Yeah, I know, thanks! Still don't believe that ANY college team should play 16 games in a single season and I've been saying as much for a few years now.
8-Team College Football Playoff Proposal
- Thread starter brodo
- Start date
Yeah, I know, thanks! Still don't believe that ANY college team should play 16 games in a single season and I've been saying as much for a few years now.
Oh as a fan I would love if this were to happen I just don't think it would. The "you're free to go schedule hard games now" argument just doesn't seem like it would work. Coaches are risk adverse and need to win games to satisfy fan bases. They might not schedule complete cupcakes in the non-con but they are going to schedule wins.
Frequently, the best team in the country doesn't get into the playoffs that decide the National Champion in College Football.
An 8-team playoff system might prevent that from ever happening again.
Since an 8-team playoff system would coincide with bowl games,
only 4 teams would play one extra game and two teams would play two extra games. And that is a most games case scenario if all conference championship games are included.
Ohio State doesn't actually control its own destiny, at least not 100%. If Michigan were to get upset before The Game, PSU wins out, and OSU then beats Michigan ... it would be PSU going to the championship game.
Why should 2 losses be worth as much as a win? Isn't the goal of the game to win and not to tie? That is a terrible idea. You either win or lose. Coming close should not count. Out of conference games including those against FCS teams should not determine conference standings.
Can we please return the games to the home fields of the team with the best seeding? That is the only change needed. Games should be played on-campus.
This propoaal lost me when it said all P5 schools must play nine conference games. The SEC and ACC refuse to do this because of the schools that have a permanent home and home OOC matchup. They would lost a home game every other year under this proposal. $$$
Similar to the lacrosse team beating fellow league member Johns Hopkins twice and Hopkins makes the tourney to get waxed and Rutgers is home watching the tourney on TV.
Before discussing how many teams should be in the playoff, you must first answer this question:
What is the goal of the playoff? Is it A) To make sure the top (currently) 4 teams get in the playoff or is it; B) To make sure the top 1 team gets in the playoff?
I personally feel that 4 teams is enough to ensure the top 1 team is in there. Adding more teams is just allowing additional teams who are not the number 1 team to play some extra games. This is fine if that's what you want, but it doesn't help to ensure the number 1 team is more clearly identified.
Can anybody name a team in the history of college football who you though should have finished the season ranked 1 but didn't even make the top four?
What is the goal of the playoff? Is it A) To make sure the top (currently) 4 teams get in the playoff or is it; B) To make sure the top 1 team gets in the playoff?
I personally feel that 4 teams is enough to ensure the top 1 team is in there. Adding more teams is just allowing additional teams who are not the number 1 team to play some extra games. This is fine if that's what you want, but it doesn't help to ensure the number 1 team is more clearly identified.
Can anybody name a team in the history of college football who you though should have finished the season ranked 1 but didn't even make the top four?
That's the whole problem. Who you think should be number 1 isn't really who actually is number 1. In college football, you have 128 teams, and they only play 12 games each. You really have no idea who is actually the best. You might have 9-3 Pac 12 team that's better than an 11-1 SEC team, but there's no way to tell.
There have only been two 4-team college football playoffs thus far. In 2014, TCU deserved a chance to play for the National Championship, but, they didn't get invited. In 2015, Ohio State deserved a chance to play for the National Championship, but, they didn't get invited to defend their title either.
TCU finished their 2014 season ranked #6 by the college football playoff system. They finished their 2014 season 12-1,
losing only at Baylor by 3 points and Baylor finished their 2014 season ranked #5 by the college football playoff system.
TCU finished 2014 ranked #3 in the AP and Coaches Final Polls after beating Ole Miss 42-3 in their bowl game for a final record of 12-1. TCU certainly deserved a shot at the title on the field.
Ohio State finished their 2015 season ranked #7 by the college football playoff system. They finished their 2015 season 12-1,
losing only to Michigan State by 3 points and Michigan State finished their 2015 season ranked #3 by the college football playoff system.
Ohio State finished 2015 ranked #4 in the AP and Coaches Final Polls after beating Notre Dame 44-28 in their bowl game for a final record of 12-1. Ohio State certainly deserved a shot to defend their title on the field.
An 8-team college football playoff system would have given TCU in 2014 and Ohio State in 2015 the chances that they deserved to play for the National Championship.
Let's settle the National Championship on the field !
All of these are reasons why I think the best way to go is to simply have a five-team playoff with the 5 conference champions, with the Big 12 being forced to have a championship game and the independent teams being forced to join a conference. The G5 teams won't like being left out, but I think you would have to rely too much on polls to determine which G5 team gets to go to the playoffs and there's too high a chance of them having an easier road to the playoff than any other team in most years. Maybe set up some kind of promotion/relegation type of deal so that the P5 teams at the bottom of the conference will still be playing meaningful games after they are mathematically eliminated from making their conference championship, and also so that the G5 teams can play for the hope of eventually making it to the national championship. I can take or leave that though.
Anyway, by taking just the P5 champions, polls would finally no longer be necessary at all except for determining the rankings of the conference champions so that it can be determined who the 4 vs. 5 play-in game is, and who the #1 team is that will meet either 4 or 5 in the semis.
This lets pretty much everything be decided on the field, which is the way sports should be, rather than decided in a conference room. Since there are too many teams and not enough games to have accurate national standings, who goes to the national playoffs should just be the teams that win their conference. This way, nobody's season is ended by polls or selection committees. If you didn't make it to the playoffs, it's because you didn't win your conference, not because some committee chose other teams and left you out. This also essentially expands the playoffs to 10 teams without adding too many games because the conference championship games also act as national playoff games with one team moving to the next round and the other team's season ending.
The reason I am using the hockey approach for points in OT is for these kinds of scenarios:
- Baylor and West Va both end up 8-1 in conference. West Va beat Baylor but went to OT to win 2 games against lower ranked conference teams while Baylor won all their games in regulation. Baylor should be there higher seed for the conference. It also changes the strartegy. If West Va is down 7 and scores a TD in the closing minute against a lower caliber team they can play for the tie or go for the win.
- A B1G West team ends up 7-5 with a win over an FCS team while a B1G East team also ends up 7-5 with no FCS game this year. For bowl selection the B1G East should be a higher conference selection then a school that scheduled an easier game. But what if 1 of the B1G West's losses was in triple OT to a top 5 ranked team that blew out the B1G East team. Shouldn't the school get credit for taking a top 5 team to OT (for Rutgers that would be almost as good as a win against an Ohio St or Michigan)?
In the end all that matters are wins. I want teams playing to win not for ties. Maybe put it in as a tie breaker 5th tie breaker but it should not be used to determine standings.
We are currently watching the World Series which is now at the end of October. Where you once had clear seasons of one sport ending pretty much before another started, we now see continuous overlapping all in the name of money. Baseball, Basketball, Hockey, Soccer and Football all playing at the same time.
How many injuries (sometimes career ending) do we need to see with bodies that are just taking too much punishment?
How many injuries (sometimes career ending) do we need to see with bodies that are just taking too much punishment?
The only reason the NHL uses this ridiculous point system is to keep the standings close over the course of an 82-game season so that there are fewer meaningless games at the end of the season. Giving a point to a shootout loser I can understand, since the actual hockey game ended in a tie and then a bogus one-dimensional skills contest determines the winner, but an overtime win and loss should count the same as a regulation win and loss.
Also, going off on a bit of a tangent, but awarding a point for a shootout loss only works if you give three points for a regulation/overtime win, otherwise you incentivize finishing the game tied, picking up a point, and taking your chances in the crapshoot that is the shootout for the other point. You could tie every game and then even if you just go .500 in shootouts, you'd finish with 123 points, which is usually enough to finish in first place even though you never really won a game.
The lower divisions of college football and high schools have been doing it for decades. I don't know why people think FBS athletes are so delicate.
It was 100% better when there were only ~20 bowls, five of which _really_ mattered, involving 10 teams. Now there are ~40 bowls, three of which matter, involving four teams.
"Better" unless you're a multi-national entertainment conglomerate in possession of the globe's #1 sports broadcasting brand. Then, this is better.
"Better" unless you're a multi-national entertainment conglomerate in possession of the globe's #1 sports broadcasting brand. Then, this is better.
imo, NFL is down because it is on all the time.
you used to be able to see 2-4 games on Sunday and then one on Monday. it was somewhat special.. appointment television
now with so many games on even in the dreaded NYC market where non-compete clauses with Jets/Giants games limit availability, you still have so many games on that there is nothing special about it.
I also think the viewership is down thing has a lot to do with major market teams stinking this year and the parity that has been created by the draft and salary cap helped this happen... smaller market teams can grab the spotlight and turn off the big market fans.
LEAVE IT.
Contracts with vendors and corporations buying naming rights are sure to depend upon conference affiliation. Relegation and promotion are out. What happens when a big NAME team gets relegated.. imagine Texas having a couple awful seasons and coming in last and getting relegated. What about TV revenues for that conference without Texas? When NDState takes their place...
I think 4 is perfect. No need for an extra game. Makes the conference championship games meaningful.
No thanks! First, it's going to be 8, and then it going to be 12 (play in games). Then, it's going to be 16.
If the conference Championship games become somewhat important for a final 6 or 8 then it makes sense but now you have 5 conference champions and only 4 spots.
in 2024 if the conferences go to 16 and have semifinal games it will become more interesting since a school who loses in the regular season can win their way into the elimination tourney. This year PSU beat PSU. What if OSU beats Michigan and gets into the B10 championship game? Michigan would have a claim too if they were also 8-1 and beat PSU. A semifinal would provide an elimination game potential rematch for a championship tourney bid.
Then you just have a 4 vs. 5 play-in game. This is the best way, it essentially turns every conference championship game into a national playoff game, expanding the playoff to ten teams, and every team in the country has a chance to make it to the national championship. If you win your conference, you are in the final five. No more polls and committees deciding who is in and who is out. Sports are meant to be decided on the field, not in a conference room.
It would make more sense for the four largest conferences (SEC, Big Ten, PAC and ACC) to split off and form their own super division. Four conference champs then play off.
The teams not in the super division can have whatever sort of playoff they want.
That works too. Anything that eliminates the need for polls and committees is fine with me.
FBS playoff expansion is inevitable and it needs to be done the right way ASAP.
No one can prove that Ohio State(14-1) was more of a National Champ than TCU(12-1) in 2014. Ohio State lost to unranked Virginia Tech by 14 at home. TCU lost AT #5(in the college football playoff rankings) Baylor by only 3. But, TCU wasn't voted into the playoffs.
No one can prove that Alabama(14-1) was more of a National Champ than Ohio State(12-1) in 2015. Alabama lost to #12(in the college football playoff rankings) Ole Miss by 6 at home. Ohio State lost to #3(in the college football playoff rankings) Michigan State by only 3. But, Ohio State wasn't voted into the playoffs.
First Round of the playoffs:
Team #8 AT Team #1
Team #7 AT Team #2
Team #6 AT Team #3
Team #5 AT Team #4
All 4 games should sellout and get great TV ratings, with a portion of the proceeds to be shared by all FBS schools.
Inevitable?? Maybe you should pay attention a little more. The current format nearly didn't happen and barely passed. The college presidents made sure that no change can be made under the current contract. So it's not going to happen "ASAP" .
Enjoy the current format, it 1000 times better than the BCS.
An expanded playoff system is inevitable. ASAP = as soon as "POSSIBLE". It doesn't mean that it will happen immediately.
The current 4-team playoff system is 2 times better than the prior 2-team playoff system was not 1000 times better.
I'll enjoy the 8-team playoff system when it happens, because, I want a true National Champion to be decided on the field as opposed to a committee that has neglected to give a great team the chance that they deserved to become a National Champ in each of the two years since its inception.
Umm you think expanding to 8 will get rid of a committee??? You want to rethink that dumb thought? Basketball is up to 66 teams and there is a selection committee. Please stop.
The college presidents aren't going to go to 8 teams just to make PSUPOWER happy.
As I stated, expanding to an 8-team FBS playoff system may eliminate committee chosen playoff fields that "don't give every great team the chance that they deserve to become a National Champ".
Stop changing what I state and read my other posts in this thread with 2014 and 2015 examples of great teams that were unjustly neglected.
The 8-team FBS playoff system is inevitable, because, of the revenue that it will generate and it is the right thing to do.
A true National Champ should be decided on the field.
FCS currently uses a 24-team playoff system and they can't generate anywhere near the revenue that an 8-team FBS playoff system can generate.
We've taken the first step in expanding from a 2-team playoff system to a 4-team playoff system. But, further expansion is inevitable. It is just a matter of when.
Last edited:
That doesn't really fix the problem. What if the #8 team wins and the #9 team has a case for why they should have been #8? This is why the only sensible way to do this is to just take the conference champions. Let the selection committees fade into the sunset.
It doesn't matter whether the #1 seeded team wins or the #8 seeded team wins, as long as every great team that deserves a chance at the National Title gets to play for it on the field.
In 2014, TCU had a great team that was ranked #6 by the college football committee.
In 2015, Ohio State had a great team that was ranked #7 by the college football committee.
The current 4-team playoff system neglected those great teams.
Have there been any great teams that did not make the top 8 of the college football committee ?
Conference Champions can certainly be factored into an 8-team playoff system. But, it would be difficult to restrict the FBS college football playoff system to only conference champions while there are 5 unequal Power 5 and 5 unequal Group of 5 conference champions that are classified as FBS.
In many conferences, it is also possible for two teams to remain undefeated at the end of the regular season. Should a conference champion tiebreaker eliminate all teams that are on the losing end of those types of tiebreakers ?
Last edited:
