CFB51 College Football Fan Community

The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: ELA on July 06, 2018, 10:58:42 AM

Title: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: ELA on July 06, 2018, 10:58:42 AM
SYSTEMIC CHANGES
End of TV monopoly
Recruiting coverage
SYSTEM RULE CHANGES
Academic ineligibility
GAME RULE CHANGES
OT
GAME PLAY CHANGES
Wishbone
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: ELA on July 06, 2018, 11:03:22 AM
I go both way on both of these, and am willing to hear the arguments on both before I make a vote.

I think the CFP is the start of a good idea, but as it is I don't like it.  I actually think 4 is the worst possible number.  2 is small enough that it's still sort of an MNC, and too narrow to focus on exclusively.  8 is a big enough number that it's still select, but retains the importance of all conference championship races without punishing teams for actually making their CCG like taking Alabama over Auburn last year.  4 is a weird spot in the middle where it feels like the CFP dominates all discussion from too early a point in the year without actually being all that inclusive, while also remaining too subjective.

On the whole I'm ok with grad transfers, I'm just nervous about long term them going the way of college basketball where the mid majors get raided of their best players.  So far it hasn't really trended too strongly like that in football though.
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: MaximumSam on July 06, 2018, 11:07:19 AM
I want to expand the playoffs in such a way that there is a definite route for teams to play their way in.  Having 8 teams with 5 or 6 autobids plus two committee choices makes some sense.  The most unsatisfying part of the playoffs is the uncertainty teams face on getting in.  
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: ELA on July 06, 2018, 11:11:58 AM
I want to expand the playoffs in such a way that there is a definite route for teams to play their way in.  Having 8 teams with 5 or 6 autobids plus two committee choices makes some sense.  The most unsatisfying part of the playoffs is the uncertainty teams face on getting in.  
Same thing as me.
Basically one is a rule change I don't like the current implementation of, but I think is the right step towards something good vs. a rule change that I'm fine with now, but fear what it could become.
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: betarhoalphadelta on July 06, 2018, 11:43:49 AM
I voted grad transfers...

I agree with ELA that I think the CFP is the start of a good thing. I've hashed out my reasoning for why you should either have a real playoff or a mythical "beauty pageant" national champion, but that the current 4-team playoff (and the 2-team BCS before that) isn't large enough to be a real playoff and still ends up being too subjective. 

Likewise, I feel like a lot of the restrictions on players transferring are mostly along the lines of "we think X or Y might not be good for the sport, so we'll punish the players if they try to do it rather than the programs". I think the grad transfer rule helps to avoid that, even if it ends up having some of the ill effects that ELA mentions. After all, we want these players to be student athletes. Someone comes in, does exactly what we want them to do [graduate with a degree] and then we're going to restrict them from transferring when they want to further their education with grad school? That's completely contrary to what's best for the players, and hypocritical to boot. So I'm happy to see that one go.
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: 847badgerfan on July 06, 2018, 11:46:25 AM
I don't mind grad transfers. Had I decided to do grad school, I'd have certainly went elsewhere (Cornell), and I almost did. There were no restrictions on me (or anyone else) so why should there be a restriction on athletes?
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: ELA on July 06, 2018, 11:46:31 AM
Yes, I'm voting based on what is best for me as a fan.  I have zero problem with the rule, and don't think it should go anywhere.  Just as a fan of the sport I don't like what has happened on the basketball side.
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: Entropy on July 06, 2018, 01:12:01 PM
I voted for grad transfers.  I think kids should have more options to transfer, especially with coaching changes.
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: medinabuckeye1 on July 06, 2018, 04:44:17 PM
I voted CFP.  I think it is an enormous change.  Part of that might be that I am a helmet-team fan so the NC is my primary focus.  We don't need to rehash the entire playoff debate in this thread but I'll just restate my underlying issue:

It is axiomatic that the more teams that get into the playoff, the less important individual regular season games are.  If we go to eight the P5 Champions will almost certainly get auto-bids.  My issue with that is that it makes OOC games essentially irrelevant to the NC race.  I remember watching a very good Ohio State team that I thought could contend for a NC lose at home to Texas in 2005.  It sucked because that one loss basically ended Ohio State's NC hopes but that is what makes individual games in CFB so intense.  
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: ELA on July 06, 2018, 05:23:20 PM
It is axiomatic that the more teams that get into the playoff, the less important individual regular season games are.  If we go to eight the P5 Champions will almost certainly get auto-bids.  My issue with that is that it makes OOC games essentially irrelevant to the NC race.  I remember watching a very good Ohio State team that I thought could contend for a NC lose at home to Texas in 2005.  It sucked because that one loss basically ended Ohio State's NC hopes but that is what makes individual games in CFB so intense.  
Well, not exactly.  The more teams get in, the less damaging an individual loss is, and it changes which games are important, and IMO actually increases the number of important games.  What we have now is important results, but not necessarily important games.  Iowa-Ohio State last year was not an important game.  It was an important result, solely because OSU lost.  Likewise, the Big Ten Championship Game was an important result, but not an important game.  If the winner had gotten in, it would have been an important game.
Like I said, it's the right idea, just at the wrong number.  I'd rather it just be 2 than 4, or increase to 8.  I just personally find 4 to be worst case scenario.
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: OrangeAfroMan on July 07, 2018, 01:08:55 AM
Each and every loss should feel damning, whether it ends up being so or not.  An 8-team playoff will make everyone's first loss unimportant.  That should not be the reaction to a loss - a shrug.  

Keep expanding the playoff and you will have the NFL-lite.  No thanks.  2 was perfect.  
Title: Re: 2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - CFP vs. Grad Transfers
Post by: ELA on July 07, 2018, 08:14:45 AM
I've simply never felt the need to crown an official one.  With 130 teams playing 12 games, the lack of schedule commonality makes any national championship mythical, we just started pretending it wasn't anymore.