College Football Playoff

B

Bigtenchamp

Well-Known Member
After filling out my Bowl pool - it made me realize how much we need a playoff.

The non play off qualifying teams can still have their bowl games but we need some post season meaning here. College football has no real post season.
 
Bigtenchamp said:
After filling out my Bowl pool - it made me realize how much we need a playoff.

The non play off qualifying teams can still have their bowl games but we need some post season meaning here. College football has no real post season.
Click to expand...

** Mark Cuban approves these comments **
 
As far as the "regular season" not meaning anything - that's just bogus.

Are you telling me in the NFL the regular season doesn't mean anything.

If anything it would make the regular season more meaningful. As opposed to going to the

Quakerstakecheerios bowl against Tulane.
 
College football has survived a century and a half without a bowl system and I think it will continue for a while at least without one.

People think a bowl system will magically solve all of the problems. If you want a truly representative playoff that won't leave out the little guys you have to minimally go to a 16 team playoff. This would give each FBS conference and one independent a spot and leave 4 or so at large bids. If you advocate anything but that system, IMO, you are pushing for a playoff that isn't going to solve the conflict, but instead redirect it to another spot. If we do a four team playoff we are left with arguing why the other conferences don't get a guy in. So you take those 12 and four (likely controversial in the spirit of CFB) at large bids. That leaves not only some really good teams out (for instance a Michigan State team this year would have gotten the axe) and some really poor teams in (Florida International).

I simply don't get how people can push for a 4 or even 8 team playoff contending that it is a more fair solution. In either case you are still leaving out teams that won an FBS conference.

I also don't get why people who like college football want to see such a change. Other than the BCS, which BTW gave teams like Boise and TCU any sort of chance at the Rose and other bowls that they never had gotten before, college football has remained unchanged for years. Why would a playoff now make something that people have always loved so much better?
 
Here's an idea. Take the 4 BCS bowls, then add the Cotton, Capital One and Outback Bowls. Make the Cotton, Cap One, Outback and 1 of the BCS bowls a first round. Use 2 other BCS bowls for the second round and use the last one for the championship. For other years, just rotate the 4 BCS bowls. So you would have an 8 team playoff. You can still have the other bowls.
 
Most American sports fans are fans of playoff systems. Which is not really the best way of determining the best team in a given sport.

A 4 team playoff would be ok, 8 would be questionable, and anything larger is a mistake, if your goal is determining the best team in college football.
 
OnLookin08 said:
College football has survived a century and a half without a bowl system and I think it will continue for a while at least without one.

People think a bowl system will magically solve all of the problems. If you want a truly representative playoff that won't leave out the little guys you have to minimally go to a 16 team playoff. This would give each FBS conference and one independent a spot and leave 4 or so at large bids. If you advocate anything but that system, IMO, you are pushing for a playoff that isn't going to solve the conflict, but instead redirect it to another spot. If we do a four team playoff we are left with arguing why the other conferences don't get a guy in. So you take those 12 and four (likely controversial in the spirit of CFB) at large bids. That leaves not only some really good teams out (for instance a Michigan State team this year would have gotten the axe) and some really poor teams in (Florida International).

I simply don't get how people can push for a 4 or even 8 team playoff contending that it is a more fair solution. In either case you are still leaving out teams that won an FBS conference.

I also don't get why people who like college football want to see such a change. Other than the BCS, which BTW gave teams like Boise and TCU any sort of chance at the Rose and other bowls that they never had gotten before, college football has remained unchanged for years. Why would a playoff now make something that people have always loved so much better?
Click to expand...

It would make it way better - I could guarentee it would make it way better.

Who the champion is should be settled on the field, not by opinion votes and who can sell out a stadium.

It shoulld be all the conference champs plus 5 at large. That's plenty fair.
 
I've been saying that 8 is the right number, but I could see 12

I think 16 is way too many and renders the regular season less meaningful

If it is 12 you take every conference champ and the best at-large or independent team. However, if I were in charge I'd put stipulations on the conference champ qualifications. To get an auto-bid the conference has to have at least 10 teams, and the champ can have no more than 3 losses.
 
A playoff isn't going to "solve" anything, it would simply shift the debate. Actually it would probably make things worse. Say there was a 16 team playoff. There are going to be more two or three loss teams "left out" that would have legitimate arguments. This year the BCS worked out perfectly in my opinion. I know it is rare, but it did. TCU is not deserving of a shot in this years scenario. Anybody who thinks a playoff in any sport proves anything is mistaken. It simply proves who won on that day at that point in time. Now I love a good tournament and playoff as much as the next guy, but it simply isn't necessary. There was a question somewhere about NFL regular season games not meaning anything. Most years the last two weeks of the NFL do not mean anything. I'd hate to see that in college.
 
ICHawk24 said:
MAC or Sun Belt teams in a playoff is the definition of not fair.
Click to expand...

It may not be fair but it would decide it on the field - they have the same number of scholarships - they are division 1 schools.

Look at the NCAA tournament? Some of those teams have 0 chance of winning but they still get in.

People just arn't looking at this right. Think about combinging the ncaa b-ball tournament with the emotion that is college football.

I can't think of a more exciting sporting event.
 
bradk6 said:
A playoff isn't going to "solve" anything, it would simply shift the debate. Actually it would probably make things worse. Say there was a 16 team playoff. There are going to be more two or three loss teams "left out" that would have legitimate arguments. This year the BCS worked out perfectly in my opinion. I know it is rare, but it did. TCU is not deserving of a shot in this years scenario. Anybody who thinks a playoff in any sport proves anything is mistaken. It simply proves who won on that day at that point in time. Now I love a good tournament and playoff as much as the next guy, but it simply isn't necessary. There was a question somewhere about NFL regular season games not meaning anything. Most years the last two weeks of the NFL do not mean anything. I'd hate to see that in college.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the concept that the playoffs dont really decide the best team. If you look at the NFL over the past years I'd say the best team does tend to win. It's not fluky at all.

Also the last couple games losing meaning is just really hard to imagine. Look at the Big Ten this year. It came down to the last week.

You think Wisconson doesnt want a chance to play Oregon? or Auburn. I bet they really do htink they could beat them.

It needs to be decided on the field.
 
Wiscy would love to play Oregon or Auburn. But they got beat, so they're out. That was decided on the field. I have no problem with Wisconsin and MSU not getting a shot at a championship the way it played out this year. Who gets left out this year if there was an 8 team playoff? Definitely some teams that could beat anybody. There would definitely be meaning less games all around the country, probably not as much as the NFL though
 
Its been decided on the field for 12 games that the MAC or Sun Belt champ doesn't belong. If they have a strong enough team, they'll get an at large.

8 teams is the maximum if you want to determine the truly "best team".

The Super Bowl champ is always the "best team"? How about the 8 Wild Card teams that have won it? I guess the best team is the team that gets hot at the right time.

83 win Cardinals win the World Series. The NHL is a total crap shoot.

Playoffs don't really determine the best team. They determine the team that won the playoff.

Like I said, most of the American public wants a playoff, not really to determine the best team. And that is fine, just be honest.
 
Having a playoff and not inviting at least each conference champion doesn't make sense for those that say these makes things fair. People like to site the FCS as having it figured out with their system, but guess what, each conference champ gets in.

Also, I hear often that the "majority" of America wants a playoff. Every time I read an article or hear an analyst advocate for a playoff I hear one argue against it. So random poll on ESPN does not accurately represent the feeling of what the fans want. The reason it would appear so is because it is the hot new topic to talk about so it appears to have solid backing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top