But that's not a product of the NCAA. That's pure economics. More people want seats, so you build stadiums to seat them and charge them. ULM's stadiuim here isn't big because there aren't 90,000 people wanting to get in. D1 football needs a playoff. period.
Before NLU/ULM moved up, they packed that stadium every weekend. I grew up here, and remember when they won that national championship. They never should have moved up. Since then, all they are is an out of conference rent a win. It's good that they are here, don't get me wrong. There are a lot of young men from up here that get an oppritunity to play Div 1 ball and go to school that wouldn't get to otherwise. I was raised on LSU, so I've never gotten into them much. I'll say this, there are a lot more passionate LSU fans up here than ULM fans. I didn't see ULM play many games growing up due to the fact that we were always down in Baton Rouge. Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread. I agree, we must have a playoff.
That's my point, there are more people willing to spend money on college football than the NFL. Has been that way forever. Why? Bowl system creates controversy, controversy sells.
Cowherd likes LSU? First I've heard of it. Hornet is right. Colin, although entertaining, can be quite oblivious at times. The Saints thing was about the most ignorant, short-sighted piece I've ever heard come from a member of the media. The guy paid absolutely NO attention whatsoever to the blatant truth. It was like he was making up the scenario as he went along to fit his take on it. I think he's just trying to get an NFL team in LA.
Agree wih you 100% on that one. So it's a vicous cycle...the Controversy leads to clamour for playoff, which brings more attention and money back to the current system, perpetuating it. haha Doesn't mean i have to like it. I just see that a playoff could mean a ton of money too and you'd get to keep the other bowls too.
college football doesn't need a playoff. however on years when there is more then 2 underfeated teams or there are a bunch of 1 loss teams then a plus one system would be good. hate to say it but it ut nor usc lose we don't deserve a chance at a NC neither soes any 1 loss team because we lost our playoff game against UT. A true playoff would ruin the regular season in CF just like it has in 1-aa.
Well said. Last year, LSU may have made an 8 team playoff. I would LOVE for LSU to win another title, but no one can honestly say LSU deserved a shot at the title last year. Thats what would happen with a playoff system though. This year, the Tenn game may turn out to be the biggest game of the year, with a playoff system, it wouldn't matter. I love the fact that EVERY game is as big as the one before it. D-1 has an 11 game playoff.
What about a 4 team playoff? How many times has there been controversy beyond 4 teams, and in those years, were all 5 teams on equal footing? I think with a 4 team playoff, the most deserving teams will make it, and it doesn't lose the significance of the regular season. LSU could make a 4 team playoff this year with one loss, but two losses would eliminate us. Teams have won the National Championship with 1 loss before. Counter argument is usually, what about in years like potentially this year where there is a clear cut 1 and 2. I'd say have USC take on LSU, Texas vs Penn State (1 v 4, 2 v 3). If USC and Texas are truly the most deserving teams, they'll have no problem beating LSU and Penn State to get to the title game.
You would have had a controversy in '03. LSU, USC, OU each with 1 loss. Mich. Ohio St. Miami each with 2. Who is the 4th team. Michigan beat OSU that year, so that eliminates OSU. But who goes between Miami and Michigan. Then look at this year, Penn St., LSU, Oregon, Virginia Tech. If either USC or UT loses, you could have a 5 teams with just 1 loss, 1 unbeaten. Who gets left out?
