"Spend a few minutes reading College Football Resource" - Whit Watson, Sun Sports

"Maybe you should start your own blog" - Bruce Feldman, ESPN

"[An] Excellent resource for all things college football. It’s blog index is the definitive listing of the CFB blogosphere ... [A] must-read for fans." - Sports Illustrated (On Campus)

"The big daddy of them all, the nerve center of this twisted college football blogsphere" - The House Rock Built

"Unsurprisingly, College Football Resource has generated some discussion" -Dawg Sports

Top Teams 2008

After Week Seven

  1. Alabama
  2. Penn State
  3. Texas
  4. Oklahoma
  5. Florida
  6. USC
  7. Georgia
  8. LSU
  9. BYU
  10. Missouri
  11. Ohio State
  12. Oklahoma State
  13. Texas Tech
  14. Utah
  15. Kansas
  16. USF
  17. North Carolina
  18. Miami
  19. Boise State
  20. Georgia Tech
Display
RSS
Search CFR
Submission Corner
« Saturday Live Thread: Week Five | Main | NCAA: You Suck. Again. »
Friday
Sep282007

Just Can't Get Enough

Who else but Get The Picture:

A couple of days ago, I linked to a story in USA Today about how the NCAA was looking to expand the playoffs for 1-AA football to 18 games.

Well, according to the same paper, it looks like the NCAA is just getting started.

The championship and competition cabinet last week forwarded a proposal to the NCAA’s board of directors to enlarge the current 16-team field to 18 beginning in 2008. Cabinet chair Carolyn Femovich says that is the first step toward a field of 24 in the near future.

“I think that’s the ideal number we’re shooting for,” says Femovich, executive director of the I-AA Patriot League. “The cabinet heard loud and clear that future expansion could be both warranted and necessary to provide access to all of our qualified conferences and members.”

In case you’re wondering, that’s 24 schools out of 120 total in Division 1-AA.  For now, of course…

Got that Plus One fans?  It doesn't stop there.  This is bureaucracy we're talking about here, and interests who are at a trough.  Once you create something, it just grows and expands and changes course from its limited intended purpose.  Call it "mission creep", call it bugaboo, call it whatever - it sucks.

Those of you quibbling over a four-team playoff or an eight team or a sixteen ... I'm not sure that you understand that whatever you think is right, the future course is already set for massive expansion.  You and I may disagree about not having a playoff versus having an eight-team framework but in the end we'll both lose because that beast won't stay in its cage.

The only power here in having a say about the direction of the sport is in saying "yes" or "no".  Count me as a strong "no". 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (6)

What's truly amazing to me is that all this boils down to is a problem with looking at history. Every single professional league that has gone to a playoff, just keeps expanding and expanding and expanding. I'm a baseball nut, but look at this this way:

Beginning-1969: There was the NL & AL and the winner of each league met in the World Series.

1969-1993: Each league was broken down into 2 divisions and a championship series was played within each league before the championship series winners met in the World Series

1995-Present: There are now 3 division with 1 wild card.

That's going from 2 to 4 to 8 teams in the playoffs and baseball has been the SLOWEST sport of any to go through changes considering how many purists there are.

Given how "PLAYOFFS CRAZY" the average american sports fan is, how long before a "PLUS 1" goes to a 4-team playoff? Or better yet how long before every BCS conference wants at least 1 person in the tournament giving at least 6, but since that's an odd number, how about 8 teams? Well now all of a sudden some subjectivity comes into play with teams #7 and #8 and don't forget your mid majors like Boise State last year or TCU, Hawaii or other teams like that who'll feel like they'll need another taste.

How long before it's 12 teams with 4 teams getting a first round bye? Wait a minute! How can we discriminate against different conference champions? We need at least 6 1st round byes so need at least 20 more teams in the playoffs keep it all even and working out.

And it's not just sports. For goodness sakes, look at the federal government or ANY human resource department at a company. It's a slippery slope into hell is what it is.
September 28, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterBaseball Savant
And I supposed the proliferation of bowls to the point that over half of I-A teams are going to go to a bowl is good? After all, nothing embodies the grand tradition of college football like corporate-sponsored money grabs that put the #5 MAC team against the #7 C-USA team.

If you're going to be anti-playoffs that's fine; you've made very good points in that vein in the past. However, warning of playoff creep is not going to get you very far against those critical of bowls because that one solidly goes both ways.

And what's to say a longer playoff is bad? The larger the sample size of games, the more likely you are to have an accurate result.
September 28, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterGatorDave
We love your web site because it is the funniest site this side of Deadspin.com. No other site site save Deadspin can compare.

Your post on the expansion of the I-AA postseason brought gales of laughter around the office. You truly are a gifted comedic writer. Last year, 64 I-A schools competed in 32 bowls.

And you "complain" about soon 24 I-AA schools making the postseason. That's comedy gold, Jerry.

This post represents one of your better comedic efforts. A few of us nearly peed ourselves while reading your post.

We understand that you need to discuss other things besides the bowl system. Understand, though, your best comedic material comes from your "defense" of the bowl system.

Keep up the effort. By the way, a couple of the guys, wants to know if you write for Conan or Letterman. I am going with Kimmel.
September 28, 2007 | Unregistered Commentermichael
I'm not in favor of bowl expansion, I've had my say about that. But it's a far lesser evil than a playoff.
September 28, 2007 | Registered CommenterCFR
Classy, Michael.
September 28, 2007 | Registered CommenterCFR
This whole bowl expansion argument is nothing but a red herring. The obvious exception of the BCS title game aside, bowls don't impact the regular season the way a playoff would. If the bowls did, playoff proponents wouldn't be bitching about the current setup they way they do now, would they?

CFR isn't defending the bowls. He's defending the regular season.
September 29, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterSenator Blutarsky

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.