Started By
Message
Why not move to a 6 team playoff vs. an 8 team playoff?
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:10 am
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:10 am
The media never mentions that option.
Give the top 2 seeds a bye. Wouldn't be fair for a 13-0 #1 seed to have to play an 8 seed who lost maybe 2 games during the year. Make seeds 3-6 duke it out to play the Top 2 in the semi-finals.
Got to still give credit for a strong regular season. Otherwise, an 8 team playoff really waters down the regular season.
No mention of it ever from the pundits, only moving to the 8 team playoff.
Give the top 2 seeds a bye. Wouldn't be fair for a 13-0 #1 seed to have to play an 8 seed who lost maybe 2 games during the year. Make seeds 3-6 duke it out to play the Top 2 in the semi-finals.
Got to still give credit for a strong regular season. Otherwise, an 8 team playoff really waters down the regular season.
No mention of it ever from the pundits, only moving to the 8 team playoff.
21
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:10 am to GreyReb
Because ESPN hates LSU.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:10 am to GreyReb
6 is the absolute MAX that I would ever want to see, and I'm not even sure I'd want to see 6.
8 would suck balls and I hope it never happens, but just like with everything else money will make that decision.
8 would suck balls and I hope it never happens, but just like with everything else money will make that decision.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:11 am to GreyReb
We already have an 8 team playoff in case you have not noticed
4 CCG's = 1st round
4 playoff teams = 2nd round
4 CCG's = 1st round
4 playoff teams = 2nd round
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:12 am to GreyReb
Too many games to play. I like 4. One problem I have with the NFL is the absurd amount of games they play, it really muddies up the product (this is only my opinion).
It puts kids careers in jeopardy playing that much more football. And honestly, do the 5 and 6 teams really deserve to be there?
It puts kids careers in jeopardy playing that much more football. And honestly, do the 5 and 6 teams really deserve to be there?
This post was edited on 11/12/14 at 11:13 am
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:12 am to GreyReb
quote:It should be an 8 team playoff, and the teams should have been chosen by the BCS formula.
Why not move to a 6 team playoff vs. an 8 team playoff?
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:13 am to GreyReb
People will bitch no matter what the postseason format looks like.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:16 am to GreyReb
I was told that the bowls are fighting the expanded playoff idea...because if the playoffs move to more than four teams, the first round of games would be at campus sites, and it would greatly affect the viability of the bowls as we know it.
This post was edited on 11/12/14 at 11:23 am
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:20 am to GreyReb
I think that 4 is enough. 6 is a better idea than 8, but you'd still be asking middle class income fans of the 3, 4, 5 and 6 seeds to shell out another $600 for the first round ticket, plus other expenses.
Hell, my wife and I make a damn good living and (assuming MSU's best case scenario) I'm trying like hell to determine how I can afford to to go to the SEC CG, the first playoff game, and the NC game. And I have advantage because I live 1.5 hours from NO so I could make the 1st round a day trip. In addition, I can fly for free to the other venues due to flyer miles, but still, that going to add up to be a ton of cheese.
Hell, my wife and I make a damn good living and (assuming MSU's best case scenario) I'm trying like hell to determine how I can afford to to go to the SEC CG, the first playoff game, and the NC game. And I have advantage because I live 1.5 hours from NO so I could make the 1st round a day trip. In addition, I can fly for free to the other venues due to flyer miles, but still, that going to add up to be a ton of cheese.
This post was edited on 11/12/14 at 11:21 am
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:24 am to GreyReb
6 is ideal IMO. I like the byes for the top 2 seeds and the little extra opportunity to minimize the committee and politics from screwing a deserving team out of a shot.
8 is too many for my liking and, personally, I would have liked to have seen just 4 using the BCS formula.
8 is too many for my liking and, personally, I would have liked to have seen just 4 using the BCS formula.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:30 am to GreyReb
8 makes sense cause you can do power 5 champs and 3 at large bids, so good teams in good conferences and independents can get in
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:33 am to GreyReb
Then there will be a cry for ten teams...then twelve, then sixteen....hell...lets make it a 64 team playoff 
Posted on 11/12/14 at 11:41 am to GreyReb
Making the playoff needs to be difficult, otherwise the regular season means nothing.
You really want 9-3 teams making the playoff?
You want in? Win your fricking games.
You're trying to be national champions, don't lose a bunch of games.
You really want 9-3 teams making the playoff?
You want in? Win your fricking games.
You're trying to be national champions, don't lose a bunch of games.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 12:29 pm to GreyReb
Here is my tweak: 5 team playoff with 4 and 5 playing for the right to be in vs 1.
My point is most years there is maybe 3 teams that are above the others and 4 and 5 are clearly above the rest but it's difficult to separate from one another.
Thoughts?
My point is most years there is maybe 3 teams that are above the others and 4 and 5 are clearly above the rest but it's difficult to separate from one another.
Thoughts?
Posted on 11/12/14 at 1:08 pm to GreyReb
I used to want an 8-team or even 16-team playoff, but now that my team has a chance to make it, I see how playing the extra game or two is less desirable.
I wouldn't mind proving myself to #4, but having to play #8 first just seems unnecessary. There's a higher chance for injury which would prevent the two best teams from playing each other at full strength.
When you think about it, seldom have there been more than 3 teams considered the best in CFB for any given year. Even more rare have there been 4. Most of these BCS years and even in the pure poll years #5-8 had little to no argument to be #1.
Still, I'm not hugely against a bigger playoff. It would add a little bit of the basketball NCAA upset fun to major college football.
I wouldn't mind proving myself to #4, but having to play #8 first just seems unnecessary. There's a higher chance for injury which would prevent the two best teams from playing each other at full strength.
When you think about it, seldom have there been more than 3 teams considered the best in CFB for any given year. Even more rare have there been 4. Most of these BCS years and even in the pure poll years #5-8 had little to no argument to be #1.
Still, I'm not hugely against a bigger playoff. It would add a little bit of the basketball NCAA upset fun to major college football.
Posted on 11/12/14 at 2:30 pm to GreyReb
I like the 4 team playoff. It makes the regular season that much more dramatic. With 4 teams you feel as if you have a better shot to go. With a 6 or 8 team the regular season might not have as many games that are IT like Ole Miss Auburn
Posted on 11/12/14 at 2:31 pm to GreyReb
8 is too many cooks
Posted on 11/12/14 at 2:33 pm to GreyReb
Why not immediately undo all the paperwork and go back to the BCS....?
It doesn't hurt 1 team more than the BCS does, but it certainly is designed to minimize the chances of 1 conference dominating when they've legitimately earned the right!
Just my worthless two cents, tho!
It doesn't hurt 1 team more than the BCS does, but it certainly is designed to minimize the chances of 1 conference dominating when they've legitimately earned the right!
Just my worthless two cents, tho!
Posted on 11/12/14 at 5:42 pm to GreyReb
Bring back the BCS, it worked. As for more, hell no. Stop thinking about left out and shift to who is undeserving. Why do people assume left out?
Posted on 11/12/14 at 5:44 pm to GreyReb
I've always wanted the 6 team playoff. And reseed after the first two games. Reward the 1 and 2.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News