Re: CFB Playoff rankings

by AvgMSUJoe Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 14:53

PennSpartan wrote:
Cameron wrote:The only thing I need help understanding is how one can be so stupid and so smarmy at the same time.
I’ll mark you down as saying the NFL is stupid.

So, a single national conference in a semi-round Robin regular season to seat a single game tournament?

I agree... without the single national conference. We would have to take the Champs of the conference and the other "best" teams to have a tournament.

by **Cameron** Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 14:57

PennSpartan wrote:
Cameron wrote:The only thing I need help understanding is how one can be so stupid and so smarmy at the same time.
I’ll mark you down as saying the NFL is stupid.

CFB Playoff rankings - Page 7 200.gif?cid=ddb306a56mis9dow7nis861jkkg1hwr6uc72l6mn5l27oszc&rid=200

by PennSpartan Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 15:00

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
PennSpartan wrote:
I’ll mark you down as saying the NFL is stupid.
So, a single national conference in a semi-round Robin regular season to seat a single game tournament?

I agree... without the single national conference. We would have to take the Champs of the conference and the other "best" teams to have a tournament.

No. Four conference champions.

by AvgMSUJoe Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 15:07

PennSpartan wrote:
AvgMSUJoe wrote:
So, a single national conference in a semi-round Robin regular season to seat a single game tournament?

I agree... without the single national conference. We would have to take the Champs of the conference and the other "best" teams to have a tournament.
No. Four conference champions.

Like the NFL???

by PennSpartan Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 15:09

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
PennSpartan wrote:
No. Four conference champions.
Like the NFL???

Well, the NFL only has two conferences. So apparently not.

by AvgMSUJoe Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 15:10

PennSpartan wrote:
AvgMSUJoe wrote:
Like the NFL???
Well, the NFL only has two conferences. So apparently not.

And a wild card weekend... remember that?

by PennSpartan Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 15:13

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
PennSpartan wrote:
Well, the NFL only has two conferences. So apparently not.
And a wild card weekend... remember that?

If you can’t understand the concept, I can’t help you dude. Enjoy the SEC…I mean CFP Championship Game.

by AvgMSUJoe Sun 2 Jan 2022 - 15:18

I didn't bring up the nfl.

by **kingstonlake** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 8:01

PennSpartan wrote:
AvgMSUJoe wrote:
And a wild card weekend... remember that?
If you can’t understand the concept, I can’t help you dude. Enjoy the SEC…I mean CFP Championship Game.

I’ll be watching.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 8:36

gomersbro wrote:
MSU addict wrote:
2 teams is better than 0
4 is better than 2
8 is better than 4

No, Maybe, No

The idea we must name a "National Champion" is just bullshit. The beauty of college football was that there was discussion. People could have legit arguments about 1997 Nebraska/Michigan or 1990 Colorado/Georgia Tech--okay maybe not the former. How many people remember any of the other New Years Six bowls since the playoffs expanded? We have several posters in this tread that admitted they can't recall who was even in these games. Before it was classic must see TV, we knew who the Orange, Cotton, Sugar and of course Rose Bowl would have because it was tied to conferences. There was pride tied to these and we knew which one was "better".

Adding more teams is NOT the solution. With expanded playoffs it is LESS likely that the best team will win it. Look at baseball, how many wild card teams win it now. They are talking about expanding that, and soon we will have a 0.500 baseball team win the World Series. It just devalues everything. Even in the NFL, the best team is not the Super Bowl champs.

I do not know if it is because I am older or the result of the playoff, but my interest in the sport outside MSU is way down. The idea of further expansion of the playoffs to be a major turnoff. Going back to the idea of 1990, the causal viewer watched BOTH the Orange and the Citrus bowls because they wanted to see the national champion and decide for themselves. So I don't see how expanded playoffs increases TV viewership.

This.

Before the "championship game" era there was way more interest in all of the bowls.

You are trading off a definitive "national championship" for what is fun about college football.

If you want a definitive national champion watch the NFL.

by **kingstonlake** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 8:39

Trapper Gus wrote:
gomersbro wrote:

No, Maybe, No

The idea we must name a "National Champion" is just bullshit. The beauty of college football was that there was discussion. People could have legit arguments about 1997 Nebraska/Michigan or 1990 Colorado/Georgia Tech--okay maybe not the former. How many people remember any of the other New Years Six bowls since the playoffs expanded? We have several posters in this tread that admitted they can't recall who was even in these games. Before it was classic must see TV, we knew who the Orange, Cotton, Sugar and of course Rose Bowl would have because it was tied to conferences. There was pride tied to these and we knew which one was "better".

Adding more teams is NOT the solution. With expanded playoffs it is LESS likely that the best team will win it. Look at baseball, how many wild card teams win it now. They are talking about expanding that, and soon we will have a 0.500 baseball team win the World Series. It just devalues everything. Even in the NFL, the best team is not the Super Bowl champs.

I do not know if it is because I am older or the result of the playoff, but my interest in the sport outside MSU is way down. The idea of further expansion of the playoffs to be a major turnoff. Going back to the idea of 1990, the causal viewer watched BOTH the Orange and the Citrus bowls because they wanted to see the national champion and decide for themselves. So I don't see how expanded playoffs increases TV viewership.

This.

Before the "championship game" era there was way more interest in all of the bowls.

You are trading off a definitive "national championship" for what is fun about college football.

If you want a definitive national champion watch the NFL.

You keep saying this like its a fact.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 8:43

MSU addict wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

I am arguing that the pre national championship game era was better.

Many bowl games had some impact on who was selected as the NC, so they were more interesting.

Also, arguing the current system is just as arbitrary as just using polls, since it just uses polls to select the teams in the NC games, so arbitrary, just at a different point in the selection process.

Now we have a whole bunch of totally meaningless bowls and an NC game which does not determine the best team, only the one that is playing well on one day. It is a boring, meaningless system, IMO.

BTW don't think that adding more games makes the current system better, probably makes it even worse.
As you said earlier - you feel the Superbowl is a joke. March Madness is a joke.

I get it - you like to argue and you dislike things that provide clarity and limits your ability to do so. Unfortunately, I do not feel the same way.

I do hope there are some clouds outside where you live - because a little bird told me they hate it when you yell at them.

My words taken out of context to continue an argument suggest that perhaps one of us likes to argue ...

We disagree about the value of the "national championship game" system

You (apparently) love it and I hate it.

I have said why I hate it and pointed out other leagues or sports systems aren't much better for determining the best team.

You, or someone else, have said the point isn't the best team, just a definite "national champion"

I have said it ruined the bowls.

We will continue to disagree.

So peace.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 8:45

kingstonlake wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

This.

Before the "championship game" era there was way more interest in all of the bowls.

You are trading off a definitive "national championship" for what is fun about college football.

If you want a definitive national champion watch the NFL.

You keep saying this like its a fact.

Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

by **kingstonlake** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 9:13

Trapper Gus wrote:
kingstonlake wrote:

You keep saying this like its a fact.

Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

That’s better

by **Turtleneck** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 9:16

Trapper Gus wrote:
kingstonlake wrote:

You keep saying this like its a fact.

Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

This is a funny and very telling statement.

Anyway, do you think bowl games meant more in the past because there were fewer bowl games?There were 11 bowl games in 1970, 15 in 1980, 19 in 1990, 25 in 2000, 35 in 2010, and 43 in 2021.

by **NigelUno** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 9:37

Trapper Gus wrote:
kingstonlake wrote:

You keep saying this like its a fact.

Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

There's no doubt that the BCS and CFP have killed the tradition of some bowl games (the Rose and Sugar in particular).

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 9:44

Turtleneck wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

This is a funny and very telling statement.

Anyway, do you think bowl games meant more in the past because there were fewer bowl games?There were 11 bowl games in 1970, 15 in 1980, 19 in 1990, 25 in 2000, 35 in 2010, and 43 in 2021.

The "championship game" started in 1993 (yes, I had to look it up) so the question would be, did the creation of the championship game, cause the NCAA to be more open to more bowls?

Another point would be the spreading of the bowl games over a extended period of time.

Yes, I do think that the expansion of the number of bowl games, and other NCAA & conference rule changes, reduced the meaning of bowls in general, however, without the NC games starting in 1993 the major New Year's Day bowls probably maintained their viewer share. Once there was an NC game it was just a matter of time before the major bowls lost the interest of the marginal viewers.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 9:46

kingstonlake wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

That’s better

As I pointed out, if you want to argue the facts then bring the data. I'm a very typical marginal college football fan. edit - aka I only follow MSU ...

by **Turtleneck** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 11:50

Trapper Gus wrote:
kingstonlake wrote:

That’s better

As I pointed out, if you want to argue the facts then bring the data. I'm a very typical marginal college football fan. edit - aka I only follow MSU ...

Translation: I don't care about reason or evidence-based discussions. I determine everything by emotion and anecdotal evidence.

by **NigelUno** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 11:59

Turtleneck wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

As I pointed out, if you want to argue the facts then bring the data. I'm a very typical marginal college football fan. edit - aka I only follow MSU ...

Translation: I don't care about reason or evidence-based discussions. I determine everything by emotion and anecdotal evidence.

With the transition from the Old Way to the BCS to the CFP, do you think there is more interest in all the bowl games (or about the same as before)?

Seems like Semi-final/NY6 games have lessened interest in other bowl games (and even impacted the NY6 games in years they aren't semi-final games).

by **Turtleneck** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 12:16

NigelUno wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:

Translation: I don't care about reason or evidence-based discussions. I determine everything by emotion and anecdotal evidence.

With the transition from the Old Way to the BCS to the CFP, do you think there is more interest in all the bowl games (or about the same as before)?

Seems like Semi-final/NY6 games have lessened interest in other bowl games (and even impacted the NY6 games in years they aren't semi-final games).

I actually agree. It is quite possible that both expansion and potentially declining interest are functions of the current championship system. I don't think Trapper is wrong about that, and it is definitely a fair question to ask. Although, as much as we talk about potentially declining interest, there remains enough profit in the bowl system to draw sponsors and support its expansion.

by **kingstonlake** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 13:00

Trapper do you think the CFP/BCS has hurt Superbowl interest as well? Sports viewership as a whole is trending down. Blaming the BCS is just B1G inferiority complex.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 13:30

Turtleneck wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

As I pointed out, if you want to argue the facts then bring the data. I'm a very typical marginal college football fan. edit - aka I only follow MSU ...

Translation: I don't care about reason or evidence-based discussions. I determine everything by emotion and anecdotal evidence.

Odd response to my post saying bring on the data so we can discuss.

by **Turtleneck** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 13:44

Trapper Gus wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:

Translation: I don't care about reason or evidence-based discussions. I determine everything by emotion and anecdotal evidence.

Odd response to my post saying bring on the data so we can discuss.

...and you in this thread not too long ago being dismissive about facts.

Trapper Gus wrote:Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

It is odd that a marginal fan has such definitive opinions about topics that go well beyond the boundaries of the marginal fan.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 13:46

kingstonlake wrote:Trapper do you think the CFP/BCS has hurt Superbowl interest as well? Sports viewership as a whole is trending down. Blaming the BCS is just B1G inferiority complex.

The Superbowl numbers started dropping about 2018, clearly a long time after 1993, so no.

All sports dropping after the start of the pandemic probably have something to do with the pandemic.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-live-sports-tv-ratings-are-down-for-all-the-big-leagues-185237865.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEUfZTT7OUyJsH8mupIJ6jTmoncA0J7xmYmXSIzerMAW8rF-nTMcBMq4kHXpUIK8zZ7yH_F18O9knKpqQ1Vfa98Oaez45stSfMfRck3y7Wrwcm3QG2ML-RC7p7wlCyOWzMH401Mtl3y6s9xMa7U_fgzzEOuVrvx9TAwzCfX39Jj9

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_television_ratings#:~:text=List%20of%20Super%20Bowl%20television%20ratings%20in%20the,%20%20Un%C2%ADknown%20%2023%20more%20rows%20

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 13:47

Turtleneck wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

Odd response to my post saying bring on the data so we can discuss.

...and you in this thread not too long ago being dismissive about facts.

Trapper Gus wrote:Well, it was for me.

I guess we could look up the TV ratings for each bowl, average, for the years before and after the creation of an NC game if you want definitive "facts"

It is odd that a marginal fan has such definitive opinions about topics that go well beyond the boundaries of the marginal fan.

Dude, excuse my French but WTF.

I invited you to look up the facts.

by **Turtleneck** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 14:00

Trapper Gus wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:

...and you in this thread not too long ago being dismissive about facts.

It is odd that a marginal fan has such definitive opinions about topics that go well beyond the boundaries of the marginal fan.

Dude, excuse my French but WTF.

I invited you to look up the facts.

Hmmm.

"Well, it was for me" was you telling Kingston something was a fact because you believe it to be true without knowing the actual truth.

Then you told him to go look up the data if he wants "definitive facts" as if somehow that data, especially if it contradicts your assumptions, is less meaningful.

It's ok. Stats are for losers and facts make message boards boring. You're doing it right.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 14:07

1998*

That’s all I don’t care that’s just bugging me

by **Turtleneck** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 14:14

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:1998*

That’s all I don’t care that’s just bugging me

Isn't that the year Tennessee won?

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 14:19

Turtleneck wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:1998*

That’s all I don’t care that’s just bugging me

Isn't that the year Tennessee won?

Yeah. The year before being the Michigan Nebraska tie that caused us all to say “well they should just play each other huh”

by **kingstonlake** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 15:03

Trapper Gus wrote:
kingstonlake wrote:Trapper do you think the CFP/BCS has hurt Superbowl interest as well? Sports viewership as a whole is trending down. Blaming the BCS is just B1G inferiority complex.

The Superbowl numbers started dropping about 2018, clearly a long time after 1993, so no.

All sports dropping after the start of the pandemic probably have something to do with the pandemic.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-live-sports-tv-ratings-are-down-for-all-the-big-leagues-185237865.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEUfZTT7OUyJsH8mupIJ6jTmoncA0J7xmYmXSIzerMAW8rF-nTMcBMq4kHXpUIK8zZ7yH_F18O9knKpqQ1Vfa98Oaez45stSfMfRck3y7Wrwcm3QG2ML-RC7p7wlCyOWzMH401Mtl3y6s9xMa7U_fgzzEOuVrvx9TAwzCfX39Jj9

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_television_ratings#:~:text=List%20of%20Super%20Bowl%20television%20ratings%20in%20the,%20%20Un%C2%ADknown%20%2023%20more%20rows%20

You mean 2011, right?

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 15:43

kingstonlake wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

The Superbowl numbers started dropping about 2018, clearly a long time after 1993, so no.

All sports dropping after the start of the pandemic probably have something to do with the pandemic.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-live-sports-tv-ratings-are-down-for-all-the-big-leagues-185237865.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEUfZTT7OUyJsH8mupIJ6jTmoncA0J7xmYmXSIzerMAW8rF-nTMcBMq4kHXpUIK8zZ7yH_F18O9knKpqQ1Vfa98Oaez45stSfMfRck3y7Wrwcm3QG2ML-RC7p7wlCyOWzMH401Mtl3y6s9xMa7U_fgzzEOuVrvx9TAwzCfX39Jj9

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_television_ratings#:~:text=List%20of%20Super%20Bowl%20television%20ratings%20in%20the,%20%20Un%C2%ADknown%20%2023%20more%20rows%20

You mean 2011, right?

I was looking at total, sure average flattened out & dropped before that.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 15:45

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:1998*

That’s all I don’t care that’s just bugging me

All the major conferences and bowls started a NC game in 1993, the Rose Bowl with the PAC12 & Big10 held out until 98 but the NC winner still was the NC from 1993 to 1997.

by **Cameron** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 15:47

Trapper Gus wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:1998*

That’s all I don’t care that’s just bugging me

All the major conferences and bowls started a NC game in 1993, the Rose Bowl with the PAC12 & Big10 held out until 98 but the NC winner still was the NC from 1993 to 1997.

*citation needed

Not sure what source you're looking at. Wikipedia says otherwise.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_Coalition

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 15:50

Turtleneck wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

Dude, excuse my French but WTF.

I invited you to look up the facts.

Hmmm.

"Well, it was for me" was you telling Kingston something was a fact because you believe it to be true without knowing the actual truth.

Then you told him to go look up the data if he wants "definitive facts" as if somehow that data, especially if it contradicts your assumptions, is less meaningful.

It's ok. Stats are for losers and facts make message boards boring. You're doing it right.

It's a message board ...

Always willing to look at the facts, but really don't care enough about this topic to do it myself. I did it for the Superbowl because I became interested enough, and tried to look at the Rose, but didn't find a simple list. I'm thinking that number of eyeballs is the story here as audience share ignores those who use the off switch. (Nobody has brought this up, yet so I did) Of course the problem with eyeballs as the measure is that it ignores the growth of the population so maybe both, I guess. Also, to have compelling data whomever did it would need to cut out the years when the bowls are the play-in games. Looking at overall bowl doesn't seem to work becasue of the increase in the number of bowls and smart scheduling to eliminate conflicts to grow eyeballs on the bowls.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 15:55

Cameron wrote:
Trapper Gus wrote:

All the major conferences and bowls started a NC game in 1993, the Rose Bowl with the PAC12 & Big10 held out until 98 but the NC winner still was the NC from 1993 to 1997.

*citation needed

Not sure what source you're looking at. Wikipedia says otherwise.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_Coalition

The Bowl Coalition was formed through an agreement among Division I-A college football bowl games and conferences for the purpose of forcing a national championship game between the top two teams and to provide quality bowl game matchups for the champions of its member conferences. It was established for the 1992 season after there were co-national champions for both 1990 and 1991. The agreement was in place for the 1992, 1993, and 1994 college football seasons.[/It was the predecessor of the Bowl Alliance (1995–1997), and later the Bowl Championship Series (1998–2013) and the College Football Playoff (since 2014)

First paragraph of the wiki link. CFB Playoff rankings - Page 7 2599972566

CFB Playoff rankings - Page 7 2599972566

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 16:20

So there was one for a few years but it didn’t include all of the major conferences and a few times in there didn’t even have 1 vs 2 as a result, but in 1998 that was all corrected and going forward it was a a true national championship game.

I think we could call it 1998 unless we really want to be dorks about it. When I google “when was the first ncaa football national championship game” it tells me 1999 (1998 season) so I’m gonna stick to that.

by **Trapper Gus** Mon 3 Jan 2022 - 16:23

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:So there was one for a few years but it didn’t include all of the major conferences and a few times in there didn’t even have 1 vs 2 as a result, but in 1998 that was all corrected and going forward it was a a true national championship game.

I think we could call it 1998 unless we really want to be dorks about it. When I google “when was the first ncaa football national championship game” it tells me 1999 (1998 season) so I’m gonna stick to that.

It didn't have two major conferences and one major bowl game, but it was called the National Championship game, I'm sticking to that.

Just a matter of opinion, anyhow.

by **Turtleneck** Sat 8 Jan 2022 - 16:42

College Football Playoff Expansion: Would It Really Make A Difference?

https://www.si.com/college/tcu/football/college-football-playoff-expansion

by **Turtleneck** Sun 9 Jan 2022 - 12:23

College Football Playoff is too elusive, too exclusive; expansion is a must

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-football/news/college-football-playoff-field-expansion/ap8u46fvcyu716qlpt7rj6pa0

by Sponsored content