Hypothetical Nightmare for CFP
October 28th, 2017 at 9:14 PM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 10:57 PM ^
No way OSU deserves to be in. They embarassed the Big 10 last year. They can't compete against non Big 10 teams. Had success one year when EE was RB.
October 29th, 2017 at 12:44 AM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 1:32 AM ^
They also got rolled in their showcase game by OK. They did well in the playoffs because of Ezekiel. Since he has been gone no way. They do not deserve it.
October 29th, 2017 at 3:10 AM ^
Don't forget, rolled AT HOME
October 29th, 2017 at 10:08 AM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 10:43 AM ^
PSU is more like 7-10. Yes OSU is very good but screw them. I'm still bitter from the ref screw job last year. Sue me.
October 29th, 2017 at 11:56 AM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 1:02 AM ^
I think the ramifications of last year will be that Conference Champions need to get selected to the playoffs over non-Conference Champions.
October 29th, 2017 at 10:08 AM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 11:21 PM ^
Seems like we have this conversation every year about this time. The chances of all those teams winning out is slim and none.
Oklahoma....lol, they're not winning out. They can barely get by a bunch of scrub teams and already lost to one. They blew their load at OSU.
ND...they'll likely fall to Miami or Stanford, both away games
Clemson....could potentially win out, but the ACC is ass this year. ACC is probably 3rd in the pecking order behind the B10, SEC, and B12
Bama/Georgia...only one of these guys is getting in, not both.
Washington...they'll drop one more
OSU...they've got a trap game next week at Iowa, and MSU always plays them tough. UM could give them a run too, but we need them to make mistakes. Wisky in the Championsip is no gimme either. A 0 or 1 loss B10 winner is getting in, period.
October 28th, 2017 at 11:58 PM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 1:23 AM ^
lose to Miami. Maybe they lose to Stanford if Bryce Love is healthy but ND is legit. They blew out every single team except a 1 pt loss to UGA. ND is for real. They have the best OL in the country and one of the best RB in Josh Adams.
ND has a tough schedule with a surprisingly tough Wake Forest, Miami, Navy and Stanford. If they win out, they will earn the right to be in the playoff. As of now, ND is a top 4 team to me.
October 28th, 2017 at 9:14 PM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 9:18 PM ^
Wow then we can fret over all of the two and three-loss teams that didn't get in.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:44 PM ^
There's a part of me that wants an eight-team playoff just to see what, if any, three-loss team could somehow end up playing in it. As strange as that sounds, one of my primary drivers for wanting such a thing is just intellectuall curiosity on what sorts of bizarre scenarios would arise from it.
October 29th, 2017 at 8:55 AM ^
over a 3 loss team not making the playoffs?
October 28th, 2017 at 9:18 PM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 9:28 PM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 9:45 PM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 10:00 PM ^
8 teams is the sweet spot.
It lets the 5 P5 champions get in, 2 worthy at larges, and the top G5 team for political correctness / antitrust reasons.
You could put in a "fuse" that says that a conference champion has to have no less than N losses to get in, but IMO if you can win a P5 conference championship you have something on the ball going on by the end of the season and you should get in regardless.
The at larges will still give everybody something to bitch and argue about, so eveybody is happy. The regular season will still have meaning.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:07 PM ^
Yup. My favorite as well. Makes the most sense from a fairness perspective as well as keeping more teams/fans mentally in it through the entire season. There are no major conferences left out (theoretically) so it gets decided on the field.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:21 PM ^
the reason the change comes--and I think it will--in time. I worry about players' health with an added game, but think that first weekend could be something like the beginning of the NCAA tourney--tremendous excitement across the country.
All such plans end up being a little bit arbitrary, and you have to accept that; in fact, that's what keeps people arguing, and is part of the fun.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:44 PM ^
You have an added game, but only for 2 teams each year. And it won't always be the same 2 teams each year.
Would like to see that first set of games be on college campuses to minimize impromptu travel and maximize attendance and general passion.
October 28th, 2017 at 11:24 PM ^
It's more than two teams playing more games.
As it is now, you have two playoff teams playing 14 games, and two playing 15.
With another round (and keeping the regular season/conference titles the same), you'd have four playoff teams playing 14 games, two others playing 15, and two more playing 16.
IMO, you need to get rid of the conference title games to make it reasonable, not only from a health standpoint but travel, too.
October 29th, 2017 at 12:47 AM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 12:40 AM ^
I mostly worry about the player's health (physical, mental, and acadmic) if they try to mimic the NFL play the playoff games too close together. Space them out a couple of weeks apart- to give time to recover, teams to prepare, players to catch up on school work, fans to work out logistics of getting to games, etc.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:14 PM ^
October 28th, 2017 at 11:16 PM ^
I'd be OK with that if they got rid of the conference title games. That week in December should be the begining of the playoff. Having the conference championships AND three playoff games is too much.
October 28th, 2017 at 11:50 PM ^
They're 7-3 in BCS games so far against the P5.
October 29th, 2017 at 12:29 AM ^
I agree, that's the sweet spot (as things stand now) for exactly the reason you mentioned- because of the number of conferences, because of the G5 for legal reasons, and the few independents. One of the best things about an AQ system is that it would put the conversation and emphasis back on conference races and actual games, instead of the process-of-elimination celebrity horserace we have now.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:58 PM ^
Okay, then shorten the regular season. It's too long.
October 28th, 2017 at 9:18 PM ^
How about we just skip the regular season and put all the teams in the playoffs. Then it will be nearly like the NHL and NCAA MBB.
October 28th, 2017 at 9:28 PM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 12:01 AM ^
and it's called the regular season. So far, it's pretty much been, lose twice and you're out, which is perfectly fair.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:07 PM ^
Expand to 8, and then teams 9-16 will be complaining they should have a shot.
4 teams is fine.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:12 PM ^
8 is better. 9-16 won't have a complaint for the most part because 5 of the 8 are automatic berths and 1 of the other 3 may be as well if there is a clear G5 team. And even if they do complain, so what? Teams complain right now so that won't change no matter what. Never understood that argument. It won't have changed with teams complaining. It will remain the same, only with actual conference champions from each power conference.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:52 PM ^
on the front page for a 6 team playoff for many years.
I still think it's the best I've seen.
http://mgoblog.com/category/tags/i-post-my-six-team-playoff-again
October 28th, 2017 at 10:53 PM ^
6 teams is the Pep Hamilton offense of Playoff arrangements. It's unnecessarily complicated just to be unnecessarily complicated.
It buys you nothing over 8 teams.
October 28th, 2017 at 11:16 PM ^
have you read it?
It's backed up by data and everything. . .
There are often 4+ teams that deserve a shot at playing for the national championship.
There are almost NEVER any deserving teams that finish 7-8, theyre just wasted spots in a kumbaya-circle-jerk.
October 28th, 2017 at 11:47 PM ^
Bye weeks are huge advantage and it's a popularity contest. Bye weeks in the even playing field pros is one thing, CFB not so much.
October 29th, 2017 at 10:13 AM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 11:29 AM ^
October 29th, 2017 at 12:08 AM ^
if you're confused by giving byes to the top two seeds, you're not very bright. And it does buy you something over 8 teams. Makes the regular season matter more in two ways:
- it's a smaller field so the conference titles still matter (they wouldn't matter in two conferences if 8 teams made it because two non-champs would make it).
- it rewards the top 2 teams by giving them byes.
If you don't think 6 buys you anything over 8, then why not 16 like FCS?
October 28th, 2017 at 10:50 PM ^
We have the "69th" team complaining now in the NCAA basketball tournament. So what?
It's not who complains, it's how justified their complaint is.
The 9th team in college football has no legit complaint (though they will still complain). They had a chance via their conference championship and yet another chance via 2 at larges. At that point, they've used up all their arguments.
October 28th, 2017 at 9:26 PM ^
at the end of last season? Why has it not happened yet? Guess it takes a system implosion before the NCAA can meet in their grabbastic sub-comittees and vote on expanding the playoff. Or they can just get their Bama, Clemson, Ohio state and whoever else they throw a bone to match ups they want. BTW, Bama plays nobody this year, softest Freedie P soft schedule I have ever seen.
October 28th, 2017 at 9:53 PM ^
So there'd be 256 teams participating?
October 28th, 2017 at 10:05 PM ^