8 team playoff in the future?

[Redux]

As we close the first ever college football playoff we can all agree it was hugely successful for almost everyone involved. Instead of a nasty Bama > FSU mandatory matchup, we got 4 of the best teams laying it all out there on the field. What more could we ask for?

 

Well already many are clamoring for another 4 teams to be added to that bracket. Seeing as we have 5 major conferences, 5 mid majors and several independent teams the fit seems natural. But before we go and dive head first into that I want you to consider something. Are we willing to sacrifice quality football for the sake of more games?

 

What I mean is take the NFL for example. When a top rated team has a playoff spot locked up they tend to sleepwalk through whatever games they have remaining to rest their starters. If this translated into the collegiate level we as fans could be robbed of some exciting games. Just think if Alabama already had the SEC West wrapped up and regardless of SEC title game they would be an at large spot if not top seed. Come rivalry week an Iron Bowl meeting that sees Auburn throttle Alabamas backups because the starters were resting for the title game and playoffs. Some would argue that simply wouldnt happen in rivalry games, yet if 8 teams became the norm evolution kicks in and the rivalry game ends up taking a backseat to playoff implications.

 

The Big 12 successfully screwed itself out of a spot by claiming it had Two "One True Champion's". Thats on them, add a couple more teams, reestablish the conference championship in Jerry world, and Ohio State never gets to play Bama. So in this case 8 teams would be great. But as a Husker fan this makes our road back to glory that much harder all be it sweeter.

 

I know this was a ramble but in closing, should we ever expand the field I think some serious things like home field advantage need to be looked at for playoff and/or conference title games so we dont see the records and on field product suffer because of it.

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

There are 4 teams and the top. And another bunch of teams I could care less about.

Leave it 4 teams as is.

[DrinkinwitTerrellFarley]

8 is best, with the first round at campus sites to reduce travel woes. There would be 5 conference champs and 3 wildcards, one of which should go to the best of the Group of 5

[Redux]

8 is best, with the first round at campus sites to reduce travel woes. There would be 5 conference champs and 3 wildcards, one of which should go to the best of the Group of 5

Also means 2 or 3 SEC teams are almost a lock.

[dvdcrr]

Start the season a week earlier and do 8. Elite 8. Its not watered down. Thats 72 coaches, 520 players in the whole USA. Heck I was on a 15 seed team that was actually 3-4th best in the whole bracket once.

[BigRedBuster]

Ultimately, I think 8 teams makes more sense. But, I'm fine with it being this way for a while. At least it's a huge improvement over what we had.

[admo]

I'm good with 4. The winners play their way into a title game. Unfortunately TCU did not make it. I think they were better than all four this year, and would have beaten any of them. But it is what it is and tOSU won it all. It was that type of year and not expected to be the norm.

[LumberJackSker]

The only thing against going to 8 is that is asking a lot of fans to pay for that much traveling

[nathanwindu]

Just out of curiosity, how would an 8-team playoff affect the conference runner-ups? For example this year, going into Conf. Champ week, the Top 8 was:

1. Bama

2. Oregon

3. TCU

4. FSU

5. tOSU

6. Baylor

7. Arizona

8. Michigan State

(9. KSU)

(10. Miss. State)

 

Arizona loses the Conference Championship and falls out of the Top 8, so then you have teams like Miss. State, Mich. State, Kansas State, etc. making it into the Top 8 and the CFP without having even played in their conference championship. Does this somewhat penalize conference runner-ups in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams? It seems like it'd be almost better to not make your Conf. Champ game in that case

[True2tRA]

Just out of curiosity, how would an 8-team playoff affect the conference runner-ups? For example this year, going into Conf. Champ week, the Top 8 was:

1. Bama

2. Oregon

3. TCU

4. FSU

5. tOSU

6. Baylor

7. Arizona

8. Michigan State

(9. KSU)

(10. Miss. State)

 

Arizona loses the Conference Championship and falls out of the Top 8, so then you have teams like Miss. State, Mich. State, Kansas State, etc. making it into the Top 8 and the CFP without having even played in their conference championship. Does this somewhat penalize conference runner-ups in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams? It seems like it'd be almost better to not make your Conf. Champ game in that case

Interesting point. +1

 

You're right. I'm not sure how they would work around that.

[True2tRA]

I think they should leave it alone. 4 is a great number. It doesn't create a lot more games. It still keeps the importance of the regular season in play. Such as, a team with 2 losses makes the top 8 and somehow pulls an upset over a team that didn't lose a game all season.

[Redux]

Just out of curiosity, how would an 8-team playoff affect the conference runner-ups? For example this year, going into Conf. Champ week, the Top 8 was:

1. Bama

2. Oregon

3. TCU

4. FSU

5. tOSU

6. Baylor

7. Arizona

8. Michigan State

(9. KSU)

(10. Miss. State)

 

Arizona loses the Conference Championship and falls out of the Top 8, so then you have teams like Miss. State, Mich. State, Kansas State, etc. making it into the Top 8 and the CFP without having even played in their conference championship. Does this somewhat penalize conference runner-ups in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams? It seems like it'd be almost better to not make your Conf. Champ game in that case

Exactly. At this point conference standings are eliminated and the eye test takes over. Yet with 10 or so teams to pick from the eye test could fail the committee. I like it at 4 right now.

[DrinkinwitTerrellFarley]

I think they should leave it alone. 4 is a great number. It doesn't create a lot more games. It still keeps the importance of the regular season in play. Such as, a team with 2 losses makes the top 8 and somehow pulls an upset over a team that didn't lose a game all season.

If a 2 loss team, for example Michigan State this year, is better than a team with no losses, Florida State, who cares? I want the best teams in the field. There's no one on earth that can convince me that FSU was better than TCU. 8 teams fixes that and doesn't "water down" the regular season. If anything the regular season was heightened this year and prevented the awful BCS matchup of Alabama and FSU based on media hype. Taking 8 teams out of 125 does not diminish the regular season IMO, it's not close to the NBA or NFL ratio. I wouldn't be against doing away with the conference championship games to enable 8. Having the first rounds games at campus sites of the higher seed eliminates any travel concerns.

[Redux]

 

I think they should leave it alone. 4 is a great number. It doesn't create a lot more games. It still keeps the importance of the regular season in play. Such as, a team with 2 losses makes the top 8 and somehow pulls an upset over a team that didn't lose a game all season.

 

If a 2 loss team, for example Michigan State this year, is better than a team with no losses, Florida State, who cares? I want the best teams in the field. There's no one on earth that can convince me that FSU was better than TCU. 8 teams fixes that and doesn't "water down" the regular season.

Yes and no. While we want the best teams in the playoff we could potentially sacrifice the legitimacy of the regular season. If every game is supposed to matter we risk games being watered down because one or both teams involved in a late sesson game are more concerned about the post season than they are with the game in front of them.

 

I absolutely DO NOT want college football turning into the NFL..

[hskrpwr13]

Exactly, Redux. I'll fully admit to being wrong about the 4 team playoff versus the old system(s). However, a good number of the games that were considered "so exciting to be played" would take on much less importance than they do now. That is one of the main reasons I couldn't care less about who wins a particular NFL game until perhaps the last couple of weeks.

 

Also, I highly doubt we don't get a deserving national champion with 4 teams. Yes, TCU probably got the shaft at the hands of FSU this year, but at the same time, it doesn't mean TCU got screwed out of a national title. I'll never advocate a ranking system as a way to determine best teams, however I'm not concerned with the voted #6 team not getting a playoff spot.