Keenum just killed the playoff expansion idea.
- Thread starter bulldogbaja
- Start date
I’m sure that’s the company line.
Hopefully he knows that until we get to 16 teams or so we have no shot.
Hopefully he knows that until we get to 16 teams or so we have no shot.
Actually. They need to go back to the BCS.
This format sucks. Group of people who don’t know Jack **** about football select the 4 teams. Hell, Oklahoma didn’t belong. Notre Dame didn’t belong. And Alabama didn’t belong!
We need to Value the bowls more.
Go back to the big bowls being great matchups and then having Coaches vote on the Champion after the bowls.
It worked for 50 years!!!
I mean damn! The “peach bowl” is now a prestigious bowl! Really??? The Liberty Bowl has the same value as the Gator Bowl! really?
The CFP didn’t fix ****. It made Conference referees cheat to make sure the blue bloods stayed up top.
This format sucks. Group of people who don’t know Jack **** about football select the 4 teams. Hell, Oklahoma didn’t belong. Notre Dame didn’t belong. And Alabama didn’t belong!
We need to Value the bowls more.
Go back to the big bowls being great matchups and then having Coaches vote on the Champion after the bowls.
It worked for 50 years!!!
I mean damn! The “peach bowl” is now a prestigious bowl! Really??? The Liberty Bowl has the same value as the Gator Bowl! really?
The CFP didn’t fix ****. It made Conference referees cheat to make sure the blue bloods stayed up top.
Last edited:
He just kicked the can further down the road. He didn't commit to making any changes or commit to not making changes.
No he didn't. He simply stated the facts. They have a 12-year contract and any expansion was never going to happen until the next contract. It took 16 years to go from 2 teams to 4. It was never going to double again to 8 in just a couple of years.
They need to bring back the BCS formula to decide playoff teams. It did a great job. They then need to have some sort of committee to use the BCS formula to slot the next six to 10 bowls. Basically you get ten to sixteen top 24 (to top 32) matchups plus the championship game with that system. The only reason you need a committee is that you don't want to send the 23rd best team across the country to play the 24th best team. The committee could get the best matchups they can while taking into account travel for the fanbases and interesting matchups.
Then any bowls not in the BCS group can use conference ties if they want. The top bowls would probably have to pay more; the non-bcs group bowls would probably end up paying less b/c they'd end up guaranteed to have non-compelling matchups.
Any bowls not ponying up to be in the top 12 to
Contracts can be broken or revised.
Originally I thought an 8 team was the way to go. Now I am for a 16 team full playoff with the power 5 champ game winners being automatic qualifiers and the rest of the field being wild cards chosen by a committee. Push up the start of the season if necessary. Get rid of these stupid bowl games (and committees). Give 16 teams a shot at a natty each and every year.
Originally I thought an 8 team was the way to go. Now I am for a 16 team full playoff with the power 5 champ game winners being automatic qualifiers and the rest of the field being wild cards chosen by a committee. Push up the start of the season if necessary. Get rid of these stupid bowl games (and committees). Give 16 teams a shot at a natty each and every year.
The further you expand the playoff, the less likely the best team over the course of a full season is to win it. Thus making the season itself mean less and less.
College football was something unique in all of sports where every game and every week mattered. Now it’s “every week but one matters”. The further you expand it, the more weeks that do not matter. To the point where you can follow in passing and tune in for the tournament like 80% of America does for March Madness.
I don’t desire for it to become college baseball or college basketball where the best team for the full season only wins in the end a small percentage of the time. Never mind that it’s turned the rest of Bowl season into the NIT where no one really cares.
I know with the tv situation it will never happen, but the best way to do it is full merit-based without a consistent number of teams getting in. And standardize the metric we are using to define “merit”.
College football was something unique in all of sports where every game and every week mattered. Now it’s “every week but one matters”. The further you expand it, the more weeks that do not matter. To the point where you can follow in passing and tune in for the tournament like 80% of America does for March Madness.
I don’t desire for it to become college baseball or college basketball where the best team for the full season only wins in the end a small percentage of the time. Never mind that it’s turned the rest of Bowl season into the NIT where no one really cares.
I know with the tv situation it will never happen, but the best way to do it is full merit-based without a consistent number of teams getting in. And standardize the metric we are using to define “merit”.
That argument is such tired ********
Literally every single 17ing sport, at every single 17ing level has managed to figure out how to have a playoff and maintain the importance of the regular season (save MLB and their ridiculous 162 game snooze fest).
And who really gives a **** if the best team wins the trophy every year? Win when it's all or nothing or go home.
Literally every single 17ing sport, at every single 17ing level has managed to figure out how to have a playoff and maintain the importance of the regular season (save MLB and their ridiculous 162 game snooze fest).
And who really gives a **** if the best team wins the trophy every year? Win when it's all or nothing or go home.
I disagree in the sense that championships should be determined on the field and there is not enough cross conference play to definitively say who the best really is. I just don't like guys with poll votes or in backrooms deciding who they THINK the best team was for the year. I'm ok with the 4 team format though I would prefer that all P5 conference champions get a shot at the title and an 8 team playoff would at least give a possibility that some non-traditional power teams (like MSU) could make it on occasion. There is a lot more cross play in the NFL and they still use a playoff to decide the champion. College football was definitely unique in the past but I personally don't think that was a good thing. When the playoffs are limited to 4 or even 8 teams, every week of a 12 week season still means a lot.
Playoff was a bad idea from the beginning. At this point, the only way to make things work out is to expand it. That way all the bowls are taken up in the playoff. Think, an 8 team playoff would consist of 6 bowls on its own, before the championship. A 16 teamer would have 14. Then you just get rid of the rest of the useless bowls. While you're at it, shorten the season by a game.
We just didn't realize how good we had it with the BCS. Most years don't produce more than 2 elite teams anyway, but in this country, we have started making rules based on the exception. All we had to do was implement a rule that the 2 teams in the BCS title game could not be a rematch (duh), and we'd have had LSU vs. Oklahoma State in 2011 and the world would have been fine. Since the playoff started, the only real problem would have been 2014.
2014: Alabama vs. Florida State (Ohio State left out)
2015: Alabama vs. Clemson
2016: Alabama vs. Clemson
2017: Oklahoma vs. Georgia (which is what it should have been all along)
2018: Alabama vs. Clemson
Now, in 2016 Ohio State was ranked ahead of Clemson in the playoff, and in 2017 Oklahoma was also ranked ahead of Georgia, but we all know that was for seeding purposes.
In my opinion, the introduction of the playoff gave Ohio State an undeserved shot in 2014 and Alabama an undeserved shot in 2017. Hell the BCS was more accurate than that.
Bowls weren't that bad. They used to be a good prize to play for late in the season for teams across the country who were obviously out of the national championship race, now nobody cares if they aren't in the playoff. Half the kids are sitting out. I think we've seen this reflected in overall interest in the product.
Ultimately I think this means more interest will go to the NFL.
We just didn't realize how good we had it with the BCS. Most years don't produce more than 2 elite teams anyway, but in this country, we have started making rules based on the exception. All we had to do was implement a rule that the 2 teams in the BCS title game could not be a rematch (duh), and we'd have had LSU vs. Oklahoma State in 2011 and the world would have been fine. Since the playoff started, the only real problem would have been 2014.
2014: Alabama vs. Florida State (Ohio State left out)
2015: Alabama vs. Clemson
2016: Alabama vs. Clemson
2017: Oklahoma vs. Georgia (which is what it should have been all along)
2018: Alabama vs. Clemson
Now, in 2016 Ohio State was ranked ahead of Clemson in the playoff, and in 2017 Oklahoma was also ranked ahead of Georgia, but we all know that was for seeding purposes.
In my opinion, the introduction of the playoff gave Ohio State an undeserved shot in 2014 and Alabama an undeserved shot in 2017. Hell the BCS was more accurate than that.
Bowls weren't that bad. They used to be a good prize to play for late in the season for teams across the country who were obviously out of the national championship race, now nobody cares if they aren't in the playoff. Half the kids are sitting out. I think we've seen this reflected in overall interest in the product.
Ultimately I think this means more interest will go to the NFL.
Last edited:
The basketball regular season is not important. Baseball 'sort of' is because you are playing for home field advantage.
I guess if you held the first couple games of the football playoff at home, you could maybe recreate it that effect if it was an 8 or 16 teamer. But then you have the problem of the bowls that no players want to participate in.
At this point, the choice is playoffs or bowls. Toothpaste is out of the tube so you have to expand the playoff. This means a diminished regular season for teams who are not good enough for the playoffs and don't have true rivalry games (which are played for pride).
Yeah, ********. The average sports fan in Mississippi couldn't tell me half of the division winners in the NFL prior to this week. Living and dying by it? Please. I just started active interest again 3 weeks ago. About the same time relative to the end of the season that I do in every other major sport(sans as it relates to MSU). It also corresponded with there being no interest at all in bowl season, sans MSU and the playoffs. Something I would have watched every second of 5 years ago.
Yeah, I disagree with the whole premise. While it hasn't come full circle to college football yet, the best team over the sum of a full season is the one that should be remembered. Not the one that got hot for a couple of weeks at the right time.
College football and the old Nascar were the only sports on the planet that got that part right. Both changed. And it's done nothing but further damage both of them.
Problem Solved...
All conference winners in. Yes... ALL. Top two ranked non conference winners as determined by CFP ranking in as at large. The teams are seeded 1-12 based on CFP rankings.
First round is the week after conference championships and the second round the following week (the 8th and 15th of December this year). First two rounds played at campus (or site chosen) by the higher seed. First and second round losers are still eligible to go play in a bowl game. Semis can be just like they are now with regards to whatever "bowl" game rotates into them.
So on Dec. 15th this year we would have gotten (barring upsets) Washington @ Bama, Georgia @ Oklahoma, Ohio State @ Notre Dame, UCF @ Clemson.
All conference winners in. Yes... ALL. Top two ranked non conference winners as determined by CFP ranking in as at large. The teams are seeded 1-12 based on CFP rankings.
First round is the week after conference championships and the second round the following week (the 8th and 15th of December this year). First two rounds played at campus (or site chosen) by the higher seed. First and second round losers are still eligible to go play in a bowl game. Semis can be just like they are now with regards to whatever "bowl" game rotates into them.
So on Dec. 15th this year we would have gotten (barring upsets) Washington @ Bama, Georgia @ Oklahoma, Ohio State @ Notre Dame, UCF @ Clemson.
That's a terrible idea. Conference affiliation should in no way play into who gets into a playoff. They aren't created equally.All conference winners in. Yes... ALL. Top two ranked non conference winners as determined by CFP ranking in as at large. The teams are seeded 1-12 based on CFP rankings.
First round is the week after conference championships and the second round the following week (the 8th and 15th of December this year). First two rounds played at campus (or site chosen) by the higher seed. First and second round losers are still eligible to go play in a bowl game. Semis can be just like they are now with regards to whatever "bowl" game rotates into them.
So on Dec. 15th this year we would have gotten (barring upsets) Washington @ Bama, Georgia @ Oklahoma, Ohio State @ Notre Dame, UCF @ Clemson.
Good god, that bracket is about the worst possible thing I've seen anyone propose. Fresno, NIU, App St. & UAB in the playoffs? That's ridiculous. I guess we should just drop out of the SEC and form a conference with UTEP, Rice, UTSA, Old Dominion, Texas St., South Alabama, & GA Southern and join the playoff party ourselves.
Why is college football the one special third rail...
that people get so offended at allowing conference winners into the playoff to win the championship? It's like the only sport in the world that doesn't do that.
that people get so offended at allowing conference winners into the playoff to win the championship? It's like the only sport in the world that doesn't do that.
With all this talk about you can't expand the playoffs, could someone explain to me why FCS (div 1AA), Div II, and Div III can have playoffs that begin with 14 to 24 teams yet FBS (Div I) can't. It seems to me the current bowl games could be used for a 16 or 24 team playoff with no adverse effects. What am I missing?
Exactly what I've always wondered.
And they let you in if you win your conference. But holy hell if you suggest that on the FBS level.
Of course we are arguing in ideals. The reason against it is and always will be the money and people wanting to control who gets pieces of the pie. And well... the NCAA doesn't have any piece of that pie, so they can't do anything about it. Not gonna hold my breath for somebody on the CFP Committee to say, "you know what, It's not fair to exclude certain conferences from a shot at a title just for profits."
And they let you in if you win your conference. But holy hell if you suggest that on the FBS level.
Of course we are arguing in ideals. The reason against it is and always will be the money and people wanting to control who gets pieces of the pie. And well... the NCAA doesn't have any piece of that pie, so they can't do anything about it. Not gonna hold my breath for somebody on the CFP Committee to say, "you know what, It's not fair to exclude certain conferences from a shot at a title just for profits."
Last edited:
Because there aren't 64 spots. That's 18% of college basketball. 18% of college football is roughly 24 teams. With that many, it might be possible.
They didn't have at large spots in the bball tourney until 1975
It was conference winners only. So having 64 spots open had nothing to do with them allowing all conference winners. It always placed more importance on winning your conference, then expanded to allow other teams a shot after that.
It was conference winners only. So having 64 spots open had nothing to do with them allowing all conference winners. It always placed more importance on winning your conference, then expanded to allow other teams a shot after that.
Honestly, I don’t really care that much about the “uniqueness” of college football. My interest in college football starts and ends with MSU. Therefore, I want the system that allows them the best chance to one day win a national title. The simple, unavoidable truth is that it is not possible for MSU to win a NC in football under either the BCS or the 4-team playoff. It just isn’t. And honestly, we’re only going to get a shot on probably a once every 15-20 year basis even with an 8-team playoff. That doesn’t mean we suck or are a “woe is me” program, it just means we are one of the 75-80% of Power 5 programs that suffers from extreme recruiting disadvantages compared to the other 20-25%, and to make it worse we have 4 teams in our own division that are in that 20-25%.
Its also kind of ridiculous to me that people think an 8-team playoff diminishes the regular season.
30 NBA teams and 16 make the playoffs (53%).
32 NFL teams and 12 make the playoffs (38%).
30 MLB teams with 10 making the playoffs (33%).
347 Division I basketball teams, 68 play for the title (~20%).
297 Division I baseball teams, 64 play for the title (~22%).
College football has 129 teams. Even at an 8 team playoff, you are looking at only 6% of the teams playing for the title. At 16 teams, only 12%. Think about that. Going all the way out to 16 teams still only results in about half of the percentage of teams playing for the title as the next closest sports. The regular season would still matter very much. And for the Top 8 teams who would get to host on-campus games for the first 1 or 2 rounds, it would also be a huge revenue stream.
Its also kind of ridiculous to me that people think an 8-team playoff diminishes the regular season.
30 NBA teams and 16 make the playoffs (53%).
32 NFL teams and 12 make the playoffs (38%).
30 MLB teams with 10 making the playoffs (33%).
347 Division I basketball teams, 68 play for the title (~20%).
297 Division I baseball teams, 64 play for the title (~22%).
College football has 129 teams. Even at an 8 team playoff, you are looking at only 6% of the teams playing for the title. At 16 teams, only 12%. Think about that. Going all the way out to 16 teams still only results in about half of the percentage of teams playing for the title as the next closest sports. The regular season would still matter very much. And for the Top 8 teams who would get to host on-campus games for the first 1 or 2 rounds, it would also be a huge revenue stream.
i bet you were rooting for Bama last night.
Unfortunately the meat for your diatribe, where you were telling us all how stupid we were for suggesting this bama team wasnt the greatest team of all time..... has fallen off the bone.
I’ve swung and missed on a few over the years myself bud.
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White Basketball
Mississippi State 98-57 Jackson State: Bulldogs roll to 3-0, Hubbard makes history
-
02
Rivals Football Recruiting
Mississippi State flips Colorado OL commit Li'Marcus Jones: 'They never gave up on me'
-
03
Maroon and White
Mississippi State "right in the middle" of work on retaining QB Kamario Taylor
-
04
Maroon and White Football
Points of Focus from Mississippi State HC Jeff Lebby in Week 11
-
05
Maroon and White Football
Same Frustrations for Mississippi State, Jeff Lebby entering Week 11