January 6, 2011 · 6:55 AM

Two compelling arguments against a college football playoff

Mike Slive is a greedy hypocrite.

Gary Patterson is a realist.

(Notice I didn’t bring politicians into the conversation.)

8 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

8 responses to “Two compelling arguments against a college football playoff”

  1. Vindexdawg
    January 6, 2011 at 8:47 AM

    It is more than a little dishonest of Dodd to omit what he himself and everyone else said in the wake of Southern Cal’s 55-19 demolition of Oklahoma: this is is, the Greatest Of All Time, nobody could have beaten them, this shows that the BCS works!!! Now, five years later, that trophy is teeterinng on the edge of being forfeited, the Trojan legacy of the 00’s decade seems permanently tainted by Bush and Carroll, and the people who said BCS works 6 years ago are the ones whining for a playoff. Look, I hold no brief for Slive’s change of position. He IS a greedy opportunist. Instead of trying to rise above what the opposition in the Big 10 and Pac 10 were saying 6 years ago, he is simply joining them.

    Like

  2. Toom
    January 6, 2011 at 9:16 AM

    Jeez. Let him go undefeated again in a year where there is no undefeated Oregon and Auburn and leave his team out of the NC. He’d change his tune real quick.

    Like

  3. BulldogBen
    January 6, 2011 at 9:51 AM

    Sigh. Not sure how either of those are “arguments” against a playoff.

    I’m surprised you didn’t work a slag of Mark Bradley in there somehow.

    Every year those on the inside looking out say things are fine the way they are. They are NEVER the best judge. Doesn’t make it right.

    Like

    • Senator Blutarsky
      January 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

      1. Mike Slive in his heart of hearts doesn’t really want a playoff because in most years he believes an SEC team will be in the BCS title game. Even something as relatively benign as a plus-one threatens that.

      2. Gary Patterson realizes that a multi-round D-1 playoff favors schools with depth. A non-AQ school’s best chance is a puncher’s chance in a one-game title format.

      Those aren’t my arguments. They’re theirs.

      Like

  4. BulldogBen
    January 6, 2011 at 11:21 AM

    Well, I guess they are technically arguments. I guess I should’ve said they aren’t “compelling”. They’re biased and self-serving.

    1) Then Mike Slive is a fool. SEC is having an unprecedented run right now but it will NOT always be that way. Such is the nature of the beast. It’s incredibly short-sighted.

    2) I could use Patterson’s argument that they don’t deserve to be there to begin with if they can’t play tough teams 3 weeks in a row. See also: arguments for playing an SEC schedule, blah, blah.

    I enjoy your blog and if ever in a bar somewhere I’ll buy you a beer for the time you spend on it. But, I simply don’t share your opinion on a playoff and it drives me nuts.

    As for Bradley, that guy must’ve done something to your family. *shrug*

    Like

    • Senator Blutarsky
      January 6, 2011 at 11:49 AM

      I’ll take you up on the beer, but I think you’re missing my point.

      Mike Slive is the head of (arguably) the most powerful conference in the country, one that saw a member institution get screwed out of the title game a few years ago. But he doesn’t want a playoff.

      Gary Patterson is on a stage right now where his forceful advocacy of a playoff would certainly garner a ton of attention. But he doesn’t want a playoff.

      They’re biased and self-serving? Of course they are. That’s the point.

      Who’s out there with any juice advocating a playoff right now?

      Like

  5. Dawg 39
    January 6, 2011 at 8:26 PM

    Except for 2005 when It worked, I still believe a plus 1 would have satisfied my desire to see a true NC not an MNC like we have now with the BCS (Bull Crap System).

    Like