Started By
Message
re: The argument against an 8 team playoff
Posted on 11/13/19 at 1:26 am to SuperKyle
Posted on 11/13/19 at 1:26 am to SuperKyle
This is an unpopular opinion, but I think we either need to (a) expand the playoff to include all 10 FBS conference champions (e.g., a 12-team structure like the NFL with 10 automatic bids and 2 at large bids with a first-round bye for the Top 4), or (b) relegate the Group of Five to FCS.
FBS football is the only division of any NCAA sport where half the teams have no chance of winning the championship before the season even begins. This is frankly absurd. Either include them or admit that they are a lower tier of football.
I also think conference championships should mean something. Why have conferences at all if winning them doesn't mean anything?
These are big-picture ideas, not tied to any particular season or team. They are also logical, and most CFB fans will bend over backwards to make illogical arguments against these points.
FBS football is the only division of any NCAA sport where half the teams have no chance of winning the championship before the season even begins. This is frankly absurd. Either include them or admit that they are a lower tier of football.
I also think conference championships should mean something. Why have conferences at all if winning them doesn't mean anything?
These are big-picture ideas, not tied to any particular season or team. They are also logical, and most CFB fans will bend over backwards to make illogical arguments against these points.
This post was edited on 11/13/19 at 1:28 am
2
Posted on 11/13/19 at 1:49 am to TxTiger82
I was with you until this popular opinion:
No, just no. There are often 2-loss conference champions and more than a few 1-loss teams in other conferences. I don't think winning a crappy conference should be an automatic qualifier.
ETA: Something definitely needs to be done with G5 teams, though. They have NO shot.
quote:
I also think conference championships should mean something.
No, just no. There are often 2-loss conference champions and more than a few 1-loss teams in other conferences. I don't think winning a crappy conference should be an automatic qualifier.
ETA: Something definitely needs to be done with G5 teams, though. They have NO shot.
This post was edited on 11/13/19 at 1:51 am
Posted on 11/13/19 at 1:58 am to TxTiger82
An interesting note
In FCS, there are 124 teams currently. The 10 conference champions are automatic qualifiers and there are 14 at large invites. The 8 highest seeds have a bye, while the bottom 16 play the first round and then the playoff continues from there. That is 15 total games, or a 3-4 game postseason.
Would this work for the FBS by simply moving it to different Bowl game sites, I don’t think so. There would be too much fatigue among fans having to travel 3-4 times for the playoffs. So what is needed is a location or three to hold these games on a rotating basis, i.e. the first and second rounds of sixteen split between two locations, and semifinals and championship at another.
In FCS, there are 124 teams currently. The 10 conference champions are automatic qualifiers and there are 14 at large invites. The 8 highest seeds have a bye, while the bottom 16 play the first round and then the playoff continues from there. That is 15 total games, or a 3-4 game postseason.
Would this work for the FBS by simply moving it to different Bowl game sites, I don’t think so. There would be too much fatigue among fans having to travel 3-4 times for the playoffs. So what is needed is a location or three to hold these games on a rotating basis, i.e. the first and second rounds of sixteen split between two locations, and semifinals and championship at another.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News