ADVERTISEMENT

Expanded playoff already in place with one small change

pgsailor

Team MVP
Dec 22, 2004
226
224
43
You have to win your conference championship to get in. I don’t care how many losses you have you are earning it on the field, just like the NCAA basketball tourney. No more 2nd place teams getting in or teams that didn’t even play in the championship. Take most of the power from the committee. Possibly expand it to 6 with 5 conference champs and one at large.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tdstick
You have to win your conference championship to get in. I don’t care how many losses you have you are earning it on the field, just like the NCAA basketball tourney. No more 2nd place teams getting in or teams that didn’t even play in the championship. Take most of the power from the committee. Possibly expand it to 6 with 5 conference champs and one at large.

I like the idea of winners of conference championship games being in automatically. Then conference championship games are basically playoff games.

Perhaps 8 teams, (6 conference championship game winners, plus 2 at-large) ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pgsailor
I like the idea of winners of conference championship games being in automatically. Then conference championship games are basically playoff games.

Perhaps 8 teams, (6 conference championship game winners, plus 2 at-large) ?
This year affirms the 4 team playoff, the top 8 this year would include 3 conference championship losers. The conference championship games are already a playoff game. Not really a good argument for any additional teams deserving top 4 this year. This year shows why 2 was not enough, would leave out an undefeated and defending champion Clemson. Should stay at 4.
 
This year affirms the 4 team playoff, the top 8 this year would include 3 conference championship losers. The conference championship games are already a playoff game. Not really a good argument for any additional teams deserving top 4 this year. This year shows why 2 was not enough, would leave out an undefeated and defending champion Clemson. Should stay at 4.
I could see a scenario where 2 teams could play each other 3 times in one season.........
 
There are certainly some scenarios where a team that didn’t make their conference championship game certainly deserves consideration for the CFP. Think of a one loss B1G East team(take your pick) whose only loss was to Ohio St by a slim margin. Ohio St goes undefeated and earns a spot in the BTCG. The one loss B1G East team handily beats everyone else on their schedule(Top 25 schedule). Are you saying they aren’t deserving because their only loss was to a likely #1 Ohio St?
 
This year affirms the 4 team playoff, the top 8 this year would include 3 conference championship losers. The conference championship games are already a playoff game. Not really a good argument for any additional teams deserving top 4 this year. This year shows why 2 was not enough, would leave out an undefeated and defending champion Clemson. Should stay at 4.
True, but they could set up the runner-up from one conference against the champion of another.
 
The conference championship games are already a playoff game.

No, they aren't. Had Wisconsin beaten Ohio State, chances are Ohio State still gets in, and Wisconsin doesn't. Especially if it were a close Ohio State loss.
 
No, they aren't. Had Wisconsin beaten Ohio State, chances are Ohio State still gets in, and Wisconsin doesn't. Especially if it were a close Ohio State loss.

Chances are very good LSU could have lost and still gotten in also.

How is that a playoff game?
 
You have to win your conference championship to get in. I don’t care how many losses you have you are earning it on the field, just like the NCAA basketball tourney. No more 2nd place teams getting in or teams that didn’t even play in the championship. Take most of the power from the committee. Possibly expand it to 6 with 5 conference champs and one at large.
So if Wiscy won the game you think they "earned it" more than osu? Even though osu stomped them earlier this year and had a much better season? What if wiscy won it on a very questionable call? Seems like you'd be putting way too much emphasis on one game and ignoring the 12 others.

No matter what, nothing will be perfect.
 
You have to win your conference championship to get in. I don’t care how many losses you have you are earning it on the field, just like the NCAA basketball tourney. No more 2nd place teams getting in or teams that didn’t even play in the championship. Take most of the power from the committee. Possibly expand it to 6 with 5 conference champs and one at large.

DIsagree. If a pair of 12-0 teams meet in their conference final...they could both be worthy of a playoff berth.

The easy and obvious solution is an 8 team playoff including the P5 conference champs and 3 at-large teams.
 
DIsagree. If a pair of 12-0 teams meet in their conference final...they could both be worthy of a playoff berth.

The easy and obvious solution is an 8 team playoff including the P5 conference champs and 3 at-large teams.

I think you’d have to add some qualifiers. Top 16 in the final CFP poll(bye Virginia) and also scheduling uniformity (settle on 8 or 9 conference games across the board)
 
I think you’d have to add some qualifiers. Top 16 in the final CFP poll(bye Virginia) and also scheduling uniformity (settle on 8 or 9 conference games across the board)

I think the TOP 16 thing would take care of itself. Can't imagine #s 8-15 all getting passed over. Not sure about the conference thing either...I think schedule strength is taken into account in both the polls and the playoff ranking system. (9 P5 wins would be stronger than 8, and If you made your conference playoff you'd have an additional P5 game)
 
I think you’d have to add some qualifiers. Top 16 in the final CFP poll(bye Virginia) and also scheduling uniformity (settle on 8 or 9 conference games across the board)
Scheduling definitely part of the problem. Too many top level teams not playing, not scheduling difficult opponents in out of conference games. Even in conference, many times top nondivisional teams don't play conference games.
 
I suppose its not fair when a high seed loses their first tourney game in basketball. Maybe a committee should step in and say they are the better team so we are going to let them advance anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawktagonapus
Make it like the NFL. 6 teams. #1 and #2 get a first round bye. Higher seeds get to host the game, until the national championship game, which is then played on a neutral site.
 
I suppose its not fair when a high seed loses their first tourney game in basketball. Maybe a committee should step in and say they are the better team so we are going to let them advance anyway.

Totally agree. This is the same logic that was used to restrict the NCAA basketball tournament for years. The basketball tournament doesn't lessen the regular season, it just divides it up into 2 distinct flavors, regular season and playoffs. Teams should still seek out and want conference titles, but it doesn't exclude you from the playoffs if your division happened to be a meat-grinder or penalize a team for playing a really good non-con schedule and losing a game.

Have a 24-team playoff, top 8 seeds get byes first week, 16 teams play. 8 winners play the 8 byes. There is the reward for being really good in the regular season, you get a bye and then you get to play at home the next game. Once you get to Final 8, you can incorporate the bowls as sites if you want, but I don't care if they blow up the bowls altogether other than the minor ones for the teams making the playoffs. Every team has a shot at making the playoff is they have a really good season. In that setup, Iowa is hosting Memphis in a first-round game. Winner plays at LSU, or you could re-seed after every round based on who won/lost, I don't care. The money for the schools (and players) would be astronomical, and the games would be meaningful.
 
Make it like the NFL. 6 teams. #1 and #2 get a first round bye. Higher seeds get to host the game, until the national championship game, which is then played on a neutral site.
I'm completely against the idea of byes.
The sec gets enough help already ;)
 
Totally agree. This is the same logic that was used to restrict the NCAA basketball tournament for years. The basketball tournament doesn't lessen the regular season, it just divides it up into 2 distinct flavors, regular season and playoffs. Teams should still seek out and want conference titles, but it doesn't exclude you from the playoffs if your division happened to be a meat-grinder or penalize a team for playing a really good non-con schedule and losing a game.

Have a 24-team playoff, top 8 seeds get byes first week, 16 teams play. 8 winners play the 8 byes. There is the reward for being really good in the regular season, you get a bye and then you get to play at home the next game. Once you get to Final 8, you can incorporate the bowls as sites if you want, but I don't care if they blow up the bowls altogether other than the minor ones for the teams making the playoffs. Every team has a shot at making the playoff is they have a really good season. In that setup, Iowa is hosting Memphis in a first-round game. Winner plays at LSU, or you could re-seed after every round based on who won/lost, I don't care. The money for the schools (and players) would be astronomical, and the games would be meaningful.
a 24 team playoff is ridiculous and there is zero chance they are going to add 5 possible postseason games to the kids season. Football is not basketball....

outside the top 10 teams...who had a "really good" season?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck2427
ADVERTISEMENT