CFB Power Brokers Discussing Expansion Of CFP To 8

mrandyk said:
8 would be a start. Imagine how fun (and profitable) the March Madness version of college football would be. I can't believe the NCAA hasn't implemented a real playoff yet.

I really like the FCS model of 24 teams with the top 8 getting a bye, and home games through the early rounds. Regular season games mean a lot more when at-large bids and seeding are constantly in play, and the playoff games would be significantly more watched than comparable bowl games.

For example - I can not muster any reason to care about Washington playing Ohio State in the Rose Bowl this year, but I would absolutely be watching if the winner went on to play Oklahoma or Georgia in the quarterfinals. Same with Texas-Georgia or any other "marquee" bowl game. All of them are pointless exhibitions and it's amazing they've been kept around in this capacity for so long.
Click to expand...
This sums up how I feel exactly.  The NCAA/ sponsors/schools/conferences all want to make more money.   This would bring in more than they've ever seen.  College football is the only sport that gets the postseason completely wrong.

It makes zero sense when people who are usually good at making money dig their heels in over something stupid and cost themselves.  Take the Washington Redskins.  Dan Snyder has a golden opportunity to not only garner goodwill, earn new fans, and sell a boatload of merchandise/sponsorships if he would just change the name.  But he refuses because he is an idiot that doesn't want anyone telling him what to do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
runningblind said:
College football is the only sport that gets the postseason completely wrong.
Click to expand...
Then CFB is the only sport that got the season right.  Ever game matters and you don't need a big playoff if a team is putting their national title chances on the line every week.

I just checked the NFC.  We have three teams clinched their divisions and are playing meaningless games.   And about four fringe .500 teams jockeying for a playoff spot.  Just dragging out the charade as long as they can. 

And no one protesting the Redskins has or will ever care about their team.

 
Notre Dame Joe said:
Then CFB is the only sport that got the season right.  Ever game matters and you don't need a big playoff if a team is putting their national title chances on the line every week.

I just checked the NFC.  We have three teams clinched their divisions and are playing meaningless games.   And about four fringe .500 teams jockeying for a playoff spot.  Just dragging out the charade as long as they can. 

And no one protesting the Redskins has or will ever care about their team.
Click to expand...


Alabama/Auburn didn't matter in 2017...

 
Notre Dame Joe said:
I think the SEC will ally themselves with Southern Tourism to prevent their champion from having to play an Ice Bowl.  
Click to expand...
Tired argument and reeks of cowardice on their part.  If the Buffalo Bills, Green Bay Packers, New England Patriots, Chicago Bears and a host of others don't have a problem with it, nobody else should either.

 
mrandyk said:
8 would be a start. Imagine how fun (and profitable) the March Madness version of college football would be. I can't believe the NCAA hasn't implemented a real playoff yet.

I really like the FCS model of 24 teams with the top 8 getting a bye, and home games through the early rounds. Regular season games mean a lot more when at-large bids and seeding are constantly in play, and the playoff games would be significantly more watched than comparable bowl games.

For example - I can not muster any reason to care about Washington playing Ohio State in the Rose Bowl this year, but I would absolutely be watching if the winner went on to play Oklahoma or Georgia in the quarterfinals. Same with Texas-Georgia or any other "marquee" bowl game. All of them are pointless exhibitions and it's amazing they've been kept around in this capacity for so long.
Click to expand...
If you are willing to take the risk that it cheapens the regular season.  It has certainly done that in NCAA basketball.  IMO, 8 teams is enough.

 
Notre Dame Joe said:
Then CFB is the only sport that got the season right.  Ever game matters and you don't need a big playoff if a team is putting their national title chances on the line every week.

I just checked the NFC.  We have three teams clinched their divisions and are playing meaningless games.   And about four fringe .500 teams jockeying for a playoff spot.  Just dragging out the charade as long as they can. 

And no one protesting the Redskins has or will ever care about their team.
Click to expand...
By that logic,  as soon as a team slips up all their games are meaningless afterwards.  95% of other college football games are as well. Having a set of rules where the qualifying criteria is laid out ahead of time, and all teams know exactly what they need to do,  is the only fair way and is how it is done everywhere else.  Criteria that changes week to week and year to year isn't fair.   There should also be a level playing field as far as how many conference games,  actually having to be in a conference,  etc., but you know all about that. 

The whole purpose of sport is to settle things on the field,  not by a subjective commitee deciding who has a chance.   It sounds like you just don't want any of the have nots at the table.  I am a fan of a "have" school and I want the little guys to be let in because that is what sports are about.  

As far as Washington is concerned,  my point was partly about money,  but how do you know they wouldn't make new fans? You think we shouldn't try and correct things because you think you know how it will turn out, so why try? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrandyk said:
The regular season is more valuable as every game is for either a bid or jockeying for seeding to get home games in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. Just look at basketball, hockey, or baseball. Plus, there's far more teams not in contention than are in contention for a spot in football.

 
RedDenver said:
No it isn't. Just look at basketball, hockey, or baseball. Plus, there's far more teams not in contention than are in contention for a spot in football.
Click to expand...
One game in any of those sports is a much smaller portion of the season, and the tournaments go to a neutral site.

I've watched the FCS model of 24 teams for years now, it makes the regular season way more interesting when the games actually count for something.

 
Every single other level of football has an actual playoff, and I think you'd have to go way down to high school to find a division that has a bracket with as few as 8 teams. 8 teams in a 130-team division is dumb, though not quite as dumb as 4 or 2 has been.

 
Mavric said:
Alabama/LSU didn't matter in 2011   ... unless you're trying to make the argument that losing that game actually made it easier for Alabama to win the National Title.
Click to expand...
Swiss Gambit anyone?

Chess term in tournaments with too many players for a full round robin (modern day conferences) and each round is reseeded so the top players are matched up.  So, you lose a game early to get yourself in the losers pile.

BTW, what problem is playoff expansion meant to solve?

 
Notre Dame Joe said:
Swiss Gambit anyone?

Chess term in tournaments with too many players for a full round robin (modern day conferences) and each round is reseeded so the top players are matched up.  So, you lose a game early to get yourself in the losers pile.

BTW, what problem is playoff expansion meant to solve?
Click to expand...




IMO, with what seems to be fewer and fewer games between P5 teams OOC, we need there to be a way that they actually play each other. And having 2 SEC teams in a 4 team playoff and a biased network like ESPN works at preventing that. A conference might have 1-2 teams with great records but there’s no good way of knowing whether they’re just benefitting from a crappy conference if there aren’t enough OOC P5 match ups for comparing the conferences to each other. Hypothetically a conference could have 4 great teams that are all 9-3 but beat each other up, and another could have a 12-0 team but the rest of the confence was trash. 

With a playoff expansion they could guarantee every conference is represented by at least 1 team.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrandyk said:
One game in any of those sports is a much smaller portion of the season, and the tournaments go to a neutral site.

I've watched the FCS model of 24 teams for years now, it makes the regular season way more interesting when the games actually count for something.
Click to expand...
But all the games don't count for something, only a tiny fraction of them do. And as the season goes on, fewer and fewer games have playoff implications.

The way to combat this is to have more teams in the playoff, but then the games individually mean less because so many teams get into the playoff and the playoffs themselves become very large with a whole lot of games. It's why I haven't watched any regular season basketball, hockey, or baseball in many years - I just wait and watch the playoffs. And even then I don't usually watch the first few rounds because the tournament is so many games.

There's just no way to keep interest in the regular season as high once there's a playoff.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top