Imagine a world

[SteveGarvey1]

Expand to 8 would be ok as it is one extra game and it can let in a deserving team. But 16 waters it down. A #1 seed like bama playing a #16

8 with the P5s' conference winners getting in plus 3 at large. There'd be less bitching them from teams who don't get selected because every team would have had a chance to clinch if they had just won their conference title game.

Maybe Notre Dame and teams like this year's UCF might complain but there'd be a lot less.

 

[guffus]

I would not mind seeing a play-in rule for the 4-team CFP for any team that did not win its CCG.

So for example Alabama last year would have to play a play-in game against the next highest ranked team, which would have been Ohio State.

Or this year if Notre Dame makes the top 4, then Notre Dame would have to play a play-in game. If Bama loses the SEC CCG but also ends up in top 4, than another play-in game would need to be played. 2 play-ins total. 1 with Notre Dame, 1 with Bama.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

8 is absolutely perfect. 16 starts to water down the conference season a bit. At the current time, every single weeks game has importance. I don't want to lose that in college football.

8 has always been the perfect # I think. The power 5 get their automatic bid. 3 at larges get in via whatever subjective measures they want. There'd be way less of the 2 loss teams getting considered over 1 loss ones that get folks so fired up just due to brand name.
Letting the top 8 teams battle it out on the field is just better than 4. And it's not too many as far as watering it down or anything like that. There's plenty of time to do it it's not like the season would be extended. Just a few more games for the teams involved.

The thing that could absolutely suck about doing that going forward would be is if this new deal of how good players are sitting out to stay healthy for the pros turns into more of a thing... That could throw a monkey wrench into it but time will tell...

 

[MelroseHawkins]

8 has always been the perfect # I think. The power 5 get their automatic bid. 3 at larges get in via whatever subjective measures they want. There'd be way less of the 2 loss teams getting considered over 1 loss ones that get folks so fired up just due to brand name.
Letting the top 8 teams battle it out on the field is just better than 4. And it's not too many as far as watering it down or anything like that. There's plenty of time to do it it's not like the season would be extended. Just a few more games for the teams involved.

The thing that could absolutely suck about doing that going forward would be is if this new deal of how good players are sitting out to stay healthy for the pros turns into more of a thing... That could throw a monkey wrench into it but time will tell...

Agree. I honestly don't know why it is taken so long to get this implemented or figured out. Seems like a no-brainer to me. It's so obvious. The playoff would still be small enough that too many games aren't added to an already rigorous season. 16 would be too big of a playoff and take too much time.

Five P5 conference champs and 3 at large for whatever teams float to the top of a solid matrix measuring Strength of schedule and records against said schedule. If somebody is just left out by the matrix, so be it. It is what it is. It would be exciting, and still every conference game would have implications. Teams like Boise St, or the Toledos of the world would have a chance for an at-large.

In addition, I think out-of-conference scheduling would get a lot better if teams had to fight for the 3 at large bids.

It's rock solid playoff and path to a champion, and no one should be able to bitch if the computer matrix kept them out for that year's playoff.

As far as the players sitting out. It is what it is and that is the team's problem in my eyes. Not the NCAA or a playoff problem. Hell, it's going to happen anyway with the current system. So, I guess that should not even play into the decision of redesigning a new playoff or adding teams. It is what it is.

WTF is taking so long figuring this chit out?

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Agree. I honestly don't know why it is taken so long to get this implemented or figured out. Seems like a no-brainer to me. It's so obvious. The playoff would still be small enough that too many games aren't added to an already rigorous season. 16 would be too big of a playoff and take too much time.

Five P5 conference champs and 3 at large for whatever teams float to the top of a solid matrix measuring Strength of schedule and records against said schedule. If somebody is just left out by the matrix, so be it. It is what it is. It would be exciting, and still every conference game would have implications. Teams like Boise St, or the Toledos of the world would have a chance for an at-large.

In addition, I think out-of-conference scheduling would get a lot better if teams had to fight for the 3 at large bids.

It's rock solid playoff and path to a champion, and no one should be able to bitch if the computer matrix kept them out for that year's playoff.

As far as the players sitting out. It is what it is and that is the team's problem in my eyes. Not the NCAA or a playoff problem. Hell, it's going to happen anyway with the current system. So, I guess that should not even play into the decision of redesigning a new playoff or adding teams. It is what it is.

WTF is taking so long figuring this chit out?

Amen. Like this year UCF would be that team. Most likely they'll finish in top 10 and undefeated maybe top 8. Instead of having the 'what ifs' they can get their shot.

I really think that's a great point. With more of an opportunity to get in I would surely think that scheduling going forward would be affected.

For those that are 9th 10th and further down to bitch about not getting in would be mute. They most likely wouldn't be a championship contender. 8 is just right. That 8th team may never get to championship game let alone ever win one in our lifetime but at least they'd be in...

 

[Northside Hawk]

One of only 2 times the Clowns have ever finished the season ranked. That 76 team was one of their best ever, may have been thee best. Earle Bruce could have been what Hayden Fry was to Iowa at Iowa State, good thing he moved on.

Bruce seemed like the heir apparent to Woody Hayes' job even before the Gstor Bowl incident. Bruce had a legendary prep career in Ohio and served as an assistant under Hayes for six years, including the 1968 championship team. Also on that staff was Lou Holtz. Bo Rein, who would later beat Bruce in a bowl game, was a running back on that team.

 

[Robowe]

I've asked this before ... why does every other level of NCAA football have a 16 team playoff (with 4 extra games) while to the Top division only has 4 teams make the playoffs for the national champ? Seems strange to me.

Now, a 16 team playoff may water things down a bit (I think 8 teams would work fine with the 5 conference champs and 3 at large teams), but it seems weird that the different levels of football would be so different. Now, we all know the bowl system and money at the top level are the reasons why, but, as others have mentioned, the barriers to at least an 8 team playoffs are flimsy at best).

 

[Fryowa]

I've asked this before ... why does every other level of NCAA football have a 16 team playoff (with 4 extra games) while to the Top division only has 4 teams make the playoffs for the national champ? Seems strange to me.

Now, a 16 team playoff may water things down a bit (I think 8 teams would work fine with the 5 conference champs and 3 at large teams), but it seems weird that the different levels of football would be so different. Now, we all know the bowl system and money at the top level are the reasons why, but, as others have mentioned, the barriers to at least an 8 team playoffs are flimsy at best).

Because of the huge bowl system.

It's turned into a money making monster and it won't be going away soon. Also, you have to remember that a huuuuuge portion of college football fans aren't nutso like we are to hang out on a team's board and analyze everything about a team from A to Z. They still like Ye Olde Timey nostalgia of teams playing in bowls that they watched in 1983 and don't care so much about a playoff. For every one fan who spends time on Twitter or a P5 team's message boards, there are probably a thousand who check ESPN for highlights or watch maybe one or two games a year in between raking leaves and changing their oil.

 

[Robowe]

Because of the huge bowl system.

It's turned into a money making monster and it won't be going away soon. Also, you have to remember that a huuuuuge portion of college football fans aren't nutso like we are to hang out on a team's board and analyze everything about a team from A to Z. They still like Ye Olde Timey nostalgia of teams playing in bowls that they watched in 1983 and don't care so much about a playoff. For every one fan who spends time on Twitter or a P5 team's message boards, there are probably a thousand who check ESPN for highlights or watch maybe one or two games a year in between raking leaves and changing their oil.

Agreed about the bowl system. However, many of the bowls actually lose money at this point. My plan would be to go to 16 games, play them throughout December and early January (like the other divisions) and create playoff brackets that people can bet on like the NCAA basketball tourney.

Now, in reality, I know the Poulan Weedeater Bowl isn't going anywhere at this point (yes, I know, bad example). OK, I know the Cheribundi Tart Cherry Boca Raton Bowl (yes, this bowl was real last year). But, from another thread, I remember the Astro Bluebonnet Bowl was played on New Year's Eve many (many) years ago and the system evolved to what we have today. I can dream, can't I?

 

[westender]

Agreed about the bowl system. However, many of the bowls actually lose money at this point. My plan would be to go to 16 games, play them throughout December and early January (like the other divisions) and create playoff brackets that people can bet on like the NCAA basketball tourney.

Now, in reality, I know the Poulan Weedeater Bowl isn't going anywhere at this point (yes, I know, bad example). OK, I know the Cheribundi Tart Cherry Boca Raton Bowl (yes, this bowl was real last year). But, from another thread, I remember the Astro Bluebonnet Bowl was played on New Year's Eve many (many) years ago and the system evolved to what we have today. I can dream, can't I?

Just sell sponsorships to each playoff game. So many of those bowls have shitty attendance and low ratings. Those can still live in a world of a 16 team playoff. The fine parting gifts or being mediocre at best.

 

[Knight78]

Why don't we go to 16 teams? Why not incorporate some of the bowl games into the 16 team playoff? Why not have the championship game be played in the Rose Bowl, honoring "the grandaddy of them all"? With a 16 team playoff there would be 15 games necessary to win the championship; that's 15 bowl games. The other, minor bowls could still be played by teams that didn't make the 16 team tournament.

Before anyone says "That's too many games!" remember that the FCS has a 24 team tournament (out of 129 schools), Division II has a 28 team tournament (out of 300 schools), and Division 3 has a 32 team tournament (out of 250 schools). Surely the FBS, with 130 schools, could have a 16 team playoff... especially when you consider that 62 NAIA football schools have a 16 team tournament.

 

[HawkeyeTech]

The lower divisions can do a 16 team tourney because all the games are played on the higher seeds home field up to the championship. If the BCS wants to go to 16, I think the first round higher seeds should have home games the week after conference championships. That would alleviate the attendance problem. The second round would move to the Bowl games.

 

[ssckelley]

A 16 game playoff will not happen for a long time, the bowl system is too strong.

 

[westender]

Talked about this on BTN last night. All agreed it will change from 4 teams. Driven by conference champions being left out and by king $$$$$$$. I guarantee it will go to 8, with the 5 P5 champs and 3 at large. crappy mediocre bowls can continue as is.

 

[Robowe]

Voice of reason ...

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Why don't we go to 16 teams? Why not incorporate some of the bowl games into the 16 team playoff? Why not have the championship game be played in the Rose Bowl, honoring "the grandaddy of them all"? With a 16 team playoff there would be 15 games necessary to win the championship; that's 15 bowl games. The other, minor bowls could still be played by teams that didn't make the 16 team tournament.

Before anyone says "That's too many games!" remember that the FCS has a 24 team tournament (out of 129 schools), Division II has a 28 team tournament (out of 300 schools), and Division 3 has a 32 team tournament (out of 250 schools). Surely the FBS, with 130 schools, could have a 16 team playoff... especially when you consider that 62 NAIA football schools have a 16 team tournament.

Watered down. No interest in that, but that is probably will what we will end up in 15 years. I like that it is such an accomplishment to make 8 teams. Every conference champion. I like that every conference game every week has implications. Why even have conferences then, just have a huge ass tournament and throw every team in. I think a team really has to earn a chance at getting into the playoffs and winning a NC. If you start taking the 2nd and 3rd best teams in a P5 conference, F that. 8 is absolutely perfect. I'd rather have less than 8 than more.

Oh, and you can already incorporate all the high-profile (BCS) bowl games in an 8 team playoff. There is no reason to start inviting the Champs.com bowl into the playoffs. Screw that.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

8 has always been the perfect # I think. The power 5 get their automatic bid. 3 at larges get in via whatever subjective measures they want. There'd be way less of the 2 loss teams getting considered over 1 loss ones that get folks so fired up just due to brand name.
Letting the top 8 teams battle it out on the field is just better than 4. And it's not too many as far as watering it down or anything like that. There's plenty of time to do it it's not like the season would be extended. Just a few more games for the teams involved.

The thing that could absolutely suck about doing that going forward would be is if this new deal of how good players are sitting out to stay healthy for the pros turns into more of a thing... That could throw a monkey wrench into it but time will tell...

Simple way to handle the last part. Players are on scholarship which is, at minimum, implied contract. Players on the roster as of last regular season game or CCG must also be on roster for any playoff game(s). Any teams that has players begging off (other than legitimate injury) is DQ'd. from CFP.

I get the part about the kid from ND getting injured in the Fiesta Bowl. But let's face it, it can happen at any time, in any game. But a kid on scholarship deciding he doesn't want to play? Schools shouldn't be able to abandon kids who can't play by dropping them from scholarship because they're injured. And a kid blowing off school shouldn't be playing at ANY time. So a kid blowing off a bowl game shouldn't be kosher, either.

Hell, Wiegers KNEW he was transferring before the season ended, but he stayed through the bowl game in case anything happened to Stanley. THOSE are the types of kids that should get headlines, not prima donnas and spoiled brats who don't want to play in a bowl game because it "doesn't mean anything".

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Watered down. No interest in that, but that is probably will what we will end up in 15 years. I like that it is such an accomplishment to make 8 teams. Every conference champion. I like that every conference game every week has implications. Why even have conferences then, just have a huge ass tournament and throw every team in. I think a team really has to earn a chance at getting into the playoffs and winning a NC. If you start taking the 2nd and 3rd best teams in a P5 conference, F that. 8 is absolutely perfect. I'd rather have less than 8 than more.

Oh, and you can already incorporate all the high-profile (BCS) bowl games in an 8 team playoff. There is no reason to start inviting the Champs.com bowl into the playoffs. Screw that.

I'm right there with ya. 16 would be too much. You want it to be a big deal to even get in it yet. What chance is there that the 10th through 16th teams could challenge for the title? I kinda like having some teams bummed they don't quite get in.

What I don't like is how if say Iowa runs the table from here this year. And lets say OSU does too. Then say we beat OSU in BIG title game by 6. Most likely we'd not get in with 1 loss (of course it depends on what all else happens with other teams too) but if OSU were to beat us by 6 they most likely would... Our having lost to Wisconsin would be a better loss than them to Purdue like they did wouldn't it? Brand name baby still has an inordinate amount of pull with the only 4 getting in. 8 would help alleviate that.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I'm right there with ya. 16 would be too much. You want it to be a big deal to even get in it yet. What chance is there that the 10th through 16th teams could challenge for the title? I kinda like having some teams bummed they don't quite get in.

What I don't like is how if say Iowa runs the table from here this year. And lets say OSU does too. Then say we beat OSU in BIG title game by 6. Most likely we'd not get in with 1 loss (of course it depends on what all else happens with other teams too) but if OSU were to beat us by 6 they most likely would... Our having lost to Wisconsin would be a better loss than them to Purdue like they did wouldn't it? Brand name baby still has an inordinate amount of pull with the only 4 getting in. 8 would help alleviate that.

Iowa would get in with 8 teams for sure as they would be the conference champ. Hell, I'm not all certain if they run the table this year and win the BIG c-ship game, they would not get in. I think they would, depending on how Iowa looks doing it.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Simple way to handle the last part. Players are on scholarship which is, at minimum, implied contract. Players on the roster as of last regular season game or CCG must also be on roster for any playoff game(s). Any teams that has players begging off (other than legitimate injury) is DQ'd. from CFP.

I get the part about the kid from ND getting injured in the Fiesta Bowl. But let's face it, it can happen at any time, in any game. But a kid on scholarship deciding he doesn't want to play? Schools shouldn't be able to abandon kids who can't play by dropping them from scholarship because they're injured. And a kid blowing off school shouldn't be playing at ANY time. So a kid blowing off a bowl game shouldn't be kosher, either.

Hell, Wiegers KNEW he was transferring before the season ended, but he stayed through the bowl game in case anything happened to Stanley. THOSE are the types of kids that should get headlines, not prima donnas and spoiled brats who don't want to play in a bowl game because it "doesn't mean anything".

But how do you enforce it? You can't fine the kid or charge them for back tuition. Once they leave their gone at that point. Teams can't control that and your not going to see any program agree to go along with it either. And what if the next highest rated team has a kid do the same thing. All of a sudden your replacing the 2nd best team with the 7th best... Just no way of making that fly