forums

Josh Pate on CFP Expansion

Advertisement
Hoyacane1620 said:



He nails it again...
Click to expand...

Pate is on point more often than not.

I feel this will eventually have to lead to a players' union and collective bargaining. The suits just want to keep adding more playoff games without offering players anything more in return and there will be a breaking point where they say "Why are we playing 15-16 games for the same thing we got for 12 games?" The problem is you start giving access to the CFP to teams who don't deserve it and have zero chance. There will be a point where a star player for one of those teams will say, "We have no chance and I'm a high draft pick, I'm opting out." Now you have watered down CFP—much like the bowls—which NOBODY will like.
 
Idk man. These "purist" takes are stupid and old to me.

Everybody was always *****ing about the previous scenarios (from the polls to BCS to 4 team playoff and now expanded playoffs) and everybody will continue to ***** about the current scenarios.

If we were still in the BCS era aka no playoff players would 100% be opting out similar to as they are now in my opinion. Maybe at a rate slightly lower than they are now because of the playoffs but definitely still trending upward at a significant clip.

It's more about the expansion of bowl games (5-7 teams are now playing in bowls), transfer portal, and NIL than it is about "playoffs." There were 25 bowl games in 2000, 35 in 2010, and 43 now. Talk about that instead of the playoffs.
 
I like Pate. But I'm ecstatic we're having a post-season playoff tournament. Everyone could argue the selection committees got the wrong 2 or 4 teams. I always wanted 8, but 12 works, too. No one can argue they got the wrong 12.

As far as bowl games go, they had meaning when the old PAC10, Big10, Southwest Conference, etc had 50 years of tradition playing their #1s and #2s against each other, and there were only 10 or so of them. They are totally worthless at this point and have been for a long time.
 
Advertisement
Games have always been meaningless in the grand scheme of things. But people had pride so it mattered to them. Coaches used to get 5 years without people calling for their jobs. Players used to stay at one school their whole career. College football, like everything else, has gotten worse bc of the times. Everyone used to not be this entitled, but now that social media and tv are so big they see the money. It’s give me mine or I’m leaving.

But the real problem started when they added 800 bowl games. Once bowl games stopped meaning something, bc everybody got to play in them, it started the postseason downward spiral. And unfortunately even if you cut bowl games down to just the big ones, players would still opt out. You can’t put that back in the bottle.

I could care less about expanding the playoff. The top teams are just gonna rout the teams that just got in. I’m ****ed that we are taking away OOC P5 matchups, for the sake of that expansion.
 
NC_Canes_11 said:
Games have always been meaningless in the grand scheme of things. But people had pride so it mattered to them. Coaches used to get 5 years without people calling for their jobs. Players used to stay at one school their whole career. College football, like everything else, has gotten worse bc of the times. Everyone used to not be this entitled, but now that social media and tv are so big they see the money. It’s give me mine or I’m leaving.

But the real problem started when they added 800 bowl games. Once bowl games stopped meaning something, bc everybody got to play in them, it started the postseason downward spiral. And unfortunately even if you cut bowl games down to just the big ones, players would still opt out. You can’t put that back in the bottle.

I could care less about expanding the playoff. The top teams are just gonna rout the teams that just got in. I’m ****ed that we are taking away OOC P5 matchups, for the sake of that expansion.
Click to expand...
A lot of truth here. It is definitely partly a cultural thing. Though I would say that the expansion of bowl games, as you mentioned, was just the same suits looking for a money grab.

I would also add that games being "meaningless" is also because we have created such a narrow scope of success. Championship or bust. Like Pate mentioned, the whole "Who is in?" campaign shaped people's minds that all that mattered was getting into the playoffs. There's now little room for winning a Rose Bowl or a Peach Bowl against a good opponent with a 10 win season and saying "That was a good year."

While they absolutely would have been crushed in the CFP, FSU did get robbed. But instead of them taking a UGA approach and playing with pride, they all sang "Poor me" and said nothing else matters. They could have tried to go undefeated, which is still a massive accomplishment, as it was for UCF (that doesn't mean they can claim to be champs).
 
CreativeCane said:
A lot of truth here. It is definitely partly a cultural thing. Though I would say that the expansion of bowl games, as you mentioned, was just the same suits looking for a money grab.

I would also add that games being "meaningless" is also because we have created such a narrow scope of success. Championship or bust. Like Pate mentioned, the whole "Who is in?" campaign shaped people's minds that all that mattered was getting into the playoffs. There's now little room for winning a Rose Bowl or a Peach Bowl against a good opponent with a 10 win season and saying "That was a good year."

While they absolutely would have been crushed in the CFP, FSU did get robbed. But instead of them taking a UGA approach and playing with pride, they all sang "Poor me" and said nothing else matters. They could have tried to go undefeated, which is still a massive accomplishment, as it was for UCF (that doesn't mean they can claim to be champs).
Click to expand...
The transfer portal and the new “Champ or bust” mentality is what ruined FSU. Also they had a real stake in preserving last season as a real stepping stone of “being back.” So they played that “poor us” narrative to the max. Everybody outside of their delusional fan base knew, they would’ve gotten smacked by UGA at full strength. It would’ve been a narrative killer.

And as I pointed out when that happened, it’s a culture issue within teams as well. Bryce and Anderson played against KSU for Bama in a “meaningless” NY6 game.
 
Gi0logy said:
Idk man. These "purist" takes are stupid and old to me.

Everybody was always *****ing about the previous scenarios (from the polls to BCS to 4 team playoff and now expanded playoffs) and everybody will continue to ***** about the current scenarios.

If we were still in the BCS era aka no playoff players would 100% be opting out similar to as they are now in my opinion. Maybe at a rate slightly lower than they are now because of the playoffs but definitely still trending upward at a significant clip.

It's more about the expansion of bowl games (5-7 teams are now playing in bowls), transfer portal, and NIL than it is about "playoffs." There were 25 bowl games in 2000, 35 in 2010, and 43 now. Talk about that instead of the playoffs.
Click to expand...
Your last sentence is 100 truth.
While I’m old enough to know that there was only 15 bowl games back in 1980 (Roughly top 20 plus some additional teams). Now there is a bowl for the vast majority of teams. The bowl games are a continuation of the participant trophy phase that starts with youth sports. No meaning = no more playing by stars of those sucky teams.

Make the games meaningful again by only allowing the deserving teams in.

If you have top 16 teams in a playoff, you should only have bowl games for G5 teams and below that won more than 8 games a year.
 
Advertisement
The biggest problem with the expanded playoffs is the clear gap in talent among a handful of teams capable of winning a national championship and the remainder of D1 college football. Scholarships and rosters need to be reduced if fans want more balance in college football. Perhaps from 85 to 75? That would spread 10 players per team among D1 teams. This could reduce portal transfers because there’s few spots per team. Could also improve the quality of G5 football as players have to go somewhere.

Fans complaining of making the regular season meaningless by adding more playoff teams should ask how meaningful is a season to any team when as soon as they have two losses they’re done? The rest of their season is meaningless. 5-2? Go home. Maybe the team rebounds, finishes 10-3 and bowl win. Good job, IMO. Today? A fail in many fans eyes.

I have no problem with the scenario a team starts off with a loss or two by mid October, but rebounds and goes in a run. Perhaps will be just the same usual top 10-12 teams we have now, but at least the season isn’t over as quickly as it may have started.

How many teams would’ve beaten the 1990 Miami Hurricanes at the end of the season? We started off with a bad loss at BYU and a midseason loss at Notre Dame, but that team could’ve rolled a national championship in the current expanded playoff format. Nobody on this board would have complained.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top