The College Football Playoff

[gurufrisbee]

I think we all agree that an 8 team playoff would be best. I like Oly's idea of having a Group of 5 team involved too as it recognizes the accomplishment of those "smaller" programs plus it likely gives the #1 seeded team a bit of an advantage with a slightly easier first round game in the playoff. We should reward the team that "won" the regular season.

As for the notion that the playoffs should only involve teams that win their conference, I'm not a fan of that. There can be crazy tie-breakers and even coin flips that determine who gets to play in a conference title game. It sometimes has little to do with on field results. To me, it is important that the "eye test" not be completely eliminated from consideration.

-Jason "how can college football not look at the NCAA basketball tourney and not realize there is a LOT more money to be made in an 8-team playoff?" Evans

I disagree. A 16 team playoff would be the best. But an 8 team would be much better. The whole issue with a playoff is that you have to include every team that legitimately can be argued that they have done enough to be considered that they could have won however many games it takes to win the title. 4 will NEVER work, because teams at 5 and 6 will always have a good argument they could have won two games against top competition. 8 will almost always work. But not always. If you have five conference winner and one guaranteed spot for a group of 5 team that only leaves two other spots. This year you already saw what could happen with Ohio St, Michigan, and Penn St all being in one half of a conference. For a while it looked like Clemson and Louisville were headed for the same kind of thing. And you also have teams like USC that stumble out of the gate and then get big changes at QB and turn it all around. 2 wild cards is just not going to be enough to ensure that you won't have teams left out with a good argument they could have won 3 in a row against top teams.

16 absolutely includes teams that have no business making it. But that's good, because it also means that you guarantee that you have all the teams that do deserve it. It's the same thought process with March Madness. Are there 68 teams who could win the title? Not even close. But do the teams that miss on the bubble ever have legitimate arguments that they could have won the whole thing if they had been it? Never.

Additionally, I agree the "eye test" should not be taken out of it. But right now it's WAY too big.

[elvis14]

I'd like to see an 8 team playoff. The 5 winners of the power 5 conferences and 3 at large bids. I'd much rather have to try to figure out if we got the #9 team wrong instead of the the #5 team. Plus this puts the proper emphasis on conference championships.

[rasputin]

I think the system is fine the way it is. Once you go to 8 teams, there's no turning back from it. And in football it isn't feasible to do an NCAA tournament-type approach where virtually everybody has a chance to win the conference tournament. Any team that isn't CLEARLY in the discussion as one of the top 2 teams should not be considered.

[JasonEvans]

A 16 team playoff would be the best.

16 team playoff means 4 additional games. Most of these teams play 12 games, so the playoffs extend the season by 33%. Compare that to college hoops where they play about 32-34 regular season games and then have (at most) a 6 game playoff. That is a 17% increase in the length of the season. Football is a violent sport and it takes time for kids to recover. Unless you plan to eliminate Christmas and New Year's for these kids (and coaching staffs), 16 is too big of a playoff.

8, which conference championships taking up 5 bids, also preserves some mystery of who will make it. It makes those final regular season games and conference championship games matter. If it was 16, the Michigan-Ohio St game would have been for seeding, not for a spot in the playoff. Same with Wasshington-Colorado. If it was 8 (with only 2 or 3 wild cards for non-conference champions) then everyone other than Alabama would have been sweating the results of last week's games.

-Jason "I bet we get to 8 in the next 3 years or so... and that is where it will stay for a while" Evans

[elvis14]

I think the system is fine the way it is. Once you go to 8 teams, there's no turning back from it. And in football it isn't feasible to do an NCAA tournament-type approach where virtually everybody has a chance to win the conference tournament. Any team that isn't CLEARLY in the discussion as one of the top 2 teams should not be considered.

This year it would be great to have Michigan, PSU and Oklahoma in the playoffs (or that undefeated directional school). A couple of years ago when TCU or Baylor were left out...

One thing that basketball can get right that football can't is accounting for teams that get better as the season progresses. So a team (like Penn State) that loses 2 early games while it's younger players figure out which end is up might end up being the best team in the country but they get excluded. What if Duke hoops didn't get to play in the NCAA tournament because of that loss to Kansas with most of our recruiting class on IR?

[crf30]

I think the system is fine the way it is. Once you go to 8 teams, there's no turning back from it. And in football it isn't feasible to do an NCAA tournament-type approach where virtually everybody has a chance to win the conference tournament. Any team that isn't CLEARLY in the discussion as one of the top 2 teams should not be considered.

I don't think anyone is pushing for conference tournaments in football. The regular season's results determine who plays for the conference championship. So one of the top two teams (debatable in cases such as the big ten this year where 3 or the 4 top teams are from the same half of the conference) from each conference would get in. I think those who want 8 teams want to see those teams that win their conference (the same way they currently win their conference) awarded a playoff spot and then the Ohio States of the world would get at large bids.

[sagegrouse]

Four works. Two games on New Year's Day or Eve and the CFP.one of those sites a week later. The existing bowls - a long-term cash cow for the colleges - are happy.

Eight means four games on or about Christmas, hosted by some of the lesser bowls (I don't see Rose, Sugar or Orange changing to Christmas). These dates are inconvenient to the fans and the players. Then the semis are at New Year's. But what happens to the major bowls left out. The Rose won't change from New Year's, but in off-years would have pretty slim pickings if the best eight are already gone.

[94duke]

I really don't think that the extra games should be an issue.
The FCS has had a 16 team tournament since 1986 as the 1-AA playoffs.
They expanded to 20 teams in 2010 and 24 teams in 2013.
*source is wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_D...l_Championship

The issue isn't the extra games. It's the bowls (and all of their money).

[Wander]

I'd like to see an 8 team playoff. The 5 winners of the power 5 conferences and 3 at large bids. I'd much rather have to try to figure out if we got the #9 team wrong instead of the the #5 team. Plus this puts the proper emphasis on conference championships.

I think you need to reserve a spot for a conference champion of the non-power conferences. It helps with the integrity of a sport that frankly doesn't have much (although it is getting better). That Boise State team that beat Oklahoma clearly deserves to be in an 8 team playoff, but they didn't even finish in the top 8 of the regular season polls.

Anyway, to go completely go off the deep end into fantasy land, my dream scenario would be 16 teams: the 10 conference champions and 6 at-large bids. Every game except the championship game would be held on the home field of the higher seeded teams. The games also start a week after the conference championship games, not a month later. Bowls would not exist - any team that doesn't make the 16 team playoff has their season ended. This year, that would yield:

(16) San Diego State at (1) Alabama
(15) Appalachain State at (2) Clemson
(14) Western Kentucky at (3) Ohio State
(13) Temple at (4) Washington
(12) Western Michigan at (5) Penn State
(11) Florida State at (6) Michigan
(10) Colorado at (7) Oklahoma
(9) USC at (8) Wisconsin

No one will ever be able to convince me that this wouldn't be the most fun postseason possible. "But Wander, you don't seriously think San Diego State could be the best team in the country, do you?" No, of course not. But you're either part of Division 1A or you're not, and if you are, your conference champion deserves a shot. That's the way every other sport in the history of the universe does it. If you feel so strongly that the Sun Belt champion or whoever doesn't deserve a spot, that's an argument for moving the conference down to Division 1AA, not to keep them out of your postseason.

Obviously, I know it will never happen, so absent that I think an 8 team playoff with guaranteed spots for power 5 champions is a reasonable way to go.

[ipatent]

I don't know how Western Michigan would do against the likes of Ohio State, but there's no chance for a Cinderella story that would be good for ratings and the college game when they don't get a shot. Like the Boise State team from a few years back. That's one of the things that draws viewers to the NCAA basketball tournament.

[Troublemaker]

I don't know how Western Michigan would do against the likes of Ohio State, but there's no chance for a Cinderella story that would be good for ratings and the college game when they don't get a shot. Like the Boise State team from a few years back. That's one of the things that draws viewers to the NCAA basketball tournament.

But I think that's more the result of office brackets and the money gambled on office brackets. I think sans brackets, most people would prefer to see an Ohio St - Clemson game rather than an Ohio St - Western Michigan game. That said, if there were a system that allowed an undefeated WMU to play, I sure wouldn't be against it.

[vick]

I think you need to reserve a spot for a conference champion of the non-power conferences. It helps with the integrity of a sport that frankly doesn't have much (although it is getting better). That Boise State team that beat Oklahoma clearly deserves to be in an 8 team playoff, but they didn't even finish in the top 8 of the regular season polls.

Anyway, to go completely go off the deep end into fantasy land, my dream scenario would be 16 teams: the 10 conference champions and 6 at-large bids. Every game except the championship game would be held on the home field of the higher seeded teams. The games also start a week after the conference championship games, not a month later. Bowls would not exist - any team that doesn't make the 16 team playoff has their season ended. This year, that would yield:

(16) San Diego State at (1) Alabama
(15) Appalachain State at (2) Clemson
(14) Western Kentucky at (3) Ohio State
(13) Temple at (4) Washington
(12) Western Michigan at (5) Penn State
(11) Florida State at (6) Michigan
(10) Colorado at (7) Oklahoma
(9) USC at (8) Wisconsin

No one will ever be able to convince me that this wouldn't be the most fun postseason possible. "But Wander, you don't seriously think San Diego State could be the best team in the country, do you?" No, of course not. But you're either part of Division 1A or you're not, and if you are, your conference champion deserves a shot. That's the way every other sport in the history of the universe does it. If you feel so strongly that the Sun Belt champion or whoever doesn't deserve a spot, that's an argument for moving the conference down to Division 1AA, not to keep them out of your postseason.

Obviously, I know it will never happen, so absent that I think an 8 team playoff with guaranteed spots for power 5 champions is a reasonable way to go.

It seems like the inevitable, and frankly correct, response of the power conferences to this proposal would be to break from the NCAA. You're going to outlaw a game like LSU-Louisville (this year's Citrus Bowl) for a Alabama-SDSU clunker which would probably have a 30+ point spread? As a fan of good football, that's an awful trade.

[Bob Green]

Unless you plan to eliminate Christmas and New Year's for these kids (and coaching staffs), 16 is too big of a playoff.

-Jason "I bet we get to 8 in the next 3 years or so... and that is where it will stay for a while" Evans

The real issue is exams. I agree with you the CFP goes to 8 and stays there.

[A-Tex Devil]

The real issue is exams. I agree with you the CFP goes to 8 and stays there.

I don't think that gets in the way of good money. If it goes to 8, then you just play the round of 8 game two weeks after Championship Saturday (if it were this year it would be December 17th) at the home fields of the top seeds or at predetermined neutral sites if that is easier for logistics reasons (there are arguments both ways). Then the rest plays out as it already is.

What would be cool is if the round of 8 was played two games each at two different sites, kind of like the NCAA tourney. Buy one ticket to watch two games, four sets of fans at the game. Also, no re-seeding.

I still prefer having the regular season be as close to an elimination process as possible, and therefore, happy to stick with four teams. But if you are going to do 8, the process and the calendar are there.