College Football Playoff System

[JoeMoma]

I wouldn't mind the CFP being expanded to 8 teams. We could have January madness with a No. 8 Team upsetting a no. 1 Team.

I think we would still have the #9 and #10 teams whining about not getting it. But I am all for an expanded playoff.

I think having the top 8 teams play this year would have resulted in the same 2 teams playing for the championship.

Of course, the next couple of teams left out will always whine.

 

[WinterBorn]

Here I am in 2019 watching the Rose Bowl game between two Power Five Conference champions who were VOTED out of a chance to play for the "national championship." Does anyone else understand the absurdity of this situation? Shouldn't CFB teams PLAY their way into championship games?

Instead of the current beauty pageant selection process, there needs to be an 8 team playoff system which includes ALL of the P5 conference champions (plus 3 at-large picks). This would allow for preserving the traditional Rose Bowl match up of P12 and B10 champions as part of the playoff system. The other three major Bowl match ups could be determined by a seeding system.

Comments?

Georgia certainly didn't deserve to be in the playoff with that disaster of a game they played against Texas.

 

[eagle1462010]

Here I am in 2019 watching the Rose Bowl game between two Power Five Conference champions who were VOTED out of a chance to play for the "national championship." Does anyone else understand the absurdity of this situation? Shouldn't CFB teams PLAY their way into championship games?

Instead of the current beauty pageant selection process, there needs to be an 8 team playoff system which includes ALL of the P5 conference champions (plus 3 at-large picks). This would allow for preserving the traditional Rose Bowl match up of P12 and B10 champions as part of the playoff system. The other three major Bowl match ups could be determined by a seeding system.

Comments?

Georgia certainly didn't deserve to be in the playoff with that disaster of a game they played against Texas.

I don't know what happened to them..........LOL

 

[WinterBorn]

I've seen a lot of talk about an 8 team playoff being better. I'm not sure it would make much difference.

The 4 teams that would have been added would be Ohio State, Michigan, Georgia, and UCF.

UCF lost to LSU. Can you see them doing anything against Alabama?
Michigan got blown out by Florida. What would Clemson have done to them?
Ohio State might have better luck against Notre Dame.
Georgia would have played Oklahoma, and maybe won. But Georgia lost to Texas, so...

But for the sake of argument, lets say Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and Georgia won.

Alabama would have beaten Georgia again.
Clemson would beat Ohio State

And the final game would be..........wait for it.......Alabama & Clemson.

 

[JoeMoma]

I've seen a lot of talk about an 8 team playoff being better. I'm not sure it would make much difference.

The 4 teams that would have been added would be Ohio State, Michigan, Georgia, and UCF.

UCF lost to LSU. Can you see them doing anything against Alabama?
Michigan got blown out by Florida. What would Clemson have done to them?
Ohio State might have better luck against Notre Dame.
Georgia would have played Oklahoma, and maybe won. But Georgia lost to Texas, so...

But for the sake of argument, lets say Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and Georgia won.

Alabama would have beaten Georgia again.
Clemson would beat Ohio State

And the final game would be..........wait for it.......Alabama & Clemson.

The transitive property does not always apply with football games. Upsets do happen. If nothing else, an 8 game playoff would put one more round of games in the system in which an upset may occur.

If we could 100% predict each game, then their would be little reason to play the games.

 

[Papageorgio]

I've seen a lot of talk about an 8 team playoff being better. I'm not sure it would make much difference.

The 4 teams that would have been added would be Ohio State, Michigan, Georgia, and UCF.

UCF lost to LSU. Can you see them doing anything against Alabama?
Michigan got blown out by Florida. What would Clemson have done to them?
Ohio State might have better luck against Notre Dame.
Georgia would have played Oklahoma, and maybe won. But Georgia lost to Texas, so...

But for the sake of argument, lets say Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and Georgia won.

Alabama would have beaten Georgia again.
Clemson would beat Ohio State

And the final game would be..........wait for it.......Alabama & Clemson.

Those two programs are so far ahead of the curve the curve. Just excellent programs.

 

[eagle1462010]

When Saban was at LSU they were bad to the bone.

Only problem with Saban is they have to buy 100 headsets a year. lol

 

[JoeMoma]

When Saban was at LSU they were bad to the bone.

Only problem with Saban is they have to buy 100 headsets a year. lol

Saban could stand to learn from Steve Spurrier; visors are much cheaper and more difficult to damage.

 

[jwoodie]

I am not interested in what teams you or I think should be playing for a national championship. My point is that P5 conference champions should represent their conferences in a national playoff. Why should a team that did not win its conference should be given preferential treatment over a team that did?

An 8 team playoff would allow for an additional three teams that did not win a conference championship, so what is the problem? I'm sorry, but any team that does not win its conference has no cause to complain about not being selected.

As far as adding to the potential number of games played, an 8 team playoff would only affect the two teams playing for the national championship. That hardly seems to be a serious issue.

My reference to the Rose Bowl game was only to illustrate how the current system has devalued non-BCS major bowl games into little more than additional sources of TV revenue. Wouldn't they be more interesting and significant if the winners went on to the national semifinals? This would allow all of the Big Six bowls to host playoff games.

Why don't we let these teams play their way into a national championship?

 

[WinterBorn]

I am not interested in what teams you or I think should be playing for a national championship. My point is that P5 conference champions should represent their conferences in a national playoff. Why should a team that did not win its conference should be given preferential treatment over a team that did?

An 8 team playoff would allow for an additional three teams that did not win a conference championship, so what is the problem? I'm sorry, but any team that does not win its conference has no cause to complain about not being selected.

As far as adding to the potential number of games played, an 8 team playoff would only affect the two teams playing for the national championship. That hardly seems to be a serious issue.

My reference to the Rose Bowl game was only to illustrate how the current system has devalued non-BCS major bowl games into little more than additional sources of TV revenue. Wouldn't they be more interesting and significant if the winners went on to the national semifinals? This would allow all of the Big Six bowls to host playoff games.

Why don't we let these teams play their way into a national championship?

A topic came up on my FB feed that illustrates one problem with expanding the playoffs. Empty stadiums.

One solid and reliable fact for college football bowls is that Alabama fans will travel to see their team play. But even the most dedicated Crimson Tide fans are questioning it now.

First the SEC Championship Game. Granted, it was in driving distance for most, but the tickets and hotel costs are not insignificant.

Next, the playoff game in Miami. Flights, hotels and tickets racked up quite a total. But at least it was on a Saturday night.

But the championship game in CA? A friend started shopping the day after the 1st playoff. He is looking at $1,200 to $1,800 for roundtrip airfare. Another $450-$750 for a hotel room. And that is before buying a ticket to the game. And the game is on a monday night on the west coast, so you'll miss 2 days of work.

Much has been made of the empty seats at NFL games. How many can afford to spend $5k on going to 3 football games?

 

[candycorn]

I know that this subject has been debated ad nauseam, but the current Committee system may be the worst yet. Virtually the entire CFB schedule is based on competing within conferences in order to determine conference champions. Why should this fact be ignored when selecting which teams should be allowed to compete for a national championship?

It seems that only conference champions (or top rated independents) should be considered for this honor. The biggest problem with this idea is that there are five major conferences, which would require an extra playoff game in order to accommodate all eligible conference champions and independents. However, the last extra game involves only two teams, so this would seem to be an exaggerated consideration. Even under the current four team playoff, the lowest ranking of the eligible teams could be excluded.

I am not a fan of any particular conference or team to be selected. Rather, I see the current system as undermining one of the most appealing facets of college football: Intra-conference rivalries. Let's resolve to preserve this the next time around.

I think the entire system needs an overhaul.

I’m not sure why in some conferences every team has to play every other team. Rutgers for example, played 12 games, scored 162 points and gave up 377. Was anyone’s Saturday afternoon made by having the Scarlet Knights come into their stadium and get slaughtered? I think the teams should play, at most, 7 conference games so you always have a winning or losing record in-conference. As for the rest of the schedule, the other 6 games should be divided up as follows;

• Three games would be “discretionary” if there are three games left (see below). So Florida and Florida State can always play one another still and keep that rivalry alive. Or they can schedule cream puffs for tune-up games etc….
• 3 are scheduled against other power five conference schools only. I would prefer that they do it like the NFL does where one division plays another. Like the SEC schools would be forced to schedule against the Big 12 and vice versa. Next Season, the SEC would schedule against the Pac 12 for example and vice-versa.

The hope would be to eliminate the argument that “they didn’t play anyone” argument as much as you can. I’d even be for putting in that conference champions have to play the other conference champions from the previous season.

As for the playoff, It really needs to be expanded immediately. I would suggest the 3 “discretionary” games becomes 1 discretionary game and do the following with the other two games. Take the two games that would be tune-ups (think ‘Bama v. Western Carolina and ‘Bama v. New Mexico State) and instead make them “playoff games”.

Then take the major bowls and make them play-off bracket games.

Just for an example…

The bowl games would rotate so the following year, the Peach Bowl would be a first-round game and perhaps the Cotton Bowl would be “promoted” to being a second-round game for the next year.


Of course, the catch is getting the schools to give up a home game. But maybe the Sugar Bowl can be moved to Tuscaloosa one year or Columbus the next year if giving up the home game is a stumbling block.

It still doesn’t solve the question about “who gets in” because if you increase it to 8 teams, the 9th team will still bitch about not getting into the playoffs. There is no perfect system.

 

[WinterBorn]

Here is an interesting stat I just heard online. It speaks to the separation between Alabama and Clemson vs the rest of college football.

When not playing each other, Alabama and Clemson are 106-4 over the last 4 seasons. That is impressive.

 

[jwoodie]

The bowl games would rotate so the following year, the Peach Bowl would be a first-round game and perhaps the Cotton Bowl would be “promoted” to being a second-round game for the next year.

Of course, the catch is getting the schools to give up a home game. But maybe the Sugar Bowl can be moved to Tuscaloosa one year or Columbus the next year if giving up the home game is a stumbling block.

It still doesn’t solve the question about “who gets in” because if you increase it to 8 teams, the 9th team will still bitch about not getting into the playoffs. There is no perfect system.

1. I agree in principle, although I would like for the Rose Bowl to remain a first-round game between the P12 and B10 champions. Do any other of the B6 Bowls have set opponents?

2. I think these bowl games need to be played in milder climates, but the other three conference champions should be given preference as to home field over their non-conference opponents.

3. There is a big difference between a deserving #5 team being left out of the playoffs and a #9 non-conference champion missing the cut. If you want to ensure entry, win your conference.

 

[jwoodie]

A topic came up on my FB feed that illustrates one problem with expanding the playoffs. Empty stadiums.

Actually, I think the inclusion of conference champions would increase attendance by making the playoffs more of a conference vs. conference issue. People may hate their rivals during intra-conference games, but they want to see their conference do well against other conferences.

I am a USC fan, but I rooted for all the P12 teams to win their bowl games. But I would have rooted for the Rose Bowl winner (Ohio State) in a subsequent playoff game, if for no other reason than to make Washington's loss look better.

Under the current system, the largest general interest is in the changing rankings during the season. Once the four playoff teams are selected, interest is largely limited to fans of those four teams. Under a P5+3 system, regional/conference rivalries would add a new dimension and interest to these games.

 

[candycorn]

The bowl games would rotate so the following year, the Peach Bowl would be a first-round game and perhaps the Cotton Bowl would be “promoted” to being a second-round game for the next year.

Of course, the catch is getting the schools to give up a home game. But maybe the Sugar Bowl can be moved to Tuscaloosa one year or Columbus the next year if giving up the home game is a stumbling block.

It still doesn’t solve the question about “who gets in” because if you increase it to 8 teams, the 9th team will still bitch about not getting into the playoffs. There is no perfect system.

1. I agree in principle, although I would like for the Rose Bowl to remain a first-round game between the P12 and B10 champions. Do any other of the B6 Bowls have set opponents?

I can see it working. I don’t like the general idea of “if you win this; you must play that opponent” but in the spirit of tradition, sure keep it if you like.

2. I think these bowl games need to be played in milder climates, but the other three conference champions should be given preference as to home field over their non-conference opponents.

I think your reward for being the higher seed is getting another home game. Clearly this is millions of dollars to the schools and the conferences they represent. So my proposal is that (just for the sake of argument) the Orange Bowl may be played in Tuscaloosa one year in the first round game between Alabama and Boise State. The next year, the Orange Bowl may be in Columbus between The Ohio State University and Texas A&M. The same for the Cotton Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Fiesta Bowl (maybe—I can’t see a “fiesta” bowl in Lawrence, Kansas or Salt Lake City). The bowls would be played in the higher seed’s home stadium. They get a trophy, the title of “Orange Bowl Champion” etc… As for the Rose Bowl, it doesn’t travel and the Pac 12/Big 10 champs accept that they will go to Pasadena and “lose” the home game.

Full disclosure, I don’t know how much the peach industry, cotton industry or the orange industry or the sugar industry are tied to the cities of Atlanta, Dallas, Miami or New Orleans any longer. I imagine at one point the growers of these commodities were closely tied to the game itself but I think that having the Peach Bowl in prime time with potentially the #1 and #4 teams playing each other is preferable to the #10 v #7 teams like they had this year. It would bring more attention to the peach industry... if there is even a tie to the industry any longer.

On a rotating basis, the bowls (pick whatever bowl game you want to insert into whatever slot)….get “promoted” to the 2nd Round where there would presumably be higher TV revenue and buzz.

I disagree that the “milder climate” is important. If you don’t want to travel to Columbus in January, be a higher seed.

I guess you could say that I’m trying to preserve the bowl system for whatever prestige it still has and make the major bowl games matter once more.

3. There is a big difference between a deserving #5 team being left out of the playoffs and a #9 non-conference champion missing the cut. If you want to ensure entry, win your conference.

100% correct on this.

 

[jwoodie]

https://sports.yahoo.com/title-game...cent-college-footbalFl-worried-214530894.html

"It exposes a truism about college football – it lacks the true national following of the NFL."

This is why CFB needs to bolster the importance of conference champions being included in the playoffs.

 

[WinterBorn]

https://sports.yahoo.com/title-game...cent-college-footbalFl-worried-214530894.html

"It exposes a truism about college football – it lacks the true national following of the NFL."

This is why CFB needs to bolster the importance of conference champions being included in the playoffs.

I see so many people clamoring for an expanded playoff. And I see even more people complaining about it being Alabama & Clemson, again.

The game tomorrow night will be a great one. These two teams were, hands down, the best two teams in college football this year. And both are more complete teams than anyone else this year.

How can you not want to see the best of the best play each other?

 

[jwoodie]

https://sports.yahoo.com/title-game...cent-college-footbalFl-worried-214530894.html

"It exposes a truism about college football – it lacks the true national following of the NFL."

This is why CFB needs to bolster the importance of conference champions being included in the playoffs.

I see so many people clamoring for an expanded playoff. And I see even more people complaining about it being Alabama & Clemson, again.

The game tomorrow night will be a great one. These two teams were, hands down, the best two teams in college football this year. And both are more complete teams than anyone else this year.

How can you not want to see the best of the best play each other?

OK, let's have a two team playoff. Or better yet, let's just take a poll and crown whoever comes in first the "national champion."

 

[rightwinger]

Doesn’t matter what playoff system you use

Alabama and Clemson will end up playing for the championship

 

[WinterBorn]

https://sports.yahoo.com/title-game...cent-college-footbalFl-worried-214530894.html

"It exposes a truism about college football – it lacks the true national following of the NFL."

This is why CFB needs to bolster the importance of conference champions being included in the playoffs.

I see so many people clamoring for an expanded playoff. And I see even more people complaining about it being Alabama & Clemson, again.

The game tomorrow night will be a great one. These two teams were, hands down, the best two teams in college football this year. And both are more complete teams than anyone else this year.

How can you not want to see the best of the best play each other?

OK, let's have a two team playoff. Or better yet, let's just take a poll and crown whoever comes in first the "national champion."

With 130 teams in the FBS, there will always be a question as to who the best teams are. An 8 team playoff with 5 automatic bids for conference champs and 3 at-large teams may help, but it won't eliminate the issue.

That would put SEC Champ Alabama 13-0, ACC Champ Clemson 13-0, Big12 Champ Oklahoma 12-1, PAC12 Champ Washington 10-3, and Big10 Champ Ohio State 12-1 in the playoffs with 3 more teams getting in the at-large spots.

Looking at the AP polls, the next 3 teams are Georgia 11-2, UCF 12-0, and Michigan 10-2 in the playoffs. Washington State has a record of 10-2. And their biggest loss was by 13 points to the conference champs. Georgia had 2 losses, but one of them was by 20 points. Michigan had 2 losses, including a loss by 23 points. If there is no human polling, why would Washington State not get the nod?

UCF was undefeated, and they would get in the playoffs as an at-large team. Look at their schedule. The top team they played was either Temple at 8-5 or Pitt at 7-7.

Fresno State was 11-2, but not the conference champ for any Power 5 conference. But they had a better record than the PAC12 conference champs.

And the PAC12 champs had losses to Auburn 8-5 and Cal 7-6. That is who you want to get an automatic bid?



But regardless of all of that, you would be hard pressed to find any reputable sports expert who didn't have Alabama and Clemson as the 2 top teams in the nation.