Nick Saban isn’t into participation trophies.

There’s a lot of the usual blah-blah-blah from Saban’s first pre-natty presser, but there’s also this:

Q. I’m curious about the semifinal games, they were both blowouts. Do you feel like going to an expansion with 12 teams would maybe help that and create more competitive games, or do you think that would diminish the regular season too much?

COACH SABAN: Well, I don’t necessarily agree with your assessment of our game. I can’t speak to the other game. But it was a really hard-fought game for us, I think. And we have a tremendous amount of respect for the team that we played.

I don’t know that expanding — if this is the best four teams and they played each other, I don’t see the logic in it if we had more teams there would be better games. I don’t know how that adds up.

It’s not supposed to!

But the more we expand the playoffs, the more we minimize bowl games, the importance of bowl games, which I said when we went to four. So I don’t think that’s changed. And I think it’s also come to fruition.

You’d almost think the man understands why some players opt-out.

13 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs, Nick Saban Rules

13 responses to “Nick Saban isn’t into participation trophies.

  1. Dylan Dreyer's Booty

    Nick knows what’s real and what is artificial. He doesn’t really have time for the bs, but he can work around it to get where he wants to go.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Russ

    Nick speaks the truth. Want better games? Fix the bowls and entice players to stay/play.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Down Island Way

      “I don’t know how that adds up.” little nicky ain’t got time for no friggin’ math…(though we know he’s got an analyst on it)…

      Like

  3. ASEF

    Kind of funny that only real snooze-bowls… were the playoff games.

    Less playoffs!!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Interesting perspective from the Staples podcast this morning – other than those who are surefire 1st round selections, it may make more sense to play in the bowl game and improve draft position than to sit out. Not sure I agree, but it did make me think about it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • classiccitycanine

      I haven’t noticed any Day 3 picks sitting out bowl games. It’s generally the guys with 1st and 2nd round potential that sit out. That said, if you’re not a surefire 1st rounder, you should weigh the injury risk against the opportunity to improve your stock with a high profile performance like Azeez did last year.

      Like

      • Even with Azeez, the fact he played at least helped mitigate some of his slide due to whatever the health issue was that pushed him into the 2nd. He slides further IMHO if he hadn’t played and showed out.

        Like

  5. whybotherdude

    If Saban retires and still wants to stay active the NCAA should make him the CFB Czar and let him manage the entire program. He generally has good ideas and knows what is import to the sport. Plus he would actually do a lot of it for the kids, not just say he was.
    Why not make the “meaningless bowl games” a two part game. First half could be the starters and the second half be second stringers and expected starters for next year. Bowl games should not impact Redshirt seasons so coaches could see what they have going into the pre-season next year. Fans would be interested in seeing the future now, or I would if my team wasn’t in the CFP.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. huntindawg

    “But it was a really hard-fought game for us, I think. And we have a tremendous amount of respect for the team that we played.”

    (Saban thinking to himself: “Damn, what was the name of that team we had the scrimmage against?”)

    Liked by 1 person

    • stoopnagle

      I just re-watched their first drive. That game was a no contest. They simply ran it right down Cincy’s throat in a way we should’ve been able to do — but didn’t — last year.

      Like

  7. hailtogeorgia9

    If they really want to expand the playoff and also try to make the games competitive, they should look at adopting the AFL Final Eight System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFL_final_eight_system)

    First round matchups are broken into qualifying games (1v4, 2v3) and elimination games (5v8, 6v7).

    Winners of the qualifying games have a bye the following week into the semis, while the losers of the qualifying games face the winners of the elimination games in what amounts to a play-in game for the other two semifinal slots. Losers of the elimination games are eliminated.

    To avoid rematches, you swap the sides of the bracket in the semis. So assuming chalk, semis would be 1v3 and 2v4. Winners of those two advance to the final.

    This seems like it would work great for what the committee (and Mickey) want as far as entertaining fans and getting more teams the chance to compete. At the same time, you get some more compelling matchups and ideally more competitive games (though the top four matchups are probably still going to be lopsided).

    Finally, you’re not devaluing the regular season as much because there’s a real benefit to finishing in the top 4 of the rankings (top four teams are guaranteed either a bye or double elimination by virtue of making the qualifying games instead of elimination games).

    Make too much sense?

    Like

  8. Saban only says words he thinks benefit him.

    Have we forgotten a few years ago he was wanting radical rule changes so his vaunted defenses could hold up against spread offenses?

    Instead he just gave in and started recruiting QBs.

    Sorry, Saban cannot be trusted on any opinion he gives publicly.

    Like