Radical CFP idea coming out of the BIG TEN .........

BigD

Well-Known Member
......... my ass. I have been saying this for a long time, even before the rudimentary four team playoff system. Unfortunately helmet to helmet causes brain damage and the boys running things are a little slow (from the previously reason I pointed out.)

They are talking about just dropping the conference championship games, It would be much, much more financially beneficial to even drop one or two more regular season and expand to include more fan bases by including more teams...... DUH!!!!!! Like I said not a real bright bunch. Thirty-two teams would be about right to incorporate a massive fan following. 32, 16, 8, 4, 2, CHAMPION

It's a semi-pro sport now anyways.

 




This waters down the regular season waaaaayyyyy too much. That is what was great about college ball versus pro. Every game had huge significance for title games, playoffs, and bowls. In the pros, the Chiefs can lose a stinker to the Raiders and not have it have much impact upon a playoff run. Flush the tape and move on. College ball has never had that feel and I don't like this proposal at all.

12 is more than enough to determine a nattie.
 


This waters down the regular season waaaaayyyyy too much. That is what was great about college ball versus pro. Every game had huge significance for title games, playoffs, and bowls. In the pros, the Chiefs can lose a stinker to the Raiders and not have it have much impact upon a playoff run. Flush the tape and move on. College ball has never had that feel and I don't like this proposal at all.

12 is more than enough to determine a nattie.
Make it an even 16 so there are no byes
 


So with no more conference championships what's going to prevent the SEC from reducing their regular season to 7 games? Let's be honest, now that this is solely about playoff money, what conference (especially the SEC) is going to want its contenders or even top tier programs competing against each other week in and week out knowing with an expanded field there's a better chance they'll get additional teams in. The SEC already has a huge advantage playing an additional non-conference game, what's to keep them (or other conferences) from reducing the conference schedule or manipulating it to enhance opportunities.
 




So with no more conference championships what's going to prevent the SEC from reducing their regular season to 7 games? Let's be honest, now that this is solely about playoff money, what conference (especially the SEC) is going to want its contenders or even top tier programs competing against each other week in and week out knowing with an expanded field there's a better chance they'll get additional teams in. The SEC already has a huge advantage playing an additional non-conference game, what's to keep them (or other conferences) from reducing the conference schedule or manipulating it to enhance opportunities.
Exactly. Winning a conference title has always meant something and it still should. But, absent a bye, there is actually a disadvantage to playing in that game, other than the pride factor of winning the conference. what if a coach chose to rest his players and tank the conference title game looking at the big picture of trying to win a nattie? Its like an NFL team that is 15-0 and has the number 1 seed locked up. Do you play your starters just to try and match the stupid '72 Dolphins? Or do you sit Mahommes and Kelce and tank? Most coaches sit the starters.

Enough is enough. What makes college great is that every game is important and it should be the goal of every team to first win their conference, then the nattie. Let's not incentivize an NFL light system. College is great because it is different.
 


While I'd argue that in the past "every game mattered" was applied equally across the board, that was what many felt made college football special. Still love the sport, but think everyone can agree that "every penny matters" replaced "every game matters" the moment they started planning the playoffs and playoff expansion.
 


I have never seen more than 10 schools in one season have a legit claim to competing for the national championship. And that's 10 at the most. it ranges from 6 to 10 depending on the year. Now If you want to throw in 5 autobids, that expands the field to 14 at the most.
 


Well the four team playoff was ridiculous as it only stirred up media bias for the teams they wanted to be in that system.

The more teams involved the greater the money flow, and the greater the fan following. If there are four prominently better teams they will make it to the final four anyways, however a certain teams matchups can cause major upsets. I personally always enjoyed watching underdogs knock the king of the hills off of their thrones.

I just think 32 really expands to a point where certain programs get a fair chance to be included. How many seasons have we seen under Kirk where Iowa improved through out the season and were playing their best ball late fall? Even if we lost one or two games early in the season, but peaked and won the last eight games in a row, then who is to say a team like Iowa wasn't one of the best teams by the end of the regular season?

A thirty-two team playoff opens things up for these type of teams. Let's see who really is the best at season's end. It also reduces bias by the selection committee. Sixteen will not stop some of that bias. Rules could stipulate that the top rated sixteen teams gets to play on their home field, or close by like they do in basketball. This adds motivation for not just scheduling as many cupcakes during the season. Cupcakes could cost you your homefield advantage in the playoffs.

By the time you get to the final eight teams you should have the best eight teams playing against each other. Bias will be put aside. The best team will have proven they are the best and not just put there by some bias system. Let's see who really is the best.
 




Top