Started By
Message
re: Yes or no for expanded playoff?
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:44 pm to bamaoldtimer
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:44 pm to bamaoldtimer
I'd rather Dana Holgerson's hair than Harbaugh's boring lack of accomplishment.
0
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:45 pm to Gump Stomper
64 team double elimination round robin with random seeding. Dissolve conference and seasons. May the best team survive the gauntlet.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:46 pm to bamaoldtimer
I'll vote yes. It's probably going to 12 regardless.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:46 pm to Gump Stomper
quote:
Imagine 1 v 8 or 2 v 7
These would be decent matchups, ole miss would’ve put up a better fight than cinci
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:46 pm to bamaoldtimer
Yes. To 12. First round bye for top 4.
Auto-qualifiers for each power 4/5 conference champions and a mess of the rest.
It will add more meaning to several bowl games if they choose to use bowls as a vehicle to make it happen, or provide more home games to the higher seeds.
Auto-qualifiers for each power 4/5 conference champions and a mess of the rest.
It will add more meaning to several bowl games if they choose to use bowls as a vehicle to make it happen, or provide more home games to the higher seeds.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:47 pm to slackster
quote:
#3 or #4 team has been in 5/8 Final games. They wouldn’t have made a single one under the old system.
Give me an expansion.
This is in no way any evidence that teams 5-12 would ever get to the championship game.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:47 pm to bamaoldtimer
Yes, but only because we went down this playoff path in the first place. It'll probably help stop opt outs since the optics of quitting on your team before the "playoffs" are worse than quitting a good bowl game.
But I'd personally rather the BCS because it kept the other bowls relevant. I don't think having a playoff is worth throwing away the other bowls. But too much money involved now to ever go back.
But I'd personally rather the BCS because it kept the other bowls relevant. I don't think having a playoff is worth throwing away the other bowls. But too much money involved now to ever go back.
This post was edited on 12/31/21 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:49 pm to RazorBroncs
Two loss team minimum. No G5 team should be rewarded for playing an easier schedule. Cincinnati had a chance to belong in the conversation but laid a turd.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:50 pm to bamaoldtimer
Yes
We’d still end up with the best 2 teams in the National Championship game, but a few other bowl games will actually matter for the first time in history.
Any bowl not containing the #1 or #2 teams in the country has always been pointless until the CFP Semifinal games came along.
We’d still end up with the best 2 teams in the National Championship game, but a few other bowl games will actually matter for the first time in history.
Any bowl not containing the #1 or #2 teams in the country has always been pointless until the CFP Semifinal games came along.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:50 pm to bamaoldtimer
The SEC would make more money eliminating the championship game and expanding the CFP to 12. Having a matchup that could potentially eliminate a team from the playoff and getting only 1 team in vs. having as many as 5 SEC members get into the playoff with 12 and no championship game.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:50 pm to MackDaddyBrown
Yes it did keep the bowls relevant but they still had split champions which it failed to fix.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:50 pm to bamaoldtimer
Don’t really care. It’s always Bama versus next best every year anyway.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:51 pm to bamaoldtimer
No
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:52 pm to bamaoldtimer
quote:
I agree blowouts will continue BUT I will turn off. Not good for advertisers.
Why do you care about advertisers?
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:54 pm to bamaoldtimer
Yes.....hopefully cuts down on opt outs and makes post season relevant again. All it would take is one surprise upset to invigorate the interest.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:54 pm to bamaoldtimer
It’s happening now for sure
Posted on 12/31/21 at 8:54 pm to bamaoldtimer
Yes
Posted on 12/31/21 at 9:03 pm to Allister Fiend
The problem this debate is that the bowl supporter/anti playoff crowd argues under the frame that the status quo is cfb of old when bowls meant something. We arent choosing between 1990 cfb and expamded playoff. The status quo sucks and is getting worse
Posted on 12/31/21 at 9:03 pm to dchog
quote:
Yes it did keep the bowls relevant but they still had split champions which it failed to fix.
The playoff era has split championships too. UCF has just as big a claim to a title as like 2004 Auburn.
Posted on 12/31/21 at 9:03 pm to bamaoldtimer
Go back go 2. We're going to keep getting these redo games. Yes, I didn't think it was fair for LSU to replay us in 2011 but it was right by the rules.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News