Playoff Expansion and Play-in Games

N

NorthKCHawk

Well-Known Member
This looks like it has real momentum. The Big10 and the SEC would have 4 playin games on what is normally Conference Championship weekend, guaranteeing each conference gets 4 teams into the playoffs. The Little 12 and ACC would get two and there would be two at-large bids. So, last season, Iowa would have went to Illinois and if we beat the fighting Berts we would have been in the playoffs. I like the system, but any system that would put Iowa one win against Illinois from having to play Georgia sure seems flawed. :)

The other model I have seen is still have a conference championship game (1 v 2), with the winner of the conference getting a bye and the other still guaranteed a playoff spot, and then having two play-in games (3 v. 6 & 4 v. 5)

This CFB world never stops spinning.

www.usatoday.com

SEC move to nine conference games may be final step in College Football Playoff expansion

SEC moving to nine-game schedule will usher in play-in games for an expanded College Football Playoff and complete seismic college football change.
www.usatoday.com
 
In what universe does it make sense to have a team that finished 6th in the BTen conference be in a playoff for the national title?
 
I believe if the Big Ten had 4 play-in games last year it would have been something like this

8 Minn @ 1 Oregon
7 Mich @ 2 PSU
6 Iowa @ 3 Ind
5 ILL @ 4 Ohio St

It's actually debatable if Iowa would have been the 5 or 6 seed because ILL and Iowa both finished 6-3 in conference the 2 teams did not play each other.
 
Another idea I saw was just give the seeds 1,2&3 the week off and only have the #4 and #5 teams play 1 "Wild Card Game" (WCG) for the 4th spot.
 
guffus said:
Another idea I saw was just give the seeds 1,2&3 the week off and only have the #4 and #5 teams play 1 "Wild Card Game" (WCG) for the 4th spot.
Click to expand...
I think the goal of this whole thing is two fold: Guarantee the two big conferences have the majority of the slots for the playoffs AND add more games to championship weekend that the conferences control and gain the revenue for. So, I don't see just one playin game. If anything, I could see crowning the regular season champ and then have the next six teams fight for playoff spots, but why leave your best team off of a revenue train Saturday night? Plus, with 18 teams and counting in the conference, a regular season title could get sticky as there are a lot of teams that don't play each other.
 
Grady said:
In what universe does it make sense to have a team that finished 6th in the BTen conference be in a playoff for the national title?
Click to expand...
Technically, they are not in the playoffs. They are in a play in game to make the playoffs. But yes, any system that could have put Iowa one win away from the playoffs last year seems a bit off. That said, there were some questionable teams that made the field this last season. Its a power grab by the two biggies.
 
NorthKCHawk said:
Technically, they are not in the playoffs. They are in a play in game to make the playoffs. But yes, any system that could have put Iowa one win away from the playoffs last year seems a bit off. That said, there were some questionable teams that made the field this last season. Its a power grab by the two biggies.
Click to expand...
I'm starting to hate the Big Ten. They are heavily contributing to the fall of college sports. At least a lot of the aspects that I love.

I live in the Seattle area and flipped the TV on the other night. Rutgers was playing at Washington. It was 10 pm PST. 10 pm! Rutgers vs. Washington. Big Ten basketball. Attendance looked light and variable.

That game happened, and yet here we are in late February and Iowa and Illinois have yet to play.

Delaney and Warren and all the rest of 'em can shove it. They need to go back to regional games for basketball ASAP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top