Playoffs need to e expanded

[RUfinal4]

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

 

[superfan01]

Ohh stop. It wouldn’t have made a difference.

 

[ScarletDave]

The 2 best teams are playing for the championship this year, let’s make that clear. BUT, I agree that any system that doesn’t have every conference champion of the power 5 represented is a flawed system. Everyone screams for 8, but 6 is plenty. 5 champions, plus highest ranked of the group of 5. Fair for everyone, all parties will have a dog in the fight, and the teams who get picked will have EARNED it ON THE FIELD, not the “4 best teams according to some people’s opinion who were hand selected by ESPN”

 

[Mr_Twister]

Let’s reward season ticket buyers (the real fans) in some fashion and at the same time let geography and weather have a role in the outcome. All playoff games to be played at on-campus home stadium of higher-seeded team, but for the championship game at a neutral site.

 

[cicero grimes]

Most of the semi final games have stunk over the life of the playoff. I would be against expansion for that reason. However; the post by Scarlet Dave makes the most sense if you are going to expand go to 6 not 8.

 

[Upstream]

The only purpose of having the semifinal games is to help ensure that the two best teams play in the Championship game. The semifinal games help eliminate the controversy of selecting the 2 teams for the Championship game when there is not clear delineation between the teams ranked 1, 2 and 3, 4.

This year, if everyone agrees that the two best teams are in the Championship game, there is no reason to have expanded the playoff. Unless you think that there is another team out there who is better than Alabama or Clemson, nothing would have been gained by expanding the playoff this year.

The College Football championship process is designed to select the two best teams and pit them against each other in the Championship game. If the system did that this year, then it succeeded this year.

The system is not designed to give a wide berth of "deserving" teams an opportunity to pull off upsets and advance. That kind of tournament serves a different purpose. And that's not the type of championship system that is in place for college football. That's not to say that one system for picking a champion is better or worse than the other; but they are different.

 

[RUfinal4]

The 2 best teams are playing for the championship this year, let’s make that clear. BUT, I agree that any system that doesn’t have every conference champion of the power 5 represented is a flawed system. Everyone screams for 8, but 6 is plenty. 5 champions, plus highest ranked of the group of 5. Fair for everyone, all parties will have a dog in the fight, and the teams who get picked will have EARNED it ON THE FIELD, not the “4 best teams according to some people’s opinion who were hand selected by ESPN”

one edit
- 5 conference champions if in top 12 and 1 wild card team
- if Group of 5 best team has 2 losses or less and is in the top 15 then that team gets the spot
- if a there is an upset in the conf championship game where a team like Pitt upsets Clemson then they may not get into the playoffs but instead a NY Day bowl. This would make that slot a wild card slot that potentially could be filled by a 1 loss Clemson (if Pit had beaten them)
- this year Washington was the P12 best ranked team at 9 so they would qualify but if they had 1 more loss and were just say 16 then there spot becomes a wildcard spot.

 

[WhiteBus]

The 2 best teams are playing for the championship this year, let’s make that clear. BUT, I agree that any system that doesn’t have every conference champion of the power 5 represented is a flawed system. Everyone screams for 8, but 6 is plenty. 5 champions, plus highest ranked of the group of 5. Fair for everyone, all parties will have a dog in the fight, and the teams who get picked will have EARNED it ON THE FIELD, not the “4 best teams according to some people’s opinion who were hand selected by ESPN”

Both the Big Ten and certainly the PAC12 didn't deserve it this year. And the outcry for Georgia now looks stupid. 4 is fine. Nobody got screwed. In fact the arguement this year could be revert back to the BCS.

 

[DJ Spanky]

No. They don't.

Next!

 

[RU from Jersey_rivals]

I don't understand why anyone would not want an expanded playoff field. I'd much rather see more games that mean something, at the end of the year, versus a bowl game that the outcome just doesn't matter. Frankly there is no reason not to expand to 8 teams. I personally would love to see first round playoff games as the home of the higher seed.

 

[NickRU714]

one edit
- 5 conference champions if in top 12 and 1 wild card team
- if Group of 5 best team has 2 losses or less and is in the top 15 then that team gets the spot
- if a there is an upset in the conf championship game where a team like Pitt upsets Clemson then they may not get into the playoffs but instead a NY Day bowl. This would make that slot a wild card slot that potentially could be filled by a 1 loss Clemson (if Pit had beaten them)
- this year Washington was the P12 best ranked team at 9 so they would qualify but if they had 1 more loss and were just say 16 then there spot becomes a wildcard spot.

So conference championships dont matter at all?
I thought that was why everyone is complaining.

 

[NickRU714]

I don't understand why anyone would not want an expanded playoff field. I'd much rather see more games that mean something, at the end of the year, versus a bowl game that the outcome just doesn't matter. Frankly there is no reason not to expand to 8 teams. I personally would love to see first round playoff games as the home of the higher seed.

As someone who doesn't take CFB nearly as serious as many here and dont really care who wins the championship or makes the playoffs:

Give me more playoff games!
Dont care about 2 loss team not "deserving".
Everyone loves the basketball tournament and nobody ever debates if teams "deserve" to make it.

 

[sherrane]

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

Georgia would have been the #5 team, which would have resulted in a Rose Bowl rematch from the previous season. A G5 team will not make the playoffs unless the playoff field is expanded to 8 teams or more. The games would have been Ohio State vs Notre Dame and Georgia vs Oklahoma.

I don't believe your proposal would have changed the championship game. Ohio State and Oklahoma would be the likely victors, but Ohio State loses to Alabama while Oklahoma loses to Clemson.

 

[WhiteBus]

I don't understand why anyone would not want an expanded playoff field. I'd much rather see more games that mean something, at the end of the year, versus a bowl game that the outcome just doesn't matter. Frankly there is no reason not to expand to 8 teams. I personally would love to see first round playoff games as the home of the higher seed.

So not only do you want a 1 versus 8, you want the #1 to have a huge advantage by playing on campus. Yeah, that makes sense. Like we didn't already see two playoff blowouts, let's add 4 more.
You answered your own question why people don't want to expand.

 

[WhiteBus]

As someone who doesn't take CFB nearly as serious as many here and dont really care who wins the championship or makes the playoffs:

Give me more playoff games!
Dont care about 2 loss team not "deserving".
Everyone loves the basketball tournament and nobody ever debates if teams "deserve" to make it.

And nobody cares about the regular season. Keep college football regular season meaningful. I'd rather have 12 meaningful weeks than just 2

 

[RU-ROCS]

The only purpose of having the semifinal games is to help ensure that the two best teams play in the Championship game. The semifinal games help eliminate the controversy of selecting the 2 teams for the Championship game when there is not clear delineation between the teams ranked 1, 2 and 3, 4.

This year, if everyone agrees that the two best teams are in the Championship game, there is no reason to have expanded the playoff. Unless you think that there is another team out there who is better than Alabama or Clemson, nothing would have been gained by expanding the playoff this year.

The College Football championship process is designed to select the two best teams and pit them against each other in the Championship game. If the system did that this year, then it succeeded this year.

The system is not designed to give a wide berth of "deserving" teams an opportunity to pull off upsets and advance. That kind of tournament serves a different purpose. And that's not the type of championship system that is in place for college football. That's not to say that one system for picking a champion is better or worse than the other; but they are different.

We can debate whether Clemson is better than OSU or OK. But, you are also ignoring the significant revenue factor here. I believe a conference gets $6M for each of its teams that makes the playoffs. When a team like OSU gets left out, that is big money lost for the conference. The 6-team format noted above would address that problem too.

 

[ClassOf02v.2]

If this system is what the powers that be want, then yes it worked. I just hate the system, for a few reasons.

1. Winning your conference should give you a shot at a national championship, and I'll never be convinced otherwise. Is there any other team sport where this isn't the case?

2. Notre Dame maintaining its independence really messes things up in a four team playoff format. It creates an uneven playing field where they can sit back and watch while everyone else has to go play an extra game (conference championship game, likely against a very strong opponent).

3. Why should the Group of 5 even bother? Take Dana Holgorsen for example. He just took a job at Houston. Based on recent G5 playoff history, he's basically being told you'll never have a legit shot of getting into the playoff. Maybe he doesn't care, but G5 teams start every season knowing there is no path for them to a national championship. It's just silly.

I'll always be in favor of a system that removes as much subjectivity as possible from the equation.

 

[G- RUnit]

Any system where conference champion does not get in is silly. OSU deserves a shot

8 teams. Five Power Five winners.
One Non Power 5 for best of remaining conferences.
Two wild cards.
Simple.

 

[superfan01]

If this system is what the powers that be want, then yes it worked. I just hate the system, for a few reasons.

1. Winning your conference should give you a shot at a national championship, and I'll never be convinced otherwise. Is there any other team sport where this isn't the case?

2. Notre Dame maintaining its independence really messes things up in a four team playoff format. It creates an uneven playing field where they can sit back and watch while everyone else has to go play an extra game (conference championship game, likely against a very strong opponent).

3. Why should the Group of 5 even bother? Take Dana Holgorsen for example. He just took a job at Houston. Based on recent G5 playoff history, he's basically being told you'll never have a legit shot of getting into the playoff. Maybe he doesn't care, but G5 teams start every season knowing there is no path for them to a national championship. It's just silly.

I'll always be in favor of a system that removes as much subjectivity as possible from the equation.

Your wrong.
1). Every pro sport allows teams who don’t win their division into the playoffs. So your wrong. In college football not all conferences all equal. What if the best 2 teams are in the same conference like last year. Should one team not be included because a much worse conference champ can get in.

 

[Foads]

If you switched this years match-ups and had ND vs. Alabama and Clemson vs. Oklahoma, I am not so sure it would be Bama vs Clemson in championship. I believe Oklahoma beats Clemson.

 

[ClassOf02v.2]

Your wrong.
1). Every pro sport allows teams who don’t win their division into the playoffs. So your wrong. In college football not all conferences all equal. What if the best 2 teams are in the same conference like last year. Should one team not be included because a much worse conference champ can get in.

You're, not your.

And yes, if the second best team (a subjective measurement) is left out because they didn't win their conference, I'm fine with that.

Now, if we want to talk about adding games so more wild cards can get a shot, I'm all ears (good luck with the NCAA on that, though). But make getting into the tourney a black and white measurable where every team knows what they need to do to get in. Not a committe behind closed doors picking the "best teams."

 

[Upstream]

Everyone loves the basketball tournament and nobody ever debates if teams "deserve" to make it.

What planet are you living on? Every year, following Selection Sunday, half the NCAA Basketball talk is about which teams were the last four in and last four out, and who got robbed, and who shouldn't be dancing. It is non-stop debate about whether the #42 team is really better than the #44 team.

No matter how big or small the Basketball tournament or Football playoff is, people will debate who deserves to make it.

 

[ScarletNYC]

The NYD Bowls outside of the semi-finals have really lost their luster. Replace them with playoff games please.

 

[ScarletNYC]

What planet are you living on? Every year, following Selection Sunday, half the NCAA Basketball talk is about which teams were the last four in and last four out, and who got robbed, and who shouldn't be dancing. It is non-stop debate about whether the #42 team is really better than the #44 team.

No matter how big or small the Basketball tournament or Football playoff is, people will debate who deserves to make it.

Non-stop??? Those debates only last a day.

 

[bac2therac]

The only purpose of having the semifinal games is to help ensure that the two best teams play in the Championship game. The semifinal games help eliminate the controversy of selecting the 2 teams for the Championship game when there is not clear delineation between the teams ranked 1, 2 and 3, 4.

This year, if everyone agrees that the two best teams are in the Championship game, there is no reason to have expanded the playoff. Unless you think that there is another team out there who is better than Alabama or Clemson, nothing would have been gained by expanding the playoff this year.

The College Football championship process is designed to select the two best teams and pit them against each other in the Championship game. If the system did that this year, then it succeeded this year.

The system is not designed to give a wide berth of "deserving" teams an opportunity to pull off upsets and advance. That kind of tournament serves a different purpose. And that's not the type of championship system that is in place for college football. That's not to say that one system for picking a champion is better or worse than the other; but they are different.

this

its not a tournament like in basketball. It is to pit the two best teams to play for the national championship. It is doing exactly that. Expanding to 8 teams...well that increases the liklihood of blowouts not to mention injuries.

There is no purpose in seeing Michigan getting an opportunity and getting pummelled by Alabama in the quarterfinals

 

[sherrane]

Both the Big Ten and certainly the PAC12 didn't deserve it this year. And the outcry for Georgia now looks stupid. 4 is fine. Nobody got screwed. In fact the arguement this year could be revert back to the BCS.

Not this year because there were three undefeated teams. Regardless what you thought about Notre Dame, there would have been a legitimate outcry when an undefeated P5 team is excluded. That is why I believe that Clemson would have been #2 rather than #3 behind Oregon in 2014 had we still had the BCS.

 

[RUfinal4]

And nobody cares about the regular season. Keep college football regular season meaningful. I'd rather have 12 meaningful weeks than just 2

Well the Regular season becomes meaningless for many teams after 7-8 games anyway.
- once a team has the 3rd less they are out of the playoff picture
- once a team has a 7th loss they are out of bowl consideration
- for powerhouse teams like Florida and Texas once they have a 4th loss the fans lose some interest
- Group of 5 teams are out of the playoff with 1 or maybe 2 losses. For 3 to 4 losses they are relegated to minor bowls

With an expanded playoff and bowls interest will go further for the teams not undefeated or with 1 loss.

Basketball has a tournament where teams wining 66% of their games can make the tourney. Others can make the NIT.

Soccer, Baseball, and other sports have tournaments that teams can make.

When it is at a point where you lose 2 games and you are out leads to fans losing interest and schools trying to find ways to avoid tougher ooc games.

In the 7 conference games big east teams would load up on 5 easy OOC games so you just needed a couple of conference wins for a bowl. Go 6-1 in conference and you are 11-1 headed to the post season.

 

[bac2therac]

If this system is what the powers that be want, then yes it worked. I just hate the system, for a few reasons.

1. Winning your conference should give you a shot at a national championship, and I'll never be convinced otherwise. Is there any other team sport where this isn't the case?

2. Notre Dame maintaining its independence really messes things up in a four team playoff format. It creates an uneven playing field where they can sit back and watch while everyone else has to go play an extra game (conference championship game, likely against a very strong opponent).

3. Why should the Group of 5 even bother? Take Dana Holgorsen for example. He just took a job at Houston. Based on recent G5 playoff history, he's basically being told you'll never have a legit shot of getting into the playoff. Maybe he doesn't care, but G5 teams start every season knowing there is no path for them to a national championship. It's just silly.

I'll always be in favor of a system that removes as much subjectivity as possible from the equation.

non power 5 schools play weak schedules..if they want a shot, then go out and schedule 3 top 25 schools non conference, thats just how it is, no one is losing sleep over Northern Illinois or Central Florida or Temple not getting a shot to play for the national championship.

Notre Dame will only be in the hunt when they are undefeated which isnt going to happen all that often..relax. Their schedule is usually tough enough, this year it happened many of the teams they played who are top 25 schools had down years.

 

[NickRU714]

What planet are you living on? Every year, following Selection Sunday, half the NCAA Basketball talk is about which teams were the last four in and last four out, and who got robbed, and who shouldn't be dancing. It is non-stop debate about whether the #42 team is really better than the #44 team.

No matter how big or small the Basketball tournament or Football playoff is, people will debate who deserves to make it.

Difference in debate - "deserve".

Basketball debate is who "deserves to make the 66 team tournament".

Football debate is who "deserves to play for a championship". (i.e. no 2 loss teams, have to play in P5, have to win P5 conference)

I've never heard "Team X lost 5 games out of 30 (equivalent to 2 out of 12) - they dont deserve to play for a basketball national championship. Team X finished 5th in their conference, they don't deserve to play for a national championship."

For some reason the football championship is held on some supreme pedestal whereas basketball isnt.

Make it like the NCAA bball tournament - who cares about "deserves to win the championship".

 

[bac2therac]

Well the Regular season becomes meaningless for many teams after 7-8 games anyway.
- once a team has the 3rd less they are out of the playoff picture
- once a team has a 7th loss they are out of bowl consideration
- for powerhouse teams like Florida and Texas once they have a 4th loss the fans lose some interest
- Group of 5 teams are out of the playoff with 1 or maybe 2 losses. For 3 to 4 losses they are relegated to minor bowls

With an expanded playoff and bowls interest will go further for the teams not undefeated or with 1 loss.

Basketball has a tournament where teams wining 66% of their games can make the tourney. Others can make the NIT.

Soccer, Baseball, and other sports have tournaments that teams can make.

When it is at a point where you lose 2 games and you are out leads to fans losing interest and schools trying to find ways to avoid tougher ooc games.

In the 7 conference games big east teams would load up on 5 easy OOC games so you just needed a couple of conference wins for a bowl. Go 6-1 in conference and you are 11-1 headed to the post season.

bowl interest isnt getting further..how do you figure that it would. Viewers watch the bowls around New Years....whether its Bama playing Michigan in the quarters or you call it the Peach Bowl, they are going to watch in similar numbers.

the reality is its not a tournament. Bowls had meaning back in the day..to increase interest in the season, you have to eliminate the number of bowls. When you had 20 bowls, schools fought tooth and nail because of the limited positions, when you have 40 bowls and dole out 7 bids for a mediocre league like the AAC then yes bowls are meaningless

 

[bac2therac]

Difference in debate. "deserve".

Basketball debate is who "deserves to make the 66 team tournament".

Football debate is who "deserves to play for a championship". (i.e. no 2 loss teams, have to play in P5, have to win P5 conference)

I've never heard "Team X lost 5 games out of 30 (equivalent to 2 out of 12) - they dont deserve to play for a basketball national championship. Team X finished 5th in their conference, they don't deserve to play for a national championship."

For some reason the football championship is held on some supreme pedestal whereas basketball isnt.

Make it like the NCAA bball tournament - who cares about "deserves to win the championship".

because as you saw, the more teams you add the more blowouts you get. who wants to see that.....basketball is a game where upsets are much much much more likely to happen. its apples and oranges

by your argument lets put 32 schools in

 

[Mikemarc]

Any system where an undefeated team has ZERO shot at a championship is more than flawed.

I think it’s starting to be seen, and a change to 8 is upcoming! Finally.

 

[RUich]

Everyone loves the basketball tournament and nobody ever debates if teams "deserve" to make it.

Uh, not much of a BB fan, but it seems to me that there is always an argument as to who got in and who didn't.

 

[NickRU714]

this

its not a tournament like in basketball. It is to pit the two best teams to play for the national championship. It is doing exactly that. Expanding to 8 teams...well that increases the liklihood of blowouts not to mention injuries.

There is no purpose in seeing Michigan getting an opportunity and getting pummelled by Alabama in the quarterfinals

Philosophical question since you are big into basketball too:

Why the difference in mindset (fans, media) for the two tournaments/championships?
Is it a historical thing?
Schedule? Basketball can be played more often so more teams?

Everyone loves an upset and roots for the underdogs - except for college football championships.

 

[bac2therac]

huh? what are you talking about....its 5 power conferences and the others generally do not matter. Central Florida didnt win last night against the fourth best team in the SEC...why should they have a case

 

[RUich]

I like the idea of using the top real bowl games that have the teams from the top deciding on who should make the finals. This way, those bowl games become even more important and you actually see if some of these teams should be rewarded with making the final four.

 

[Mikemarc]

huh? what are you talking about....its 5 power conferences and the others generally do not matter. Central Florida didnt win last night against the fourth best team in the SEC...why should they have a case

Because they were 13-0.

 

[bac2therac]

Philosophical question since you are big into basketball too:

Why the difference in mindset (fans, media) for the two tournaments/championships?
Is it a historical thing?
Schedule? Basketball can be played more often so more teams?

Everyone loves an upset and roots for the underdogs - except for college football championships.

because upsets happen alot more in hoops, not in football...way more games in hoops and its all over quite quickly..they go from 68 schools to 4 in just 11 days

spreading out a football tournament over 4 weeks makes the early rounds irrelvant, how are they any different than current bowl games

 

[bac2therac]

Because they were 13-0.

when? last year, not this year


so what...look at the schedule strength, as I just said if they want a chance then go out and schedule 2 top 15 programs and beat them in their non conference schedule

 

[WhiteBus]

Any system where an undefeated team has ZERO shot at a championship is more than flawed.

I think it’s starting to be seen, and a change to 8 is upcoming! Finally.

Princeton went undefeated, should they be allowed in??? Last I looked UCF isn't a P5 team.