Started By
Message
re: What if the College Football Playoff had 8 teams and played like this?
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:31 am to WG_Dawg
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:31 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
You keep talking about CBB even though it's apples to oranges.
No, I'm talking about the excitement generated by the inclusion of more good teams. You can't tell me that you wouldn't be more excited about UGA being in an 8 or 16 team playoff than playing in whatever bowl they're in this year. You could but I wouldn't believe you.
quote:
the reward for a successful regular season/ccg is making the playoff. The playoff is the reward.
That's a fact, whatever your seed.
quote:
uh no, it rewards the 4 best teams.
No, a committee picks the 4 teams. Only in an expanded tourney can we say that the 4 best teams reach the semi-finals.
quote:
september counts the exact same as november dude.
Hardly. Tell that to the Ohio State team that lost to VTech early in 2014 and the one that lost to Michigan State late in 2015.
What if Ohio State had stumbled early twice in 2014? They would have never been in the 4-team playoff, but would have in an expanded tourney.
This post was edited on 12/29/15 at 11:35 am
1
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:35 am to Kentucker
quote:
No, I'm talking about the excitement generated
which has precisely nothing to do with how many teams deserve in. If all you want is entertainment watch a movie. I want to see the best and most deserving teams. There aren't 8 or 16 of them.
quote:
You can't tell me that you wouldn't be more excited about UGA being in an 8 or 16 team playoff than playing in whatever bowl they're in this year.
You are awful at logical thinking. I'd be happier if UGA was currently ranked 8th than not ranked? Holy hell what a revelation!
quote:
What if Ohio State had stumbled early twice in 2014? They would have never been in the 4-team playoff,
nor would they have deserved to be. You don't get to excuse all losses in your first 6 games simply based on you playing well in the last 2. That's not how it works.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:36 am to Kentucker
I agree 100%. I doubt I'll watch their bowl game as it is today.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:42 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
which has precisely nothing to do with how many teams deserve in. If all you want is entertainment watch a movie. I want to see the best and most deserving teams. There aren't 8 or 16 of them
Sports is entertainment. 38 shitty bowls are not.
quote:
You are awful at logical thinking. I'd be happier if UGA was currently ranked 8th than not ranked? Holy hell what a revelation!
And you're awful at evasion. Playoff vs. shitty bowl game was the subject.
quote:
nor would they have deserved to be. You don't get to excuse all losses in your first 6 games simply based on you playing well in the last 2. That's not how it works.
That's not how it works for FBS. It seems to work great for every other football level of competition.
While I think that a 4-team playoff is better than the total beauty contest of old, it could be so much better with an expanded list of teams.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:50 am to Rescue22
There are 128 FBS teams - that would make for 8 16-team conferences, each with 2 8-team divisions. Organize them roughly geographically to reduce travel costs and maintain traditional rivalries to some extent. Cross-level as needed to achieve rough parity among conferences/divisions.
Each team plays all 7 teams in its division, 2 in the other division in the conference, and 2 from the rest of FBS for an 11-game regular season. Schedules are made by the NCAA or whoever is put in charge.
Then have conference championships followed by an 8-team playoff. No wild cards, no "mulligans", no subjectivity.
Each team plays all 7 teams in its division, 2 in the other division in the conference, and 2 from the rest of FBS for an 11-game regular season. Schedules are made by the NCAA or whoever is put in charge.
Then have conference championships followed by an 8-team playoff. No wild cards, no "mulligans", no subjectivity.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:52 am to Rescue22
Here's the really sad thing about the conference this year, even with eight we wouldn't place two teams in. Get it together people!
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:56 am to Kentucker
quote:
March Madness
Sucks. Fact.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 12:01 pm to nc14
In 2008 UGA was 13-16 (4-12) after the regular season and made the tournament. We were a truly awful team that "got hot" and made the tournament over a team that was far more deserving. All because we won the conference.
People like march madness because it's something to do at work, it's nonstop sports the first 4 days, you can gamble, it's fun to make a bracket, and there's upsets.
Not one of those things I mentioned has anything whatsoever to do with which teams are the best and most deserving.
Take the BCS, take the top 4 teams (with no rules or stipulations, just take the top 4) and be done with it.
People like march madness because it's something to do at work, it's nonstop sports the first 4 days, you can gamble, it's fun to make a bracket, and there's upsets.
Not one of those things I mentioned has anything whatsoever to do with which teams are the best and most deserving.
Take the BCS, take the top 4 teams (with no rules or stipulations, just take the top 4) and be done with it.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 2:27 pm to Rescue22
I like 8 team.
Have playoff committee rank them 1-8, top 4 teams host home playoff games on NYE and NYD. Round 2 uses the bowls like they do now and then a final around the 14th of January.
The home games help the fans and student-athletes. It also gives a ton of additional revenue and publicity to the universities. Plus, hosting a playoff game at home in college sounds fricking awesome.
There is A LOT bigger chance of #5 having a legit gripe to get in the playoff than #9.
Have playoff committee rank them 1-8, top 4 teams host home playoff games on NYE and NYD. Round 2 uses the bowls like they do now and then a final around the 14th of January.
The home games help the fans and student-athletes. It also gives a ton of additional revenue and publicity to the universities. Plus, hosting a playoff game at home in college sounds fricking awesome.
There is A LOT bigger chance of #5 having a legit gripe to get in the playoff than #9.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 3:07 pm to Tigers of War
quote:
Honestly the match ups look good. The rankings are skewing my opinion some to the point
Well when I responded originally, the match ups were:
Clemson (1) vs. Oklahoma (4)
Alabama (2) vs. Michigan State (3)
Iowa (5) vs. Notre Dame (8)
Stanford (6) vs. Ohio St. (7)
Winner of 1/4 plays winner of 6/7
Winner of 2/3 plays winner of 5/8
That's why I thought it was dumb.
Posted on 12/29/15 at 3:34 pm to Rescue22
bama
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News