Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Comments
Participation trophies for everyone…more money for the conference coffers.
Offering an opposing POV is whining?
Yeah we're all very well aware that the corporate interests are going to win out. The sport that we all grew up loving will become less and less recognizable in service of those who never cared about it. That's what makes comments supporting the changes so obnoxious.
I have no problem with a different POV, but the arguments for NOT expanding to 16 or 24 teams make little sense to me. When you already have an 128-team FCS playing a 24-team playoff - SUCCESSFULLY - and have been doing it for 13 years now (before that it was 16 teams).
How do you realistically argue against it with any solid argument ??? People don't like change. I get that, but c'mon, what's the big deal.
Are you telling me the FCS conferences regular season games don't mean as much as the FBS regular season games?
That's BS, and we all know it.
People make it sound like the FBS is just such a higher level field of football than any other group and should operate under different rules. I just don't get it. The FCS playoffs may be watched by less overall fans, but you can't tell me their fans aren't as rabid, passionate, and hungry as any FBS fan base. I know, because I have attended both Griz and Cat games, and they were crazy loud, sold out, and always a blast.
People are fighting a system that has already been proven elsewhere, and we all know it's a losing argument with little real merit. You can work out all the new contracts and all the details, but the bottom line is this will bring different and better matchups, more money, and ultimately more people watching. That has already been proven with the 12-team CFP. More people are watching the playoffs now than ever.
24 is too much with teams included that have no shot. Meanwhile a family of 4 pays through the nose with unrealistic expectations to advance. Who do you thinks ultimately wins?? Lol
This may not be a popular topic on this board, but I have to say I really enjoyed watching Erk Russell and his Eagles blow the doors off of teams in the old 1-AA 16 team playoff format back in the mid/late 80s. That format lasted a long time. Thinking back to recent years, there is always a lot of consternation involving a few deserving 3 or 2 loss teams, and having a 16 team format would have helped. Of course, I get that there will always be some debate over the last few in, but at some point, any seriousness regarding those teams ability to actually win a title gets lost. Does that happen at #13 - #16? Maybe, as we saw Miami nearly pull it off after being on the bubble last year. I do think we can nearly always say that #17+ are not serious threats to win it all, so it seems like 16 teams may be the sweet spot with anything beyond that just watering down the system.
One question related to your 24 team fcs pov…2013 they went to 24 teams, since then how many championships have been won by the 17th to 24th seed? I think the last unseeded team to win was Richmond in 2008 but seems like the top seeds have dominated since the latest expansion…
it’s a participation trophy for some schools. The ACC and Big 12 will now get 3 teams each. With the SEC/B1G getting 7 each. Throw in ND, and 3 group of 6 - that’s your 24 most years. That’s at least 7 or 8 teams that statically shouldn’t be in a playoff. Sure, they could win a game. But win it all?
That's all you got?
Sounds like whining to me.
The national champions in a 24 game plan would play an 18 game season. That's an NFL season.
Football injury risk rises with exposure. More games mean more live-contact snaps, more fatigue, and less recovery time.
A championship-caliber roster might use roughly 55–70 players in a postseason game. If the game injury rate is around the commonly reported college-football competition range of roughly 30–40 injuries per 1,000 athlete-exposures, then each additional playoff game could statistically produce about:
- 2–3 additional reportable injuries per team per game
Over the 5 additional CFP games, the champions should expect 10-15 additional injuries over the post-season play.
Assume those injuries are more common to the better players because they get more snaps.
A 24-team FBS playoff probably does not just add “one more fun round.” For the champion, it could mean an 18-game season and several additional injuries or degraded players by the title game.
I can see the top RBs opting out. I can see some top QBs opting out. Even a kicker. Agents are going to explain in graphic detail their worst case scenarios. Have you ever seen a photo of a compound femur fracture? I see your 24 plan becoming flag football to keep elite player participation.
Further, the FCS had 4 players drafted, FBS had 253. The stakes for FBS player health are higher.
You can make a case for a 16 team playoff with no byes but 24 is not worth the added risk.
It's all about the money and they could care less about the student athlete. I feel sorry for the UGA players who have to endure that many games not to mention the vigorousness practices! How many times have we heard the players say the practices are harder than the games? Kirby may have to rethink his practice regimen.
@DawgfromILM wrote “The national champions in a 24 game plan would play an 18 game season. That's an NFL season.
Football injury risk rises with exposure. More games mean more live-contact snaps, more fatigue, and less recovery time.
A championship-caliber roster might use roughly 55–70…”
If college semi-pro players expect to get paid like NFL players then why shouldn’t they take on the same risks? To your point, NFL teams deal with up to 22 games a year with a roster of 55, semi-pro college rosters are in excess of a 100. Want the benefits of pay to play? Then take on the risks as well…equality for all.
The first thing DeBoer did at Bama was dial down the intensity of Saban’s S&C and vigorous practice sessions, the results are showing up on the field, Bama players are getting pushed around much easier these days and their stamina late in games is revealing. Be careful what you ask for…
Fine. If college football wants NFL-length seasons, then give the players NFL-grade protections.
That means collective bargaining, long-term medical coverage, disability protection, revenue sharing, and Lloyd’s of London-quality insurance against career-ending injuries and loss of future earnings.
Until then, calling them “semi-pro” is just a convenient way to demand professional risk without providing professional protection.
Or…play for an all expenses paid trip to a college degree, honor your commitment, be loyal to your teammates and play a 12/13 game schedule as the amateur athlete that you still are at age 18…
Last I checked, elite athletes with smart agents negotiate med/disability/insurance without the need for collective bargaining…ain't life grand. AND, they can quit and go somewhere else without penalty if they feel like it. What a wonderful system…so forgive me if I don't feel bad for these kids playing 18 games for my meager enjoyment…
Only the elite draft-class players — the likely first-, second-, maybe third-rounders — are realistically covered by Lloyd’s-type loss-of-income insurance. The 85 scholarship players, much less the 100-plus-man roster, are not broadly protected that way.