Somebody's going to be pistoff

[hawkeyebob62]

I don't like OSU at all, but they earned it. They beat better teams than the other 1 loss teams. They had a better loss than the other 1 loss teams too.

Hypothetical question: if Bama had lost to Florida yesterday, would ANYONE had said bama should be out or Florida in? Unless you can say that, then you really can't argue against OSU

PSU DID get chosen by the CFP committee for a NY6 bowl, they just didn't get chosen for the 4-team playoff. PSU certainly can make a case. So can a few other teams. But on-balance, you are spot-on, O$U gets the nod. Win ON ROAD at Oklahoma, ON ROAD against Wiscy. PSU has a home win over O$U, a 39-point road loss to UM. Easy pick, IMO

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Go to 8 team playoff. 5 conf champs in. Best non P5 champ in at #8. Committee can choose 2 at large at 6-7. Want better? win your conf.

Easy peasy.

 

[tksirius]

Go to 8 team playoff. 5 conf champs in. Best non P5 champ in at #8. Committee can choose 2 at large at 6-7. Want better? win your conf.

Easy peasy.

Even if a conference champ has 3 or 4 losses?

 

[Ickehawk]

PSU shouldn't have lost to an avg Pitt team and more importantly they shouldn't have got obliterated by Mich.

If PSU would have had a very close hard fought loss at Mich then maybe but getting beat by more than 5 TDs?

Sooners with two bad losses now that Houston doesn't look that tough should be same as for PSU.

OSU won at Wisky and at MSU and beat a Mich team that crushed PSU while OSU lost at PSU on a blocked FG runback.

Well, Clemson lost to Pitt also. So they shouldn't be in also by your twisted logic.....

 

[deanvogs]

Even if a conference champ has 3 or 4 losses?

Yeah, why not? I'd rather let in 1 undeserving team every now and again, than leave out a deserving team every single year.

2 years ago Baylor/TCU could have absolutely made noise in the college football playoffs. Last year who would have wanted to play Stanford? This year you leave out OU and Penn St.? Conference champs should always get in.

I just don't think it has ever made any sense to leave out a P5 conference champion. If they let them decide it on the field then the whole seasons matters and every team is clear as to a path to the college football playoffs. Win your division, and conference championship, and you are in.

Right now teams are getting punishing for playing good/tough non conference games. What was the upside for OU to play OSU and Houston, it kept them out. What was the upside for Penn St. to schedule an in state rival, kept them out. Last year Stanford played Northwester, kept them out. If teams win their conference and they are in, then we will see many, many more good non conference games as well.

 

[IlpYGwoeBk]

That would have been an interesting system a few years ago when Wisconsin was the Big Ten champ with an 8-5 record.

I think Jon mentioned something on the last podcast about conference championship games starting to feel like conference tournaments in basketball. I agree 100%, I know Penn State is technically the Big Ten champion, but we all know they weren't the best team and there are some years where it's even more obvious that the conference champ isn't even close to being the best team.

 

[DJL]

Well, Clemson lost to Pitt also. So they shouldn't be in also by your twisted logic.....

But Clemson had one loss, PSU has 2 losses including one where they were absolutely destroyed. No question they are playing well and could be one of the best 4, but the 4 teams selected have a better overall resume.

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

Even if a conference champ has 3 or 4 losses?

In an 8 team playoff....Yep. Maybe the conference is extremely tough top to bottom.
But the answer is yes, even with the very unlikely scenario of a 3 loss team making it to, and then winning the conference.

Not in a 4 team playoff, because I believe the committee got it correct this year, but in an 8 team playoff, absolutely.

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

That would have been an interesting system a few years ago when Wisconsin was the Big Ten champ with an 8-5 record.

I think Jon mentioned something on the last podcast about conference championship games starting to feel like conference tournaments in basketball. I agree 100%, I know Penn State is technically the Big Ten champion, but we all know they weren't the best team and there are some years where it's even more obvious that the conference champ isn't even close to being the best team.

In a 4 team playoff, I have no issue with a conf champ being left out based on overall body of work. In an 8 team playoff, all P5 champs get in.

Iowa likely isn't better than Michigan, but we won. PSU likely isn't better than OSU, or Wisky, but beat them both.

Look, I don't like that PSU won the B1G, as I think they should still be under a bowl and recruiting ban, But they did, and they beat a pretty good OSU and pretty good Wisc team to do it. I also am happy they are not in the CFP. But in an 8 team playoff, they absolutely should be in.

 

[theboat]

The thing about adding more teams is that it just creates more chaos. That may be what you want but it does nothing towards determining the "best" team.

I actually liked the BCS system. I am not a fan of an 8 seed winning a national championship in basketball, nor would I like a 4 loss team getting a few bounces and being the national champs

 

[deanvogs]

The thing about adding more teams is that it just creates more chaos. That may be what you want but it does nothing towards determining the "best" team.

I actually liked the BCS system. I am not a fan of an 8 seed winning a national championship in basketball, nor would I like a 4 loss team getting a few bounces and being the national champs

For me it really isn't about getting more teams. It is getting clearly defined rules as to how to make the playoffs. Teams don't play close to the same schedule, they never have and never will. Just do it like every other playoff on the planet.....win your division/conference, have a couple "at large/wild card" teams and there you go.

Just add 2 more teams at the minimum, give a bye to 2 teams and then you are covered. Go to 8 teams if you wanna add in a non P5 team and 2 at large teams. Either way I think making it about the conference/divisions will lead to a better product personally. It will make beating the teams you play every year more meaningful and fun.

 

[DDThompson]

The thing about adding more teams is that it just creates more chaos. That may be what you want but it does nothing towards determining the "best" team.

I actually liked the BCS system. I am not a fan of an 8 seed winning a national championship in basketball, nor would I like a 4 loss team getting a few bounces and being the national champs

A four loss team isn't going to win three straight on lucky bounces.

Let them play whomever they want in OOC.

Want to make conference play mean something? Win it and you are in it.

If they don't figure on winning conference titles then better schedule power 5 OOC teams instead of powder puff OOC.

 

[ShockHawk22]

Yeah, why not? I'd rather let in 1 undeserving team every now and again, than leave out a deserving team every single year.

2 years ago Baylor/TCU could have absolutely made noise in the college football playoffs. Last year who would have wanted to play Stanford? This year you leave out OU and Penn St.? Conference champs should always get in.

I just don't think it has ever made any sense to leave out a P5 conference champion. If they let them decide it on the field then the whole seasons matters and every team is clear as to a path to the college football playoffs. Win your division, and conference championship, and you are in.

Right now teams are getting punishing for playing good/tough non conference games. What was the upside for OU to play OSU and Houston, it kept them out. What was the upside for Penn St. to schedule an in state rival, kept them out. Last year Stanford played Northwester, kept them out. If teams win their conference and they are in, then we will see many, many more good non conference games as well.

I understand your reasoning and you are very good at articulating what you mean. I don't agree with you however. At least for the 2 parts that I placed in bold/italics.

Bolded text. There are 5 power 5 conferences and only 4 spots. So even if you choose only conference champions, someone gets left out. Bama, Clemson, PSU, Washington, OU. They all won their conference so according to your logic they should be in.....That's why I think winning your conference isn't everything. (Though should be considered)

Italic text. If all the games mattered then PSU shouldn't get in because they have another loss. I agreed that looking at it this way might get some teams to go away from scheduling good non conference games. So you take this into consideration as well.

There aren't black and white answers. There is a gray area to be considered.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Even if a conference champ has 3 or 4 losses?

OMG, we agree. And I thought it was just an earthquake I was feeling...

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

For me it really isn't about getting more teams. It is getting clearly defined rules as to how to make the playoffs. Teams don't play close to the same schedule, they never have and never will. Just do it like every other playoff on the planet.....win your division/conference, have a couple "at large/wild card" teams and there you go.

Just add 2 more teams at the minimum, give a bye to 2 teams and then you are covered. Go to 8 teams if you wanna add in a non P5 team and 2 at large teams. Either way I think making it about the conference/divisions will lead to a better product personally. It will make beating the teams you play every year more meaningful and fun.

8 teams. no Byes. If you are going to give byes it would just create more advantage for the higher ranked teams. I would rather it stay at 4 than to give byes.

8 teams probably allows 1-2 teams in that are truly on the fringe of being "deserving" for the NC. But it basically ensures not leaving out a team that might be "deserving".

I hate media/committee engineered drama. Take "most" of the talky talky out of it, and go to 8.

 

[DDThompson]

All playoff scenarios have flaws to them. Some are more flawed than others and the arguments opposing an 8 team playoff are seriously flawed.

Some silly arguments:

1. College football needs to get rid of conferences and go to regional districts.

Whaaaa? This is just dopey. Big10 West becomes a glorified Big8 and diluted with Kansases and Iowa St. Not going to happen.

You think it's all about the blue bloods now? This is lords and serfs kingdom.

2. Rule that every conference must have divisions for championship game and play same number of conference games to make a subjective system less subjective.

Question.

Why? Why give more power to the NCAA or whatever governing body alphabet soup of college football.

An 8 team playoff allows the power 5 conferences the autonomy to chose their champion as they desire and gives space for the media and AD to drama-tize the football consumers for the final three spots as they desire.

Coaches, say like Ferentz for example, can schedule cream puffs in OOC, and gamble on making that the drama-tizers look at football players like eye candy or he can focus on conference games (division games) and win conference titles.

The best of both worlds: merit based performances on the field And eye test (candy) for the fantasy projection crowd of comparing games with common opponents and who looks good with "if that fluke play..."