I'd love to see a playoff of teams that think they were robbed of a playoff spot. It would be hysterical. Sit back and grab some popcorn as you watch SUC go down to Vanderbilt. Watch with glee as BYU shuts up Notre Dame. Fire up the BBQ as Texas finds a way to blow it against ACC champs Duke.

By the time the dust finally settles only one team will have a legitimate complaint. The rest will be searching in the excuse drawer to find the perfect reason why they were robbed and if just a couple plays were different, they'd be national champions.

The reality is that championship games need to go away and that weekend should just be play in games... put some of those teams against each other and see who is actually worthy of those final spots.

10 hours ago, David Marsh said:

The reality is that championship games need to go away and that weekend should just be play in games... put some of those teams against each other and see who is actually worthy of those final spots.

I do believe all the "outrage" is to strongarm the NFL-lite participants into accepting "terms" they might not necessarily want or agree with. IE: eight to nine conference games for SEC/ACC. Push for automatic qualifiers for top two mega-conferences. The continued dilution of the importance of the conference championship games. The bottom falling out of the mass amounts of "bowl games" that play to mostly empty stadiums with "depleted" rosters from opt outs. The narrative to include other (Western state) "bowls" via Vegas/SOFI stadium to even out playoff travel during an ever expanding playoff qualifiers size. And the one, thorny, money-centric, issue of a supposedly annual championship contender, NOT playing in a conference with a somewhat equal number of home/away games, instead of the "pick and choose" scheduling allowing up to 9 home games to be played as an independent. Yeah, the Entire NFL-lite be looking, Hard, at you Notre Dame!

Basically it is easier to piss off and inconvenience people into accepting your... intentions...if you let the unfairness run it's course till the peoples, organizations, fans, and money brokers (Oh Wait! The money brokers are actually the ones "breaking it to fix it" according to the business plans they want in place, sorry) are screaming for the change that was wanted initially in the first place by the powers that be.

In the end it will become what is wanted and needed to continue to pimp and grow the NFL-lite model envisioned.

As long as OBD is competing annually in whatever iteration of NFL-lite playoffs, I be a Happy Man!

Go Ducks! 🦆

1 hour ago, MicroBurst61 said:

IE: eight to nine conference games for SEC/ACC.

I mean the SEC probably got one more team into the playoff because they only play 8 conference games.

Just think... if USC did NOT play Oregon they would be right in the thick of the discussion whether they are in or out but that loss to Oregon was the kiss of death to them.

You could say the same thing about Michigan if they didn't play USC this year. They lost an OOC game to Oklahoma and then they will play Ohio State every year no matter what... but what if USC wasn't on their schedule? That's two losses and right in the thick of the discussion.

The B1G having 9 conference games this year has eliminated one of our teams from the playoff potentially... well probably not because Michigan and USC haven't looked THAT good.

And it's not even really about 8 or 9 conference games but more about the scheduling format the conferences use. The BIG set up a format that ensures all 18 teams play each other home and away every 5 years. Some schedules may be more daunting than others any given year but the overall effect is equality.

The SEC doesn't come close to this concept and instead goes to great length to avoid top tier match ups. I believe one of our SEC friends recently posted some outrageous facts about how few match ups certain teams have had in the last several years, You shouldn't be able to both avoid the top teams in your conference AND get credit for playing in a tough conference.

Iowa had several close losses to several top twenty teams and are an after thought but many top SEC teams avoided most of each other. How do we know Iowa wouldn't be a playoff team with an SEC schedule?

I think a component of conference tie breakers should be the conference winning percentage of the teams you beat followed by teams you lost to.

Great Take! At first, I thought you were referring to this season's Pin Strip Bowl in the Bronx.

I'm sure Dabo's guys can't wait to take a trip up north in December. 😶‍🌫️ And what a great season for the Nits! Going 6-6 and qualifying for a bowl game. 🤪

Clemson vs Penn State is the AP Voters' Delusion Bowl, no doubt. And Voters, how about Archie getting Horny and Cheesy vs. Michigan?

Serious Note - I was happy to see that Matt Campbell is keeping interim PSU head coach, Terry Smith, on the staff.

It's like the NCAA tournament in basketball. You have 68 teams, or whatever the number is now. Yet on selection Sunday, you have people moaning and complaining.

The playoff could go to 24, 36, or 64 in football, and you'd still get complaining. There would be complaints about who got home games, who got the hardest path, or why you had too many rematches.

It's true that you could give a person a hundred million dollars, and they'd complain about it being taxed.

Since everyone is hellbent on not getting to the final playoffs solution all at once, you have to embrace the process (started with the BCS Championship game decades ago) to get where this need to go. We're still in the process, it's just where we are at.

So many people in positions of authority lacking vision and weighed down with too many conflicts of interest from the status quo, so we're gonna do this the hard way until the bitter last needed change.

Last year was Oregon's turn to be shafted, this year is ND's turn and so on and so forth.

Trust the process, lol it will still get us there eventually!

Edited 13 hours ago13 hr by Solar

16 hours ago, The Kamikaze Kid said:

I'd love to see a playoff of teams that think they were robbed of a playoff spot

If basketball can support an NIT, why not football? If nothing else, it would make for a bunch of very happy cities that might otherwise be cut out of their traditional, year-end economic celebrations.

Could even keep the NIT acronym: Next In-line Tournament?

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by Washington Waddler
grammar, spelling

1 hour ago, Washington Waddler said:

If basketball can support an NIT, why not football? If nothing else, it would make for a bunch of very happy cities that might otherwise be cut out of their traditional, year-end economic celebrations.

I've been a big proponent of this idea. I think a 16 team playoff with a 16 team NIT would be a win win for everybody. Throw in economic incentives round by round and the players could stay motivated and the teams and fans get much more than a mere Tatter Tot Bowl invite.

13 hours ago, The Kamikaze Kid said:

The SEC doesn't come close to this concept and instead goes to great length to avoid top tier match ups

Iron sharpens iron. Rather than improving the SEC’s top tier teams chances for success, avoidance often diminishes the over all ability to meet challenges.

Notre Dame did NOT get shafted. They weren’t even in the top 8(2 full rounds of playoff teams). Only 2 teams ended the regular season 12-0. They played each other and Indiana won. If you lose a game then you have no gripe when other teams don’t lose games. If they don’t like it then join a conference and you are guaranteed a shot to get in. Aaaaaaaaaall a-Nother Lame teams fault.