Don’t understand expanding the CFP to eight....

[DarthCat]

as that would just give us MORE unentertaining blowout games as 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, etc. The goal was ultimately to get 1 vs. 2 for the championship. And again this year, we clearly will. But I don’t understand the argument to expand the undercard matches at all as a fix for the debacles that happened yesterday. Yeah, four vs. five could be a good game. But I can see that type of matchup on one of the bowl games. Wanting to see what a plucky 6th seed would do if they got to the championship is the same type of blowout games we are already seeing.

 

[corbi296]

as that would just give us MORE unentertaining blowout games as 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, etc. The goal was ultimately to get 1 vs. 2 for the championship. And again this year, we clearly will. But I don’t understand the argument to expand the undercard matches at all as a fix for the debacles that happened yesterday. Yeah, four vs. five could be a good game. But I can see that type of matchup on one of the bowl games. Wanting to see what a plucky 6th seed would do if they got to the championship is the same type of blowout games we are already seeing.

I disagree. I would argue that yesterday's games only strengthened the argument that Georgia belonged in the playoffs. Increasingly they look like the only team, other than perhaps Clemson, capable of giving Alabama a game. The issue is that it was impossible to convincingly put forth that argument without seeing seeing undefeated ND and one loss Oklahoma play against Clemson and Alabama yesterday. In my mind the goal of the eight team playoff format isn't necessarily to generate 4 competitive playoff games but rather to make sure that the best two teams ultimately square off in the national championship game. As things stand, I think a compelling argument can be made that Georgia may be the most worthy opponent to play Alabama in the NC game.

 

[Catreporter]

I disagree. I would argue that yesterday's games only strengthened the argument that Georgia belonged in the playoffs. Increasingly they look like the only team, other than perhaps Clemson, capable of giving Alabama a game. The issue is that it was impossible to convincingly put forth that argument without seeing seeing undefeated ND and one loss Oklahoma play against Clemson and Alabama yesterday. In my mind the goal of the eight team playoff format isn't necessarily to generate 4 competitive playoff games but rather to make sure that the best two teams ultimately square off in the national championship game. As things stand, I think a compelling argument can be made that Georgia may be the most worthy opponent to play Alabama in the NC game.

They already played just four weeks ago and Georgia lost! End of story. Should we make it two out of three now?

 

[corbi296]

They already played just four weeks ago and Georgia lost! End of story. Should we make it two out of three now?

Sure but I could just as easily see them winning the next game against Alabama. If the goal is to have the two best teams in college football play against each other in the national championship game, them Georgia should have been part of the playoff field.

 

[DarthCat]

Sure but I could just as easily see them winning the next game against Alabama. If the goal is to have the two best teams in college football play against each other in the national championship game, them Georgia should have been part of the playoff field.

Then the issue isn’t just expanding the field, as that would let in a lot of undeserving teams. It’s more along how do you better select the four that get in. Frankly, this year we didn’t even need a 3rd and 4th team, as Clemson and Alabama are clearly the top two. The goal of this was to find an undisputed National Champion, and this format does that. Letting in four more increasingly flawed teams wouldn’t help that.

Plus, if Georgia gets in and beats Alabama, then they each have one loss on the season, against each other?! How does that really tell you who should be NC? Catreporter said it. That game was played and Georgia lost. They shouldn’t be given another shot to tie up the series. They’re out.

The debate over who should have been 3 and 4 is irrelevant. This is about finding who’s number one, or to get the right game of 1 vs. 2. This format does it.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Then the issue isn’t just expanding the field, as that would let in a lot of undeserving teams. It’s more along how do you better select the four that get in. Frankly, this year we didn’t even need a 3rd and 4th team, as Clemson and Alabama are clearly the top two. The goal of this was to find an undisputed National Champion, and this format does that. Letting in four more increasingly flawed teams wouldn’t help that.

Plus, if Georgia gets in and beats Alabama, then they each have one loss on the season, against each other?! How does that really tell you who should be NC? Catreporter said it. That game was played and Georgia lost. They shouldn’t be given another shot to tie up the series. They’re out.

The debate over who should have been 3 and 4 is irrelevant. This is about finding who’s number one, or to get the right game of 1 vs. 2. This format does it.

I think the only argument is to give UCF a shot. Until they lose, there is always a debate. Arguably they should have been in over OU.

 

[BleedingPurple15]

as that would just give us MORE unentertaining blowout games as 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, etc. The goal was ultimately to get 1 vs. 2 for the championship. And again this year, we clearly will. But I don’t understand the argument to expand the undercard matches at all as a fix for the debacles that happened yesterday. Yeah, four vs. five could be a good game. But I can see that type of matchup on one of the bowl games. Wanting to see what a plucky 6th seed would do if they got to the championship is the same type of blowout games we are already seeing.

Well, this year, most of the bowl games have been blowouts. What do you propose to do about that?

The fact of the matter is that bowl games are not representative of the regular season. With that much time off, players sitting out, differing levels of motivation, you just never know which team is going to show up.

 

[TejasCat]

They already played just four weeks ago and Georgia lost! End of story. Should we make it two out of three now?

Well Georgia had to beat Alabama twice last year?

 

[corbi296]

Then the issue isn’t just expanding the field, as that would let in a lot of undeserving teams. It’s more along how do you better select the four that get in. Frankly, this year we didn’t even need a 3rd and 4th team, as Clemson and Alabama are clearly the top two. The goal of this was to find an undisputed National Champion, and this format does that. Letting in four more increasingly flawed teams wouldn’t help that.

Plus, if Georgia gets in and beats Alabama, then they each have one loss on the season, against each other?! How does that really tell you who should be NC? Catreporter said it. That game was played and Georgia lost. They shouldn’t be given another shot to tie up the series. They’re out.

The debate over who should have been 3 and 4 is irrelevant. This is about finding who’s number one, or to get the right game of 1 vs. 2. This format does it.

Does the basketball selection committee believe that every team that makes the NCAA Tournament has a realistic chance to win the National Championship? No, but they do realize that games are not won on paper and every once in a while a Cinderella team does emerge. Expanding the playoff to eight teams gives undefeated teams like this year’s ND team a rightful chance to prove they are for real, gives great teams like Georgia a second chance to knock off the 10,000 lb gorilla and gives teams like UCF a chance to prove that a non P5 conference champion can compete with the Alabamas of the world. I see no harm in that and believe that it would make the college football season a more exciting experience for teams and fans alike.

 

[Styre]

The debate over who should have been 3 and 4 is irrelevant. This is about finding who’s number one, or to get the right game of 1 vs. 2. This format does it.

So we should get the right game of 1 vs. 2. Unless 2 already lost to 1 during the regular season, then we should put in 3 or 4 or whatever because reasons.

The purpose of a playoff is to determine an undisputed champion. You go into a playoff with the understanding that the winner of the playoff is the champion, even if they weren't the best team in the field. If I ask you who won the 2014 D1 basketball national championship, you'll correctly say UConn, even though they were clearly not the best team in the country. You probably also remember Loyola's run to the Final Four last year, which is in the record books as an official Final Four appearance, even though they were clearly not one of the four best teams in the country and would never even have sniffed the postseason under a CFP-style system. Whether you think results like that have any value should determine your attitude toward a proper playoff field.

 

[Hungry Jack]

4 teams:
CONS:
1) poses the power conference conundrum (kinda like the Problem of Fitz, but consequential) where 5 conference champs vie for 4 spots
2) almost certainly will exclude a team that can make a strong case for a bid

PROS:
1) Only 2 additional games in what has become a long season (vs 3 for 8 team playoff)

8 Teams
PROS
1) pretty much assures that all deserving teams will have a shot at the playoff
2) eliminates the power conference conundrum
3) MOAR college football for junkies like me

CONS
1) Almost assures that an undeserving team will experience a bloody sacrifice at the hands of Bama in round 1
2) championship game teams will play a 16 game season. That’s kinda nuts
3) Norte Dame benefits greatly from 3 at large bids

 

[NUCat320]

Does the basketball selection committee believe that every team that makes the NCAA Tournament has a realistic chance to win the National Championship? No, but they do realize that games are not won on paper and every once in a while a Cinderella team does emerge. Expanding the playoff to eight teams gives undefeated teams like this year’s ND team a rightful chance to prove they are for real, gives great teams like Georgia a second chance to knock off the 10,000 lb gorilla and gives teams like UCF a chance to prove that a non P5 conference champion can compete with the Alabamas of the world. I see no harm in that and believe that it would make the college football season a more exciting experience for teams and fans alike.

Could you imagine OSU getting blown out by Purdue and it being irrelevant to their CFP prospects?

Nobody pays attention to the hoops regular season because it’s all prelude — we’re so focused on the tourney that a February Duke-UNC (I assume UNC is good still, but I truly don’t know) battle is only relevant in potentially determining which little number will be next to their name.

College football is a 13-week (or 12 if you’re ND) single elimination tournament. If you win all 13, you’re in (unless you’re a have-not). If you don’t, then your fate is in the hands of whatever Frank Beamer’s nephew told him last weekend.

Now, because THE GOAL IS TO MAKE MONEY, we’re almost certainly expanding the week of Christmas by 2025, but don’t trick yourself into believing it’s about anything but securing four more televised properties to sell.

 

[Just Gary]

Just because this year it appears Alabama and Clemson are the two best doesn't mean that happens every year. Each Power 5 conference plays their own teams and depending on the strength of those teams, the national champ could be labeled the 4th, 5th, or 6th best. Would Ohio State have been beaten like Notre Dame or could the Buckeyes, who surged late, have beaten them? The first playoff champion, Ohio State, was questionable of even being in the playoff. Last year, Alabama was close to not making the playoff. And a couple of years back, Penn State should have been the B1G rep. I think for the fan base, each power 5 champion should be in the playoff, along with the 3 best non-champions. Then let's have an event that can pit conferences against each other until we get a true champion. It would make all fans happy.

 

[NUCat320]

8 Teams
PROS
1) pretty much assures that all deserving teams will have a shot at the playoff

Define “deserving”.

When Michigan got blown out by Alabama, wouldn’t we be beating the drum for two-loss Wazzu?

 

[corbi296]

Could you imagine OSU getting blown out by Purdue and it being irrelevant to their CFP prospects?

Nobody pays attention to the hoops regular season because it’s all prelude — we’re so focused on the tourney that a February Duke-UNC (I assume UNC is good still, but I truly don’t know) battle is only relevant in potentially determining which little number will be next to their name.

College football is a 13-week (or 12 if you’re ND) single elimination tournament. If you win all 13, you’re in (unless you’re a have-not). If you don’t, then your fate is in the hands of whatever Frank Beamer’s nephew told him last weekend.

Now, because THE GOAL IS TO MAKE MONEY, we’re almost certainly expanding the week of Christmas by 2025, but don’t trick yourself into believing it’s about anything but securing four more televised properties to sell.

Nobody pays attention to the hoops regular season? We must live on a different planet. Everybody I know pays attention to the regular season because it dictates who gets a shot at the tournament. That would be even more so the case in an eight team college football scenario because the margin for error is still pretty small. It is unlikely that any of those eight teams could have more than 1 loss out of 12 games and still make the playoffs.

The answer to your question is yes, I could imagine a great team having one bad day and still having a chance at a college football championship.

 

[NUCat320]

Nobody pays attention to the hoops regular season? We must live on a different planet. Everybody I know pays attention to the regular season because it dictates who gets a shot at the tournament. That would be even more so the case in an eight team college football scenario because the margin for error is still pretty small. It is unlikely that any of those eight teams could have more than 1 loss out of 12 games and still make the playoffs.

The answer to your question is yes, I could imagine a great team having one bad day and still having a chance at a college football championship.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...ss-bad-for-college-basketball-ncaa-tournament

D1 attendance has been down 21 of the last 27 years (though last year’s increase broke a string of 10 straight years of decline):
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2019/Attendance.pdf (page 18)

 

[corbi296]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...ss-bad-for-college-basketball-ncaa-tournament

Yes, it diminishes the college basketball season somewhat because the casual fans don’t pay attention until tournament time. That doesn’t mean that the true core college basketball fans are any less engaged. Besides, I think this phenomenon would be muted in college football because the playoff would only involve 8 teams (vs 64) and there are not as many games in a college football season vs. a college basketball season. The margin for error to make the college football playoff will still be very small making every regular season college football game still very important.

 

[pawildcat]

Then the issue isn’t just expanding the field, as that would let in a lot of undeserving teams. It’s more along how do you better select the four that get in. Frankly, this year we didn’t even need a 3rd and 4th team, as Clemson and Alabama are clearly the top two. The goal of this was to find an undisputed National Champion, and this format does that. Letting in four more increasingly flawed teams wouldn’t help that.

Plus, if Georgia gets in and beats Alabama, then they each have one loss on the season, against each other?! How does that really tell you who should be NC? Catreporter said it. That game was played and Georgia lost. They shouldn’t be given another shot to tie up the series. They’re out.

The debate over who should have been 3 and 4 is irrelevant. This is about finding who’s number one, or to get the right game of 1 vs. 2. This format does it.

Select the champions of the five P5 conferences. Then select the top three ranked teams outside of the champions. If it is desired to get non-P5 teams involved, reserve a slot for them. Standardize the number of conference games for the P5, so one isn't playing eight games and the other nine. So you have five selections basically determined on the field, rather than by committee. If one league is stronger than the rest, they have a chance to get an extra team in through the three at-large choices. There is always going to be griping about who gets left out, but the answer for the P5 teams would be: If you don't like it, win your conference.

The present format obviously doesn't create an undisputed national champion because you're leaving at least one of the five best conferences in the country out every year. You simply can't do that and say it's a national championship. It would be as if they'd left Michigan out of the basketball tourney last season because the B1G had a down year. No format will be free of disputes, but having one that leaves out major players makes zero sense.

Clemson and Alabama might clearly be the best now. Things go in cycles. You can't base your playoff format on the fact that two teams dominated in a given year. I'm amazed at the number of people who seem to have no problem with 38 bowl games featuring a raft of mediocre teams, yet balk at an eight-team playoff that would include conference champions and mainly one- or two-loss teams.

 

[NUCat320]

Yes, it diminishes the college basketball season somewhat because the casual fans don’t pay attention until tournament time. That doesn’t mean that the true core college basketball fans are any less engaged. Besides, I think this phenomenon would be muted in college football because the playoff would only involve 8 teams (vs 64) and there are not as many games in a college football season vs. a college basketball season. The margin for error to make the college football playoff will still be very small making every regular season college football game still very important.

There are fewer core fans today than there were a decade ago.

 

[Styre]

Define “deserving”.

When Michigan got blown out by Alabama, wouldn’t we be beating the drum for two-loss Wazzu?

As it stands, Washington State would be ranked behind Michigan, Florida, LSU, and Penn State for the final at-large berth, so probably not.

 

[Catreporter]

Well Georgia had to beat Alabama twice last year?

No they didn't. Only meeting was in the championship game. Bama lost to Auburn and Georgia won SEC championship vs. LSU.

 

[willycat]

Sure but I could just as easily see them winning the next game against Alabama. If the goal is to have the two best teams in college football play against each other in the national championship game, them Georgia should have been part of the playoff field.

Go back to a one game championship, with teams chosen by computer analysis and votes of a select few football minds.

 

[willycat]

4 teams:
CONS:
1) poses the power conference conundrum (kinda like the Problem of Fitz, but consequential) where 5 conference champs vie for 4 spots
2) almost certainly will exclude a team that can make a strong case for a bid

PROS:
1) Only 2 additional games in what has become a long season (vs 3 for 8 team playoff)

8 Teams
PROS
1) pretty much assures that all deserving teams will have a shot at the playoff
2) eliminates the power conference conundrum
3) MOAR college football for junkies like me

CONS
1) Almost assures that an undeserving team will experience a bloody sacrifice at the hands of Bama in round 1
2) championship game teams will play a 16 game season. That’s kinda nuts
3) Norte Dame benefits greatly from 3 at large bids

Agree with most of what you said, especially that the season is already to long. All schools need to play the same amount of games and yes that includes ND. Also 8 teams does not insure that all deserving teams will get a shot. There would them be complaining that team #9 or #10 should be in instead of #8.

 

[corbi296]

Go back to a one game championship, with teams chosen by computer analysis and votes of a select few football minds.

No way, that’s not good for anybody. not good for the game, not good for the teams, not good for the players, not good for the fans and not good for business. Not happening.

 

[Medill '03]

Well Georgia had to beat Alabama twice last year?

No they did not.

 

[Fitz51]

Go back to a one game championship, with teams chosen by computer analysis and votes of a select few football minds.

It would seriously make no difference to me. It would also make more bowl games significant, perhaps. It’s all fine. No one looks back at 30 years ago and days the champs weren’t “real.”

 

[curdog]

No they didn't. Only meeting was in the championship game. Bama lost to Auburn and Georgia won SEC championship vs. LSU.

Georgia beat Auburn in the sec championship, not LSU

 

[Catreporter]

Georgia beat Auburn in the sec championship, not LSU

Yes, ok, point was the same, Georgia did NOT have to beat Bama twice last year.

 

[zbag51]

Set up a ladder rung system, seeded 1-120. The first week, 1 plays 2, 3 plays 4, etc all the up to the 119 v 120 game. Win, move up a rung, lose move down. The season lasts five years, each year has 12 games. Whoever is on top at the end wins.

 

[DaCat]

Set up a ladder rung system, seeded 1-120. The first week, 1 plays 2, 3 plays 4, etc all the up to the 119 v 120 game. Win, move up a rung, lose move down. The season lasts five years, each year has 12 games. Whoever is on top at the end wins.

Waste of time. Why go through all that trouble when you have the Transitive Property?

 

[zbag51]

Waste of time. Why go through all that trouble when you have the Transitive Property?

Ah, true!

 

[StreamCat]

I can’t explain it, but I just don’t care who’s national champion, unless, of course, it’s the Cats.

 

[Hans81]

4 teams:
CONS:
1) poses the power conference conundrum (kinda like the Problem of Fitz, but consequential) where 5 conference champs vie for 4 spots
2) almost certainly will exclude a team that can make a strong case for a bid

PROS:
1) Only 2 additional games in what has become a long season (vs 3 for 8 team playoff)

8 Teams
PROS
1) pretty much assures that all deserving teams will have a shot at the playoff
2) eliminates the power conference conundrum
3) MOAR college football for junkies like me

CONS
1) Almost assures that an undeserving team will experience a bloody sacrifice at the hands of Bama in round 1
2) championship game teams will play a 16 game season. That’s kinda nuts
3) Norte Dame benefits greatly from 3 at large bids

I promote going to a 6 team format, whereby #1 & #2 both get a bye and 3 seed plays 6 seed, and 4 plays 5. That seems to be a win/win with by expanding the field somewhat, eliminating the Power 5 conundrum, and not making the playoff too lengthy.

 

[phatcat]

"WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THE BEST TEAM (as of december) GETS IN! CANNOT TAKE THE CHANCE THAT THE 8TH BEST TEAM MIGHT GET HOT AND WIN OUT!"

so say the folks that brought us : "REPLAY DELAYS ARE WORTH IT TO BE SURE EVERY CALL IS RIGHT! "

what a joke

 

[Fitz51]

"WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THE BEST TEAM (as of december) GETS IN! CANNOT TAKE THE CHANCE THAT THE 8TH BEST TEAM MIGHT GET HOT AND WIN OUT!"

so say the folks that brought us : "REPLAY DELAYS ARE WORTH IT TO BE SURE EVERY CALL IS RIGHT! "

what a joke

You know what wastes more time than replays? Another week of playoff games.

 

[zbag51]

I promote going to a 6 team format, whereby #1 & #2 both get a bye and 3 seed plays 6 seed, and 4 plays 5. That seems to be a win/win with by expanding the field somewhat, eliminating the Power 5 conundrum, and not making the playoff too lengthy.

I would prefer this to 8 teams, I think. Is there a chance one of the 5th and 6th teams are better than/more deserving than 1 and 2? Probably not, but the argument could be made that one of the 5th and 6th teams is as good/deserving as 3 or 4. This would allow teams like UGA a chance to get back in to the final 4 with a win.

Edit: For the record, I’d rather leave it at 4.

 

[Deeringfish]

The funny thing to me is how so many people thought a playoff would accurately determine a champion. No matter what you do people will always have excuses and extenuating circumstances to argue that the best team didn't play or got jobbed by bad calls or and unfortunate injury or time zone drama.

 

[pawildcat]

The funny thing to me is how so many people thought a playoff would accurately determine a champion. No matter what you do people will always have excuses and extenuating circumstances to argue that the best team didn't play or got jobbed by bad calls or and unfortunate injury or time zone drama.

Classy teams and coaches don't alibi. Bad losers will always have excuses. The only way I know of to determine a champion, whether of a division, a league or nationally, is to play football games on a football field.

 

[Catreporter]

Sobering note for ESPN and playoff expansion lovers. This year's ratings were DOWN considerably despite having an iconic national brand Notre Dame team in it. Too many of the same teams year after year and not such great games!

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Sobering note for ESPN and playoff expansion lovers. This year's ratings were DOWN considerably despite having an iconic national brand Notre Dame team in it. Too many of the same teams year after year and not such great games!

You’ll have the same championship game next year.