Are there too many teams in the playoff?

[MeetTheFerentzes]

First of all, I'm not liking the playoff era at all. I'm one of those guys who wants it how it was prior to the Coalition/Alliance/BCS etc.

But, since we've gotten this far and there's no going back, we might as well do it right. 12 teams is too many. There are 5-6 teams at most each season that have a legitimate claim as the best team. 8 team playoff should be enough. 4 top conference champs plus 4 at-large, seeded how the Committee sees fit, quarterfinals on home fields, then on to the old 4-team CFP (2 major bowl games for semifinals, then a championship game).

No byes. No automatic high seeds. Playoff home game is ultimate goal. #9 team left out had no chance of winning it all, anyway. All teams involved need to win a game if they want a traditional bowl trip. Still some really good bowl games/destinations for teams that missed the playoff. 4 fewer games to get hyped to death for very little reason. Most of the time fans will only need to take 2 trips to see their team play in the championship game (only rare exception would be fans who travel to the quarterfinal road game and then have their team end up reaching the championship game). Season over before spring semester starts (I know that's of very little importance to most players, but it's still a plus).

I know this isn't happening, and eventually we'll have 16 teams with team #17 bitching and moaning about how unfair it is they were left out, and we'll be enduring 8-9 blowouts every playoff instead of 5-6, but that's what the people want (just like NIL and the transfer portal). Congratulations.

 

[sodakhawkfan]

i think it should be 8 Teams with no byes and the first round games on campus , The Teams that make the finals have really long Seasons and the injury risk is really magnified , Major Conference Champions and the rest at large , It does not matter how many You expand to some will have sour grapes and the welfare of the Athletes needs to be the top priority not TV money .

I agree and teams seeded as they are ranked no conference champs

 

[onlyTheObvious]

Blowouts in bowl games also all the time.

 

[HawknBadgerLand]

So you must hate the basketball tournament?

Should be 16 teams and the top seeds SHOULD be rewarded with an easier matchup (just like march madness). I hate the "eyeball" test and the blue blood arguments. No 3 loss team should get in regardless of their brand name or eyeball test.

 

[DJ_Kool_Herk]

Playoff things I like:
Home field advantages.

Things I don't like:
In trying to reduce controversy, it's created more.
Other bowls mean even less now.
It's really going to expose the drop off in talent after the top 6-8 teams. This ain't hoops where a 15 is gonna beat a 2. Get ready for ZERO big upsets. Ever.

What should be:
The other bowl games should be week zero games next season.


The BCS was right. This year, Oregon vs Georgia. Done.

 

[HawknBadgerLand]

Playoff things I like:
Home field advantages.

Things I don't like:
In trying to reduce controversy, it's created more.
Other bowls mean even less now.
It's really going to expose the drop off in talent after the top 6-8 teams. This ain't hoops where a 15 is gonna beat a 2. Get ready for ZERO big upsets. Ever.

What should be:
The other bowl games should be week zero games next season.


The BCS was right. This year, Oregon vs Georgia. Done.

You're probably right with the home field advantage situation but the Hawks have had some huge upsets over the years. It can happen, but the first round will almost always be chalk.

 

[yrunvs]

I'd hate to see the Hawkeye's miraculously make it to the playoffs and then have to play an Ohio State type team at their stadium would be so unfair.

 

[fezzador]

No just the wrong ones…..Miami and Alabama should’ve been in the playoffs over Indiana and SMU.

Does it really matter? Alabama and Miami would have lost badly too.

 

[DJ_Kool_Herk]

You're probably right with the home field advantage situation but the Hawks have had some huge upsets over the years. It can happen, but the first round will almost always be chalk.

There won't be home field upsets because the lower seed teams won't be playing at home in the playoffs.

 

[LUC8]

More teams in the playoffs seemed like the only solution after so many controversial decisions leaving out excellent teams.

I am going to reserve judgment and let the first season with expansion play out before crying about it or claiming it mistake.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Should be 16 teams and the top seeds SHOULD be rewarded with an easier matchup (just like march madness). I hate the "eyeball" test and the blue blood arguments. No 3 loss team should get in regardless of their brand name or eyeball test.

There were only 15 teams in the Top 25 with less than 3 losses. Just sayin'

 

[HawkOptimist]

So you must hate the basketball tournament?

I love the basketball tournament because I see more parity in basketball. Any team can get hot and knock off a top seed and/or go on a deep run. You might have 1-2 teams in the Final 4 that came out of nowhere.

On the flip side, in football, a weaker team that got into the tournament because they had a great season against a weak schedule and/or won their conference championship (think ASU, Boise State, SMU), is not making it to CFP final 4.

Maybe we’ll be proven wrong.

 

[spiderland]

It depends on what your objective of a playoff is.

If it’s to determine who the best team in FBS is/was for that particular season, then 12 is way too many. To point: I challenge anyone to pick a season 2014-23 where the best team in CFB was excluded by the 4-team format. Name the season and the team that you believe was better than the eventual champ.

If, on the other hand, your objective is to generate more broad based excitement, greater inclusion, and a sh*t ton of revenue, by all means expand the field. Why stop at 12 or even 16? 24 seems like a cool number. Just think of how thrilling it would be to see the MAC champ knock off an SEC or B1G school in a playoff game.

 

[BonzoFury]

In the data I found going back to 2005 home teams won 59.2% of the time in FBS football. If you take out the early season cupcakes that number would drop. Not as overwhelming as you might think.

 

[thewop]

So far it's chalk. All home teams won, so I guess all is well.

Seeing southern teams play up north was well overdue, fun to see that, though results probably even more lopsided than expected.

 

[83Hawk]

No. Back to the bowls and then a final poll.

No.

 

[rfgiowa]

I like it. The conference winners should absolutely get a bye week as a reward. It makes the conference games more meaningful during the season. The lop sided games will happen. Teams need to win their games and their conference for the coveted home field.

 

[iowamike21]

This is the correct answer. Trying to mimic the NCAA basketball tournament will turn out to be a mistake IMHO. Why not have the top 8 teams duke it out and then match up an Indy vs SMU in a competitive warm weather bowl game?

Why doesn't FCS do that? They've been running a tournament for 47 seasons, and the teams that make it to the title game play 15 games. This year the FCS playoffs had a 24-team bracket with the top 16 teams seeded and the top eight seeds receiving automatic byes to the second round. Instead of all that foolishness, why not just have Montana State, North Dakota State, North Dakota, and South Dakota State duke it out EVERY season in a 4-team playoff?

 

[iowamike21]

It depends on what your objective of a playoff is.

If it’s to determine who the best team in FBS is/was for that particular season, then 12 is way too many. To point: I challenge anyone to pick a season 2014-23 where the best team in CFB was excluded by the 4-team format. Name the season and the team that you believe was better than the eventual champ.

If, on the other hand, your objective is to generate more broad based excitement, greater inclusion, and a sh*t ton of revenue, by all means expand the field. Why stop at 12 or even 16? 24 seems like a cool number. Just think of how thrilling it would be to see the MAC champ knock off an SEC or B1G school in a playoff game.

FCS has a 24-team field. The title game participants will be playing in their 15th game of the season. FCS has operated a playoff for 47 seasons. Or they could just have South Dakota, North Dakota, North Dakota State, and Montana State play each other every year and forget about it. Yet for almost half a century, they have continued to let many other teams into the field.

 

[Doodads and Hoohah]

16. !works for every other division. I'm fine with conference champ getting an auto bid but just seed them 1-16

 

[NorthEndzoneCrew]

Yeah, let’s have even more games matching up average teams against the best in the country….that will surely produce even more entertaining outcomes.


Playoff games have more often than not been snoozers. I liked it better before this playoff.

FCS has more parity overall than FBS

 

[yrunvs]

Yeah, let’s have even more games matching up average teams against the best in the country….that will surely produce even more entertaining outcomes.


Playoff games have more often than not been snoozers. I liked it better before this playoff.

FCS has more parity overall than FBS

And the average team going into a rabid blue blood home stadium.....yea that sounds like a slaughter every time.

 

[swihawk]

Yup, I'm gonna be that guy.
4 games and 4 lopsided scores.

Nope.

 

[spiderland]

FCS has a 24-team field. The title game participants will be playing in their 15th game of the season. FCS has operated a playoff for 47 seasons. Or they could just have South Dakota, North Dakota, North Dakota State, and Montana State play each other every year and forget about it. Yet for almost half a century, they have continued to let many other teams into the field.

Well then 24 it is. Heck, let’s make it easy and just go with the AP Top 25. Or maybe a composite top 25 of AP and Coaches. Number 25 vs. 24 in a “play in” game. Surely the top team in the “others receiving votes” group can’t seriously believe they have a shot at winning 6 games in a row. And if so, we can always further expand the field in the future.

 

[obfuscating]

No, there should be 16 with higher seeded team having home games until final where it is then at a neutral site. Just like FCS. Forget the extra bowl games.

 

[littlez]

Well then 24 it is. Heck, let’s make it easy and just go with the AP Top 25. Or maybe a composite top 25 of AP and Coaches. Number 25 vs. 24 in a “play in” game. Surely the top team in the “others receiving votes” group can’t seriously believe they have a shot at winning 6 games in a row. And if so, we can always further expand the field in the future.

Why not?

 

[tdburg11]

No just the wrong ones…..Miami and Alabama should’ve been in the playoffs over Indiana and SMU.

Why does Tennessee get a free pass? They were beaten as bad - maybe worse - than Indiana and SMU.

 

[soybean]

I would prefer 8 or 16.

16 is the correct number, and I expect it to be so within 5 years.

 

[gojojo]

16 teams. Go back to the BCS formula that took SOS and other metrics to rank teams and have no auto seeding…1 vs 16, 2 vs 15, etc; lower seed gets a home game and 2nd round goes to bowl games/neutral sites.

There will rarely be upsets in the first round, with a lot of blowouts, but the better team deserves the easier path and the town gets to benefit💵 from another home game. This is seen quite often at the FCS and lower levels.

With a 12 team format, no 9-3 should ever complain they didn’t get in; your playoff started once you lost 1 game, when you lost the second you knew you couldn’t lose another. The amount of whining from SEC fans, coaches, and media has been embarrassing. It was nice to see tOSU shut them up.

 

[Ladell-hawk]

Yup, I'm gonna be that guy.
4 games and 4 lopsided scores.

Yes.

 

[hawkcub]

If you want it to be a competition of teams deserving of a championship. 4 is all you need. Even looking at things pre BCS. It wasn't that bad. But you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

All the SEC crying was ridiculous and OSU punching Tennessee in the mouth was needed. Still hasn't stopped the after the games talk.

No matter how unbalanced the schedule IU had one loss in the Big Ten vs. 3 losses for SEC teams. Now you may have an argument for SMU. But they did just enough to be ahead of the 3 loss SEC teams IMO.

The after the fact results should have no bearing on who got picked. The whole most deserving vs. "perceived" best 12 teams needs to stop. Especially when you're a blue blood that can't except the fact all your advantages still wasn't enough.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

16 is the correct number, and I expect it to be so within 5 years.

Tv ratings for playoff versus bowl will be the driver. Be interesting to see the numbers.

 

[spiderland]

Why not?

Like I said, it depends on your objective. If the goal is to identify the best team decisively via a competitive process, then once that “best team” is in the field any expansion with additional competitors diminishes the best team’s odds of winning it all (even if only slightly). But given that Iowa will almost certainly never be that best team in my lifetime, I honestly don’t GAF. Make it as big as people want.

 

[Hawkfan_08]

I love some of these arguments. No offense to some of you but why don't we just start the year with the playoffs. Eyeball test and recruiting rankings will determine who is in. Forget who wins the games, not important. Maybe some teams should try to get out of the SEC if they can't avoid losing 3 games?

Miami needed 2 total bailouts from the refs and still finished behind 2 teams from the ACC.

Bama SHOULD have lost to USF (but didn't, credit for the comeback), lost to Vandy. Didn't look impressive in many of the wins but we want to put them in off recruiting rankings and eyeball test?

Ole Miss and Kiffin have whined the most. How about don't lose 4 games?

 

[danny14]

8
If you're not ranked in the top 4, you should feel lucky you even got in the playoff. No matter how many teams get in someone always complains they didn't get in. 64 in basketball and #65 complains. C'mon you're #65, dude...take a seat!

 

[TXHCHawk]

This is the problem with an INVITATIONAL tournament, in lieu of an actual playoff. It is far too subjective. If everyone wants a CHAMPIONSHIP playoff, then have the CHAMPIONS playoff.

FBS conference champions, seated accordingly by objective computer rankings, including SOS/SOC. The B1G and SEC will hate it. The talent disparity amongst FBS conferences over time, will dissipate, as conference championships ultimately matter again. Notre Dame will hate it, because they’ll actually have to join a conference - hell, even the service academies play in a conference.

And outside of the true, tournament of champions, bowl games can still matter again. Additionally, it could return some sanity to NIL and pay-to-play, naturally, as the focus returns to being a conference champion spreads across conferences. It’s amazing what true competition can do in ridding folks of picking winners and losers and settling market pricing.

Alas, the B1G and SEC (and others intent on super-conferences) will fight against this true, championship playoff, because they actually want all their teams in, but fail to realize a tournament of champions, combined with force-ranked bowl games will still produce relevant competitions that generate money.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

No just the wrong ones…..Miami and Alabama should’ve been in the playoffs over Indiana and SMU.

Tennessee took a much bigger ass whoopin than Indiana. Just sayin...

 

[elipse]

So far - the games have been so horrible - I flipped the channel or went to the garage.

These geniuses should work at the Post Office or the DMV.

 

[BurgHawk87]

Indiana was always a poser. They didn't have the depth of elite athletes necessary to compete with teams with $10 million + payrolls. The old system had 4 teams and Indiana wouldn't have made it and would have been spanked in their Bowl game.

NIL has destroyed college sports and now it is professional football Professional leagues always have playoffs, only question is number
of teams and format.

There are usually 2-3 teams that are at different level each year and Indiana (and Iowa) aren't at that level. The last Iowa team that might have had a shot at competing for Title was 2009 Iowa team. The 2015 Iowa team was a good story, but little bit like Indiana---overachieving the talent level.

Except every other level (and almost every other sport) in college athletics has a playoff and has had one for awhile now.

 

[obfuscating]

So far - the games have been so horrible - I flipped the channel or went to the garage.

These geniuses should work at the Post Office or the DMV.

FCS games were fantastic. NDSU vs SDSU was a heck of a game. Cool to see 3 kids from the same high school playing on 3 different teams and others from the area.