re: I don’t buy the whole “24-team playoff is going to devalue the regular season” idea

You keep confusing "people will still go to the games" with "the games still have the same consequences." Those are not the same thing.

Nobody has ever argued that Alabama-Auburn is suddenly going to draw 25,000 people because the playoff expanded. Of course the stadium is going to be packed. It's Alabama-Auburn. People would pack Bryant-Denny and Jordan-Hare if both teams were 5-6 and playing for absolutely nothing but bragging rights. The same goes for all of the other historic rivalries of college football.

That proves people care about college football and rivalries. It does not prove the regular season hasn't been devalued. The issue is what happens when you LOSE.

If Alabama and Georgia were to play in November and everybody already knew both teams are safely in the playoff, then the consequences of losing that game have obviously been reduced. That's not even debatable. Twenty years ago a loss in a game like that could wreck your national championship season. Now you might drop from the #3 seed to the #6 seed and get another shot at the same team six weeks later.

And then you turn around and say, "Georgia-Bama Part II in January will be freaking awesome." You're making our argument for us. If Georgia-Bama Part II is the game that really determines who advances toward the national championship, then what exactly was Georgia-Bama Part I? An appetizer? That's the entire point!

College football was unique because the regular season WAS the playoff. Every Saturday had enormous consequences because there were very few mulligans. You couldn't just shrug off a loss and say, "No big deal, we'll get them again in January." That's what made games like Alabama-Auburn, Michigan-Ohio State, Florida-Florida State, Nebraska-Oklahoma, etc. so enormous.

There was finality to them. Now we're moving toward NFL logic: Just get into the tournament. Lose a big game? Fine. Lose two? Probably still fine. Lose three? Depending on how big they eventually make this thing, maybe still fine. Then we'll settle everything in December and January anyway. And that's supposedly NOT devaluing the regular season? Come on.

And the attendance argument is especially silly. Army-Navy sells out regardless of whether either team has national championship implications. The Iron Bowl would sell out if Alabama and Auburn were both 6-5. People going to a football game tells you they want to watch the football game. It doesn't tell you anything about how costly losing that game is.

Let's take your argument to its logical conclusion. Suppose Alabama is 9-2 entering the Iron Bowl and everybody knows they're making a 16-team or 24-team playoff regardless of what happens against Auburn. Will Bryant-Denny still be packed? Absolutely. Will Alabama fans desperately want to beat Auburn? Absolutely. Will the game have the same NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP consequences as an Iron Bowl where Alabama has to win or its title hopes are over? Obviously not.

That's the distinction you keep dancing around. Nobody is saying expanded playoffs make big games boring. We're saying they make losing big games less damaging. And when losing becomes less damaging, the regular season becomes less consequential.

You can prefer that system. That's fine. If what you want is more playoff games and more rematches between big-name teams in January, just say that. But don't sit here and tell everyone the regular season hasn't been devalued because fans still showed up to watch Alabama-Auburn.

Fans would show up to watch Alabama-Auburn if the winner got a ham sandwich. That's not the point.