This is why you don't get rid of bowls...

Predestined

Member
Dec 5, 2008
2,353
51
48
what a 17in game! I'm not saying no playoffs - there has to be a way to have both. But keep bowls - you get games like this and it means so much to schools like Idaho and such that will never see (or rarely see) the playoffs.
 

Woof Man Jack

New member
Apr 20, 2006
947
0
0
There are 32 bowl games this year. A playoff would take three or four of the games....that leaves 28 or 29 to spread around to teams like Idaho and MSU. Both can exist.
 

RebelBruiser

New member
Aug 21, 2007
7,349
0
0
Yea, if you look back at it, even if there were a 16 team playoff, I can't remember a season when either of our schools would've actually been in a playoff.

So yes, we need the bowls, and I do agree that there is no reason that a playoff couldn't exist along with the bowl system. You already have bowl games that are treated differently than other bowl games. You have BCS bowls and non-BCS bowls, so what would be the difference between having a playoff and non-playoff bowls?
 

DancingRabbit

New member
Mar 3, 2008
2,209
0
0
so you probably end up taking 15 bowls. There probably would be a few more lower bowls added so the total number of teams participating wouldn't be reduced by much.

It would de-value the non-playoff bowls somewhat, but that's just the price of a playoff. The SEC would lobby for getting 2 teams in guaranteed, with a chance for 1 or 2 more at large teams.

I'm neutral on a playoff from State's point of view, somewhat skeptical that it improves our lot in life in the SEC. Speaking as a fan of college football in general, I'm in favor of a playoff. I think the BCS schools hold out for as long as they can, first going to a 4-team playoff.
 

DancingRabbit

New member
Mar 3, 2008
2,209
0
0
would play the first round on campus, but that definitely sucks for the team that travels.

Let's say the Bulldogs go to the SECCG and lose, end up with a 9-seed. Let's say the 8-seed is Ohio State - playing on the road up north in the snow? Sugar Bowl sounds better.
 

RebelBruiser

New member
Aug 21, 2007
7,349
0
0
DancingRabbit said:
would play the first round on campus, but that definitely sucks for the team that travels.

Let's say the Bulldogs go to the SECCG and lose, end up with a 9-seed. Let's say the 8-seed is Ohio State - playing on the road up north in the snow? Sugar Bowl sounds better.

Yea, but that's part of my favorite playoff scenario, home sites for the opening games and bowl sites for the remaining games.
 

drunkernhelldawg

New member
Nov 25, 2007
1,372
0
0
Like the 2008 Rebels or the Bulldog team that won the Peach Bowl for its 10th win.

Personally, I don't get the obsession with the NC. I just love the games.
 

RebelBruiser

New member
Aug 21, 2007
7,349
0
0
drunkernhelldawg said:
Like the 2008 Rebels or the Bulldog team that won the Peach Bowl for its 10th win.

Personally, I don't get the obsession with the NC. I just love the games.

Our 2008 team was hot, and they would've had a shot at just about anyone outside of Florida ironically, but they blew it with too many early season losses. Any playoff is going to leave teams out. The bigger you get it though, the more likely you are to include everyone that deserves a chance. Whether they want to call it this or not, we have a playoff today.

It's just a 2 team playoff. Expanding the field from 2 teams to 4 teams increases the chances you get the true best team. Increasing from 4 to 8 increases those chances and from 8 to 16.

In basketball, if you aren't in the Top 40-45, you really don't deserve a shot anyway. In football, if you aren't in the Top 10 or 15, it's your own fault that you don't get a shot, whether that team could compete with the best or not.

In a 2 team playoff, you have the opportunity for having 2 or 3 teams that did everything they could only to get left out, like we see this year and like we saw in 2004.