope for the 12 team that it introduces a little more parity of teams at the top, but not much hope at this point and think we may be too far gone.
I don't know if I necessarily disagree but is this a subjective opinion or is there data to support that? The SEC is being dominated by Bama, partially because Bama is really good but also because there hasn't been a really good coach in the conference other than Saban since Urban left. The Big Ten is kind of the same story but with OSU and the ACC with Clemson. The second tier teams don't have any less resources than the top tier teams and there are good coaches out there, I think it's just a perfect storm that has led to a lot of contenders being down for longer than normal.
I can assure you, sir, that if Arkansas is in this 32-team conference there will still be -58 spreads vs Alabama.
I don’t necessarily have the data, but someone said awhile back we’ve had the least number of champions over the last decade than ever and the number of contenders seems to be dwindling as we have gone on in the playoff era. The dominant programs have always existed in cfb, but there have always been rises and falls with powers. Maybe recency bias but seems like we are in the longest sustained rises for the super teams, though maybe that is also a product of the hyper focus of the playoff now. I long for seasons like 2007 and frankly I can’t ever envision a scenario that happens ever again.
Imo parity is the biggest threat to cfb, outside of the sec the sport is losing a shit ton of fans from that group of historic top15 ish programs(Nebraska, Washington,usc, Michigan, psu etc.).
Like who? If the SEC added Ohio St/Texas/Oklahoma /Clemson/FSU/Michigan... Auburn dropping Alabama St, Troy and Arkansas St, and adding them or other SEC teams we aren't playing... How could that mean shitty games vs the current??
Don't put this on Bama. It's the rest of the SEC. Saban has been begging for 9 conference games for the past decade and we've got 2 p5 ooc opponents on the schedule starting in the next year or two I believe
I don't think you can legislate parity and if you could, I don't know that it would be a good option.
I wonder how this will play out. The old conferences were a significant part of cheering for your team. You had ~3 solid rivals and played most of the teams in your conference. It was part of your team's identity. Also if you're a middle of the pack team, you can still say you're the 5th best team in the SEC, which means something. What if you're the 10th best team in a super conference? Will that motivate fans to stay engaged?
I realize I'm likely very much in the minority on this among the board, but part of the fun of CFB to me is watching an Auburn/UMass game in September where Auburn's only up 10-7 early in the 2nd half. You know they're going to end up winning 38-7, but there's like 10 minutes where you can imagine an earth-shattering upset. If I wanted to watch 32 stacked teams, I'd just put 100% of my football watching in the NFL column.
You add those 4. They each have to play 12 games. Yea you might get a couple good games, but you're going to have a ton of games like OSU vs Vandy, USC, etc
bill connelly had some crazy stat that in the 1980s the number 1 ranked team lost like 20+ times to an unranked team and that it hasn’t happened since 2008
Haven’t we also had like 4 or 5 of the best teams ever within the last like 10 years? Something really insane which just goes to show the consolidation of power and lack of parity over the last decade the playoff has helped usher in. That could also be a product of Saban’s dominance to a degree as well, though.
You still have Vandy, Kentucky, the Mississippi schools, and Tennessee. There are still shitty games aplenty
Scholarship limits were the only real attempt to legislate parity, 85 per team. Pittsburgh’s 1976 national title team originally was a 76 member class of recruits in 1973.
Yeah, there is a bad team or 3 in the conf, but USCe is typically better than Mercer so there will be better competition. Every game is better than Mercer
and they’d get worse in this construct imagine the NFL, with no draft and free agency where the best teams are given a higher salary cap and constantly have room for the best available players as someone who doesn’t really give a shit if Duke football is good or bad but still follows them, I can’t imagine watching us try to compete in that league ——“don’t worry you’re not even invited shield”——-
Yeah, but all of those teams are better than Mercer and Troy and can be OK ish with a random pretty good year. Hypothetically, They are adding Michigan who is essentially Tennessee level. I'd much rather watch Alabama Michigan than Alabama Troy. Plus we are already playing those shitty teams and adding much better teams whom are replacing 3 shit cupcakes. It's a net better games for everyone playing an all conference slate. Or 11 games plus 1 P5