Started By
Message
re: What if the College Football Playoff had 8 teams and played like this?
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:02 am to WG_Dawg
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:02 am to WG_Dawg
Yeah, because I was clearly advocating changing the shape of the ball.
Football would be a whole lot more fun if the games nobody gives a shite about actually really meant something.
Football would be a whole lot more fun if the games nobody gives a shite about actually really meant something.
0
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:08 am to BamaELCo
I'd prefer the old bowl system or BCS
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:11 am to oman
go watch soccer
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:36 am to Rescue22
March Madness is a rousing success because there are 68 teams involved and there are always huge upsets. Only occasionally is there a juggernaut that rolls through the tournament.
My favorite part of the tournament is seeing a Cinderella team get hot late in the season and plow some of the traditional heavy weights, excluding UK of course. Duke is my favorite victim right now.
This can't be duplicated in football but there are teams that suffer early losses and then become the best squads in the nation as the season progresses. Having 8, or even 16, teams in the playoff would give them the opportunity to show their improvement.
Right now there isn't nearly as much excitement as the basketball tourney across the college football community. All bowls outside the playoff are consolation shitshows and mean absolutely nothing.
My favorite part of the tournament is seeing a Cinderella team get hot late in the season and plow some of the traditional heavy weights, excluding UK of course. Duke is my favorite victim right now.
This can't be duplicated in football but there are teams that suffer early losses and then become the best squads in the nation as the season progresses. Having 8, or even 16, teams in the playoff would give them the opportunity to show their improvement.
Right now there isn't nearly as much excitement as the basketball tourney across the college football community. All bowls outside the playoff are consolation shitshows and mean absolutely nothing.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:40 am to Rescue22
quote:
5 conference champs and 3 at large team
I have always wanted to see, if I were the Grand Poobah of College football:
1. Six championship conferences, 12 teams each, two division each, must have conference championship game. Let's call it SEC, PAC 12, Big 10 (12), Big 12 (need a conference name change!), ACC, and one more created from the random teams and conference trimmings down to 12. That makes a total pool of 72 teams to determine a national champion.
2. Home/away series with your division opponents, two permanent opponents from the other division, two rotating opponents from the opposite division. That's nine conference games... and then -
3. Three non-conference games each year. Only one is up to the school to schedule, go outside the championship conferences to get that extra home game to help pay for your stadium expansion. The Grand Poobah will schedule the other two games inter-conference by random selection, one home and one away each year for two years. I.e., Big 12 North #1 vs ACC Coastal #4, SEC West #5 vs Pac 12 North #3 in a swapped home/away series. Whoever they may be. You get what you get, and it changes every two years. This adds in new and fresh opponents and trips for fans. This adds in a great deal of strength of schedule parity and fairness.
4. Every two years, you had better win some games... because the bottom team in the conference gets relegated out of the championship series. Six teams outside of the championship conferences on a regional basis rotate in. Louisville, welcome to the SEC East, goodbye Vandy. Maybe we'll see you again in a couple of years. This allows teams a pathway to earn their way to a potential championship, but it can't just be a single great season, they have to have programmatic success. Win and you're in. Lose and you're out.
5. Playoff time... go with eight teams - the six conference champions will be in period. The final two are chosen at-large from the remaining six conferences in the championship series group. Seed them at playoff time and play it out. First round is at top seed home stadium to ensure attendance. Second and final round at venues bid upon like now.
Maybe there's a better plan out there, but I think this would be great for college football. Anyway, that's what I'd want to see. Sorry for the TLDR crowd.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:45 am to Dawgsontop34
Honestly the match ups look good. The rankings are skewing my opinion some to the point.
I'd watch every single one.
I'd watch every single one.
This post was edited on 12/29/15 at 10:46 am
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:48 am to The Quiet One
quote:
This plan works perfectly up to the moment Alabama gets in the playoffs without winning the conference title. Then everyone gets apoplectic and demands to reduce it to the Big Six champions or back to four teams.
we survived them getting into the BCS game without winning their division. I think we can survive a team making an 8 team playoff without winning one of the 5 power conferences.
Because 8>5
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:51 am to Kentucker
quote:
Having 8, or even 16, teams in the playoff would give them the opportunity to show their improvement.
If after 13 weeks you're ranked 16th, you don't deserve to even be thinking about winning a national title. That's what weeks 1-13 are for, to show your improvement.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:51 am to Tigers of War
quote:
I'd watch every single one.
Therein lies the key reason for expanding the playoff, I think. More of us would watch Iowa in a playoff game than will in the Rose Bowl, for example, because it would mean so much more and the players, coaches and fans would be more engaged.
Consolation games suck.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 10:53 am to Kentucker
quote:
Therein lies the key reason for expanding the playoff, I think. More of us would watch Iowa in a playoff game than will in the Rose Bowl,
so we should change CFB based on what john q viewer at home thinks is more interesting?
I realize that the fatcats in charge are only motivated by money, but when talking about what's actually best for football, 16 teams is a farce.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:00 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
If after 13 weeks you're ranked 16th, you don't deserve to even be thinking about winning a national title. That's what weeks 1-13 are for, to show your improvement.
Not every team in the basketball tourney or the other divisions of college football playoffs enter thinking they can win the NC. They want to see how deep a run they can make.
There's more reward for more teams in a true playoff system. A four-team tourney just gets the teams with the glitzy records while passing up those teams that have gelled late.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:04 am to Rescue22
quote:
What if the College Football Playoff had 8 teams and played like this?
What if I told you that Amateur College Football teams have enough trouble making it through the season already without being decimated by injuries.
We have enough games already. If we do to an 8 team playoff, take one off the regular schedule. That'll frig everyone else who doesn't make it to the playoff, but whatever.
We haven't even started the 2nd playoff and already the 4 teams is not enough.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:05 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
so we should change CFB based on what john q viewer at home thinks is more interesting?
Yeah, dude, that's what makes the basketball tourney so interesting. And profitable.
There are 3 games that count in FBS right now and 38 that don't. Most post-season college football games are poorly attended and serve as boring filler for ad-starved networks.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:13 am to Rescue22
Most people would still get their picks wrong
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:15 am to Grievous Angel
quote:
What if I told you that Amateur College Football teams have enough trouble making it through the season already without being decimated by injuries.
I saw this argument made on one of the talking heads sports shows. They even went so far as to say that, because FBS level players were so much better than lower level athletes, they hit harder and were therefore more prone to injuries, so they shouldn't play as many games.
I don't know that I buy into that argument. The argument used to be that having a playoff would affect the academics of FBS players because of too many games.
After the laughter subsided they went to the current excuse. If it's valid, then what is the explanation for the number of games in pro playoffs?
The absolute best of the best are in the pros and they play many more games than the FBS. You'd think players would be dropping dead on the fields every Sunday.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:17 am to Kentucker
quote:
They want to see how deep a run they can make.
so? That doesn't speak at all to whether they deserve to be there or not. You keep talking about CBB even though it's apples to oranges. CBB takes 68 of what, like 350 teams? Should cfb have a 24 team playoff?
quote:
There's more reward for more teams in a true playoff system
the reward for a successful regular season/ccg is making the playoff. The playoff is the reward.
quote:
A four-team tourney just gets the teams with the glitzy records
uh no, it rewards the 4 best teams.
quote:
passing up those teams that have gelled late.
september counts the exact same as november dude.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:19 am to Rescue22
Bama. Reason, bama.
Bama.
Bama.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:21 am to Kentucker
quote:
eah, dude, that's what makes the basketball tourney so interesting.
THIS IS NOT BASKETBALL. Your points have as much relevance as trying to compare the playoffs to the world series.
quote:
There are 3 games that count in FBS right now and 38 that don't.
and those 4 teams in the playoff have earned it. Team 8 or 16 has not.
quote:
Most post-season college football games are poorly attended and serve as boring filler for ad-starved networks.
So remove some bowls. There are way, WAY too many bowls. That doesn't change the fact that a 4 team playoff is fine.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:24 am to Rescue22
I think Ohio State is the only team from #5-#8 that would have a chance at winning.
I still think they are one of the four best teams this year. You just can't lose that late in the season.
I still think they are one of the four best teams this year. You just can't lose that late in the season.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:31 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
september counts the exact same as november dude.
No it doesn't. Maybe if you're Iowa or Boise.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News