Jump to content
seaofred92

CFB Power Brokers Discussing Expansion Of CFP To 8

Recommended Posts

I know this is more general CFB than specifically related to the Huskers but this is a big big deal: 

 

https://theathletic.com/708538/2018/12/12/college-football-playoff-expansion-eight-team-support/

 

Quote

The first four years of the College Football Playoff were considered a success. The four-team format has been more universally accepted than the old BCS system, and it has kept fans engaged throughout the country.

 

But ahead of Year 5’s national semifinals featuring Alabama, Clemson, Notre Dame and Oklahoma, there is a sense of growing discontent with certain aspects of the CFP system, including the selection committee’s deference to the SEC and what some consider unfair treatment of UCF.

 

Now, a number of influential voices in college football are calling for a serious look at expansion.

 

There is a groundswell of support to expedite expansion before the end of the CFP’s initial 12-year contract with ESPN in 2026, with many telling The Athletic they support an eight-team format.

 

“It’s an appropriate thing to begin thinking about,” Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby told The Athletic this week.

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will eventually be 8....I think that kind of changes things in regards to National Titles. Nebraska has 0 losses in the 5 NC we have. Nick Saban has only gone undefeated once out of his 6 national titles. 8 teams would allow the elite teams to lose a game each year and still be in the top 8 to still have a chance at the NC. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

It will eventually be 8....I think that kind of changes things in regards to National Titles. Nebraska has 0 losses in the 5 NC we have. Nick Saban has only gone undefeated once out of his 6 national titles. 8 teams would allow the elite teams to lose a game each year and still be in the top 8 to still have a chance at the NC. 

I also think that more teams are competitive now and 1 loss now is probably equal to 0 back when you could just stack rosters

  • Plus1 4
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

It will eventually be 8....I think that kind of changes things in regards to National Titles. Nebraska has 0 losses in the 5 NC we have. Nick Saban has only gone undefeated once out of his 6 national titles. 8 teams would allow the elite teams to lose a game each year and still be in the top 8 to still have a chance at the NC. 

 

Don't forget that he didn't win his division or his conference in 2 of those years either :D

  • Plus1 6
  • Haha 2
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

It will eventually be 8....I think that kind of changes things in regards to National Titles. Nebraska has 0 losses in the 5 NC we have. Nick Saban has only gone undefeated once out of his 6 national titles. 8 teams would allow the elite teams to lose a game each year and still be in the top 8 to still have a chance at the NC. 

I think 8 is great. The current 4 team system has teams every year get in with a loss. 8 would just give more 1 or 2 loss teams a chance- plus it would give UCF their crack. I dont think UCF would have any shot to win a playoff- but it would be fun to give them a chance. For example- this year they would probably be the 8 seed and play Alabama and get destroyed. But at least we wouldnt have to listen to them whine anymore. Heck we almost had to watch a 2 loss Georgia team- who lost their last game of the season make it to the current 4 team structure over 1 loss P5 conference champions. So if we are going to have to watch 2 SEC teams get in the 4 team playoff most years then might as well expand to 8 and give more teams from more conferences a chance. 

 

The thing I like about the idea of each conference champion gets an auto bid to the playoff is that it keeps every fanbases hopes alive for most of the season. Say Nebraska. As long as we are alive to win our division in the big 10- we still have a shot to get in the playoff and win a National Championship. I think that would make for an exciting season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, seaofred92 said:

I also think that more teams are competitive now and 1 loss now is probably equal to 0 back when you could just stack rosters

Not necessarily. If you look back every year you usually had 2-3 undefeated teams at the end of the year. This year you have 3. Most years you have 2-3. So I dont think that has changed much. But the talent is spread around more. But on the flip side Alabama and Clemson are stacked rosters. So is Ohio State.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am big advocate for conference champs. If you can't win your conference, you don't deserve to be there. This is would make it like having regional champs. 

  • Plus1 5
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jager said:

I am big advocate for conference champs. If you can't win your conference, you don't deserve to be there. This is would make it like having regional champs. 

 

They don’t even do that with a 4 team playoff, so I doubt they’ll do it with 8.

 

What they can do with 8 is put in undefeated G5 champ(s) over P5 teams that didn’t win the conference. If there are no undefeated G5 teams, P5 teams that aren’t conference champs should have a chance at the playoff. E.g. this year it could’ve been Georgia, Ohio State, and UCF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they don't.  Nobody would have been jazzed to see Northwestern get in over Ohio State.  It's BS, conference champ, regardless of record, earned it by winning their conference.

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they move to a 8 team playoff with no stipulations other than their "rankings" then be prepared for at minimum 2 SEC teams in the playoff every year, last year we would have gotten 3.  Do we really want that?  I don't. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again: There's an obvious and simple way to do an 8 team playoff. 5 slots to the P5 conference champs. 1 slot for the "best" G5 conference champ. 2 slots for independents and other teams. Keep the committee to decide on the 3 non-P5-champs and to seed them 1-8 for the playoffs.

 

Of course, that's too obvious and simple, so that's never going to happen.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again: There's an obvious and simple way to do an 8 team playoff. 5 slots to the P5 conference champs. 1 slot for the "best" G5 conference champ. 2 slots for independents and other teams. Keep the committee to decide on the 3 non-P5-champs and to seed them 1-8 for the playoffs.

 

Of course, that's too obvious and simple, so that's never going to happen.

I think the top G5 school should have to be within the top 12 or so to make the playoff. If the highest ranked G5 is a 9-3 Boise State ranked 21st, then 3 at large teams from P5.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GSG said:

 

Don't forget that he didn't win his division or his conference in 2 of those years either :D

Good strategy if you want to win a NC. Tank 1 game so you can rest up by not playing a CCG while the rest of the 8 teams are getting beat up.

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't heard one honest explanation as to why we started with a 4 team playoff system when we have 5 power conferences considered equal to one another... that system will inherently be unfair and guaranteed to leave out at least one conference champ each year, 2 when notre dame has a solid year.

 

All conference champs and then next 3 highest ranked teams.  Makes conference champ weekend and late november football way more compelling when teams 6-12 are fighting for the last spots.

 

I'm 100% against a 6 team because it gives the top 2 team an inherent advantage with a week off and since its impossible to have equal schedules, do not want a scenario where a biased committee dictates who gets a bye.

 

Start the 3rd round this weekend, 2nd round around new years and title game where it is now.

 

Who the F says no to that?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dspanther05 said:

If they move to a 8 team playoff with no stipulations other than their "rankings" then be prepared for at minimum 2 SEC teams in the playoff every year, last year we would have gotten 3.  Do we really want that?  I don't. 

That's why you should have to win your conference to get into the playoffs.

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gossamorharpy said:

Haven't heard one honest explanation as to why we started with a 4 team playoff system when we have 5 power conferences considered equal to one another... that system will inherently be unfair and guaranteed to leave out at least one conference champ each year, 2 when notre dame has a solid year.

 

All conference champs and then next 3 highest ranked teams.  Makes conference champ weekend and late november football way more compelling when teams 6-12 are fighting for the last spots.

 

I'm 100% against a 6 team because it gives the top 2 team an inherent advantage with a week off and since its impossible to have equal schedules, do not want a scenario where a biased committee dictates who gets a bye.

 

Start the 3rd round this weekend, 2nd round around new years and title game where it is now.

 

Who the F says no to that?

 

I don't think it is bad to give an advantage to the top teams if playoffs get expanded. It would provide a much greater incentive to earn one of the top two seeds as opposed to slipping into the playoffs as the #6 or #8 team in the country and suddenly be on equal footing with number 1. 

 

Also, I don't know the answer to the perfect playoff system, but if all the conference champs got auto bids to the playoffs, wouldn't non-conference games lose all of their importance? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Ulty said:

 

I don't think it is bad to give an advantage to the top teams if playoffs get expanded. It would provide a much greater incentive to earn one of the top two seeds as opposed to slipping into the playoffs as the #6 or #8 team in the country and suddenly be on equal footing with number 1. 

 

Also, I don't know the answer to the perfect playoff system, but if all the conference champs got auto bids to the playoffs, wouldn't non-conference games lose all of their importance? 

 

I get the incentivizing the top 2 seeds but its also going to create a scenario of 2 vs. 3  and much of the poll biasy is going to pop up again.

 

If anything, I'd argue non-conf games become even more important.  As of now, there's really only a handful, if that, of non con games that actually matter and they usually involve whoever is ranked in the top 10 to start the year against another ranked team.  Having more teams in play to get into the playoffs means the importance of squads ranked from 10-15 playing another ranked team will heighten compared to the current situation where a fringe top 10 team really isn't that relevant on the national stage.

 

For pure selfish reasons, saturdays in december suck.  Its cold out, now I have nothing to watch on saturday, gimme a round of legit football in mid december to carry me to the holidays and the 2nd round of playoffs/bowl season that actually matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or what if you kept it as a 4 team playoff. All 5- P5 conference champs have a crack. The top 3 highest rated conference champs get seeds 1-3. The 2 lowest ranked conference winners face eachother in a wild card to earn the final 4th spot. 

 

So this year. 

 

1. Alabama

2. Clemson

3. Oklahoma

4. Washington vs Ohio State play wild card to earn 4th spot. 

 

I know what your thinking. What about Notre Dame. My response is Notre Dame better join a P5 then- they have no one to blame but themselves. Any of the P5 conferences would take Notre Dame tomorrow. 

 

Now you say what about G5. So UCF. I say keep working hard and maybe you will earn a spot at the P5 table the next time expansion comes along. But why should someone with the 100th hardest schedule have an equal shot at the playoff as someone fighting an SEC, ACC or BIG10 Schedule. Or Maybe the G5 just needs to be a subset division to the P5 and hold their own playoffs/national title game.

  • Plus1 2
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, seaofred92 said:

I also think that more teams are competitive now and 1 loss now is probably equal to 0 back when you could just stack rosters


I hear that but don't believe that as much. I think the top teams have the same advantage, it's just that the lower teams are better than what they used to be. Bama has dominated the last 10 years like we've never seen before. Clemson also has a ridiculous record as of late. Ohio State, Oklahoma etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely hate the idea of a wild card/play-in/first round byes....

 

Just go to 8 teams and be done with it. 5 P5 conference champs, two at-larges, and the highest rated G5 (if they're in the top 10).... Hopefully UCF is the first G5 in, so we can watch Bama curb stomp them by 35.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care how they get it done but there should be a representative from each P5 conference.  Beyond that, it honestly doesn't matter.  Under the current system, strong conferences are cannibalizing each other to the point they are left out.  For example, the B1G beat each other up in the regular season (2017) but went 7-1 in the bowl games.  They weren't playoff worthy because Ohio State lost to Iowa in the middle of a loaded schedule...  It's a crappy system to me.        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ulty said:

 

I don't think it is bad to give an advantage to the top teams if playoffs get expanded. It would provide a much greater incentive to earn one of the top two seeds as opposed to slipping into the playoffs as the #6 or #8 team in the country and suddenly be on equal footing with number 1. 

 

Also, I don't know the answer to the perfect playoff system, but if all the conference champs got auto bids to the playoffs, wouldn't non-conference games lose all of their importance? 

There's been thoughts of having the 1st round be at the home site of the higher ranked school.  Surely they'd have to figure out logistics around this but I like the idea of this simply to incentivize being top 4 while still opening the door for all "equal" conferences to have their champ have a shot at the title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, gossamorharpy said:

Haven't heard one honest explanation as to why we started with a 4 team playoff system when we have 5 power conferences considered equal to one another

 

Because there are two teams in each game and 4 is a power of two  :dunno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't lock in the conference champions, the SEC will get three most years is my guess and then they would be whining about needing a fourth.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always liked the idea of developing conferences with two 16 team tiers, split into divisions. I think European Soccer does something like this. 

 

For instance: The Big 10 and the Mac merge into 1 conference and steal Oklahoma, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Kansas from the Big 12 and: Tulsa (just for geography's sake) from the American West. (Only the top two performing Big 12 teams get added to tier 1 from the get go, only to fill out the 8 team west division because 11-1 votes deserve some payback.)

 

At the conclusion of each year, the lowest performing team from each division in the Tier 1 schools drops to Tier 2, and the Highest performing schools from each tier two division jump to tier 1. This would add so much more meaning to games that are played after a school is eliminated from the conference championship hunt. 

 

Each tier can have its own championship game. Each team only plays the 8 other teams in it's division to qualify for the championship game (schools can fill out their remaining schedule however they want). Tier 1 conference champions are guaranteed a spot in an 8 team playoff for national champion. Tier 2 can even have its own tier two championship. 

 

What I love about this is that is provides access for high performing small schools (UCF, TCU before the Bix 12, Boise State, for example) to the big boy table, and penalizes low performing power 5 schools for being terrible (Rutgers and Illinois). 

 

Based on Win/Loss records from this year, the conference might look like this in 2019.

 

The Big 10 tier 1

East: Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Michigan State, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, Buffalo

West: Northwestern, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Illinois, Oklahoma, Iowa State, Northern Illinois,

 

The Big 10 Tier 2

East: Kent State, Akron, Ohio, Miami, Bowling Green, Toledo, Eastern Michigan, Rutgers,

West: Central Michigan, Western Michigan, Ball State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Tulsa, Kansas, Illinois

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they did home games, I wonder if they’d consider moving the season up 1 week or removing a non con game. Dec. 14 in Nebraska could get... interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Home games in the first round would be amazing.  Could you imagine the atmosphere?  

 

The SEC would never go for it, but how fun would it be to see Alabama or Georgia have to come into Lincoln mid December?

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Now you say what about G5. So UCF. I say keep working hard and maybe you will earn a spot at the P5 table the next time expansion comes along. But why should someone with the 100th hardest schedule have an equal shot at the playoff as someone fighting an SEC, ACC or BIG10 Schedule. Or Maybe the G5 just needs to be a subset division to the P5 and hold their own playoffs/national title game.

 

Strength of Schedule 2018:

 

76. Clemson (0.901)
83. UCF (0.907)

  • Plus1 5
  • Thanks 2
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, southernoregonhusker said:

It's a done deal.  With a nod to Vanilla Ice, it's all about the Cash Cash, baby.  Da na na nananana.

 

It's always been this way. Find out what makes the most money, then convince people it's the best way to determine a champion. 

Cable subscriptions continue to plummet, fatigue is setting in, time to juice this up. It's not principally about, nor is it ever, about fairness, efficacy or accuracy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

The SEC would never go for it, but how fun would it be to see Alabama or Georgia have to come into Lincoln mid December?

I don't think the SEC matters as much as the Bowl Director Cartel.  Once everyone sees how much better of a game it is for fans to have it at the campus of the higher seed instead of some antiseptic NFL stadium, they will have to ratchet up the propaganda to keep the semi-finals in a Bowl.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DrinkinwitTerrellFarley said:

I don't think the SEC matters as much as the Bowl Director Cartel.  Once everyone sees how much better of a game it is for fans to have it at the campus of the higher seed instead of some antiseptic NFL stadium, they will have to ratchet up the propaganda to keep the semi-finals in a Bowl.  

Bowls will fight tooth and nail against any campus games.  NCAA and the universities have no obligation to listen to them or worrying about supporting southern tourism.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think eight works as long as you get rid of the championship games and get every P5 to play the same number of conference games.

 

Seeing Alabama lose the SEC title game and then come back and win the damn playoff every other year suggests to me that it's just more problematic than it should be.

 

God I wish we had this setup back in the 80s and 90s. I like to think we might have had one or two rematch shots with OU.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Yes I think the 4 team playoff was the 'medicinal' marijuana of, this one sport that must continue to be different than every other sport in actually having a good way to determine a champion who no one need question, to get the camel's nose in the tent.

Fixed it for you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 12:38 AM, DrinkinwitTerrellFarley said:

I don't think the SEC matters as much as the Bowl Director Cartel.  Once everyone sees how much better of a game it is for fans to have it at the campus of the higher seed instead of some antiseptic NFL stadium, they will have to ratchet up the propaganda to keep the semi-finals in a Bowl.  

 

On ‎12‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 12:40 AM, DrinkinwitTerrellFarley said:

Bowls will fight tooth and nail against any campus games.  NCAA and the universities have no obligation to listen to them or worrying about supporting southern tourism.

I think the SEC will ally themselves with Southern Tourism to prevent their champion from having to play an Ice Bowl.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, 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.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Moiraine said:



Never going to happen.

 

Probably not.... but I can dream.

 

I'd like to dream of a world where Alabama doesn't win 15 of the next 20 national titles.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, runningblind said:

College football is the only sport that gets the postseason completely wrong.

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.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 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.

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cdog923 said:

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

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×