JoeyLabasForPresident
Well-Known Member
This is a caffeine (or something harder) fueled fever dream, and I enjoyed reading it.
Effed up playoff system
- Thread starter BigD
- Start date
Fryowa
Administrator
What would you do with the regular season. That’s 5 extra games for the two teams that make the finals. You’d have to cut out regular season games unless they went to an NFL schedule. Definitely wouldn’t be time for extra practices etc. like they have now before the CFP starts.
But…these are professional athletes getting paid to play football now (there’s no such thing as “college” FBS football anymore, they aren’t students. They’re pro football players who have to take college classes just because.
I do think there’s some danger in it though. If you have guys who are playing 38% more games, you’re going to see injuries in those extra games that end careers before they get to the NFL. It’s just statistically going to happen no matter what at some point.
Annnnnd....
This is why it's nuts. Too many teams. Not enough weeks. The ONLY way, in my estimation....or at least the hill I'm dying on.....is to maintain the awesomesauce of the conferences. The entire season is the playoffs. A giant 130 team tournament. The conferences are the brackets. Dunno if the Big 10 and SEC are too big. If they are.....
Easy. Do three divisions. Newcomers can go pound sand and have to do what I say.
Legends Division: OSU, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Indiana, PSU,
Leaders Division: Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Minnesota
Llamas Division:
USC, UCLA, Rutgers, Maryland, Oregon, Washington
Each year, 3 of the Llamas are assigned to either the Leaders or Legends
The Legends/Leaders will play 5 games within their division, one from the opposing Leaders/Legends Division and 3 against a Llama. Or something to that effect.
I could maybe be talked into some sort of cycling thing where you switch two Legends/Leaders team each year, and you then cycle through 6 year periods of being a Legend or a Leader. Only problem is trophy and rivalry games. Indiana/Purdue have to play, Iow-MN and Wisconsin. Wisconsin and Minnesota. Michigan has to play MSU and OSU every year. I'd need a spreadsheet to make sure this would work when they're not in the same division. But all this seems overly complex. It was sure a heck of a lot more sensible and would have been easier without the Llamas.
Maybe the Llamas can just, I dunno.....find a bunch of teams from California, Washington, and Oregon where it would make sense regionally and for them to form their own conference. I mean, I have the perfect name. They're all kind of situated along the Pacific coast. Pick a number, since it doesn't matter. Maybe 6/7. They could be the Pacific....or "Pac" for short. The Pac 6/7.
Have everyone start week 0 (one week earlier). I would also be concerned about the # of games, but cutting a game or 2 from the regular season would cost a ton on money (I would assume) from TV contracts and missing out on home gates/concessions. I suppose you could take the same plan as I proposed but cut down to 6 teams each from B1G, SEC, Big12+ACC, and Group of 6. Give the top 2 teams from each of those groups a bye. Chances are, it would be the teams with a bye that would be going all the way, potentially playing 4 extra games (instead of 5). If a team without a bye makes a run all the way to the championship, gerat story, we will live with that rare occurrence.
I am not saying it is a great plan, but like @SwirlinLingerie mentioned above, it seems so weird that we have a plan that is so different from how it is done at every other level of football. They keep making these iterative solutions, and I think it is time for a radical re-envisioning.
How about this...3 divisions, and they are determined by draft. The top 3 teams by record from the previous year are in 3 different divisions. In February (a dead period for CFB interest), they will have a live draft (snake order) to determine which teams will be in their division the following season.
Can you imagine the intrigue? You have to think about level of competition, travel, maintaining rivalries. And the disrespect teams would claim for being picked early! I love it!
JoeyLabasForPresident
Well-Known Member
Just do group play for seeding in the conferences. Non-con games do not matter for playoff purposes. They're for you to 1. make money and 2. prep for games that matter.
NCHawker
Well-Known Member
Excellent analysis
youtu.be
College Football Playoff Bracket IS SET! Who's IN?!
The College Football Playoff bracket is set and it came with plenty of drama surrounding the reveal. Notre Dame was left out in the cold after the committee ...
youtu.be
Fryowa
Administrator
I like the idea of 8 teams, top 2 of each P4, and the first round could be the CCG without having to have a separate game. G5 can do their own thing. Having the first round as CCG would kill two birds with one stone and only be two extra games for the finalists. Wouldn’t be any more than there are now and it gives 2nd place conference finishers a shot. Literally any P4 team can make the playoffs by finishing 2nd in their conference. No committees, no choosing who to leave out, and no one can (legitimately) bitch.
Also forces ND to join a conference or sit at home.
Seems messed up to consider the ACC and Big 12 to be equally worthy of spots as the B1G and SEC, but who knows, in 10 years things could look a lot different. What if I had told you 3 years ago that Indiana would be #1 in the country going into the 2025 CFP (https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/indiana/2023.html)? You would have thought I was a lunatic. Things are hard to predict, especially the future.
Fryowa
Administrator
Gotta settle on something. It’s not about being worthy, it’s about all P4 teams having a clear path to the playoffs, laid out from the start, equal for everyone. Then there’s no bitching or depending on a stupid committee to decide if ND or Alabama deserves to get in more.
It’s not arguable that there are 4 conferences that as a whole are better than the rest, and generate more money, yadda yadda, whatever metric you want to use to measure it
Think about the NFL. No one complains that team XYZ didn’t make it in because there are rules, and if you want to make the playoffs those are the rules. There are times that it’s not always the best teams that make it if you have a shitty division. How do you make the playoffs in the NFL? You win your division or you make a wildcard spot which is based solely on your record and tiebreakers that are already established. It is what it is, no ambiguity, no committee that says the Patriots (or whoever) make a wildcard spot because they’re better than the Steelers (or whoever) even though the Steelers potentially have a better record or an easier schedule.
Take the grey area out of it.
If you want to make the CFP then finish at least 2nd in your conference. Does a 2nd place AFC east team get to bitch about not making the playoffs because their division is harder than the AFC west? Hell no.
It’s the same in MLB, NBA, NHL, and so on.
I like that for determining a national champ, though I don't mind the idea of more teams getting a chance. It does cheapen the regular season in some ways (not every game feels like life-or-death), but it also keeps more teams' hope alive, which is not a bad thing.
But, what becomes of bowls? They have gotten so ridiculous with so many player opting out, or entire teams opting out. I get that they are a reward and they have historical meaning, and heck, we have to have something to do on New Year's Day. But those reasons don't seem very compelling to a lot of players. Further, the oddity of the Bowl game being 4.5 weeks after the end of the regular season (in Iowa's case), with players leaving teams in the interim, makes it so that the teams playing in the Bowls are not the same teams that earned that honor in the first place.
So, do you just let them die, or do you try find a way to make them relevant? If they exist completely outside of the CFP, how do you imbue them with some relevance?
Fryowa
Administrator
Let the bowl games die.
Go back to 12 bowl games plus the CFP if they want to continue the bowl game thing. @NorthKCHawk mentioned that as well and I think it's a good idea. Would make it a deal where you still had to be a top 25 team to make one if you go that route.
To appease the, "we want a vacation, it's for the kids" crowd, allow every team one exhibition game of their choosing and let them decide on opponent, location, etc.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
I think I will stay with the “crowd.”
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Or just leave them alone and allow them to operate as they are now. We can all make our own choices whether or not to go or to tune into and watch these games. Any bowl game regardless of how many exist are glorified exhibitions anyway, it doesn't matter if there are 12 or 100 of them. Reaching the CFP is now the new standard of judging team performances and coaches.
The first bowl game will be televised by ABC this Saturday at noon, the Celebration Bowl that features South Carolina State vs Prairie View A&M. I have zero interest in watching this game but someone does and probably the 1000ish students between both schools that get to go to this game, paid for by sponsors, care along with all their fans. There is no good reason for us to crap all over this, if they want this game then let them have it. Sponsors must want them or they wouldn't pay, TV must be selling ads to broadcast them or they wouldn't bother. Nobody cares whether you or I want the game or not.
BTW, later that night the LA Bowl will be on featuring Boise State vs Washington. If I'm not doing anything else I might tune in to watch that one.
