So if Virginia would have beaten Clemson last night they should make an 8 team playoff? No, just no. Dont give every conference a medal. All for an 8 team playoff. But take the 8 best teams. If Virginia won last night they still would not be one of the 8 best teams in the country.
If the playoffs had eight teams . . .
- Thread starter grayhair81
- Start date
So if Virginia would have beaten Clemson last night they should make an 8 team playoff? No, just no. Dont give every conference a medal. All for an 8 team playoff. But take the 8 best teams. If Virginia won last night they still would not be one of the 8 best teams in the country.
I don't know. Probably more than 15 but I don't know. It seems like less pressure, both physical and mental, playing FCS games than P5. Who knows?
I'm not going to convince you, and your way (expanding to 8 or 16) makes more money so it will probably happen.
I think the regular season stakes have been raised higher than ever! Teams with any hopes of going to the playoffs have to win every game or at the least have one loss and it has to be a good loss( which is stupid because no loss is good) to have a chance to play for a National Title. I don't believe any team with two losses ( even if it was Ohio State and they won the conference with two losses) should play for a title.
I like the 4 team playoff, because it's different than anything else we have in sports, to make the playoffs should be special and if they expanded the playoffs to 8 or 16 teams, that would be too much and really the conference championship games are the first round of the playoffs. At the most they should expand to six teams so all conference champs are represented and one at-large, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Not when so many power 5 teams load up non conference schedule with jokes.
The thing with the conference championships being the "semifinal" is that they are obviously games within conference. Expanding the playoffs adds more interesting nonconference matchups in games that actually MATTER.
Bowl games seem to matter less and less each year. You end up with games like ND vs. ISU in some Quicklane bowl. We can all imagine the difference in motivation between those two teams for that game.
Because with a 4 team "playoff" very few teams can afford even a single loss. And the system has proved if you are a P5 team you are not penalized for playing a garbage non-conf. What motivation do teams have to play a challenging non-conf schedule?
Heck, reduce the regular season (non-conf) by one game, then expand the playoffs, if we are concerned with player health.
Iowa, Minny, Wisc, PSU and Michigan all beat Baylor and Memphis by double digits...
So because there are some cream puff games you don't think the FBS regular season is good .... I think you are in the minority.
Every game matters. 16 teams is just stupid on so many levels. 8 teams is too many too ... why do we need that? There were blow-outs in most of the semi final games recently anyway, how would 1 vs 8 and 2 vs 7 games go?
I could maybe go along with 6 teams perhaps, but no more than that IMO. Leave the best regular season in sports stay the best ...
A three loss team doesn't' deserve a chance for the National Championship. JMO
You need to take in an FCS game. Head on up to Cedar Falls and watch UNI play in a Valley game next season. Your opinion will change.
I see your point about the bowl games losing some of it's luster, but the NCAA are the ones to blame for that by adding 900 bowl games(lol). During the BCS, really, if you weren't going to the Rose, Sugar, Orange or Fiesta Bowls and The BCS Championship Game, was anyone really that excited about going to any other bowl?
What the powers that be need to do is make every criteria the same for all conferences, make all them play either 8 conf games or 9 conf games and be penalized for playing FCS teams, but they won't , so I'm afraid we are stuck with the system we have now, until an SEC champ is left out to the playoffs...
And college football is worse for having 5-8 in the playoffs.
Chance a player 1-4 gets hurt in win.
Rewards teams with terrible out of conference schedules.
Power5 should only get a spot if undefeated in to 12. Iowa has a better resume than Memphis and they don’t deserve playoff spot.
Lies.
Iowa > everyone, so of course we deserve a playoff spot.
And if injuries happen to higher seeded teams and that benefits Iowa.....then so be it.
If they went to 8, I suppose they’d always invite the top group of 5 champion, so that’s 6 conf champions and two at large.
For the first round I’d seed the 4 highest ranked champs to host games, then seed 5-8 by ranking regardless of who was a champ. Then reseed simply by ranking for the semifinals at neutral sites. So if using this year’s committee rankings the games would be:
17-Memphis* at 1-LSU*
7-Baylor at 2-OSU*
6-Oregon* at 3-Clemson*
5-Georgia at 4-OU*
The year Bama made CFP without winning SEC 2017) it would have been:
12-UCF* at 1-Clemson*
8-USC* at 2-OU*
6-Wisconsin at 3-Georgia*
4-Alabama at 5-OSU*
*Conf champs
Like NFL, conference/division championships should be rewarded with home games. Related to the NFL, I think they should reseed the wildcard weekend winners based solely on record - so like this year if the 49ers and Seahawks finish with best records, they shouldn’t have to play in second round as 1 and 5 seed. Likewise, the conference championship game should be played at team with best regular season record even if they didn’t win their division. Winning division should assure you one home game, nothing else
For the first round I’d seed the 4 highest ranked champs to host games, then seed 5-8 by ranking regardless of who was a champ. Then reseed simply by ranking for the semifinals at neutral sites. So if using this year’s committee rankings the games would be:
17-Memphis* at 1-LSU*
7-Baylor at 2-OSU*
6-Oregon* at 3-Clemson*
5-Georgia at 4-OU*
The year Bama made CFP without winning SEC 2017) it would have been:
12-UCF* at 1-Clemson*
8-USC* at 2-OU*
6-Wisconsin at 3-Georgia*
4-Alabama at 5-OSU*
*Conf champs
Like NFL, conference/division championships should be rewarded with home games. Related to the NFL, I think they should reseed the wildcard weekend winners based solely on record - so like this year if the 49ers and Seahawks finish with best records, they shouldn’t have to play in second round as 1 and 5 seed. Likewise, the conference championship game should be played at team with best regular season record even if they didn’t win their division. Winning division should assure you one home game, nothing else
Last edited:
Really, besides getting to play a first round game sometime, the more they expand it, the more it will help blue bloods by giving them second chances to use their superior talent to make up for possible regular season slip ups. I bet there is less parity in conference champions since conferences went to CCGs - anyone care to check?
Can’t automatically seed the P5 conf champs 1-5. That generally won’t be fair to the 3-seed and possibly 2-seed, since many years the 4-seed would get an easier matchup. See my post a couple above with a slight variation to fix that.
I don't know if I'm all in for hosting playoff games at home. Hosting a game in Columbus in late December would be tricky, because the weather here is so fickle, one day it could be 55 degrees and sunny, then the next day 28 and snowing. I would rather play in Indy to host the home game, so if you do play someone like Alabama, and you beat them, you beat them on a neutral field, fair and square and they and ESPN can't say the weather was a factor.
This right here is another great point (and one I always bring up in this argument with friends). The rich will only get richer (more games, more injuries, deeper team wins).
I want to see 8 teams. The 4 team system is such a vast improvement over what we had before but its not perfect. A P5 team gets left out every year. For a team like Iowa, you want an 8 team playoff. 8 teams with automatic bids for conference champs means that even if Iowa loses an early game or two (which is very likely) they are not eliminated from the playoffs.
In 2002, Iowa had 1 loss to ISU. They would have had plenty of chance to prove themselves by beating Ohio State in the BIG championship under the current system... but because the committee has shown now that they place way too much weight on brands, Iowa still may not have been one of the top 4 teams.
Say everything else was the same this year except Iowa had 1 loss and was playing OSU in Indy. Iowa wins, Oklahoma wins, Utah wins. You have undefeated LSU and undefeated Clemson. Do you really leave out 12-1 Ohio State? Which one of Oklahoma, Utah, or Iowa gets left out as a conference champ? You can argue one way or another all you want but no one can say one of those teams is definitively undeserving of a playoff bid.
There would still be controversy with an 8 team system for sure. And with any system for that matter. But 8 teams would be really entertaining for sure.
In 2002, Iowa had 1 loss to ISU. They would have had plenty of chance to prove themselves by beating Ohio State in the BIG championship under the current system... but because the committee has shown now that they place way too much weight on brands, Iowa still may not have been one of the top 4 teams.
Say everything else was the same this year except Iowa had 1 loss and was playing OSU in Indy. Iowa wins, Oklahoma wins, Utah wins. You have undefeated LSU and undefeated Clemson. Do you really leave out 12-1 Ohio State? Which one of Oklahoma, Utah, or Iowa gets left out as a conference champ? You can argue one way or another all you want but no one can say one of those teams is definitively undeserving of a playoff bid.
There would still be controversy with an 8 team system for sure. And with any system for that matter. But 8 teams would be really entertaining for sure.
In that scenario... Ohio State and Iowa would both go to the playoffs, because the committee would state that the BIG was better than the Big 12 and Pac 12. Although, I could see the committee putting Oklahoma in over Iowa, because of the narrative that would be spun by ESPN...
The NFL should do that too, huh................that way ESPN can't say the weather was a factor.
Lol...no one cares about the NFL. If you were a player, would you want to play a game in the cold, when you could be playing somewhere warm? That type of playoff system is great for the FCS schools, but for Major College Football...no. I want the teams to be able to run their offense and defense without having to worry about the weather, unless it's raining in some place warm, that's still better than snow and wind.
There's this narrative of having a team from the south come up and play a team from the north in the cold weather, well Clemson played Boston College in the cold and snow and still whipped their ass, so I don't see why people think that would be such an advantage in a playoff game.
shit I wish we could give them a reason to say that!!!
THIS IS FOOTBALL!!! They'd have millions of people laughing at them....
I should also add......you know where you guys will be playing lsu if you both win, right?
Every bowl season the b1g plays at a huge disadvantage, and I never hear that mentioned. I'd love for espn to say something about a southern team having to do what b1g teams do every single bowl season.
shit I wish we could give them a reason to say that!!!
THIS IS FOOTBALL!!! They'd have millions of people laughing at them....
I should also add......you know where you guys will be playing lsu if you both win, right?
Every bowl season the b1g plays at a huge disadvantage, and I never hear that mentioned. I'd love for espn to say something about a southern team having to do what b1g teams do every single bowl season.
I know BIG teams always have to go down there to play them, but when we win, it makes it that much sweeter. In 2014, when we beat Bama in the Superdome, that was sweet! I'm friends with Trey Depriest, who was the starting middle linebacker at Bama that year and I always remind him that we came down south and beat them.
Why is it ok for fcs and not d1? Fcs has good offenses too, just not as big of market.
Clemson playing BC there isn’t quite like coming to the Midwest in November and playing OSU, Michigan, Iowa, etc.
I'm gonna quote you so you don't go away, and if I'm still interested in replying, I will get back to you.....but I just wanted to give you the heads up to stay tuned.......thank you.
The NCAA is always talking about player safety and not wanting to add to the season, so having 20 something teams and extra playoff games is not going to be approved for Power 5 playoffs by the NCAA. Plus, more than 6 in the playoffs is too much. Teams with 2 or 3 losses should not be playing for a national title ( even if it was OSU, Clemson, Oklahoma or Alabama) JMHO.
The winters on the east coast are just as bad as winters in the midwest. What I was trying to say is if your team is good, they can play and win in any weather.
12 Teams with top 4 getting a 1st round bye 2nd and 3rd week of December. All major conference Champs / independent included plus highly ranked non-champion power 5 conference teams.
This gives more inclusion of more D1 Conferences and more of the most highly ranked teams while not including teams that would not have a reasonable chance of appearing competitive in the 1st Rnd.
Top 4 are rewarded with a bye and a lesser ranked team in Rnd 2 leading to Semi's and Final Championship game as usual.
OR, 4 teams to play for the 3rd & 4th spot (6 team CFP). Less likely to get a bad game.
This gives more inclusion of more D1 Conferences and more of the most highly ranked teams while not including teams that would not have a reasonable chance of appearing competitive in the 1st Rnd.
Top 4 are rewarded with a bye and a lesser ranked team in Rnd 2 leading to Semi's and Final Championship game as usual.
OR, 4 teams to play for the 3rd & 4th spot (6 team CFP). Less likely to get a bad game.
Last edited:
Similar threads
