header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31]   Go Down
Author

Topic: Rich get richer

 (Read 16094 times)

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13105
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #420 on: September 15, 2023, 09:09:08 PM »
Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on September 15, 2023, 09:05:13 PM
No, I honestly meant that as a serious question.

Assumptions: 18-team B1G (no further expansion). No divisions and top two teams make CCG. 9 team conference schedule (since it hasn't been announced to be 10). 12-team playoff with *5* (not 6) auto-bids of the top conference champs since there's only a P4 now, and thus 7 at-large bids.

Knowing the history of CFB, what do you realistically think is the o/u on the first year Purdue makes the playoff?
I am being serious. You think the networks are going to keep giving 50 million dollars to every school in the Big Ten? I don't. The next go around of conference shenanigans will probably be to break up the ACC, followed by cutting off the chaff from the SEC and Big Ten. Honestly, I'm not sure who gets the chopping block and whether Purdue would be considered or not, but it's coming.
Logged

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18877
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #421 on: September 15, 2023, 09:54:21 PM »
And Thats The Bottom Line Because I Said So GIF - And Thats The Bottom Line  Because I Said So Thats It - Discover & Share GIFs

Ohhh, okay.
Logged
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #422 on: September 15, 2023, 10:10:02 PM »
Quote from: MaximumSam on September 15, 2023, 07:56:19 PM
Yes it does! I mean, when you are wrong you're wrong, and here you are 100%, without a shadow of a doubt, living in a dreamland wrong.

It doesn't matter that you can say, in retrospect, what games matter and what didn't. That doesn't tell you, at the time they are played, when they are played, how they will matter and why. The stakes are uncertain. If you like that, more power to you, though there is a reason pretty much all sports that can have moved away from that system. When the games are played, you don't know if they matter, whether they will matter, and how they will matter. That's the whole problem! The 2016 Big Ten Championship was maybe for something and maybe not for something. While you were watching, you didn't know. It was NOT, win and you advance, which is exciting. It was "win and hope" which is very much more of a wet fart.
You are literally changing your argument midway through your post.

You claim to be arguing for games that matter but then your explanation isn't whether or not or how many games matter but rather whether or not the stakes were 100% known in advance.

But that is not the same thing. 

I've said repeatedly that the intensity of random mid-season games came from the fact that any given game *COULD* derail a NC season.

You completely ignored my take down of your 2016 argument. Your argument was that the PSU over tOSU game didn't matter ignored the fact that the system you advocate would make Penn State's BAD losses to Pitt (bad because they sucked) and Michigan (bad because it was a blowout) meaningless. In your own chosen example you are arguing for one meaningful game (PSU>tOSU) instead of the other 23 games that tOSU and PSU played.

I want LOTS of intense regular season games. We had that but expanded playoffs are depriving us of that because a mid-season loss to PU or MSU will no longer have any chance of depriving the Buckeyes of a spot in the playoffs.

You say you want games to matter but the system you are advocating replaces hundreds of meaningful games with 11.

What @OrangeAfroMan , @betarhoalphadelta , and I are arguing for is hundreds of meaningful games.

What you are arguing for is 11 meaningful games.

I'm being very charitable to say that for you to claim that you are arguing for games that matter is disingenuous.
Logged

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13105
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #423 on: September 15, 2023, 10:30:40 PM »

Quote
You claim to be arguing for games that matter but then your explanation isn't whether or not or how many games matter but rather whether or not the stakes were 100% known in advance.

But that is not the same thing. 
It is the same thing. As I have said from the start, the invitational only playoff means that every game is of uncertain value, and you only know how it matters at the end of the season, when they tell you. This is something you have agreed with and in fact said is a positive. Fair enough. But it is in no way changing the fact that in an invitational only playoff, games are of uncertain value until they tell you at the end of the season what they meant. I don't really see what we are even arguing about there.



Quote
You completely ignored my take down of your 2016 argument. Your argument was that the PSU over tOSU game didn't matter ignored the fact that the system you advocate would make Penn State's BAD losses to Pitt (bad because they sucked) and Michigan (bad because it was a blowout) meaningless. In your own chosen example you are arguing for one meaningful game (PSU>tOSU) instead of the other 23 games that tOSU and PSU played.
I did not ignore it at all. I'm simply stating the facts. The 2016 Big Ten championship game, which was to crown the champion of the Big Ten, was clearly of uncertain quality when it came to the playoffs. It was not clear, at the time the game was being played, what it meant for the playoffs. Therefore, it wasn't clear what stakes the game had. You didn't disagree with that, but instead tried to justify the committee's decisions. I (obviously) love the committee's decision because they voted for my team. But it doesn't change the fact that the game, at the time, was more of a data point than a meaningful game.



Quote
I'm being very charitable to say that for you to claim that you are arguing for games that matter is disingenuous.
Well, again, we are talking about tradeoffs. Playoffs are here. They are not going away. They will expand. These are assumptions I am making that I think are very grounded in fact. I am not arguing what is better between the bowl system and BCS and playoffs because I think it is completely irrelevant. The bowl system is over. The past is dead and buried. The only question is what system we are going to use in the future. My concern the have not teams are going to be even more dead and buried because college football people are just giving everything away to television executives with little concern as to the overall health of the sport. My contention is these invitational only playoffs are designed to get the big money, big market teams the most exposure, which will naturally lead to the 30 team super conference NFL Lite.
Logged

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18877
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #424 on: September 15, 2023, 11:05:59 PM »
You're completely ignoring what the helmet programs have done to reap their rewards.  They won.  A lot.  For decades.  They invested time and money to build immense stadiums and fuel the motivations to fill them.  

They're not in privileged positions "just because."
Stop acting like it.
Logged
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13105
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #425 on: September 16, 2023, 07:25:59 AM »
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on September 15, 2023, 11:05:59 PM
You're completely ignoring what the helmet programs have done to reap their rewards.  They won.  A lot.  For decades.  They invested time and money to build immense stadiums and fuel the motivations to fill them. 

They're not in privileged positions "just because."
Stop acting like it.
Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12215
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #426 on: September 16, 2023, 08:58:10 AM »
Quote from: MaximumSam on September 15, 2023, 09:09:08 PM
I am being serious. You think the networks are going to keep giving 50 million dollars to every school in the Big Ten? I don't. The next go around of conference shenanigans will probably be to break up the ACC, followed by cutting off the chaff from the SEC and Big Ten. Honestly, I'm not sure who gets the chopping block and whether Purdue would be considered or not, but it's coming.
This thread has taken a weird turn. I remember how it started:

@medinabuckeye1 : "We're making a bunch of changes to the sport that seems to be only of benefit to helmet and helmet-adjacent teams and it's driving away superfans of the other teams. This can't be healthy for the sport."

And here we are...

@MaximumSam : "I've got just the answer. We'll create a playoff that primarily benefits the helmet and helmet-adjacent teams leading to the death of the bowl system that those fans liked. And then we'll throw them out of their traditional conferences because they're not good enough to move the needle for ratings for the helmet and helmet-adjacent teams and they're diluting the money. And we'll just tell them it's awesome and they'll believe us, because what are they gonna do? Not watch?! Go do something else on Saturdays? No! That'll never happen! It's gonna be great for the health of the sport!"
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71612
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #427 on: September 16, 2023, 09:22:36 AM »
I am pessimistic.
Logged

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13105
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #428 on: September 16, 2023, 09:55:21 AM »
Clearly I'm not articulating well.

This is what has happened:


Quote
We're making a bunch of changes to the sport that seems to be only of benefit to helmet and helmet-adjacent teams and it's driving away superfans of the other teams. This can't be healthy for the sport."
This is what is coming:



Quote
We'll create a playoff that primarily benefits the helmet and helmet-adjacent teams leading to the death of the bowl system that those fans liked. And then we'll throw them out of their traditional conferences because they're not good enough to move the needle for ratings for the helmet and helmet-adjacent teams and they're diluting the money. And we'll just tell them it's awesome and they'll believe us, because what are they gonna do? Not watch?! Go do something else on Saturdays? No! That'll never happen! It's gonna be great for the health of the sport!"
I'm trying to suggest things that could actually happen that move the needle the other way. The response has generally been 2500 word point by point dissertations on why Gameday was better before Lee Corso had a stroke and that they need to bring that guy back.
Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12215
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #429 on: September 16, 2023, 11:12:46 AM »
Quote from: MaximumSam on September 16, 2023, 09:55:21 AM
Clearly I'm not articulating well.

<snip>

I'm trying to suggest things that could actually happen that move the needle the other way. 
I guess I missed those suggestions. 

All I've heard is a defense of the playoff as it is constructed. And perhaps an effort to expand it. I don't know how that moves the needle to make the 80+% of the sport that has no chance at a national championship feel better about being part of a sport that seems now to ONLY be about crowning a champion. 
Logged

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13105
  • Liked:
Re: Rich get richer
« Reply #430 on: September 16, 2023, 12:00:30 PM »
Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on September 16, 2023, 11:12:46 AM
I guess I missed those suggestions.

All I've heard is a defense of the playoff as it is constructed. And perhaps an effort to expand it. I don't know how that moves the needle to make the 80+% of the sport that has no chance at a national championship feel better about being part of a sport that seems now to ONLY be about crowning a champion.
Well, like I said before, getting back to a system that makes people feel good even if they don't win a championship seems optimal. We already see with the CBB that this is a real thing. I wouldn't advocate for a 64 team playoff, but one with home field advantage and byes makes sense. Purdue going to Georgia in the first round isn't optimal. Hosting TCU in the first round? Hey, that's something.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31]   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
FAFO No Trespassing Sign

FAFO No Trespassing Sign