Again, I’m not advocating the abolition of bowl games. Just the fact that the vast majority of them don’t “matter.”
There are too many bowl games.
That being said, what does "doesn't matter" really mean? For a team like Illinois that has sucked for years, I would think this would be a sign of progress. Otherwise, we might as well be like Auburn and fire the coach every other year. Or we could aspire to be like LSU and win national titles and THEN fire the coach a couple of years later.
My other point centers upon how teams are picked for the alleged playoff. If anyone can explain the process in some objective fashion in less than 5,000 words, I would be surprised. First it was "CONFERENCE CHAMPS!" Then it morphed into who had played the "toughest" schedule, as long as we discounted the SEC teams and the handful of ACC teams who played FCS teams in November. This season, we had a coach claiming his team should be considered because his team had "looked good in its last 3 games." One of those games was against Austin Peay. Austin Peay!
Until there is some objectivity to scheduling and team selection, these "playoff" games don't mean a thing. They are more worthless than some of the bowl games. The two-game structure is the only thing separating some of the playoff games from a lower-tier Jan. 1 bowl game. Before that, we had a two-loss LSU team getting tossed into a final game because there "just wasn't anyone else."