[BostonCard]

And the money printer that is college football goes brrrrrr…..

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-expansion

First 12 team playoff will be 2024.

BC

[BostonCard]

And the money printer that is college football goes brrrrrr…..

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-expansion

First 12 team playoff will be 2024.

BC

[martyup]

4 years ago I would have been really excited about a 12 team playoff.  Now, not so much because Stanford doesn't have much chance to be in it unless we can climb out of the trash heap we've become.

[martyup]

4 years ago I would have been really excited about a 12 team playoff.  Now, not so much because Stanford doesn't have much chance to be in it unless we can climb out of the trash heap we've become.

[81alum]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

[81alum]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

[cardcrimson]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

I read it the same way. Another tradition bites the dust.

[cardcrimson]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

I read it the same way. Another tradition bites the dust.

[Maple Leaf]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

I read it the same way. Another tradition bites the dust.

So assuming that the Rose Bowl will no longer host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10 on an annual basis, do these two conferences pick another bowl or develop a new bowl or don't bother with continuing with tradition since tradition does count much anymore.

[Maple Leaf]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

I read it the same way. Another tradition bites the dust.

So assuming that the Rose Bowl will no longer host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10 on an annual basis, do these two conferences pick another bowl or develop a new bowl or don't bother with continuing with tradition since tradition does count much anymore.

[82lsju]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

I read it the same way. Another tradition bites the dust.

So assuming that the Rose Bowl will no longer host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10 on an annual basis, do these two conferences pick another bowl or develop a new bowl or don't bother with continuing with tradition since tradition does count much anymore.

with a 12 team playoff it is likely that one or maybe two pac-12 and big-10 teams are in the playoff each year so I guess you could have the first pac-12/big-10 bowl after the playoffs get the highest placed team left from each conference (which for the pac-12 this year is the Alamo bowl, not sure of the big-10 bowl order).  Personally I don't think this arrangement would continue the tradition so I'm guessing it won't be a priority...

[82lsju]

Does this mean that the Rose Bowl will no longer routinely host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10?  I know that there were years when this did not happen, but it sounds like the new arrangement may completely kill this tradition?   Or am I misreading what this is about?

I read it the same way. Another tradition bites the dust.

So assuming that the Rose Bowl will no longer host the winner of the Pac 12 and the Big 10 on an annual basis, do these two conferences pick another bowl or develop a new bowl or don't bother with continuing with tradition since tradition does count much anymore.

with a 12 team playoff it is likely that one or maybe two pac-12 and big-10 teams are in the playoff each year so I guess you could have the first pac-12/big-10 bowl after the playoffs get the highest placed team left from each conference (which for the pac-12 this year is the Alamo bowl, not sure of the big-10 bowl order).  Personally I don't think this arrangement would continue the tradition so I'm guessing it won't be a priority...

[msqueri]

I think the reality is that if a 12 team playoff comes into effect the non-playoff bowls are irrelevant. Good luck getting players to play in those or fans to be interested. Sad. I always felt like the traditional bowl system and the BCS were both great. I could tolerate the College Football Playoff but didn't think it was an improvement. Now the system will be such that the season is a failure for 92 percent of the country. That kind of high stakes works in professional sports in which there is parity (or the playing field can be manipulated to push toward parity), but I find it an odd, soul-less, dispiriting step for an enterprise like college football. If the same 20 teams are competing for the 12 slots every year, that does grave damage to college football for the vast majority of the country.

I suppose my hope is that a 12 team playoff will create a race to the top so to speak and teams like Stanford will double down on football in the hopes of getting into the top 12. In other words, maybe the playoff itself helps create parity as teams gun to get to that level. But that's more hope than prediction. I doubt a 12 team playoff will be an improvement.

[msqueri]

I think the reality is that if a 12 team playoff comes into effect the non-playoff bowls are irrelevant. Good luck getting players to play in those or fans to be interested. Sad. I always felt like the traditional bowl system and the BCS were both great. I could tolerate the College Football Playoff but didn't think it was an improvement. Now the system will be such that the season is a failure for 92 percent of the country. That kind of high stakes works in professional sports in which there is parity (or the playing field can be manipulated to push toward parity), but I find it an odd, soul-less, dispiriting step for an enterprise like college football. If the same 20 teams are competing for the 12 slots every year, that does grave damage to college football for the vast majority of the country.

I suppose my hope is that a 12 team playoff will create a race to the top so to speak and teams like Stanford will double down on football in the hopes of getting into the top 12. In other words, maybe the playoff itself helps create parity as teams gun to get to that level. But that's more hope than prediction. I doubt a 12 team playoff will be an improvement.

[dabigv13]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

[dabigv13]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

[Spiny_Norman]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

Brought it up to us like room service.

[Spiny_Norman]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

Brought it up to us like room service.

[CowboyIndian]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

I think I'm a fan of Stanford football, Pac-12 football and college football generally...or at least I HAVE been. I didn't...and still don't...give a damn about an alleged "undisputed" national champion. When the Rose Bowl gets spun down the drain...that just might be a bridge too far.

[CowboyIndian]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

I think I'm a fan of Stanford football, Pac-12 football and college football generally...or at least I HAVE been. I didn't...and still don't...give a damn about an alleged "undisputed" national champion. When the Rose Bowl gets spun down the drain...that just might be a bridge too far.

[Phogge]

The fans and ESPN are to blame. Almost everyone wants whatever NOW. Whatever system (12, 24, 64 teams) prevail it's not going to beat March Madness. Plus if teams play 16 or 18 games an awful lot of players are going to be hurt, some forever.

Growing up the Rose Bowl was the Ark of the Covenant. I listened to Cal on January '51 and Stanford January '52 and watched the great UCLA teams fall to Michigan State twice. January 1971 took a long time coming and to boot I shot the USIA Jim Plunkett film on the field.

So everybody can have their tournament champion. ESPN will have their financial orgasm and the SEC will take most of the titles. Good for them.

I liked it when UPI and AP crowned two different champions. Made for lots of talk until the next September.

I get a bigger kick watching North Dakota State play in the FCS title game than I do watching Alabama mutually masturbate with a Clemson or an LSU or an Ohio State.

[Phogge]

The fans and ESPN are to blame. Almost everyone wants whatever NOW. Whatever system (12, 24, 64 teams) prevail it's not going to beat March Madness. Plus if teams play 16 or 18 games an awful lot of players are going to be hurt, some forever.

Growing up the Rose Bowl was the Ark of the Covenant. I listened to Cal on January '51 and Stanford January '52 and watched the great UCLA teams fall to Michigan State twice. January 1971 took a long time coming and to boot I shot the USIA Jim Plunkett film on the field.

So everybody can have their tournament champion. ESPN will have their financial orgasm and the SEC will take most of the titles. Good for them.

I liked it when UPI and AP crowned two different champions. Made for lots of talk until the next September.

I get a bigger kick watching North Dakota State play in the FCS title game than I do watching Alabama mutually masturbate with a Clemson or an LSU or an Ohio State.

[Giants]

No one will have exclusive rights to the entire schedule of playoff games in the future.  Given the financial issues at Disney along with the change in leadership of that company, there is no guarantee that ESPN will be a significant player (for example, they are currently taking a hard look at what the NBA is expecting to get in their upcoming negotiations).  It is my guess that Fox, NBC and CBS will all have seats at the table when the money wheel stops spinning.

[Giants]

No one will have exclusive rights to the entire schedule of playoff games in the future.  Given the financial issues at Disney along with the change in leadership of that company, there is no guarantee that ESPN will be a significant player (for example, they are currently taking a hard look at what the NBA is expecting to get in their upcoming negotiations).  It is my guess that Fox, NBC and CBS will all have seats at the table when the money wheel stops spinning.

[81alum]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

I think I'm a fan of Stanford football, Pac-12 football and college football generally...or at least I HAVE been. I didn't...and still don't...give a damn about an alleged "undisputed" national champion. When the Rose Bowl gets spun down the drain...that just might be a bridge too far.

+1

[81alum]

Everyone gets everything he wants. College football football fans wanted an undisputed national champion, and for our sins, they gave us one.

I think I'm a fan of Stanford football, Pac-12 football and college football generally...or at least I HAVE been. I didn't...and still don't...give a damn about an alleged "undisputed" national champion. When the Rose Bowl gets spun down the drain...that just might be a bridge too far.

+1

[BostonCard]

I agree with what everyone else has said in this thread (and I thought I was swimming alone in that regard).  This is bad for student-athletes, who will now play up to 17 games (12 regular season, a conference championship, and up to four playoff games).  It's bad for the 90+% of teams who won't make the playoffs, and who now have a second tier bowl to look forward to, which will be like the NIT, but worse.  It's bad for tradition (and I feel that way as much about the Sugar Bowl and Cotton Bowl as the Rose Bowl), and it is ultimately bad for fans.  What it is good for is TV networks and everyone whose palm will be greased by this system, which is a revenue maximizing instead of student-athlete-welfare-maximizing.

WE've been on this road for a long time, but, so none of us should be surprised that we are here now.

BC

[BostonCard]

I agree with what everyone else has said in this thread (and I thought I was swimming alone in that regard).  This is bad for student-athletes, who will now play up to 17 games (12 regular season, a conference championship, and up to four playoff games).  It's bad for the 90+% of teams who won't make the playoffs, and who now have a second tier bowl to look forward to, which will be like the NIT, but worse.  It's bad for tradition (and I feel that way as much about the Sugar Bowl and Cotton Bowl as the Rose Bowl), and it is ultimately bad for fans.  What it is good for is TV networks and everyone whose palm will be greased by this system, which is a revenue maximizing instead of student-athlete-welfare-maximizing.

WE've been on this road for a long time, but, so none of us should be surprised that we are here now.

BC

[msqueri]

Random making lemonade out of lemons comment:

If college football is going to have as many games as BC suggests, the season should start earlier. Having playoffs extend into January is too anti-climactic past New Year's and too rivalrous with the heating up NFL season. Nobody wants to watch college football in mid-January.

[msqueri]

Random making lemonade out of lemons comment:

If college football is going to have as many games as BC suggests, the season should start earlier. Having playoffs extend into January is too anti-climactic past New Year's and too rivalrous with the heating up NFL season. Nobody wants to watch college football in mid-January.

[Phogge]

Well, we don't have to like and we don't have to watch it. If Bama plays Georgia I won't watch. If SC and their once in a lifetime QB are in it I'll watch.

[Phogge]

Well, we don't have to like and we don't have to watch it. If Bama plays Georgia I won't watch. If SC and their once in a lifetime QB are in it I'll watch.

[Giants]

Random making lemonade out of lemons comment:

If college football is going to have as many games as BC suggests, the season should start earlier. Having playoffs extend into January is too anti-climactic past New Year's and too rivalrous with the heating up NFL season. Nobody wants to watch college football in mid-January.

Look for that to happen when the new contract is signed in 2026.  The current Week 0 will become Week 1.

[Giants]

Random making lemonade out of lemons comment:

If college football is going to have as many games as BC suggests, the season should start earlier. Having playoffs extend into January is too anti-climactic past New Year's and too rivalrous with the heating up NFL season. Nobody wants to watch college football in mid-January.

Look for that to happen when the new contract is signed in 2026.  The current Week 0 will become Week 1.

[dabigv13]

Oh good, more home games with empty student sections. Boooooo.

I was happiest with 10 team conference where you played everybody, Rose Bowls with B10 and P10 Champs, and no NLI or BCS or playoff BS. But can't turn back time.

[dabigv13]

Oh good, more home games with empty student sections. Boooooo.

I was happiest with 10 team conference where you played everybody, Rose Bowls with B10 and P10 Champs, and no NLI or BCS or playoff BS. But can't turn back time.

[martyup]

If the Rose Bowl game hosts one of the playoff games and the committee decides to give first priority to a Pac-10 playoff participant versus a Big 10 participant, we could end up playing USC or UCLA in the Rose Bowl at some point in the future.

[martyup]

If the Rose Bowl game hosts one of the playoff games and the committee decides to give first priority to a Pac-10 playoff participant versus a Big 10 participant, we could end up playing USC or UCLA in the Rose Bowl at some point in the future.

[cardcrimson]

If the Rose Bowl game hosts one of the playoff games and the committee decides to give first priority to a Pac-10 playoff participant versus a Big 10 participant, we could end up playing USC or UCLA in the Rose Bowl at some point in the future.

It would be luck of the draw, or at least, rankings. A twelve team playoff would certainly be seeded by rankings, not by tradition. . . .

[cardcrimson]

If the Rose Bowl game hosts one of the playoff games and the committee decides to give first priority to a Pac-10 playoff participant versus a Big 10 participant, we could end up playing USC or UCLA in the Rose Bowl at some point in the future.

It would be luck of the draw, or at least, rankings. A twelve team playoff would certainly be seeded by rankings, not by tradition. . . .