24 team playoff
- Thread starter NCHawker
- Start date
NCHawker
Well-Known Member
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
I admittingly in the past have been opposed to this but have warmed up to it after listening to some podcasts and points.
1) Iowa would have made it in the playoffs about 4-5 times over the years if implemented.
2) With the bowl games really tailing off, teams and fans have kind of needed a new carrot dangling in front of them with how the landscape of college has been changing.
3) I had concern that this was going to water down the conference/regular season for teams. But in actuality, fans will be following their 2-3 loss teams in late season games with the chance of making the playoffs. This kind of offsets in years past hoping for 1-2 losses to win the conference or get into the conference c-ship game. I mean, it would make those games interesting to fans that might not otherwise be interesting, like Iowa having to beat a Mich St. or Purdue towards the end of a season. Or a Vandy going up against Georgia to have a chance.
4) It would be really cool if the top teams got a 1 or 2 week of a homefield advantage. This would prevent a 10-1 or 11-0 team of resting their top players if already locked into the playoffs. They might have to play for a home field advantage.
There are some positives out there. 24 teams would only take a few weeks.
One downside is the attendance in the early playoff rounds. Are teams fans going to travel to mult games ($$$)? Will certain games only be attended by the locals? Not sure how that is going to work.
1) Iowa would have made it in the playoffs about 4-5 times over the years if implemented.
2) With the bowl games really tailing off, teams and fans have kind of needed a new carrot dangling in front of them with how the landscape of college has been changing.
3) I had concern that this was going to water down the conference/regular season for teams. But in actuality, fans will be following their 2-3 loss teams in late season games with the chance of making the playoffs. This kind of offsets in years past hoping for 1-2 losses to win the conference or get into the conference c-ship game. I mean, it would make those games interesting to fans that might not otherwise be interesting, like Iowa having to beat a Mich St. or Purdue towards the end of a season. Or a Vandy going up against Georgia to have a chance.
4) It would be really cool if the top teams got a 1 or 2 week of a homefield advantage. This would prevent a 10-1 or 11-0 team of resting their top players if already locked into the playoffs. They might have to play for a home field advantage.
There are some positives out there. 24 teams would only take a few weeks.
One downside is the attendance in the early playoff rounds. Are teams fans going to travel to mult games ($$$)? Will certain games only be attended by the locals? Not sure how that is going to work.
Last edited:
guffus
Well-Known Member
I know one of the ideas being floated is to move up the start of the regular season 1 week and get rid of the CCGs.
That way the first 3 rounds of the 24-team CFP could be played the first 3 weeks of December on campus. Then the semi-finals can be played in bowls on NYD and the NCG can be played in early January.
If that is the case it would not be too much travel for fans and the whole season will be done by early Jan, and actually it really would be done for most teams by December.
That way the first 3 rounds of the 24-team CFP could be played the first 3 weeks of December on campus. Then the semi-finals can be played in bowls on NYD and the NCG can be played in early January.
If that is the case it would not be too much travel for fans and the whole season will be done by early Jan, and actually it really would be done for most teams by December.
Hawkboys
Well-Known Member
Like Nebby could finish at 20
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
Too many. 16, no byes.
Bigger isn't always better to me. I have my reservations of even going to 16. 24 seems absurd. The intent is to find who the best team is. Teams outside the top 12 aren't going to have a realistic shot at winning the thing. Is there a snow balls chance of an 8-4 team going on a run? I guess but will any of us live long enough to see it?
To me it's a replacement for the bowl system as we know it and yeah I see why they'd want that. This would blow up the conference championship games. It's just too much to me. But the BIG 10 often gets what they want so even if it's not gonna happen real soon I won't be surprised if it does in the next 5-10 yrs
To me it's a replacement for the bowl system as we know it and yeah I see why they'd want that. This would blow up the conference championship games. It's just too much to me. But the BIG 10 often gets what they want so even if it's not gonna happen real soon I won't be surprised if it does in the next 5-10 yrs
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
12 is the best number. 4 byes. 5-12 play on campuses week one. Round two is also on campus at the four bye teams. Final four played in an NFL stadium. No bowls.
This. By eliminating Divisions conferences already 'watered down' the value of regular season games for 80% of teams by eliminating the possibility of teams winning a Division within their conference. As an Iowa fan I could give a shit about the BTen championship game -- going forward Iowa will never be in it so why should I care? I would barely care if Iowa was struggling to get to 6 wins and a bowl game. I would be VERY interested, however, if the Hawks could get to 9-3 and get into the CFP.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
I like the bowls and still think they can play a role. Right now you have like 80 teams participating in postseason action. Getting rid of the bowls would really truncate that. Plus, you need to feed the beast. ESPN needs bowls for content. That money stream is not going away.
Whatever the number for the playoff, the playoffs do not include any of the bowls. The bowls are reserved for the first 12 out. You have six major bowls all played on New Years Eve and Day just like the olden days. Make them special and make playing in those games a big deal. Have a payout to the winner. National audience, prime TV spots, etc.
Then, you can still keep the lesser bowls for Nebraska to play in. I mean, who gives a shit if they want to keep the Pin Stripe Bowl? But, differentiate six real bowls from fake bowls so you basically have your Top 30 teams or so playing in meaningful post-season play.
guffus
Well-Known Member
I dont know, to hold your team in this weird post-season bowl game limbo while coaches are getting fired and hired, players are declaring for the portal and sitting out. AND you got finals to study for and finals week exams to take. It seems like a good time to just shut down the season if you are not in the playoffs. Look at what happened to Iowa St. They were not equipped at all to play a bowl game last season.
Maybe Iowa is an exception with its old fashioned stability where coaches dont get fired and players dont transfer and/or sit out bowl games, but they are a growing exception.
Maybe Iowa is an exception with its old fashioned stability where coaches dont get fired and players dont transfer and/or sit out bowl games, but they are a growing exception.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
You won't break my heart if you get rid of the Motor City Bowl.
But, there is a strong case to keep the Rose, Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Fiesta, and Peach? Whatever the Top 6 bowls are. I think you would still have strong interest in players and coaches wanting to participate in those big bowls, for a nationwide audience, and attached to a fun trip. They all get played on New Years, so that doesn't stretch the season too much.
#1DieHardHawk
Well-Known Member
It is almost impossible to see the bowl format going away. Way, way, too much money involved - not just with broadcast rights, but also with local spending. Those cities capitalize big time on the huge influx of players, fans, families and media personnel. There's no way they would give that up.
My personal preference has always been an 8 or 12 team playoff. Beyond that, the time commitment and logistics become overly chaotic.
To me, it makes sense to designate the P4 conference championships (only one game per conference) as the "first round" of the CFP. The remaining 8 teams are chosen strictly by rankings REGARDLESS of conference affiliation (No automatic group of 5 inclusion). The bowls can battle over the rest in a free-market fashion, including potential financial incentives for individual players not to opt out if they so choose.
Unfortunately, there is no reasonable way to make it entirely objective, but, IMO, the committee should be comprised of sports journalists balanced by demographic regions. No other cohort is going to have a more comprehensive knowledge base on which to form an opinion. Using ADs invites too much bias and room for conflicts of interests.
My personal preference has always been an 8 or 12 team playoff. Beyond that, the time commitment and logistics become overly chaotic.
To me, it makes sense to designate the P4 conference championships (only one game per conference) as the "first round" of the CFP. The remaining 8 teams are chosen strictly by rankings REGARDLESS of conference affiliation (No automatic group of 5 inclusion). The bowls can battle over the rest in a free-market fashion, including potential financial incentives for individual players not to opt out if they so choose.
Unfortunately, there is no reasonable way to make it entirely objective, but, IMO, the committee should be comprised of sports journalists balanced by demographic regions. No other cohort is going to have a more comprehensive knowledge base on which to form an opinion. Using ADs invites too much bias and room for conflicts of interests.
BigD
Well-Known Member
2, 4, 8,16 Four more games for a championship. No byes for any team. It could be set up like basketball in that your reward for being a top ranked team is the number one team play's the number 16th ranked team. The number two ranked team plays the number 15th ranked team....... and so on and so forth. In warm locations OR indoor stadiums in colder regions.
Iowa fans wouldn't give an eff if they were playing in an indoor facility while a blizzard was going on outside. I can visualize the Hawk fans carrying out the field goal post in a blizzard after the game.
David Muir from "World News Tonight" in his America Strong Series "Tonight we see the enthusiasm of University of Iowa fans carrying out the field goal post after their first win in the college football playoff series over the Georgia Bulldog's located at US Bank Stadium in Minneapolis. A few of the loyal fan's going shirtless in the middle of a heavy snow fall with strong winds."
Iowa fans wouldn't give an eff if they were playing in an indoor facility while a blizzard was going on outside. I can visualize the Hawk fans carrying out the field goal post in a blizzard after the game.
David Muir from "World News Tonight" in his America Strong Series "Tonight we see the enthusiasm of University of Iowa fans carrying out the field goal post after their first win in the college football playoff series over the Georgia Bulldog's located at US Bank Stadium in Minneapolis. A few of the loyal fan's going shirtless in the middle of a heavy snow fall with strong winds."
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
In a perfect world they could decrease the bowl numbers for any teams that have around a 8-4 or 7-5 record. I don't think teams going 6-6 or even under .500 should be going to a low tier bowl. That would be ideal but as along as the $$$$ are out there, we are going to have a lot of bowl games with shitty teams. Some bowls have gone away so maybe the lack of $$$$ in the future will eliminate even more where we get to the point above. Dunno.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Football as always seeded the teams lowest plays highest in the first games. That's pretty much the way any playoff in any sport goes.
guffus
Well-Known Member
Agree that's the best way but in the past the highest ranked teams didn't always end up slotted like that.
Just 2 years ago in the very first 12-team CFP, it had the 4 highest ranked conference champs getting the top 4 seeds instead of the 4 highest ranked teams. Another proposal just in this thread had the 4 CCGs act as opening round games which is not very fair when both teams in a CCG are highly ranked like last year when indiana and Ohio St were ranked #1 and #2 in the country. Other tourneys have used regional formats where you play all the teams in your region first before advancing to the final 4. So these things are not always obvious especially in college athletics.
