16 Team Playoff

[macroboy]

The playoff system is an example where everything scales.

 

Prior to the BCS, you didn't have championship games. You just had bowls and polling picked the National Champions at the end of the season.

Then they introduced the BCS, which solved what most people wanted "We want to actually see the top two teams play". It introduced the issue, however, where we don't get to see the teams that missed the cut, through whatever reasons, even given the chance to compete.

So the CFP is introduced. It has all the same issues that the BCS had, but now we have 4 teams instead of 2. NOPE, IT GOT BETTER. COMPETITION BETWEEN 4 VERY STRONG TEAMS.

So we introduce the 8 team playoff, and it doesn't solve any of the issues. SOLVES ALMOST ALL ISSUES. YOU ARE A CHAMPION BY WINNING GAMES AGAINST OTHER CHAMPIONSHIP CONTENDERS

So we introduce a 16 team playoff, and it doesn't solve any of the issues. WOULD MAKE FOR MORE OUTSTANDING FOOTBALL AND FAN BASE LOVE AND INCLUDE THE TEAMS THAT FELT LEFT OUT BY 8

So we intro...

 

In the end, what are we trying to accomplish? A CHAMPION BY HEAD TO HEAD COMPETITION THE WAY EVERY OTHER FREAKING SPORT DOES IT!

 

srsly?

 

I answered your questions.

 

Just so I'm clear, you don't want a college football champion determined by head to head competition? You'd rather have it decided by voting polls?

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The playoff system is an example where everything scales.

 

Prior to the BCS, you didn't have championship games. You just had bowls and polling picked the National Champions at the end of the season.

Then they introduced the BCS, which solved what most people wanted "We want to actually see the top two teams play". It introduced the issue, however, where we don't get to see the teams that missed the cut, through whatever reasons, even given the chance to compete.

So the CFP is introduced. It has all the same issues that the BCS had, but now we have 4 teams instead of 2.

So we introduce the 8 team playoff, and it doesn't solve any of the issues.

So we introduce a 16 team playoff, and it doesn't solve any of the issues.

So we intro...

 

In the end, what are we trying to accomplish?

Yes and playoff creep is something the NCAA was wary of between every step swearing the next step wouldn't come to pass.

 

As for the bolded,I like to use the example of the NFL or the NCAA in Basketball. The playoff gets big enough you are determining who won the playoff instead of who the best team is. I know it doesn't sound like there is a difference but there is. The two examples I point to (they are getting somewhat old now) are the last time the New York Giants won the super bowl they went 9-7 in the regular season, lost 4 games in a row at one point, 5 out of 6 in a stretch and 5 out of their last 8 regular season games yet won the Super Bowl. Now they WON the playoffs but were they really the best team that season?

 

My second example is in basketball, UCONN won it all in 2014 but only finished third in their own conference yet they won the big dance so does that mean they were truly the best team in the country that year? Or simply the hottest at the end of the season?

 

My point is at some point it becomes less about finding out who the best team is and more about crowning a survivor. Where that line is exactly, I don't know.

 

Edit: Thought of lots of other stuff....

in all fairness though that happens with a 4 team playoff too. Ohio State would have gotten blown out by Alabama mid-season in 2014-2015, but they were on a roll at the end so they won

Yeah you could make the argument even pre-BCS. I could be wrong but I bet a lot of people would say the 83 team was better than the Miami team that upset them.

 

So it again becomes a question like HuskerMav said, "In the end, what are we trying to accomplish? "

 

It's another reason why I'm /meh about national championships. The trophies and the recruits it attracts are nice but I'd rather just win games.

What do you mean "In the end, what are we trying to accomplish? "

 

 

Huskers? Well win a championship, what else? Go to the Rose bowl?. Same for any other team. For the fans, knowing that a large enough group of teams was invited as to avoid leaving out a team deserving a shot at the finals, and most of all for fans to get some great entertainment.

 

And no if you loose a game on the field, you were not better then that team, upset or not, because you did not loose on paper, on charts, on comparison to other teams, but on the field, and thats all that matters.

First off, lose only has a one 'o' in it.

 

Second, use some context clues, bud. The whole statement was about the NCAAF post-season. So obviously, the question is, what are we trying to accomplish by changing the post-season? Crowning the champion? Well, playoffs don't always do that.

 

Finally, no, the best team does not always win the football game. Winning is all that matters, but sometimes the worser team wins. Example, my brother-in-law is a way better basketball player than I am. With that said, sometimes I beat him in 1-on-1. I don't become better than him just by beating him. He still beats me 9 times out of 10.

 

There is no perfect formula for making sure the "best team" wins it all. In the end 4 (possibly 8 in the future) of the very best teams as determined by the regular season are matched up and the team that wins the games is crowned. Nothing wrong with that and if we don't do auto qualifiers it won't be as fluky as the UCONN and Giants championships seem to be. They got in because they won their conference tourney or division and made the most of it. If we go to a system where we are selecting teams based on merit and resume you won't see the flukes that don't deserve it that much because they struggledon't early in the year as often

[HuskerMav11]

 

The playoff system is an example where everything scales.

 

Prior to the BCS, you didn't have championship games. You just had bowls and polling picked the National Champions at the end of the season.

Then they introduced the BCS, which solved what most people wanted "We want to actually see the top two teams play". It introduced the issue, however, where we don't get to see the teams that missed the cut, through whatever reasons, even given the chance to compete.

So the CFP is introduced. It has all the same issues that the BCS had, but now we have 4 teams instead of 2. NOPE, IT GOT BETTER. COMPETITION BETWEEN 4 VERY STRONG TEAMS.

So we introduce the 8 team playoff, and it doesn't solve any of the issues. SOLVES ALMOST ALL ISSUES. YOU ARE A CHAMPION BY WINNING GAMES AGAINST OTHER CHAMPIONSHIP CONTENDERS

So we introduce a 16 team playoff, and it doesn't solve any of the issues. WOULD MAKE FOR MORE OUTSTANDING FOOTBALL AND FAN BASE LOVE AND INCLUDE THE TEAMS THAT FELT LEFT OUT BY 8

So we intro...

 

In the end, what are we trying to accomplish? A CHAMPION BY HEAD TO HEAD COMPETITION THE WAY EVERY OTHER FREAKING SPORT DOES IT!

 

srsly?

 

I answered your questions.

 

Just so I'm clear, you don't want a college football champion determined by head to head competition? You'd rather have it decided by voting polls?

 

 

First off, you should realize that your answers are merely opinions that others are free to share or disagree with. K, just making sure.

 

Second, no. If I was in control, I would institute a 12 team playoff with 4 play-in games, and 4 byes for the top 4. I feel that pads enough room and gives significant advantage to those who have earned those top spots. With that said, you need to realize that the top team doesn't always win the football game, and that this doesn't solve that issue.

 

Finally, you should realize and respect that football is not like EVERY OTHER FREAKING SPORT. There are less games, which means losses are more impactful. Additionally, EVERY OTHER FREAKING SPORT kind of agrees that their are issues with their playoff/post season. On top of that, money plays a big factor. Most schools athletic programs are heavily subsidized by the revenue of the football program. Creating a post-season where teams are valued based on their consistency in the regular season creates a lot of excitement and demand around every football game.

 

The point I was initially trying to make, which may have not been obvious, is that you can't just change the post-season. You have to restructure everything. Conferences, scheduling, and the post-season would all need to be changed.

 

In the end, what are we trying to accomplish? Do we value consistency throughout the season? Do we demand perfection during the regular season? Do we expect scheduling to play a big role? Is conference membership important? Simply adding more teams as contenders doesn't address any of these issues.

 

I don't have the answers. This is an extremely complicated issue. There wouldn't be so much discussion around it if it was a simple fix.

[beorach]

This topic makes me feel like the season is over already (probably because we beat it like a dead horse all the months it's not in swing).

 

I think the FBS, as we know it, needs to disappear. Roughly half the division is made up of P5 teams already. Why the rest are in the same division boggles the mind. The national champion will never come from that pool.

 

If you don't allow for your top division teams to play lower division ones, scheduling is a lot simpler.

 

The real dream would be to have a relegation and promotion system...whereby your worst teams from the top division drop and the best from the next division down move up. Perhaps that's on an annual basis or maybe you allow for multiple seasons between swaps (and have a system for determining relative, aggregate performances). Kansas and Rutgers could disappear and be replaced by Boise State and Houston or something. Maybe you have those teams play against each other for positions in the "top flight." I'd be more interested in those high stakes games than most bowl games I've watched...just because they were televised and I had some free time...

[RunMickeyRun02]

This topic makes me feel like the season is over already (probably because we beat it like a dead horse all the months it's not in swing).

 

I think the FBS, as we know it, needs to disappear. Roughly half the division is made up of P5 teams already. Why the rest are in the same division boggles the mind. The national champion will never come from that pool.

 

If you don't allow for your top division teams to play lower division ones, scheduling is a lot simpler.

 

The real dream would be to have a relegation and promotion system...whereby your worst teams from the top division drop and the best from the next division down move up. Perhaps that's on an annual basis or maybe you allow for multiple seasons between swaps (and have a system for determining relative, aggregate performances). Kansas and Rutgers could disappear and be replaced by Boise State and Houston or something. Maybe you have those teams play against each other for positions in the "top flight." I'd be more interested in those high stakes games than most bowl games I've watched...just because they were televised and I had some free time...

This article from back before the Big 12 voted not to expand describes a promotion/de-motion scenario like you are describing.

[Nebfanatic]

I got it. 4 conferences 48 teams. 12 teams in each conference and each conference runs a round robin schedule of 11 games. All of the conference champions then are entered into a round robin (gold pool), runner ups will play each other (silver pool), every 3rd place is pooled together and down on the line and even the worst teams from each conference are entered into a round Robin. Wouldn't solve much but might be fun

[HuskerMav11]

 

This topic makes me feel like the season is over already (probably because we beat it like a dead horse all the months it's not in swing).

 

I think the FBS, as we know it, needs to disappear. Roughly half the division is made up of P5 teams already. Why the rest are in the same division boggles the mind. The national champion will never come from that pool.

 

If you don't allow for your top division teams to play lower division ones, scheduling is a lot simpler.

 

The real dream would be to have a relegation and promotion system...whereby your worst teams from the top division drop and the best from the next division down move up. Perhaps that's on an annual basis or maybe you allow for multiple seasons between swaps (and have a system for determining relative, aggregate performances). Kansas and Rutgers could disappear and be replaced by Boise State and Houston or something. Maybe you have those teams play against each other for positions in the "top flight." I'd be more interested in those high stakes games than most bowl games I've watched...just because they were televised and I had some free time...

This article from back before the Big 12 voted not to expand describes a promotion/de-motion scenario like you are describing.

 

 

Except the article's description is relegation from a two-tiered super-conference perspective, which makes a good story fantasy that no top-tier team would ever agree to simply from an economical standpoint. What about other sports? How do you manage the logistics? Isn't depriving other schools access to money based on their inferior status only going to ensure they cannot compete with those at the top? Won't blue blood schools worry about damaging their program due to down seasons? How would you justify having a top tier program with a top paid coach, and then not being able to afford those contracts due to loss in revenue from relegation?

 

Honestly, I think it's interesting, but realistically, I can't see anyone with any sort of skin in the game letting it happen.

[beorach]

Thanks for the article, RMR! I would agree that any change would have to show potential for increased revenue. There are several articles online that offer details as to how a promotion/relegation arrangement makes financial sense (and even this from the page RMR linked to gets into such things: http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/2/24/8052475/college-football-relegation-promotion-conferences-LIKE-SOCCER). This is a football board, though. Dreams, stories, fantasies...whatever we want to call them...are also about ideals. It's not ideal to have one division with teams as small as Charlotte and as big as Michigan - just went by the capacities of their facilities here. There are other ways to fix that.

 

E.g., I figure the two biggest gripes about the national title game have been: 1) a team that didn't win its conference (CCG?) shouldn't be allowed to play for a national title; and 2) there should be a path for the occasional "mid-major" team to the big game.

 

Take all your P5 conference champions and add the top team (or top three teams?) from outside those conferences for your postseason field.

[RunMickeyRun02]

Thanks for the article, RMR! I would agree that any change would have to show potential for increased revenue. There are several articles online that offer details as to how a promotion/relegation arrangement makes financial sense (and even this from the page RMR linked to gets into such things: http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/2/24/8052475/college-football-relegation-promotion-conferences-LIKE-SOCCER). This is a football board, though. Dreams, stories, fantasies...whatever we want to call them...are also about ideals. It's not ideal to have one division with teams as small as Charlotte and as big as Michigan - just went by the capacities of their facilities here. There are other ways to fix that.

 

E.g., I figure the two biggest gripes about the national title game have been: 1) a team that didn't win its conference (CCG?) shouldn't be allowed to play for a national title; and 2) there should be a path for the occasional "mid-major" team to the big game.

 

Take all your P5 conference champions and add the top team (or top three teams?) from outside those conferences for your postseason field.

You are very welcome my friend.

[HuskerMerc44]

I feel that an 8 team playoff,

Is enough and functionally adaquate.

[Nebfanatic]

I feel like it's alot easier to support 8 teams mid season but as the season wears on 4-6 teams really have separated themselves

[HuskerMerc44]

I feel like it's alot easier to support 8 teams mid season but as the season wears on 4-6 teams really have separated themselves

How do you feel about the P5 conferences

Their conference champions

Getting 5 of 8 playoff spots.

3 at large add ins.

No complaints.

[HuskerNation1]

Regarding the CFP, did Iowa just screw Ohio State last night? In essence, if OSU and Penn State win out, PSU goes to the big ten championship and OSU sits. If Michigan beats OSU then Michigan goes to BCG.

[WhatDoIKnow]

Regarding the CFP, did Iowa just screw Ohio State last night? In essence, if OSU and Penn State win out, PSU goes to the big ten championship and OSU sits. If Michigan beats OSU then Michigan goes to BCG.

 

tOSU fans are saying they will be in anyway. I'm not so sure.

[ScottyIce]

I think I'm ready to give in and go with 8 team playoff... it's one more week. Just play the first round sooner, like mid December. Then semi-finals at regular time (NYE or whatever) then Championship game a couple weeks later...

 

Then you can eliminate a couple junker bowl games.