Is a 4-team playoff the best model?
I didn't think about it until I read this article, but...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-greenstein-college-f…
I haven't heard anyone talking about expanding the playoff field this year. I'm not so sure now, but before, I was in favor of a 6-team playoff with byes for the top 2. I think this might be what Brian advocated also. I always thought 8 was too much. With 6, you could have all the Power 5 conference champs and 1 more team that was a runner-up or an independent or even a non-Power 5 champ.
The author here makes some good points in favor of keeping it at 4 teams.
"Check out the rankings: Iowa is No. 5, followed by Stanford, Ohio State and Notre Dame. If you included all these teams, you would have effectively rendered the Big Ten title game irrelevant. And Michigan State's stunning victory in Columbus. And Notre Dame's loss to Stanford.
And you'd still have No. 9 Florida State and No. 10 North Carolina, two-loss teams just like Notre Dame, howling over perceived injustice."
With the 4-team playoff, the regular season is just as important, and even more interesting, because with just a couple games to go, seemingly everyone in the top 15 had a chance to get into the playoff if things fell their way. And I think it's at least as fair as any other system would be. 2 teams is too strict. 8 teams lets in too many teams who just don't have resumes that compare to the top teams.
At some point the toll taken playing more and more games does add up, but in terms of the enjoyment and fairness of the sport itself, a 6-team playoff still may be best. Having said that, do you really think Iowa should be in there? I don't. And that would have taken away from the B1G championship game since it would have just been for seeding. I would like to see Stanford in there though; I can't say they're a step down from the current playoff field or undeserving. I also think 6 would have been better last year. There was definitely a good case for TCU or Baylor.
Thoughts?
December 8th, 2015 at 9:14 AM ^
I like that model because it gets more teams in, but definitely rewards the top 4 teams both on the field and financially. Plus, I'd love to see some of those first round games being played outside in December. Could you imagine that in Ann Arbor or Madison or Boulder? Would be incredible.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2015 at 9:23 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2015 at 9:14 AM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 9:17 AM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 10:39 AM ^
They wouldn't be one of the final four and they wouldn't deserve it. I'm glad the days are gone when all that mattered was not losing.
December 8th, 2015 at 9:28 AM ^
https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2013/JUL13/DBJuly24.html
December 8th, 2015 at 9:58 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2015 at 10:14 AM ^
In 2010, because there were already 3 undefeated teams with legitimate claims to the #1 or #2 positions, the one-loss teams are irrelevant beyond providing filler for the #4 spot. The whole purpose of the playoff is to put the #1 and #2 teams together in the final game. It is NOT to maximize TV revenue or satisfy the appetites of college football fans for intriguing matchups - that's what the rest of the bowls are for. By Steele's argument, which I agree with, a two-loss Arkansas team should not even be considered for a National Championship, particularly in that year, since Auburn was already the undefeated SEC champ and had beaten Arkansas head-to-head.
December 8th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^
In terms of determining a true champion, I think there have been years where the best team in the country is 11-1, despite the fact that there are 2-3 undefeated teams. If 13-0 Auburn was really the best team in 2010, they still would have won the NC. Just would have played two additional games to prove it. Doesn't lessen the regular season IMO, especially if you give the top 4 seeds home field advantage in the first round.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2015 at 9:32 AM ^
4 is pretty good because it makes the regular season mean something. The B1G was pretty much a quarterfinal game and I think most years it will be.
If we went to 8 I'd prefer it be the five P5 champs plus the next two highest ranked teams and the highest ranked G5 team.
December 8th, 2015 at 9:42 AM ^
at this point the 4 spots are basically locks for P5 teams. I wish there were 6-8 so at least the top non-P5 team can get in. It's part of what makes the NCAA tournament so awesome
December 8th, 2015 at 9:43 AM ^
Every Conference Champion with 0 or 1 loss gets into the playoffs; Independents with 0 or 1 loss get in at the committees discretion. Quarterfinals (if necessary) are on campus and byes awarded as needed.
This year would have one change/addition:
Houston @ Oklahoma
For the right to play Clemson in Semi-Final
Having a deserved Cinderella get an opportunity would only add to the splendor.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:00 AM ^
That would be outstanding, though I'm not sure how I feel about these guys playing 17 games. I think they should expand the number of scholarships a team can have if that happens.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:19 AM ^
The champs of the Power 5 conferences that have a conference championship game would be slotted 1-4. The Big 12, by virtue of not having a 13th game, would always be slotted 5th until they add the title game. Have three at-large bids.
Two weeks after the conference championship games, the top four teams would host a first round game. The winners would then go to the bowl sites set aside for the playoffs.
I'd also reduce the season to 11 games and eliminate any games against FCS opponents for Power 5 teams. I don't think fans will miss a game against UMass or FAMU.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:20 AM ^
I'd love to see an 8 team playoff and expect that we will within 5-10 yrs. Teams on a run like Boise State had in the late 2000s deserve a chance to compete against the big boys.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:23 AM ^
I was happy with the way it shook out this year. Execept I wold have been pissed if OU got in over ND with both at 11-1. ND is fine and frankly 12-0 or 11-1 would get you in most years in a 4 team playoff. Take care of business and don't lose by a total of 4 points to 2 top 10 teams.
I was on the 8 team bandwagon for a long time, until this year.
December 8th, 2015 at 11:57 AM ^
I think I see now that teams 5-8 don't normally have much claim for being considered the national champion, but at the same time I wish the mid-major schools had a better shot. They're basically locked out at this point unless they go undefeated and have 1-2 wins over P5 schools (which is probably a reasonable expectation if you want to be in competition for the national title)
December 8th, 2015 at 10:29 AM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 5:39 PM ^
I am only for P5 champions if they meet criteria. A 3 loss champ should not be in a playoff.
December 8th, 2015 at 7:51 PM ^
Yes, there would be plenty of drama around those 2 at-large teams.
Look at this year. Clemson, MSU, Alabama, OK, Stanford are all in. Houston is in.
Who are the 2 at-larges? OSU, Iowa?, ND?
Lots to argue over.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:42 AM ^
FCS already plays a 24 team playoff but they only play 11 regular season games and no confernce championships.
32 works better with no conference championship games but can work with it.
http://s2.postimg.org/g619sbc61/bracket.png
December 8th, 2015 at 11:02 AM ^
But now you have destoryed bowl games. At least with the CFP at 4 teams we still get some great bowl games in the rest of the NY6. Stanford-Iowa, OSU-ND,
December 8th, 2015 at 11:43 AM ^
Think about it with 40 bowl games the value has been utterly diluted. The vast majority of schools lose money on bowl games - they are simply winter programming for ESPN at this point. And if they really wanted to they could still have a couple in and around the playoff games sort of like the NIT
The 32 team playoff makes Southern teams play up North which they are loathe to do and it makes them go in December.
Also it preserves the Big Four bowl games in fashion by having playoff games in New Orleans, Miami, Pasadena and Tempe on New Year's Day. They can still have the Rose Parade.
It adds 5 games (which is a lot) for two teams. Take away the conference championships and that's 17 games, but it's only two more games than the maximum today.
But for 16 teams it doesn't add a game at all and if you kill the conference championships it doesn't add a game for an additional 8 teams.
December 11th, 2015 at 8:47 PM ^
No? No.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:56 AM ^
it's better than what we had, though, for picking a National Champion. Hopefully it will evolve to an 8 team playoff.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:57 AM ^
The 4 team playoff works. This years playoffs make sense. P5 chamions with 1 loss (or 0 in the case of clemson) and 5 through 10 have either 2 losses or they lost to their conferences champion (Iowa and OSU).
Last year you had 4 conference championship game winners with 1 loss or less and 12 wins or more. The Big XII had two teams left out at #5,6 that were 11-1. Sorry Big XII but not having a championship game hurts you and you know it. Add BYU and Boise State to get to 12 and have a championship game like the rest of the PF. Then with 5 PF champions at 12-1 or 13-0 we can have some real chaos.
December 8th, 2015 at 11:45 AM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 12:10 PM ^
With 8 teams, you'd start to see teams with 2 losses being considered for the playoffs. That's horseshit if you ask me.
December 13th, 2015 at 5:28 AM ^
9-7 NFL teams in the playoffs isn't horseshit?
That's the way it goes, when you have a playoff. For the increased money and $$, that's what you take a chance on. Otherwise, make a rule that any 2-loss team is not qualified. If not enough teams qualify, the highest seeds get a bye for that round.
December 8th, 2015 at 12:18 PM ^
How about a 128 team playoff starting the last weekend in November? Include everyone and thier pets and potted plants.
December 13th, 2015 at 5:00 AM ^
7 rounds, single elimination. (presumably following an 8 game regular season).
Now that would be a real playoff.
December 8th, 2015 at 1:03 PM ^
I think eight is perfect. All power five conference champs qualify, and other three teams are picked by the selection committee. The selection commitee also seeds the eight teams.
You skip bye weeks during the season.
Final regular season games are the week before Thanksgiving.
The confrence championship games are the Friday & Saturday of Thanksgiving weekend.
The Quarterfinal playoff commences the week after Thanksgiving at school locations (Top 4 teams host): 1 game Fri night, 3 games Saturday. The bowls still select on Sunday, including the losers of the Playoff Quarterfinals.
The rest of it remains as is - two bowl games will host the semi-finals, you still have the "New Year's Six Bowl games", the championship game is still a week or so later, and the rest of the bowl games still serve as the NIT.
December 8th, 2015 at 1:13 PM ^
People proposing 6 or 8 teams are missing the point. You want the regular season to matter a lot. As soon as you go that many teams in playoff, then teams at the top (ranks 1-3) can afford a loss and still make the playoff. Thefore many high profile regular season games no longer matter. MSU - Iowa doesn't matter. Both get in anyways. Same with OSU-MSU. Clemson could have lost to UNC, doesn't matter. They'd be in at 12-1. Alabama could have lost to Florida and still been in.
You get the idea. But I am biased, I don't watch neutral site College FB games (too sterile, the atmosphere kills it for me) so I prefer the real regular season games to matter as much as possible.
December 8th, 2015 at 1:16 PM ^
Regular season can still matter A LOT if the Power Five Conference Champs have an automatic berth...
December 13th, 2015 at 5:34 AM ^
Regular season would matter a lot, especially conference games. More than now, where only Rankings matter.
OSU, by losing to MSU, knocked themselves out of a chance to an auto-bid; and as it turned out, the playoffs entirely.
BTW we would still have the debate of which team is more worthy of an at-large bid: 12-1 Iowa or 11-1 OSU?
December 8th, 2015 at 1:17 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2015 at 2:43 PM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 1:44 PM ^
4 is stupid because it leaves out a P5 conference champ. It is a time-bomb waiting to blow up, and don't mistake it, it WILL blow up. Hell, it basically did blow up in 2014 with TCU and Baylor, but because no one cares about those schools it got away with it. Wait until it is an 11-1 MAJOR program conference champ being left out due to politics and things will change.
6 is the right number, but will never work because of the BYEs. You can't be giving out BYEs based on politics. That is the same bullshit that got us to just depositing the SEC into the title game every year to begin with.
8 is the only number that includes all P5 conference champs and actually works as a tournament. It will happen at some point.
December 8th, 2015 at 6:23 PM ^
I'm a fan of the 8 team playoff format. Conference champion from each of the Power 5 conferences gets an automatic bid. 3 at large bids regardless of conference affiliation.
December 8th, 2015 at 6:23 PM ^
I'm a fan of the 8 team playoff format. Conference champion from each of the Power 5 conferences gets an automatic bid. 3 at large bids regardless of conference affiliation.
December 8th, 2015 at 7:55 PM ^
It's all a moot point because a 4 team Playoff shuts out a P5 confenence every single year. If ND gets in, then it's 2 P5 conferences that get shut out.
The P5 conferences won't stand for this very long. They are the guys paying the bills.
Either we will go to 8 teams, or we will go to 4 super-conferences. We won't stay where we are for very long.
The guys that control the $$$ won't sit still for it.
December 8th, 2015 at 10:50 PM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 11:25 PM ^
That's pretty bad. What other sport has a 4 team playoff to decide a champion?
December 13th, 2015 at 5:45 AM ^
Well if you want to get technical, (based on the assumption that the purpose of a playoff is to determine the most worthy champion), then a playoff should only occur when it is necessary- when a determination cannot be made, such as a tie. [in that sense, the 1-game baseball playoffs that everyone hates, are the only true playoff games.].
If one (P5) team is undefeated and all the rest have a loss, that team should be crowned champion- no need for a playoff. Or if there are three teams clearly better than the rest, only those teams should be included in a playoff.
It's because everybody has a different idea of what a playoff means and should be- the "best"?; the most "deserving"?; best- in what way?; deserving- how?- and then trying to fit it into a format that is both systematic and lucrative, that there will never be correct answer.
December 11th, 2015 at 8:44 PM ^
8 would be cool.
December 13th, 2015 at 5:38 AM ^
You are kidding yourselves if you think you can:
a) exclude ND (or any independent) from possible inclusion, or force them to join a conference
b) force a P5 conference (Big 12) to have a conference championship game
[Let's be honest, the conference championship games were kind of gimmicks to begin with- a way to get TV money, and boost rankings for the winner. You take the risk that your stronger team loses, and hope that it helps the weaker team more than it hurts the stronger team.
A 6,8, or 10 team conference with a round robin schedule is much better as a way of determining a conference champion, but we're well past that now.]
c) be able to exclude the G5 from a tournament in the long run without costly legal challenge
December 13th, 2015 at 5:24 AM ^
5- P5 Champions
1- Highest rated remaining G5 Champ
if 8 add:
2- Highest rated among all remaining, giving special consideration to undefeated non-P5 (G5 or Independents, etc.). (Sorry, but you will need a path for ND, or possibly BYU, or say, Texas, etc. if they ever decide to go independent)
No more than 2 possible from any conference (TBD whether a team can lose its division and still be eligible for the playoff).
Seed them loosely, but allow the committee some leeway- to put Pac12 and B1G champs in the Rose Bowl; avoid rematches; considering geographical location, etc.
Games approximately two weeks apart. (One week is not enough time for fans to make travel arrangements, players to get studying in, recover from minor injuries, etc.).
This means:
The media would be spending October and November paying attention to conferences and conference games (and maybe the G5 a little more), rather than reducing it all to the incessant blather about 'Who are the Top 4'? This would be much better for the game all around.
Let's face it, when we say "Playoff", we really mean tournament, which just about any (American) sport's post-season is.
Would that mean that "the best" 8 are always going to be selected? No. ANY playoff is really just a tournament. It includes teams that have no business being there, and excludes teams that are just as good or better, but lost at the wrong time. There are too many variables to determine "the best' teams, without doubt. e.g. at a conference level, you would need to play NFL style schedule- round robin, home & away, against each of your divisional opponents.
[BTW I believe this year that would have meant the 4 who are in, plus Stanford; ND; then Houston, and Iowa or OSU.]