(03-04-2018 02:33 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-04-2018 02:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 12:55 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 07:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2018 08:36 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  We have 10 FBS conference champions. Not hard to manage a playoff. 130 teams will not be going to a playoff.

Part of the reason there is disparity is because quality players know that they have to go to a certain few P5's in order to have a shot at a championship.

If all conferences had an equal shot at a playoff slot by their own performance, then some players who now sit on the bench at LSU would instead choose to play every down and be playoff-bound champions at Rice or Louisiana or Arkansas State.

This would improve the performance of G5 conferences and lessen your complaints of a quality difference.

If a quality difference remains it can be handled like all other sports with playoffs....by seeding them lower.

With the increased quality, P5 fans would have less complaint about meaningless home cupcake games that are not competitive or relevant.

With increased competitiveness and playoff spots on the line, all FBS conferences would see increased attendance and interest.

Over time more programs would rise and fall rather than the stagnant repetitive list of 15 or so schools that have a legit chance at a national championship.

What I've described is how a normal healthy sports league behaves.

The fact that there is a persistent disparity in your sports league is not an argument for continuing that disparity...or for creating more disparity.

College football fans are odd in their defense of such an unsporting system. Its like brainwashing.

Wow ...

1) What makes you think college football isn't a healthy sport? It brings in far more money than college basketball, even though hoops is run by the 'rational' system you prefer.

E.g., compare NBA to NFL. Top NFL franchise is worth $4.2B, top NBA team is worth $3B. College? Top college football program is worth $1.5B, top college hoops program is worth $346m, a much larger disparity.

There's zero evidence that college football is an unhealthy sport, it is making more money than ever.

2) As explained, there's no rational reason to give (for example) the Sun Belt champion an auto-bid in the playoffs when we know that on average, most years, there will be several P5 teams that didn't win their conference that are clearly better. It would be irrational, in the sense of having a system that is best able to determine who is truly best, to have a system that guarantees G5 conference champ bids but leaves P5 non-champs out.

That's not the case in the NFL, NBA, NHL, etc. where yes, in a given year, the NFC East might be better than the AFC West, but over time, it clearly is all even.

And that's because of the nature of the 'leagues'. The NFL is a true league, in that the members themselves tightly control who can be in the league and the standards they have to meet. No city can throw together a football team and then declare to the NFL "Here we are! We got a football team, so you have to let us play with you and compete for the Super Bowl just like the Cowboys"!

But that's FBS. In FBS, a school can self-select to join that "league" by meeting very low attendance and scholarship standards set by the NCAA. That is irrational, no professional league would do that. FBS isn't a 'league' in any rational sense of the term. It's always been just an NCAA category to distinguish schools that want to play bowl games rather than participate in NCAA organized playoffs.

So there's nothing "unsporting" about the current system. It fits the financial and rational realities of college football, and the vast majority of college football fans know this.

#2

No rational reason except all division/conference champions should be given a playoff spot before all wild cards. Using your logic, the AFC South has been a terrible divisions for years now. Take away it's automatic bid to the NFL playoffs because it's clearly inferior to the AFC North and NFC West. Same for the western conference versus the eastern conference of the NBA.

You see how ridiculous that is? I'm assuming not because the same automated response is coming I presume. Again, in college basketball, the same inequality you speak of exists, yet they find a way to make sure each conference champion gets a bid, even if some are eliminated before the second full round.

College hoops is different, for two reasons. First, the culture of hoops has always been based on an expansive, inclusive tournament. The culture of college football never has been.

Second, by the nature of the sport, hoops can have a huge, 68-team tournament that lets everyone in. They don't have to face the either/or of a Sun Belt champ vs a B1G runner-up, because there is space for both.

Football can't have that, so choices have to be made. And since the ACC runner-up is almost always better than the Sun Belt champ, it is irrational to give the Sun Belt champ an auto-bid and leave the ACC runner-up out. That would *hurt* our ability to derive the best team, not help.

And your NFL example to support your claim is bad, because even if the AFC South is worse than the AFC North for 10 straight years, that's still just by chance, it's not structurally true, and we know the day will come when the AFC South is better. It's like the Patriots have been better than the Dolphins for 17 years now. Still, we know that when Brady and Belichik finally retire, the Fins may very well be better than the Patriots again, as they have in the past. Fundamentally, despite 17 years of Patriots dominance, they are equal.

That's not true of the Sun Belt vs the ACC. The ACC is structurally better than the Sun Belt, it ALWAYS is, without exception. They are categorically unequal, and a system that pretends they are equal is irrational.

Umm, why can't football have that? Why is it irrational? The ACC runner-up had their shot. Make sure you have enough at-large space for the ACC runner up if they're good enough. Problem solved.

And why do we just assume they're better?

We can't have a 68-team football tourney because football teams can't play every two days like basketball teams can.

As for "why do we assume ... " for an 8 team playoff, assuming the ACC runner-up is better than the Sun Belt champ isn't an ideal situation, any more than assuming that the ACC runner-up is better than the FCS or D2 champ is. Ideally, all would be in the playoffs.

But since they can't be, we have to make a choice, and it's more likely that the ACC runner-up is better than the SB champ. So it makes no sense to give the SB champ an auto-bid if that keeps the ACC #2 out.