Don’t understand expanding the CFP to eight....
- Thread starter DarthCat
- Start date
They lost by 8 despite lacking their superstar QB. They probably win with Milton. They absolutely would have belonged in an 8 team field.
(And they would have belonged regardless as the best G5 team would have an auto bid.)
(And they would have belonged regardless as the best G5 team would have an auto bid.)
I don’t like the 8 team playoff. It starts to diminish the regular season too much. Funny saying this as a Buckeye fan but it makes it too easy for teams like Alabama, OSU, Clemson, and Oklahoma to make the playoffs. Lose one game and they’re still in, lose 2 and probably still in the dance. I say take out the idea that a P5 Conf Champ gets an automatic bid. Top 6 ranked teams after the Conference Championships. If you win your Conference and aren’t a top 6 team, either you or your Conference doesn’t deserve to be in it. Top 2 ranked teams get a first round bye, next 4 play the first round with higher ranked playing at home.
Yes, they would have belonged in an 8 team field. No, they are not good enough to be worthy of competing for the National Championship.
By definition anyone in a playoff field is worthy of winning it. I don’t care if they’re not the best team in the country, all I care about is an undisputed champion in a playoff field with no artificial barriers to entry. Loyola was not good enough to be worthy of competing in the Final Four.
I think not having two conference champions in the playoff diminishes the regular season. Basing it on rankings gives whatever conference is the darling of the moment a big advantage as they probably start the season with multiple teams in the top 10. And I'm not a fan of byes, either.
Artificial barriers like winning games against good teams and not losing to bad teams?
No, artificial barriers like having a group of people sit down in a room and determine what constitutes a good win and a bad loss while largely ignoring objective standards like "won your conference."
I see what you’re saying and I’m not a fan of byes either, but with 6 there is no choice. If it was the top 6 this year it would be Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Georgia, and OSU. UCF might have a complaint, but generally that’s a strong playoff group without out too much argument. If it was P5 Conference Champions +3 at large, it would be Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Oklahoma, Washington, Georgia, for sure, Michigan, UCF, LSU, and Florida arguing for the last two spots- and it’s difficult to really say who deserves the inclusion with the final two. You also could have added Texas, Northwestern, Utah, and/or WVU into the mix which could drive out one of the better teams. In that scenario it adds the Cinderella quality which would be great for those programs, but if the argument is “Let’s get the best teams in there”, that could prove to be a failure in the objective.
Bottom line, is given the current structure of FBS it is difficult to get the perfect playoff system. It is a perfect system for debate however.
Currently, Alabama and Clemson seem to be playing at a higher standard and simply choosing them to play for the championship seems reasonable to many.
In a few years, the playing field may be much more balanced and it might not be so easy to pick a final 2.
I still favor an 8 team field and the format I have presented on many occasions
In a few years, the playing field may be much more balanced and it might not be so easy to pick a final 2.
I still favor an 8 team field and the format I have presented on many occasions
I'm with you about conference champs, but instead of playoffs, how about we just promise the conference champs a game at the end of the season against another conference champ. For example the B1G champ could play the Pac 12 champ. They could play in this cool old stadium called The Rose Bowl out in California. Who wouldn't want to see that? Other conferences champions could hook up with other bowls. How fun would that be, representing your conference in a big game at the end of the season?
That would never work.
Wouldn’t we just argue who the best team was at the end of the year?
Believe it or not, I’m not opposed to going back to the old system. I don’t like the half measures we have now. If you want to just entirely disregard the idea of a national champion decided on the field, I’m game.
Sort of a side question but do the traditional rivalry games like UM and OSU being a the end of the season hurt a teams chances of getting into a playoff situation because they come at the end of the season? In other words is an early loss more forgivable than a late one? Michigan and OSU may be cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
Georgia and Alabama are in different SEC divisions and did not crossover last year. They actually did not play each other in 2017 because Alabama lost their division to Auburn, so Georgia beat Auburn to win the 2017 SEC championship without having to play Alabama at all. Alabama, with only 1 loss to Auburn for the season, then got in the playoff as an at large team over Big Ten champion Ohio State.
The argument of comparing basketball to football is bad. Basketball plays 30+ games and the 7th team in a league can make a 64+ team playoff. We are talking about possibly 5 league champions with 3 at large. The fact that you would have to win the league would increase interest in the league battle. If the Big Ten Champ automatically gets a playoff bid, do you think it would have diminished the interest in winning the West? And we are talking an extra game for 4 teams. That is it. It increases interest in every Power 5 conference while still allowing a few deserving non-conference winners a chance. I don’t know why football fans are against more football and since it will probably be the fastest way for us to get in the playoffs, why NU fans would be against it. If I cared about attendance and how much interest is in other people watching a game, I would pick a different team to follow.
Because these kids aren't paid and it's just not necessary for them to put their bodies on the line just so institutions can make more and more money. The fans' hankering for more playoffs just makes me support players who bail on bowl games even more.
Do you really think kids on the four teams that have to play an extra game really think they are being exploited by increasing the playoffs? Really? You don’t know much about the motivation of winning a national championship for a college football player. 4 teams playing one more game is all we are talking about and none of the players will complain.
Ohio State, Washington, Georgia, and UCF football players would not have mind.
Last edited:
Of course they won't complain; they're already being hosed on this whole deal, so why would they notice getting hosed worse?
If that is what you are going to stick with as an argument, so be it for you. I’m not going to try and argue against that view as there is no way to win. You won’t change your mind and won’t accept anything less than what you believe. The rest of us who live in the real world where companies exploit people every day and don’t live on a high horse can just enjoy an extra game.
So...your answer is that since everyone in life gets ****ed, it's OK to just keep expanding here for the sake of money, since, you know, that's just the way the world works?
This really is a remarkable position. Most people say things like “I would’ve lloved a free education”, but you’re simply going with “Fug ‘em”.
I respect your honesty.
I am tired of everyone coming on here and acting like they want to “save” the football players from tyrannical depression and then probably don’t tip their waitress enough, pass a homeless man on the street, and won’t think twice about the person who changes out the sheets in the hotel room. We can go back to 11 game seasons, only the Big Ten winner going to a bowl game, cut out freshman playing, reduce practice time and require tutors for players who can’t hold a 2.5 GPA, and cut down on practices totally if everyone is really concern about not exploiting the players. Otherwise, let’s not act that four teams playing one more game means doom for all players and anyone that likes expansion are slave traders. We can continue to watch the same 3-4 teams in the playoff for the next ten years or get a system that will give us a little variety.
To me it is funny that no one is concern about East Washington and North Dakota State players being exploited as they play their 15th game on January 5. The players don’t even have the total scholarships or the same pro prospects. Just a love for the game.
https://sports.yahoo.com/title-game...rcent-college-football-worried-214530894.html
Interesting that ticket prices are plummeting. People seem to be voting with their wallet for some type of change.
Interesting that ticket prices are plummeting. People seem to be voting with their wallet for some type of change.
No matter the system, it would have been the same two teams in the final.
Agree, and a lot of folks are tired of that. There is a very good chance it is the same two teams next year too.
Power 5 conference champions then 3 at large bids. No conference can have more than 2 teams in the CFP (or espn would push for 4 sec teams to be in).
Do this and you eliminate a lot of the consternation and can still have Georgia, ND, and UCF in there.
BTW, congratulations to Northwestern on your bowl win and for making the B1G championship game entertaining. There is just no quit in that locker room. Fitzgerald is a great coach.
Do this and you eliminate a lot of the consternation and can still have Georgia, ND, and UCF in there.
BTW, congratulations to Northwestern on your bowl win and for making the B1G championship game entertaining. There is just no quit in that locker room. Fitzgerald is a great coach.
