The National Championship in College Football has become Boring

Submitted by WalterWhite_88 on December 19th, 2020 at 6:55 PM

Perhaps others feel this way, but year after year, it's always Clemson and Alabama way ahead of everyone else, with a couple exceptions. And the semifinals are usually boring blowouts because Clemson and Alabama are just so much better (once again, with a few exceptions). It's just boring. An 8 team playoff would be good to implement in order to at least give some other teams some excitement in the quarterfinal round before inevitably losing to Bama/Clemson. 

 

Anyway, perhaps once players start getting NIL money, it will help to even the playing field. We can only hope.

MGoBoard
Football

Hail to the Vi…

December 19th, 2020 at 9:18 PM ^

Interesting anecdote I found that supports the "give some teams a shot" argument:

Since the CFB has been established in 2014, 9 teams have made the playoff: Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Washington, Georgia, Oklahoma, Florida State, Michigan State, LSU

Over that same time period, 18 teams have made the NCAA Final Four. I could list them all, but the point is expanding the playoff doesn't necessarily lead to lambs being lead to the slaughter.

I think most would agree, on the aggregate in today's college basketball landscape, Duke, Kentucky are UNC, Kansas are the best recruiting programs in America. They account for 6/20 Final Four seeds. Under those same constraints, Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Georgia have accounted for 14/20 available seeds.

This is not to say that an exact analogy between college football and college basketball should be made, after all these are different sports with completely different dynamics across their respective landscape.

Still I think the greater point this demonstrates is over time with an expanded CFP bracket, as recruits begin to observe you can compete for championships without committing to the same 3-5ish programs, you begin to distribute the talent more equitably across college football which makes for a more compelling and competitive championship tournament. Rather than basically re-watching the same season over, and over, and over with just some variation in the minor details of the season.

Joined: 09/13/2010

MGoPoints: 12888

WolverineMan1988

December 20th, 2020 at 1:05 AM ^

I’m very much in favor of a 16 team playoff and have been for a couple of years.

1. Gives more teams something to play for deep into the season

2. Would create an excitement level across all of college football instead of just 6-8 fanbases every year. The VAST majority of teams start the year knowing they have absolutely no chance to even compete for a title.

3. It might take several years, but it could potentially help talent spread out more if kids knew they didn’t have to be on a top 4 team to compete for a national title

4. Group of five teams would get their shot

5. The matchups would be incredibly fun to watch

 

Joined: 09/26/2017

MGoPoints: 5215

MinWhisky

December 20th, 2020 at 10:15 AM ^

I firmly believe in a return to the "old" bowl system.  Instead of one "winner" with the rest losers, you have a couple of dozen winners with a big debate about who is #1.  That's entertaining in and of itself.   It would also rejuvenate traditional inter-conference rivalries.  If tv revenue is the objective, I think the old system would do just fine, but I have no way of proving that.

Joined: 10/17/2011

MGoPoints: 1261

stephenrjking

December 19th, 2020 at 7:46 PM ^

I think it could increase variability, though. Even if they're still the cream (for now, and things change), more slots in the playoff means more top teams getting in, which will attract recruits to more places. 

Right now the rich are getting richer. Guys want to go to OSU and Bama and Clemson because guys who go to OSU and Bama and Clemson win titles and go to the NFL. People argue "but cheating!," but Ole Miss and Tennessee and Texas cheat too and they're not getting the same classes. A big reason for the imbalance is that there is an "elite" in cfb and the club only has room for about five or six teams because that's the only number that can make the playoff with any consistency. 

It's hard for me to separate my subjective position as a fan of a team that is not part of this elite with my objective position as a college football fan. My fandom is diminishing in some ways. But how much of that is because Michigan is bad? It's not like the BCS was a great option, either. And people who long for the days of tie-in bowls with a mythical national champion don't remember what it was like to be a fan back then. 

And I'm a guy who has long been a huge proponent of preserving the every-game-matters nature of the regular season. But if we have no chance, does it really matter?

The reality is that I as a Michigan fan am in roughly the same position as, say, a Royals fan in 2001 lamenting that the Yankees and the Red Sox have all the money and get all the good players. It was imbalanced. It wasn't good for the game. What do you do?

No salary caps in college football. No draft. It's hard to see how this changes. Expanding the playoff at least inserts the possibility of randomness, the occasional surprise result. We don't have that right now. Maybe it's worth a shot. 

Joined: 03/15/2012

MGoPoints: 20143910

Nobody Likes a…

December 19th, 2020 at 7:02 PM ^

I remember reading a piece years ago that said the BCS took away some of the magic of college football. It made it too much like the professional game and argued that every step that way devalues the sport. It sounds right to me but I was still a teenager when the bcs came into play, so my ability to compare isn't great.

For me the thing I love about college athletics is the weird wonkiness of it, the ability to produce a completely unexpected random result and right now that seems less like a thing in the p5

Joined: 09/20/2013

MGoPoints: 11813

mooseman

December 19th, 2020 at 7:20 PM ^

I'm of this school (then again I'm old).

Winning your conference used to be the pinnacle. Trip to the bowl was the reward (you got some extra practice, another game and got to eat beef at Lawrys). The bowl results of the bowl were kind of secondary. I don't ever remember thinking about a "National Champion".

Certainly winning the conference has been devalued. It's playoff or bust.

I liked the old way. Then again, if Michigan's suckitude hadn't corresponded with this evolution maybe I'd feel differently.

Joined: 07/10/2008

MGoPoints: 35512

Wolverine 73

December 19th, 2020 at 7:44 PM ^

The best part about the old system was it resulted in talent being more spread out. Now, if you are a hotshot recruit and want to be in the playoffs, you know Alabama or Clemson guarantee that.  Without the playoffs, there was less of a recruiting advantage to the yearly participants.  And that made for more upsets, and arguments about who was best when all the bowl games were played.  What difference did it make if there was no clear no. 1?  

Joined: 08/03/2009

MGoPoints: 27248

maizenbluenc

December 19th, 2020 at 8:19 PM ^

Meh - I disagree with you. The switch to BCS and then to the 4 team playoff has ruined the tradition and glory of the bowl season, and caused concentrated flocking.

To me it was obvious in the old bowl system that you were left with two, maybe three teams, that you wished could play one more game, and (it was BCS then yes, but think USC vs Flordia after the 2006 season - or even Michigan vs Nebraska after the 1997 season). For that reason I think ideas like this one: Forget Expansion, here's the best way to change the College Football Playoff format bring back some of the tradition and thrills, while resolving the abiguity after New Years day.

Joined: 07/21/2009

MGoPoints: 10630

BassDude138

December 19th, 2020 at 7:04 PM ^

Clemson and Oklahoma have each won 6 straight conference championships. OSU has won 5 in a row. Alabama has won 4 of the last 6, and one of the years they lost, they still won the National Championship. I don't see any sign of change anytime soon.

Joined: 03/01/2016

MGoPoints: 3977

Qmatic

December 19th, 2020 at 7:29 PM ^

And Oklahoma has struggled big time in the playoffs. Aside from the year they had Baker and lost in OT to Georgia, they haven’t been able to keep up. ND, MSU, Washington all got popped in the semis. OSU has lost the last two times. 

From this point on it’ll take a once in a generation team like LSU to derail the Bama Clemson dynasty. To think they beat both teams is quite impressive. 

In saying that though, the 2019, 17, and 16 Finals have been top notch.

Joined: 01/09/2013

MGoPoints: 32780

Catchafire

December 19th, 2020 at 7:05 PM ^

This year is probably by far the worst.  Teams such as Cincinnati are being left out when. They are undefeated.  It is too limiting. In general, the cfp is hurting cfb on a whole.

Joined: 09/30/2009

MGoPoints: 27956

The Deer Hunter

December 19th, 2020 at 9:33 PM ^

+1 I seriously think Cincinnati could take down OSU.

Not saying it would happen but we'll never know because of the CFB model. It's damn shame for a fan and fucking bullshit for the athletes. The NCAA is desperately grasping for control and pandering to their cash cows, but I believe it will be coming to an end very soon. 

Joined: 05/21/2020

MGoPoints: 3503

Yeoman

December 19th, 2020 at 11:06 PM ^

Of course there are undefeated G5 teams this year; the nonconference schedule was gutted. Cincinnati hasn't beaten anyone in the top 40 at Massey all year, and no one they played has beaten anyone in the top 40.

I'm a little worried they'll get in, get absolutely curbstomped, and it'll make it even harder for some more worthy G5 team to get in in the future (somebody like '08 Utah, or the best Boise or TCU teams). Cincinnati's a mirage.

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21390