Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And regarding expansion, the release should say:
And regarding expansion, the release should say:
I would like to respond in 2 ways to this post:Bring on the 12 team playoff!
I would like to respond in 2 ways to this post:
1 and 2! 😜
The charm of college football has always been EVERY GAME MATTERS. With a 12 team playoff, that is no longer true.Seriously,
Why wouldn't you want more teams in the playoffs. I'd like us to make it sometime this decade. 4 teams to me are boring. Why not allow other teams to get in and get a chance to win it?
Honestly, I think most years there are not even 4 worthy teams for the playoffs. Expanding it further just means more mediocre teams and games.Seriously,
Why wouldn't you want more teams in the playoffs. I'd like us to make it sometime this decade. 4 teams to me are boring. Why not allow other teams to get in and get a chance to win it?
Bring on the 12 team playoff!
No matter how many teams the playoffs expands to, there will be complaints bout whose in and/or who was left out.Honestly, I think most years there are not even 4 worthy teams for the playoffs. Expanding it further just means more mediocre teams and games.
So we should limit the playoffs to protect the lowest-tier bowls no one actually cares about and many scream to eliminate?I can think of a lot of reasons.......
for me personally, I think expanded playoffs will have a significant and negative impact on the entire Bowl Season process we have now (believe me, I get it - most bowls are simply programming for ESPN and FS1)... but, the expanded bowl world we live in has done more good to more programs than we realize (CFP is for the big boy blue bloods) and it's going to end-up killing some of the bottom-tier bowls.. and that will hurt programs whose realistic program goals are getting to bowls like that... (never-the-less, I do expect expansion to happen).
What exactly is a "worthy" team and why shouldn't that team be required to prove it through multiple rounds of playoffs?Honestly, I think most years there are not even 4 worthy teams for the playoffs. Expanding it further just means more mediocre teams and games.
If you can't win your conference, you really shouldn't play victim about not getting hand-selected for an at-large because you think you're better than other second-place teams. Win or shut up.I'll say this every time it comes up--the issue isn't the number of teams, it's that with seasons either continuing or ending in a conference room, there will always be debate over teams being snubbed.
My answer to your :What exactly is a "worthy" team question is :What exactly is a "worthy" team and why shouldn't that team be required to prove it through multiple rounds of playoffs?
Who wouldn't want to see an underdog get hot late and spoil Alabama's season? Would definitely beat watching the same three teams play for an NC every year.
I'm with you. Win or shut up.My answer to your :What exactly is a "worthy" team question is :
winning your conference championship deems you worthy , not winning conference deems you not worthy for prime time.
Doesn't mean a thing if you're ranked in top 5, you are not as champ and don't deserve a shot at national championship.
The only exception would be for an independent, an independent would gain automatic eligibility for playoff if ranked above one of the 4 conference champs in a 4 team playoff.
Same if playoffs expand to 8 teams, all 8 need to be conference champs or 7 champs and independent ranked high enough to take a lesser ranked champs place.
If two independent are ranked higher, then the highest ranked one allowed in and lower ranked independent treated like a 2nd place conference member.
Of course if lower ranked independents undefeated they take the playoff spot of the conference champ ranked worst in the playoff seeding rankings.
As far as I'm concerned those non-champs re getting in playoffs because they won the participation trophy in their conference and not the title.
Looks like you quoted my post before I edited it to elaborate, but yep, that's exactly what I'm saying. Set it up so that you qualify for the next level by winning the previous level, not by hoping some people choose you like this is an episode of The Bachelorette or something.If you can't win your conference, you really shouldn't play victim about not getting hand-selected for an at-large because you think you're better than other second-place teams. Win or shut up.
0
So we should limit the playoffs to protect the lowest-tier bowls no one actually cares about and many scream to eliminate?
You need a stronger argument.
Just don't see what makes cfb so much different from every other sport ever that they can't have a broader playoff.
Tell that to the guy who said it did.The teams that would be in the playoffs would not be in those lower tier bowls. They would be in the New Years Day bowls. So this has nothing to do with protecting lower tier bowls.
Boy, did you ever expand, ha ...with a lot of truth.Looks like you quoted my post before I edited it to elaborate, but yep, that's exactly what I'm saying. Set it up so that you qualify for the next level by winning the previous level, not by hoping some people choose you like this is an episode of The Bachelorette or something.
More years than not we'll get the P5 Champions + 1 GE Champion. Covid 2020 was somewhat of an anomaly where Oregon wins the Pac-12 and would have been outside looking in.
Who has cried foul of late. BCS era yes. Playoff era none.No matter how many teams the playoffs expands to, there will be complaints bout whose in and/or who was left out.
I truly believe only conference champions and Independents ranked in top 5 should be eligible.
Yes mediocre teams are sure to be in the playoffs that way, but like you implied > mediocre teams are in playoffs already.
At least that mediocre team will be a conference title holder and not an also ran with a great pedigree.
Not true.Who has cried foul of late. BCS era yes. Playoff era none.
It's not perfect because you still have teams being hand-picked instead of winning their way in on the field. Doesn't matter how many teams there are, when you get to the playoffs by being chosen rather than qualifying via winning the previous round, there are going to be disagreements over who should have been chosen. Going from 2 teams to 4 didn't fix this problem, and going from 4 to 8 won't either. In fact it's even harder to get a consensus on who the 7th and 8th teams are than who the 4th team is. Whenever I say this, someone's response is that the teams that feel snubbed should have won their conference and then they wouldn't have had to worry about it. While that is true, if the playoffs consist of 8 teams and you believe you are one of the top 8, you're going to feel like you were screwed by the committee if you're not taken.8 is perfect, 5 champs, 1 G5 ranked at least Top 12 and then two or three highest ranked teams, max two from one conference. Don't like 12 at all as I think a bye is too big of an advantage and they will mostly go to SEC teams.
The undefeated UCF Knights in 2018Who has cried foul of late. BCS era yes. Playoff era none.
Agree. Eight is the right number. 12 or 16 too many. Use existing bowls for the six games ( 4 quarter final and 2 semi final)8 is perfect, 5 champs, 1 G5 ranked at least Top 12 and then two or three highest ranked teams, max two from one conference. Don't like 12 at all as I think a bye is too big of an advantage and they will mostly go to SEC teams.
An argument can be made for Texas A&M. Their problem was that everyone saw the ass whopping Alabama put on them. Coastal Carolina, laughable. UCF was not a top 4 team. Top 10 probably.The undefeated UCF Knights in 2018
Texas A&M in 2020 with onlly one loss and Coastal Carolina’s 11-0 season could be cause to complain about OSU with 6 ( though undefeated) games picked over them
Maybe the undefeated (9-0) 2020 Cincinnati Bearcat program would a good gripe over the 6-0 Ohio State getting the call because of the 3 less games played.
good point...I believe those who would argue that a G5 school will have little chance of advancing deep into the playoffs are in for quite a surprise. Having to play 3 or 4 post season games will inevitably lead to a lot of the top draft talent at the P5 schools to sit out the entire playoffs or perhaps just play in one game. While the G5 kids will be using the playoffs to prove to the pros that they deserve to be drafted. The roster a P5 team finishes the regular season with isn't necessarily going to be same as the one that they will have entering the playoffs. It should make for some very interesting games.