More thoughts on my megatournament idea

[moralvictories]

My plan would be to have a megatournament consisting of all FBS teams fighting for the championship. That means a team would have to win 7 or 8 games depending upon seeding in order to become the champion. So the first 6 games of the season could be for determining what seed a team receives in the tournament.

That way as one poster put it, a team's season isn't over after the 1st game of the season, they still have 5 other games to look forward to to determine their seed in the tournament.

 

[Raptor10]

Congratulations your school doesn't get to have a home game this year better luck next season

 

[thall__]

good thing sensible people are in charge, cuz that sounds terrible.

 

[moralvictories]

good thing sensible people are in charge, cuz that sounds terrible.

What's terrible about it? No less terrible than an undefeated P5 team being left out of the playoffs.

 

[thall__]

What's terrible about it? No less terrible than an undefeated P5 team being left out of the playoffs.

because the playoff has already diminished meaningful bowl games, and it would lead to further player exodus.

say you're a team in rebuilding mode, like Nebraska. say you exceed expectations and go 4-2. then you draw a better team in the first round of your playoff and lose. season is over, you played 7 games. meanwhile championship teams play twice that, essentially doubling the practice time and game film for the players with NFL aspirations.

why would anyone want to go to a school where their team isn't guaranteed to play a full season? imagine going from playing 10 games in high school, to 7 games in college, then 17 in the NFL. it makes no sense for the progression of player development and would only ensure the rich get richer.

as a general fan of college football, why would you be in favor of severely limiting the volume of games played?

your creativity is admirable, but this reads like a stoner who just watched their first CFB game.

 

[moralvictories]

because the playoff has already diminished meaningful bowl games, and it would lead to further player exodus.

say you're a team in rebuilding mode, like Nebraska. say you exceed expectations and go 4-2. then you draw a better team in the first round of your playoff and lose. season is over, you played 7 games. meanwhile championship teams play twice that, essentially doubling the practice time and game film for the players with NFL aspirations.

why would anyone want to go to a school where their team isn't guaranteed to play a full season? imagine going from playing 10 games in high school, to 7 games in college, then 17 in the NFL. it makes no sense for the progression of player development and would only ensure the rich get richer.

as a general fan of college football, why would you be in favor of severely limiting the volume of games played?

your creativity is admirable, but this reads like a stoner who just watched their first CFB game.

Losing teams would have the option of playing other losing teams in exhibition games so they can get practice time in. Problem solved.

 

[thall__]

Losing teams would have the option of playing other losing teams in exhibition games so they can get practice time in. Problem solved.

no, that's another problem created as a result of unintended consequences. athletes are already opting out of games they don't see as meaningful, or making the impulse decision to transfer.

"hey kid, even if we lose in week 7 you can still have a chance to not play in a conference championship, bowl game, or national championship"

i'm sorry, but this is just a stupid idea and its better for you to be told now before you start telling people in real life.

 

[moralvictories]

no, that's another problem created as a result of unintended consequences. athletes are already opting out of games they don't see as meaningful, or making the impulse decision to transfer.

"hey kid, even if we lose in week 7 you can still have a chance to not play in a conference championship, bowl game, or national championship"

i'm sorry, but this is just a stupid idea.

How is that any different than the current system where players opt out of meaningless bowl games?

 

[moralvictories]

because the playoff has already diminished meaningful bowl games, and it would lead to further player exodus.

say you're a team in rebuilding mode, like Nebraska. say you exceed expectations and go 4-2. then you draw a better team in the first round of your playoff and lose. season is over, you played 7 games. meanwhile championship teams play twice that, essentially doubling the practice time and game film for the players with NFL aspirations.

why would anyone want to go to a school where their team isn't guaranteed to play a full season? imagine going from playing 10 games in high school, to 7 games in college, then 17 in the NFL. it makes no sense for the progression of player development and would only ensure the rich get richer.

as a general fan of college football, why would you be in favor of severely limiting the volume of games played?

your creativity is admirable, but this reads like a stoner who just watched their first CFB game.

It's funny how you mention my system makes the regular season meaningless. The regular season has already been rendered meaningless when Florida State won ALL of their games but was denied the chance to compete for a championship.

 

[Mack In Motion]

Zero schools would sign on to any plan that diminishes the number of home games.