- I, for one, am not in favor of a playoff system for college football. I think the national championship should have to do with how a team played OVER THE ENTIRE SEASON. With a playoff system - even if it's with just the few top teams - you would always run the risk of one team who just happened to be "hotter" at the end of the year. I don't think they should change the system as it is now (even though it is far from perfect). I don't really think it matters if there is a "true" champion or not, because no matter the system, there are always going to be glitches. So I vote 'no playoff.'
- I do NOT, however, like what has happened with the bowl situation in college football. It seems like there used to be a few bowl games towards the end of the year, and then on New Year's Day you had the "big" bowl games, and that was that. There are just WAY too many bowl games now. And what's with this championship game being played on Thursday, January 8th!?! Get rid of some of these games between .500 teams, and condense the bowl season. More games does not equal better football (IMHO).
- I also don't think it's fair for teams to play in their home state for bowl games. I don't know how you would get around this, but it seems like the California teams and Southern teams always win the bowl games. Why? Because they're almost always playing within a couple hours of home. I actually think this has a lot to do with why the Big Ten suffers in bowls so much. I know you wouldn't want a bowl game played in the midwest - it would cost tourism dollars and pre-game/post-game parties wouldn't be near as much fun... but I'd like to see the USC's or Florida's come play in the snow against the Big Ten and then see how well they do.
- And finally... one thing that absolutely drove me NUTS watching the game last night - and so many games during the season - is this new wrinkle where offenses line up without a huddle, and then EVERYONE looks to the sideline for the play signal. I understand it's supposed to give an edge to the offense, it keeps defenses off balance, doesn't allow for substitutions and whatnot... but I HATE IT! It makes the players look like idiots, and I think it strips needed leadership qualities from the quarterback position. I also think it can cost the offense an edge as well, because so many times the offense then seems unsettled. In my opinion, once an offensive player is set, they shouldn't be able to move again. What's wrong with giving the quarterback the play, allowing them to audible if need be, but letting the quarterback lead the offense? This new way seems to put the coaches too far out on the field to me. Not literally, but it allows them to be too much a part of the game. I dunno, I don't like it.
Peace out; and in.