Playoffs need to e expanded

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
I don’t expect them to give a G5 team a guaranteed spot.

I do expect them to give an undefeated team a guaranteed spot like every other sports playoff system in the world.
Well you haven't been paying attention at all than. College football is unlike any other sport. It doesn't have a governing body, the conferences not the NCAA came up with the system. And the AAC was part of the rules approval. So go complain to the AAC.
UCF would get destroyed by Bama.

I don’t get the argument that UCF would get destroyed. Ok, so what?

#1 seed in college hoops Tourny almost always destroys #16

#1 in nba and nhl sweeps #8 often (more so in hoops). That’s exactly how playoffs work.

And occasionally (every 30 years or so) you get a monumental upset. That’s what makes playoffs great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jreinsdorf

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
I don’t get the argument that UCF would get destroyed. Ok, so what?

#1 seed in college hoops Tourny almost always destroys #16

#1 in nba and nhl sweeps #8 often (more so in hoops). That’s exactly how playoffs work.
And watching those game suck. That is a bad system. Way too many in. Without NCAA pools its unwatchable.
Do you watch the EPL or hate it because the regular season means everything?
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
I don’t get the argument that UCF would get destroyed. Ok, so what?

#1 seed in college hoops Tourny almost always destroys #16

#1 in nba and nhl sweeps #8 often (more so in hoops). That’s exactly how playoffs work.
And watching those game suck. That is a bad system. Way too many in. Without NCAA pools its unwatchable.
Do you watch the EPL or hate it because the regular season means everything?

I hate it cause I don’t like the sport of soccer...

Regular season doesn’t mean everything. Texas win over OU meant nothing in the long run
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
I hate it cause I don’t like the sport of soccer...

Regular season doesn’t mean everything. Texas win over OU meant nothing in the long run
It did to Notre Dame, Alabama and Clemson

If it truly meant something, UCF, which had a flawless regular season..would be in.

Outcomes of games in regular season mean nothing. Who and how teams play mean everything...which is nutty.
 

T2Kplus10

Heisman
Feb 24, 2010
28,180
17,566
0
While the best 2 teams are facing off I think the system needs to be expanded to 6 teams as the 3rd and 4th teams are always debated. Would Ohio St have fared better than Oklahoma? Would UCF match up better than Notre Dame did?

Byes (Clemson and Bama)

Then would have done:
- UCF vs Notre Dame at a neutral site (like Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte, Detroit, or Indy) on Dec 15 or 22
- Ohio St vs Oklahoma at a neutral site (like Jerry world, Minnesota, or one of the sites mentioned above) on Dec 15 or 22

- Winners play on Dec 29th against the top 2 teams
- losers to New Years Day 6 bowls
This year, the playoffs needed to be cut. Adding the 3rd and 4th teams was a complete waste of time. Bama and Clemson are so much better than anyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhiteBus

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
If it truly meant something, UCF, which had a flawless regular season..would be in.

Outcomes of games in regular season mean nothing. Who and how teams play mean everything...which is nutty.
Stop crying and tell UCF go play someone like Boise did. Any team, any where, any time. Than you can say they did everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2Kplus10

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
If it truly meant something, UCF, which had a flawless regular season..would be in.

Outcomes of games in regular season mean nothing. Who and how teams play mean everything...which is nutty.
Stop crying and tell UCF go play someone like Boise did. Any team, any where, any time. Than you can say they did everything.

Not crying. Just debating.

Again, i find it crazy that it’s more about who they play than the outcome of who they play.

Sure, you can argue UCF didn’t prove they belong. But by going 13-0, they didn’t prove they don’t belong. Just think it’s unfortunate they didn’t get a shot 2 years in a row. Change is needed.
 

Pils86

All-Conference
Sep 21, 2008
1,783
1,332
113
Definitely need 8 as it gives every conference a chance and interest in the playoff. Would we want to get rid of the BB tournament and just invite Kansas, NC, Kentucky and someone else each year? Maybe UCF beats Ala last year, they were good. Need to have a Cinderella story.
 

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
Not crying. Just debating.

Again, i find it crazy that it’s more about who they play than the outcome of who they play.

Sure, you can argue UCF didn’t prove they belong. But by going 13-0, they didn’t prove they don’t belong. Just think it’s unfortunate they didn’t get a shot 2 years in a row. Change is needed.
Really?? So a team in a crap conference can schedule a bunch of nobodies for the OOC schedule and go 12-0 and the "deserve" to be a top 4 team??? They didnt deserve anything above 8 and that was a stretch. They played FIU, Austin Peay and some school called SC State and they deserve to be in a playoff for the National Championship??
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
Not crying. Just debating.

Again, i find it crazy that it’s more about who they play than the outcome of who they play.

Sure, you can argue UCF didn’t prove they belong. But by going 13-0, they didn’t prove they don’t belong. Just think it’s unfortunate they didn’t get a shot 2 years in a row. Change is needed.
Really?? So a team in a crap conference can schedule a bunch of nobodies for the OOC schedule and go 12-0 and the "deserve" to be a top 4 team??? They didnt deserve anything above 8 and that was a stretch. They played FIU, Austin Peay and some school called SC State and they deserve to be in a playoff for the National Championship??

Correct. In my opinion an undefeated team is deserving..as I’ve said about 30 times already.

But again, ultimately in my ideal 8 team playoff, the top ranked G5 only would make it...so that kind of encourages G5 teams to schedule tougher OOC while winning their conference.
 

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
Correct. In my opinion an undefeated team is deserving..as I’ve said about 30 times already.

But again, ultimately in my ideal 8 team playoff, the top ranked G5 only would make it...so that kind of encourages G5 teams to schedule tougher OOC while winning their conference.
So you want all P5 teams to schedule a bunch of nobodies too?? You must be a big fan of participation trophy. Champions should be the best of the best not some cheap record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SF88 and bac2therac

RUdude

Senior
Sep 2, 2014
1,036
679
113
the 2 best teams are playing...so it doesn't matter 4,6,8...

If you expand to 8 for the TV money.. no first round byes..game is played at the higher seeds home field..

final 4 teams assigned to bowls similar to prior years..
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
Correct. In my opinion an undefeated team is deserving..as I’ve said about 30 times already.

But again, ultimately in my ideal 8 team playoff, the top ranked G5 only would make it...so that kind of encourages G5 teams to schedule tougher OOC while winning their conference.
So you want all P5 teams to schedule a bunch of nobodies too?? You must be a big fan of participation trophy. Champions should be the best of the best not some cheap record.

No. Again, I my scenario, you also have two at large. If P5 teams schedule nobodies and don’t win conference...they’re likely out.

Winning conference encourages tougher OOC schedules. That means better chance at large with wins..while HAVING TO win conference with losses.
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
the 2 best teams are playing...so it doesn't matter 4,6,8...

If you expand to 8 for the TV money.. no first round byes..game is played at the higher seeds home field..

final 4 teams assigned to bowls similar to prior years..

Agree. Hold first 4 games week after Conf Champ week at top 4 conference winner stadiums. Hold bowl season as normal...with losers of those 4 games bowl eligible
 

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,288
176,962
113
Not crying. Just debating.

Again, i find it crazy that it’s more about who they play than the outcome of who they play.

Sure, you can argue UCF didn’t prove they belong. But by going 13-0, they didn’t prove they don’t belong. Just think it’s unfortunate they didn’t get a shot 2 years in a row. Change is needed.


Akron can go 12-0 and play no one..should they go too...what if Akron and Fresno State and Tulsa all go 12-0
 

T2Kplus10

Heisman
Feb 24, 2010
28,180
17,566
0
Not crying. Just debating.

Again, i find it crazy that it’s more about who they play than the outcome of who they play.

Sure, you can argue UCF didn’t prove they belong. But by going 13-0, they didn’t prove they don’t belong. Just think it’s unfortunate they didn’t get a shot 2 years in a row. Change is needed.
They didn't get a shot because they didn't deserve it. They were no where close to being a top 4 team either year.
 

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,288
176,962
113
Because they did everything they needed to do. They were flawless...no reason a team with no losses shouldn't play for the championship. Every single sport they'd be in the playoff with that kind of record.

Sports championships aren't won by teams that are CLEARLY the best. Sports championships are won by teams that WIN. Not in college football, for some odd reason.


no they didnt...they didnt schedule top 15 schools....its up to them to play these programs on the road
 

FastMJ

All-American
Jan 6, 2007
33,929
6,614
68
The current system is a thing of beauty. Keep it exactly as it is. The best part of that it adds only one game and one week to the football season compared to the old system while making sure the best two teams have a chance for the championship 98% of the time.
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
Because they did everything they needed to do. They were flawless...no reason a team with no losses shouldn't play for the championship. Every single sport they'd be in the playoff with that kind of record.

Sports championships aren't won by teams that are CLEARLY the best. Sports championships are won by teams that WIN. Not in college football, for some odd reason.


no they didnt...they didnt schedule top 15 schools....its up to them to play these programs on the road

More evidence to why I think it’s flawed. It’s more about who a team plays than the results of the field. Lunacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScarletNYC

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
Not crying. Just debating.

Again, i find it crazy that it’s more about who they play than the outcome of who they play.

Sure, you can argue UCF didn’t prove they belong. But by going 13-0, they didn’t prove they don’t belong. Just think it’s unfortunate they didn’t get a shot 2 years in a row. Change is needed.


Akron can go 12-0 and play no one..should they go too...what if Akron and Fresno State and Tulsa all go 12-0

In my scenario, if they finish above a P5 champ, they’d be in.
 

LotusAggressor_rivals

All-American
Oct 11, 2003
16,055
7,835
113
So conference championships dont matter at all?
I thought that was why everyone is complaining.
They don't matter if you're a traditional power. Alabama has won National Championships under both the BCS and playoff systems without even playing in the SEC Championship. Nebraska and Oklahoma got into BCS Championship games despite getting their doors blown off in the Big 12 Conference Championship.
 

LotusAggressor_rivals

All-American
Oct 11, 2003
16,055
7,835
113
Stop crying and tell UCF go play someone like Boise did. Any team, any where, any time. Than you can say they did everything.
That didn't do Boise any good. The BCS and the current playoff system were designed to keep teams that aren't traditional major conference powers from winning National Championships. Miami in 1983 was the warning. BYU in 1984 was the tipping point. It's no accident that Miami, Penn State, and Florida State eventually joined conferences.
 

Fzacsattac

Junior
Sep 22, 2013
1,064
254
0
While the best 2 teams are facing off I think the system needs to be expanded to 6 teams as the 3rd and 4th teams are always debated. Would Ohio St have fared better than Oklahoma? Would UCF match up better than Notre Dame did?

Byes (Clemson and Bama)

Then would have done:
- UCF vs Notre Dame at a neutral site (like Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte, Detroit, or Indy) on Dec 15 or 22
- Ohio St vs Oklahoma at a neutral site (like Jerry world, Minnesota, or one of the sites mentioned above) on Dec 15 or 22

- Winners play on Dec 29th against the top 2 teams
- losers to New Years Day 6 bowls

Why we wouldn’t be included.......lol
 

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
That didn't do Boise any good. The BCS and the current playoff system were designed to keep teams that aren't traditional major conference powers from winning National Championships. Miami in 1983 was the warning. BYU in 1984 was the tipping point. It's no accident that Miami, Penn State, and Florida State eventually joined conferences.
Didn't do them any good?? They were basically a community college before 1997. They move up to D1 in 1997 and have been a powerhouse since
 

LotusAggressor_rivals

All-American
Oct 11, 2003
16,055
7,835
113
Didn't do them any good?? They were basically a community college before 1997. They move up to D1 in 1997 and have been a powerhouse since[/QUO close to 90% of their games
They won 88% of their games between 2006 and 2013, with 2 undefeated seasons and high profile wins over programs from major conferences. How many National Championship games were they even close to being invited to play in? This is exactly the kind of program that the current system and the previous one were designed to exclude. It doesn't matter who UCF beats, or how much they win. They will always be on the outside looking in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sherrane

sherrane

All-Conference
Aug 17, 2003
10,560
1,309
0
Yes you missed the sarcasm. G5 teams without big P5 wins don't deserve a spot in the top 4. They aren't a National Championship caliber team.

Then you need to define "big". Pitt won their division and played in the ACC Championship Game, which would qualify as a big win unless you insist on using the beauty contest rules that a playoff system generally strives to eliminate. The problem with the beauty contest criteria is there is not a legitimate path for a G5 team to make the playoffs because program quality tends to change over time. For example, UCF had a game against North Carolina cancelled this year due to a hurricane. 2-9 North Carolina would not likely qualify as a "big win" using your criteria and there were several stories written where not playing this game would strengthen UCF's schedule. The game was scheduled in 2016 when UNC was ranked #22. (BTW: if nobody other than Clemson is a "big game" in the ACC, then Clemson also failed to play a "big game" this season prior to the post season. Their biggest win was by 2 points at Texas A&M who lost 4 of their first 7 P5 games while being outscored 183-156. Texas A&M would be unlikely to qualify as a big game for UCF).

UCF plays Stanford next year and the game was scheduled in week 2 of 2014 when Stanford was ranked #11, but Stanford finished this past season ranked #32 in the Coaches Poll. Is Stanford a big game next year or is it too early to tell?

Last year UCF had a game canceled against Georgia Tech due to a hurricane and the game is rescheduled for 2020. The game was scheduled before the 2015 season when Georgia Tech was ranked #16 and later climbed to #14 that season after defeating Alcorn State and Tulane. Is Georgia Tech a big game or is it too early to tell?

If Stanford, Georgia Tech, UNC, and / or Pitt are not "big P5 games", you've reduced the "big game" field to about 10 teams or less (Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Georgia, and perhaps Michigan, Texas, Penn State, LSU, Stanford, USC, Florida, and Florida State). Florida refuses to play UCF in a home and home because they insist the distance between the two programs exceed the 125 miles that separate the two schools and Florida may not even qualify as a "big game" based on your criteria (ranked in the top 10 for two weeks in the past three seasons). They wouldn't have last year after finishing 4-7, correct? You're essentially advocating the creation a system where a G5 team needs to take a paycheck game where they might get paid more like an FCS opponent than a potential contender in hopes the team doesn't tank between the time the game is scheduled and played in order to have a chance at the playoffs. Once you appreciate the fact that you've eliminated all chances that a G5 team can make a four team playoff, the only reasonable option is to expand to eight. Unlike your Princeton reference, UCF is in the same football division as Alabama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satnom

sherrane

All-Conference
Aug 17, 2003
10,560
1,309
0
First they aren't a P5 team. Second they don't have signature win. If a Triple A team has an outstanding season should they play in the MLB playoffs??

This is the source of your confusion. Triple A vs MLB and FCS vs FBS are different leagues. P5 vs G5 are unofficial designations within the SAME league.
 

sherrane

All-Conference
Aug 17, 2003
10,560
1,309
0
Didn't do them any good?? They were basically a community college before 1997. They move up to D1 in 1997 and have been a powerhouse since

Boise State was approved as a 4-year university in 1965 and officially entered the state system of higher education in 1969.
 

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
Then you need to define "big". Pitt won their division and played in the ACC Championship Game, which would qualify as a big win unless you insist on using the beauty contest rules that a playoff system generally strives to eliminate. The problem with the beauty contest criteria is there is not a legitimate path for a G5 team to make the playoffs because program quality tends to change over time. For example, UCF had a game against North Carolina cancelled this year due to a hurricane. 2-9 North Carolina would not likely qualify as a "big win" using your criteria and there were several stories written where not playing this game would strengthen UCF's schedule. The game was scheduled in 2016 when UNC was ranked #22. (BTW: if nobody other than Clemson is a "big game" in the ACC, then Clemson also failed to play a "big game" this season prior to the post season. Their biggest win was by 2 points at Texas A&M who lost 4 of their first 7 P5 games while being outscored 183-156. Texas A&M would be unlikely to qualify as a big game for UCF).

UCF plays Stanford next year and the game was scheduled in week 2 of 2014 when Stanford was ranked #11, but Stanford finished this past season ranked #32 in the Coaches Poll. Is Stanford a big game next year or is it too early to tell?

Last year UCF had a game canceled against Georgia Tech due to a hurricane and the game is rescheduled for 2020. The game was scheduled before the 2015 season when Georgia Tech was ranked #16 and later climbed to #14 that season after defeating Alcorn State and Tulane. Is Georgia Tech a big game or is it too early to tell?

If Stanford, Georgia Tech, UNC, and / or Pitt are not "big P5 games", you've reduced the "big game" field to about 10 teams or less (Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Georgia, and perhaps Michigan, Texas, Penn State, LSU, Stanford, USC, Florida, and Florida State). Florida refuses to play UCF in a home and home because they insist the distance between the two programs exceed the 125 miles that separate the two schools and Florida may not even qualify as a "big game" based on your criteria (ranked in the top 10 for two weeks in the past three seasons). They wouldn't have last year after finishing 4-7, correct? You're essentially advocating the creation a system where a G5 team needs to take a paycheck game where they might get paid more like an FCS opponent than a potential contender in hopes the team doesn't tank between the time the game is scheduled and played in order to have a chance at the playoffs. Once you appreciate the fact that you've eliminated all chances that a G5 team can make a four team playoff, the only reasonable option is to expand to eight. Unlike your Princeton reference, UCF is in the same football division as Alabama.
If you think beating Pitt is a big win than it isn't worth reading the rest of your post. Was it a big win for UCF, yes. On a national level was it a big win, not even close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
This is the source of your confusion. Triple A vs MLB and FCS vs FBS are different leagues. P5 vs G5 are unofficial designations within the SAME league.
No it's not the "same" league they are differentiated on purpose and for a reason
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
This is the source of your confusion. Triple A vs MLB and FCS vs FBS are different leagues. P5 vs G5 are unofficial designations within the SAME league.
No it's not the "same" league they are differentiated on purpose and for a reason

There is no G5 champion. There is no P5 champion. There’s just an FBS champ. Both are in the same league, the FBS.
 

NickRU714

Heisman
Aug 18, 2009
14,026
12,829
113
If you think beating Pitt is a big win than it isn't worth reading the rest of your post. Was it a big win for UCF, yes. On a national level was it a big win, not even close.

The ultimate problem in CFB - nobody has big wins or impressive seasons.
Makes it impossible to decide who "deserves to compete for a national championship."

Everyone here says ND was overrated and shouldn't have been in the playoff - their big wins were #7 Michigan, #22 Northwestern and #20 Syracuse
Everyone here says Ohio State should have been in - their big wins were #7 Michigan, #22 Northwestern and #12 Penn State
More or less the same (despite what many say, #20 is still #20 so Syracuse counts as a big win).

Plus throw in OSU got blown out by Purdue and ND had no losses.
 

WhiteBus

Heisman
Oct 4, 2011
39,515
21,916
113
There is no G5 champion. There is no P5 champion. There’s just an FBS champ. Both are in the same league, the FBS.
No they aren't. And it isn't called the FBS Champion is it? It's not even an NCAA sanctioned title.
If they are in the same league what is the P5 vs G5?? Why even create the two? It's closer to the EPL where their is a second division that can not play for the title.
Your lack of comprehension of how the college football playoffs was created and the specific separation of the P5 and G5 is amazing.
 

mdh2003

All-Conference
Feb 4, 2003
4,866
3,795
78
How do you think a CFP will go with the following:
Akron
Fresno
Tulsa
Alabama
:)
Honestly, probably about the same as any other playoff right now.

Not weighing in on more/less CFP games. But, some have mentioned that more teams in would make the regular season have less meaning. True, but not for the reasons you think. Parity is so off in CFB at the moment, it's de facto meaningless (with respect to the championship) right NOW for 95% of the teams.

Here is the correct current playoff format (until Saban/Sweeney leave):
1 - Alabama
2 - Clemson
3 - 2nd best SEC team
4 - Literally anyone else
 

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,220
17,902
97
There is no G5 champion. There is no P5 champion. There’s just an FBS champ. Both are in the same league, the FBS.
No they aren't. And it isn't called the FBS Champion is it? It's not even an NCAA sanctioned title.
If they are in the same league what is the P5 vs G5?? Why even create the two? It's closer to the EPL where their is a second division that can not play for the title.
Your lack of comprehension of how the college football playoffs was created and the specific separation of the P5 and G5 is amazing.

I comprehend how it was created. I just don’t agree.

That EPL 2nd division has a champ, right? I feel anything that crowns a champion is it’s own league.
 

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
247,288
176,962
113
Then you need to define "big". Pitt won their division and played in the ACC Championship Game, which would qualify as a big win unless you insist on using the beauty contest rules that a playoff system generally strives to eliminate. The problem with the beauty contest criteria is there is not a legitimate path for a G5 team to make the playoffs because program quality tends to change over time. For example, UCF had a game against North Carolina cancelled this year due to a hurricane. 2-9 North Carolina would not likely qualify as a "big win" using your criteria and there were several stories written where not playing this game would strengthen UCF's schedule. The game was scheduled in 2016 when UNC was ranked #22. (BTW: if nobody other than Clemson is a "big game" in the ACC, then Clemson also failed to play a "big game" this season prior to the post season. Their biggest win was by 2 points at Texas A&M who lost 4 of their first 7 P5 games while being outscored 183-156. Texas A&M would be unlikely to qualify as a big game for UCF).

UCF plays Stanford next year and the game was scheduled in week 2 of 2014 when Stanford was ranked #11, but Stanford finished this past season ranked #32 in the Coaches Poll. Is Stanford a big game next year or is it too early to tell?

Last year UCF had a game canceled against Georgia Tech due to a hurricane and the game is rescheduled for 2020. The game was scheduled before the 2015 season when Georgia Tech was ranked #16 and later climbed to #14 that season after defeating Alcorn State and Tulane. Is Georgia Tech a big game or is it too early to tell?

If Stanford, Georgia Tech, UNC, and / or Pitt are not "big P5 games", you've reduced the "big game" field to about 10 teams or less (Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Georgia, and perhaps Michigan, Texas, Penn State, LSU, Stanford, USC, Florida, and Florida State). Florida refuses to play UCF in a home and home because they insist the distance between the two programs exceed the 125 miles that separate the two schools and Florida may not even qualify as a "big game" based on your criteria (ranked in the top 10 for two weeks in the past three seasons). They wouldn't have last year after finishing 4-7, correct? You're essentially advocating the creation a system where a G5 team needs to take a paycheck game where they might get paid more like an FCS opponent than a potential contender in hopes the team doesn't tank between the time the game is scheduled and played in order to have a chance at the playoffs. Once you appreciate the fact that you've eliminated all chances that a G5 team can make a four team playoff, the only reasonable option is to expand to eight. Unlike your Princeton reference, UCF is in the same football division as Alabama.


wow they beat 8-5 Pitt...lets cry because they arent in the playoff