Playoff expansion: it's about time

deanvogs said:
I would support a 6 team playoff, but I didn't see any talk of that. Seems like they are talking about 8 teams.
Click to expand...

People with money tend to talk a lot.
It's been said, I see through all the bs and see the end result.
Without major changes and we know when you own the apple cart, you don't upset the apple cart, talk of more than 6 is not going to sit well with the owners of said apple cart. However, Im betting Independents like ND, BYU would be on board with one at large.
 
I know people don't like it when I say this, but the College Football Playoff has been a failure. It hasn't crowned a true champion, nor has it eliminated controversy. We were better off back in the days of the Bowl Coalition, when the Rose Bowl was still the big prize.
 
4thngoal said:
Why not just do six teams. All p5 champs and one at large. The at large can not be from a p5 conference.
Click to expand...
Because then the two highest ranked teams will get a bye week. Then you have the others that still have to play an extra game. It has to be a fair deal all the way around. 5 automatic conference champions and three at large teams. That leaves room for Indepents and group of 5 teams to get in. Thats the only fair thing to do. I think Delaney made a big mistake going to a 9 game conf. schedule. Then B1G teams couldve had extra wins instead of 50% of the conf teams losing. Iowa couldve been 9-3, Penn St coulve been 10-2. He may have gotten us a few extra $$$ by playing an extra conf game, but we are not sending enough teams to the higher tiered bowls or competing for those extra bowl dollars.If OSU didnt have to play the crossover against Purdue, they’re in the CFP, if Iowa didn’t have to play Penn St., we’re likely 9-3 and playing in a better bowl. 8 playoff teams are enough, I wouldn’t want to go beyond that.
 
Ree4 said:
Your math is nowhere near accurate..

37.5% perhaps?
Click to expand...
Yeah well, I was in a hurry. Still 37% (almost 40%) of the pie is to much considering that the P5's together control 90% of all eyes and $.
They would be stupid to agree to that.
If that were the option, then just have a p5 champion (which is what I was saying, except adding in an independent or the occasional exceptional non P5 to make it an even number)

thetrza said:
I know people don't like it when I say this, but the College Football Playoff has been a failure. It hasn't crowned a true champion, nor has it eliminated controversy. We were better off back in the days of the Bowl Coalition, when the Rose Bowl was still the big prize.
Click to expand...
Agree.
ModebaSan said:
Because then the two highest ranked teams will get a bye week. Then you have the others that still have to play an extra game. It has to be a fair deal all the way around. 5 automatic conference champions and three at large teams. That leaves room for Indepents and group of 5 teams to get in. Thats the only fair thing to do. I think Delaney made a big mistake going to a 9 game conf. schedule. Then B1G teams couldve had extra wins instead of 50% of the conf teams losing. Iowa couldve been 9-3, Penn St coulve been 10-2. He may have gotten us a few extra $$$ by playing an extra conf game, but we are not sending enough teams to the higher tiered bowls or competing for those extra bowl dollars.If OSU didnt have to play the crossover against Purdue, they’re in the CFP, if Iowa didn’t have to play Penn St., we’re likely 9-3 and playing in a better bowl. 8 playoff teams are enough, I wouldn’t want to go beyond that.
Click to expand...

But the knife cuts both ways. If we had our west division schedule (say Braska gets better) with Purdue getting better, Northwestern getting better, Wisconsin, being Wisconsin, cross overs of PSU, OSU and Michigan, plus had ISu (whose getting better), and say one other non con of say Oklahoma, Florida, Stanford, do you realize the gautlet that would be? Our sos would be far above any sec team that played three cupcakes for non cons.
You don't think that deserves a bye??
It also rewards teams that play challenging non cons instead of cupcakes, which adds to the excitement (and $) of the beginning of the season.
 
Last edited:
I will spin my wheels one more time here. Going to a 8 team playoff with auto bids for CCG winners is actually a 10-13 team playoff. Here is the reality of what you are doing.

Scenario 1, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG. If ultimately the 3 at large teams selected are all CCG losing teams, that was10 teams playing to determine a 8 team playoff field.

Scenario 2, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. If ultimately 2 losing CCG teams are selected as at large and 1 team that didn't play in the CCG is selected, that is basically 11 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with one team receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.

Scenario 3, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. If ultimately 1 losing CCG team is selected as a large and 2 team that didn't play in the CCG is selected, that is basically 12 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 2 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.

Scenario 4, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. 0 losing CCG teams are selected as a at large and 3 teams that didn't play in the CCG are selected. That is basically 13 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 3 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.


This would be an absolute nightmare of a mess. This would basically be a 10-13 team (depends on who is selected as at larges) "tournament". The horror of that is some teams actually get byes, some teams get to actually lose a game and continue, and people on here think this is the answer? Wow!
 
hawkdrummer1 said:
This. I can't remember at time when anybody at #9 had a legitimate claim to the National Title. 8 leaves plenty of room for a UCF or Boise St if they're worthy.
Click to expand...
We're saying that if it goes to an 8 team playoff, in some cases as Dean explained, there would be a field of 13 teams with 8 of them chosen for that spot. If an 8 team playoff existed this year and NW [Big IF obviously) won the B1G 10 championship game, they would have gone from #22 to in the Playoff. If a standard 8 team playoff had existed in 2012, Wisconsin would have been in the Playoff with a record of 8-5. The hypothetical scenario I mentioned above is not that far fetched. Giving conference champions an automatic bid removes any relevance of National Ranking.


deanvogs said:
I will spin my wheels one more time here. Going to a 8 team playoff with auto bids for CCG winners is actually a 10-13 team playoff. Here is the reality of what you are doing.

Scenario 1, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG. If ultimately the 3 at large teams selected are all CCG losing teams, that was10 teams playing to determine a 8 team playoff field.

Scenario 2, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. If ultimately 2 losing CCG teams are selected as at large and 1 team that didn't play in the CCG is selected, that is basically 11 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with one team receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.

Scenario 3, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. If ultimately 1 losing CCG team is selected as a large and 2 team that didn't play in the CCG is selected, that is basically 12 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 2 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.

Scenario 4, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. 0 losing CCG teams are selected as a at large and 3 teams that didn't play in the CCG are selected. That is basically 13 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 3 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.


This would be an absolute nightmare of a mess. This would basically be a 10-13 team (depends on who is selected as at larges) "tournament". The horror of that is some teams actually get byes, some teams get to actually lose a game and continue, and people on here think this is the answer? Wow!
Click to expand...
Lets see if people can actually grasp it this time, I thought the bracket would make sense for everyone but I guess not. People are severely underestimating the unfairness that the suggested 8 team playoff model and this:

deanvogs said:
That is basically 13 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 3 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division
Click to expand...
 
hawkdrummer1 said:
This. I can't remember at time when anybody at #9 had a legitimate claim to the National Title. 8 leaves plenty of room for a UCF or Boise St if they're worthy.
Click to expand...


It is absolutely the perfect number because it still makes every conference game huge. No room for error for those who can possibly contend. Doesn't leave the UCF's out. No Div 1 team that goes undefeated should ever be left out, EVER. What more could they have done that season??? No team should have to fight that recruiting obstacle. "Well, you can come to UCF where we will go undefeated but may never get a chance to win the NC.!!". That's wrong for a Div 1 player.
 
deanvogs said:
I will spin my wheels one more time here. Going to a 8 team playoff with auto bids for CCG winners is actually a 10-13 team playoff. Here is the reality of what you are doing.

Scenario 1, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG. If ultimately the 3 at large teams selected are all CCG losing teams, that was10 teams playing to determine a 8 team playoff field.

Scenario 2, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. If ultimately 2 losing CCG teams are selected as at large and 1 team that didn't play in the CCG is selected, that is basically 11 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with one team receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.

Scenario 3, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. If ultimately 1 losing CCG team is selected as a large and 2 team that didn't play in the CCG is selected, that is basically 12 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 2 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.

Scenario 4, You have 10 teams playing for an automatic bid in the CCG.. 0 losing CCG teams are selected as a at large and 3 teams that didn't play in the CCG are selected. That is basically 13 teams in the mix for the 8 spots with 3 teams receiving a bye who didn't even win it's division.


This would be an absolute nightmare of a mess. This would basically be a 10-13 team (depends on who is selected as at larges) "tournament". The horror of that is some teams actually get byes, some teams get to actually lose a game and continue, and people on here think this is the answer? Wow!
Click to expand...

Figured Ree4 would like this. o_Oo_O

Who would want this CF?
 
MelroseHawkins said:
It is absolutely the perfect number because it still makes every conference game huge. No room for error for those who can possibly contend. Doesn't leave the UCF's out. No Div 1 team that goes undefeated should ever be left out, EVER. What more could they have done that season??? No team should have to fight that recruiting obstacle. "Well, you can come to UCF where we will go undefeated but may never get a chance to win the NC.!!". That's wrong for a Div 1 player.
Click to expand...
The only place we seem to disagree is that you think 8 should be chosen from a field of 13, and I think it should be a field of 16. We both want an 8 team playoff.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Figured Ree4 would like this. o_Oo_O

Who would want this CF?
Click to expand...
Yep, after reading his arguments in the other playoff thread about the unfairness of having 3 undeserving at large teams skip a game (which is big IMO) is why I suggested having 6 at larges battle it out.

My whole suggestion is based off of his argument, so of course I "like it"
 
Ree4 said:
The only place we seem to disagree is that you think 8 should be chosen from a field of 13, and I think it should be a field of 16. We both want an 8 team playoff.
Click to expand...

It ends up on whatever side you put the conference championship game bracket. I choose to keep it out of the "official" playoff bracket and you choose to have it a part of it. The reason I keep it out is because conferences still have and should have their own way of deciding their conference champion. Some don't have a conference division c-ship game and some do. With your way, all P5 conferences would be required to have the championship game to be a part of your playoff bracket. Those games are now becoming more in the air than even in the past.

So, yes, in the end it ends up pretty much an 8 team bracket run to the NC.
 
Ree4 said:
Yep, after reading his arguments in the other playoff thread about the unfairness of having 3 undeserving at large teams skip a game (which is big IMO) is why I suggested having 6 at larges battle it out.

My whole suggestion is based off of his argument, so of course I "like it"
Click to expand...

Give me an example of an unfairness/undeserving of 3 situation? Maybe I can grasp what you are debating.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
It ends up on whatever side you put the conference championship game bracket. I choose to keep it out of the "official" playoff bracket and you choose to have it a part of it. The reason I keep it out is because conferences still have and should have their own way of deciding their conference champion. Some don't have a conference division c-ship game and some do. With your way, all P5 conferences would be required to have the championship game to be a part of your playoff bracket. Those games are now becoming more in the air than even in the past.

So, yes, in the end it ends up pretty much an 8 team bracket run to the NC.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think they should be part of the playoff bracket, per se. Whoever wins the CCG should be in. I think losers of CCGs should be eliminated. I would have 3 different games where the 6 at larges play each other. The winners of these at larges could/should (not sure on this one) be seeded 6, 7, 8. Seeding for the 5 Conference Champs would be up for debate.

Unfairness even in this group of 4 playoff teams would be that Notre Dame played 12 games this year. During championship week, they sat and watched Alabama play Georgia, Oklahoma played Texas, Clemson played Pitt (easy win for Clemson). These are incredibly tough games (except for Pitt) and Notre Dame gets a bye. They skip playing potentially their hardest game of the season and get a pass to the playoff. Would they be in with another loss? Maybe but they skip the wear and tear that other teams face. Why do NFL teams play their backups in game 16 when they've already clinched the conference? They don't want to risk injury. Notre Dame gets this free pass, they don't have to take the risk.

With the 3 at large model there's potentially an incentive for teams to do just well enough but NOT have to play in a conference championship. The path to a national championship is easier for an at large team than it is for a team that has to play in a CCG. Teams should be rewarded for playing in and winning CCG's, not penalized relative to their At-Large peers by being given a tougher path to a national championship.

That's why I suggest that these at larges should at least have to play that extra game that conference champions do, although you can still argue that they would be playing lesser teams than those that play in CCGs. That could be partly made up by seeding them 6, 7 and 8.

I just feel like this is a big issue that many are overlooking, that's all.
 
Ree4

Ok. I am not a Notre Dame fan by any stretch of the imagination. But, I do point out that they typically schedule one of the tougher season schedules every year and play P5 opponents most games. Not many others do this so I'm fine if they play a tougher schedule than most with 12 games then throwing in a sure win directional school. I mean, they have a better shot of taking a loss with that 12 team schedule then most others who played 13 games. Here is this seasons schedule.
So, in essence, on the whole, they played a tougher overall schedule with 12 games.

UND Athletics

2018 Football Schedule

Scheduled Games
 
This whole "expansion" talk was totally avoidable if the powers-to-be had thought things through when implementing the whole playoff system initially.

Five major conferences, major independents, FCS teams, 8 vs 9 game conference schedules, championship games, ever-morphing playoff selection committee criteria...on and on.....who in their right mind thought four teams would be adequate?

There was pressure from the old guard, especially the bowls, not to go immediately to eight so as not to overly dilute their product. Hell, Delaney wasn't a playoff advocate, ever, then quickly jumped on board when it was inevitable. (and look at him now...as I predicted...pounding the podium for expansion....ironic).

The lesser bowls aren't affected. The NYD-6 bowls are, but too bad. Their days of determining national status are over.

These things could all been hashed out and a solid playoff system put in place initially instead of tip-toeing into this muddled mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top