»
Topic: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion
Replies: 22   Last Post: Jun 12, 2021, 10:50 AM by: Harley®
[ Tiger Boards - Clemson Football ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 22  

TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 7:05 PM
    Reply

 
Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

Clemson athletic director Dan Radakovich knows a thing or two about the College Football Playoff and he weighed in on the expected CFP expansion to 12 teams Thursday. The move, which would give the top-4 conference champions first-round byes and have the top-6 conference champions and top-6 at-large Read Update »


link

Heard a guy on talk radio riding home say the the expansion

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 7:41 PM
    Reply

just meant Alabama and Clemson will play an extra game before they play for the national championship. Sound about right.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Tiger/Terrier


Re: Heard a guy on talk radio riding home say the the expansion


Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 7:53 PM
    Reply

Try 2 games.

link

Top 4 teams would play 1 Extra game

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 9:45 PM
    Reply

With those top 4 having a bye ,5-12 would play 2 extra games to make to NCG.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[3]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 7:50 PM
    Reply

Three times the chances to get in didn't help us the first year we didn't go to the CFP. We were #15.
Keep it at 4. Don't let the SEC stack the deck.

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg link


Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 7:51 PM
    Reply

If you are a top 8 seed this idea might be ok but say you are a 10 seed and play a conference championship on the road, win your 1st playoff game on the road and then go on the road again how many fans would go to have time off and money to go to the games? This smells like ESPN trying to make $$$ on more games.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 8:29 PM
    Reply

Good point. I do think that fans will travel to all of these games, just not all the same fans to every single game.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 8:57 PM
    Reply

If you're worried about that, you have already missed the bus bc, college FB plan to get richer by root out the less fortunate fans that has made college FB as big as it is now, bc, they don't care as much about filling the stands anymore bc, the biggest amount of money that college FB generates is through TV advertisement, and the less fans in the stands, the more that is watching the advertisements in front of the TV around the world!!!!!!!!!

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg link


Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 9:39 PM
    Reply

I would wager that the bowl games, or playoff games at home fields for these 12 teams, will generate larger fan bases and more ticket, merchandise and concession revenue than any of the bowl games outside of the 3 playoff games and a couple of other bowls (on good years). You can count on every single one of these games being sell outs with seats in the stands, and that the team fan bases will travel to all the games. Every time we travel we sell out plus some. There will be more opportunity for additional fans to get tickets with more games. If some fans tire or run out of money, others will fill the gaps. Guaranteed economics regardless of who you think is out to make money or get more conference teams into the playoff, etc. Bank on it.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[4]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 8:15 PM
    Reply

Will there be enough to money generated so everybody gets a trophy? We wouldnt want to reward excellence or anything. (sarcasm)

badge-donor-05yr.jpgringofhonor-74tiger.jpg link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 10:07 PM
    Reply

Filling the stands won't be a problem. We have a national fan base now.

... and we could fill the valley 52 weeks a year.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 10:09 PM
    Reply

NCAA hasn't worked out all the details and fine tuning, for sure.

But, if this plan is put into effect of the top 50 issues on the list of concerns about how to implement it, one concern will not be on the list.

1. The fans. How are they going to travel to all those extra games? How can we make it less expensive and more accommodating for them? What can we do to help them out?

None of those things will be discussed.

What will be discussed is.

1. How can we maximize revenue?
2. What system will give us the largest TV contract?
3. How can we make this work so that we can get the most money possible?

Somewhere, way down the list of questions will be:

49. What about the bowl games?

Nowhere on the list will be:

What about the fans?

2021 white level member link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 12:09 PM
    Reply

Agree. They definitely need to make the second round hosted by the top 4 teams as well. Travelling all over the country 3 times in 3-4 weeks is too much, especially right around the holidays.

2021 student level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 12, 2021, 10:50 AM
    Reply

THE NCAA has almost nothing to do with the CFP. They do not make the rules. They do not collect the money. I'm not even sure the NCAA can prohibit a team from playing in the CFP for violating NCAA rules.

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 10:23 PM
    Reply

I didn’t read the article or know anything about it, but imagine a night playoff game in the valley, that would be fun to be at!

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Jun 10, 2021, 10:32 PM
    Reply

25°? No thanks I’ll take the 3:30 spot.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg link

I used to be all for the 4 team playoff but


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 6:30 AM
    Reply

This could be cool as long they don’t go beyond it- I don’t want to see 3 loss teams in it.

link

Re: I used to be all for the 4 team playoff but


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 6:30 AM
    Reply

Beyond a conference champ here or there

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 9:10 AM
    Reply

They are going to do what ever they want to do. But the biases when there was only a few teams that were a lock for the BCS NC, they were just fine with those bias selection when it was Bama, LSU, OSU, and Oklahoma playing for the NC year in, and year out. Now they are looking for ways to get all their favorite BCS schools back in the NC game!!!!

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg link


Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 2:33 PM
    Reply

Honestly I don't think you need to go to 12 to get all deserving teams and teams with a chance in. It is not NCAA basketball and just are not going to see "December Madness" with tops seeds falling everywhere.
You also need to go back to an 11 game regular season and get rid of the wasted weeks and added wear and tear and injury possibilities of Clemson v SC State and such.
You also need to fix the current plan where 5-8 get a home game and 1-4 do not since the 8-team tourney is said to be absorbed into the Bowl structure.
Personally I would go with 8 - 5 champs, group of 5 champ and 2 at large. Home games for the first round and do the final 4 like we do now.
I would still cut out a meaningless game but I know that's not a very popular idea.

2021 orange level member link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 2:50 PM
    Reply

No longer about finding the best team or most deserving team. Now just a money grab, and popularity sweepstakes. Expect the greed to ruin the bowls and the regular season, and possibly end up with less money and more disgruntled fans.

Just read the reactions on fansites to see why this is a bad idea. USUC and Auburn talking about how this may give them a chance to sneak in with a 9-3 team and upset somebody, not how to become elite. UM talking about how they might have a chance to get in now, instead of having to beat OcryO. UGAly, LSU, and ATM talking about getting 4 SEC teams in every year now instead of how to beat BAMA. ND talking about it being easy to get in every year now due to their popularity, and never having to join a conference now. Everyone expects an SEC lovefest, and biased rankings based on popularity and money rather than talent and ability.

To preserve the meaning of the regular season, conference affiliations, bowl games, and give everyone a fair opportunity, the CFP does need expanding, but not the way everyone is discussing. Top 8 conference champions. Only 1 team per conference. Makes regular season and conference championship mean something. Gives better group of fives an opportunity, and rewards top seeds with easier first round game. Only adds 1 game. Removes most all bias and rankings discussions, just win and you're in. Forces ND and other independents to join a conference if they want to participate.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 11, 2021, 3:15 PM
    Reply

Forgot to mention this proposed SEC lovefest was a setup from the start. Look at the 4 members of the working group advisors. Sankey SEC, Swarbrick ND, Bowles BIG12, and Thomson MWC, a group of 5 commissioner.

It may look different once the whole board weighs in. I sure hope so. This will be a disaster with way too many supposedly unforseen, unintended consequences, that are actually easy to see, and probably intended by the greedy unscrupulous actors involved.

link

Re: TNET: Clemson AD reacts to proposed Playoff expansion


Posted: Jun 12, 2021, 10:37 AM
    Reply

Without the conference champs are seeded 1-4 rules, this would probably look like

1 seed: SEC champ
2 seed: SEC champ game loser
3 seed: SEC team in second place in SEC west
4 seed: SEC team in second place in SEC east
5 seed: Notre Dame (just because)
6 seed: best 3-loss SEC team
7 seed: B1G champ
8 seed: Big 12 champ
9 seed: ACC champ
10 seed: next best SEC team
11 seed: best Go5 team
12 seed: PAC-12 Champ

If they keep that rule, shuffle a bit:

1 seed: SEC champ
2 seed: B1G champ
3 seed: Big 12 champ
4 seed: ACC champ
5 seed: SEC champ game loser
6 seed: SEC team in second place in SEC west
7 seed: SEC team in second place in SEC east
8 seed: Notre Dame (just because)
9 seed: best 3-loss SEC team
10 seed: next best SEC team
11 seed: best Go5 team
12 seed: PAC-12 Champ

2020 would have look like: (Actual 2020 rank in () [Thanks Jeff B]

1) Bama (SEC champ) (1) - Bye
2) Clemson (ACC champ) (2) - Bye
3) Ohio State (B1G champ) (3) - Bye
4) Oklahoma (Big 12 champ) (6) - Bye
5) Notre Dame (4) - R1 Host
6) Texas A&M (5) - R1 Host
7) Florida (7) - R1 Host
8) Cinci (AAC champ) (8) - R1 Host
9) Georgia (9)
10) Iowa State (10)
11) Indiana (11)
12) Coastal Carolina (Sunbelt champ) (12)

USC (the real one) is left out as Pac 12 champ (ranked 17) by virtue of AAC and Sunbelt champs being ranked higher)

What this proposal ignores is that the conference championships already act as round 1, mostly. In 2020 we already saw Alabama-Florida and Clemson-Notre Dame and Oklahoma-Iowa State in those conference championship games. But this format would give them yet another bite at the apple. Plus it would let teams that could not even win their conference DIVISION (let alone the conference championship) into the playoff (A&M was 2nd in SEC West, UGA was 2nd in the East)?

For exciting every upset (say Cinci over UGA in 2020 example) that people will point to every 5 years to say "See, they deserved to be there! That's why we need to expand to 16 teams in the playoffs!" there will be boring lopsided games that had no business being played in the first place, which will end up just setting up rematches (possibly 3rd games, e.g. if ND had been ranked 7th and both Clemson and ND won their games, that would have been a 3rd game).

Killing the golden goose is what they're doing.

2021 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg link

Replies: 22  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: The Season Is Almost Here...FOR SALE : Two tickets South Lower Sec :H Row II seats 13,15 About 12 st...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Tiger Boards - Clemson Football ]
Start New Topic
2294 people have read this post