College Football Playoff Idea

[Roll Along!]

Conference titles are for the teams that perform best during an 8 (or 9) game segment of their schedule. National titles are for the teams that perform best during the entirety of their schedule. It's pretty simple. One doesn't necessarily have to be a stepping stone toward the other (though doing well for 2/3 of your schedule is likely going to be a strong step towards success throughout the entirety of your schedule).

[Flipper]

I posted months ago that...and again a few days ago...the Big12 was on the way out ane we were moving towards a 4/16 set up...so I'm not arguing that point. I'm simply pointing out that the conference championship is a card that gets played on us (the top non P5 CHAMPION gets the game) ad it was used against the Big 12 because they didn't have a championship game and it has no bearing whatsoever when it comes time to suit THEM. They're hypocrits...that's the point.

If we did a conference champs playoff you would have had Temple, Western Kentucky, San Diego State etc... playing for a title over #5 Michigan and a slew of other top ten programs that didn't win their championship...including #2 Ohio State.

That will never...ever...in a hundred fricking million years happen...even if you said "fine..the conference champs from what would be the P4 aren't automatic" you would still have years where a multi loss non P4 team would be in the hunt over a top five team.

If you think the day will come when a MAC school has a shot at national title over a team in the top ten...you're crazed

[Schadenfreude]

If we did a conference champs playoff you would have had Temple, Western Kentucky, San Diego State etc... playing for a title over #5 Michigan and a slew of other top ten programs that didn't win their championship...including #2 Ohio State.

With 16 teams, this would not be an issue. Just about all of the Top 10 teams would be in. Going by the AP poll, we would be looking at:

1. Alabama (SEC champ; AP 1) hosting the Sun Belt champion
2. Ohio State (Big Ten at-large; AP 2) hosting Western Kentucky (Conference USA champion; unranked)
3. Clemson (ACC champ; AP 3) hosting San Diego State (Mountain West champion; unranked)
4. Washington (Pac 12 champ; AP 4) hosting Temple (American champion; AP 23)
5. Penn State (Big Ten champ; AP 5) hosting Western Michigan (MAC champion; AP 12)
6. Michigan (Big Ten at-large; AP 6) hosting Colorado (Pac 12 at large; AP 11)
7. Oklahoma (BIg 12 champ; AP 7) hosting Florida State (ACC at large; AP 10)
8. Wisconsin (Big Ten at-large; AP 8) hosting Southern California (Pac 12 at large; AP 9)

The last two left out would be 13th-ranked Oklahoma State and 14th-ranked West Virginia. Would Oklahoma State fans complain about some of these automatic bids? Probably. But they didn't win their league, and they lost to Central Michigan, for God's sakes.

[Flipper]

16 teams? Are you nuts? You're either going to play until February or limit teams to 10 games. Good luck getting Ohio State, Michigan etc...to give up a home game (more likely 2) so Temple and Western Kentucky can play in a tournament. Four teams is the right number for a TV driven event...you play the play in...you play the title game. You don't dilute the field with a bunch of multi loss P5 teams so you can include non P5 champs. The vast majority o fans would view that as a joke

[Schadenfreude]

16 teams? Are you nuts? You're either going to play until February or limit teams to 10 games.

The FCS and Division II playoffs each have at least four rounds, and they play 11-game regular seasons in each division. I'm not sure this is quite as difficult as you make it sound. Asking schools to go back to 11 game schedules would be tricky, though, I'll grant you that. Ohio State-type behemoths would not want to give up a home game.

On the other hand, I can't think of a playoff system that ever shrank. At some point, the playoff will grow, and when it does, they will have to decide on what approach to take. If FBS goes to eight, will they just include at-large picks or will make it a point to reward a respected conference champions or two from a less heralded conferences? The New Year's Day quota for the G5 already serves as a precedent for this, and we can count on the G5 to insist on the point.

That's where I think this would go next when it finally does -- eight teams and a spot or two reserved for a quality G5 champion. They could probably do this without stretching the season. (There is room in the bowl schedule for an extra round, isn't there?)

[Flipper]

Getting the P5 to drop a home game will not happen..they make way too much money in places like UM and OSU and that tilted home schedule is a huge competitive edge too. I don't think Michigan played away from AA until mid October this year.

The main impediment to any kind of expanded playoff is that no one wants to see it. The non P5 teams have been NIU, UCF, Houston, Boise and now WMU ...I don't think any of them were in the top 12. I don't think people (outside of Ann Arbor) want to see it moved beyond four teams. I sure can't see anyone wanting to lengthen the season so we can dilute the process further so the number 16 team can have a shot...then #17-20 will bitch..where will it end?

Another factor that complicates the issue is the bowl system. Doing a nice neat little four team deal keeps the bowl players happy...they wield a lot of influence..keeping them happy is important. To keep them relevant and involved to the extent that are now (playing on New Year's and being the semi final) means you'd have to cut games and start earlier...like before Labor day. Nobody wants that either.

The only set up that makes sense is running a four conference 64 school Power of God NFL lite circle jerk that results in four teams at the end...whichever four they want. No..we won't be in that mix. I suppose they could mollify us and leave open the possibility that if one of us somehow climbs to the top four nationally..we're in. But given the fact that we seem capped at @#15 I don't see it happening.

You are fighting history..a history of greed and exclusion. Virtually every change to the college football landscape in my lifetime...from the formation of the now dead CFA to the BCS and on to the CFP..has served to narrow the power and influence to a smaller group at the expense of the larger, less economically powerful "rest of us". I don't see an argument that can be made to turn that tide because there isn't one that can made based on economics.

We'd be better off trying to figure out a way to grow our sport outside of their structure than getting them to accommodate us

[Globetrotter]

You could add games at the end of the year pitting non tournament teams against eachother to get teams back up to the 12 games a year.

[Schadenfreude]

The main impediment to any kind of expanded playoff is that no one wants to see it.

I think these fans would like to see FBS go to eight:



These fans, too.



That's 200,000 fans right there, and those are just the ones who happened to be pictured.

[Flipper]

There's always someone left to complain...and there's a far cry between Michigan and PSU and the G5 12-15th ranked team ...it's called a resume. And no...being unbeaten playing largely no one at #15 isn't a resume for a "National Title" shot.

Besides, LEGITIMATE controversy and discussion ...like that surrounding Michigan... is good for the sport and the "tournament". It builds interest in the product. Widen it to Eight and you're watering it down with teams that obviously don't belong.

[Flipper]

You could add games at the end of the year pitting non tournament teams against eachother to get teams back up to the 12 games a year.

To what end? They're playing ostensibly for nothing...who would care?

[Globetrotter]

You could add games at the end of the year pitting non tournament teams against eachother to get teams back up to the 12 games a year.

To what end? They're playing ostensibly for nothing...who would care?

Those games don't matter for the non playoff teams now either. Right now the games don't matter for 5 entire conferences for the entire year and the bottom half of the Big 5 conferences after about week 6. Many many many more games would matter with this system. Those last games would just be fun.

[Globetrotter]

There's always someone left to complain...and there's a far cry between Michigan and PSU and the G5 12-15th ranked team ...it's called a resume. And no...being unbeaten playing largely no one at #15 isn't a resume for a "National Title" shot.

Besides, LEGITIMATE controversy and discussion ...like that surrounding Michigan... is good for the sport and the "tournament". It builds interest in the product. Widen it to Eight and you're watering it down with teams that obviously don't belong.

This logic is wanting. If there are 10 pieces of pizza and 11 people. If one guy eats all 10 pieces. 10 people are hungry. If 8 people eat the 10, 3 people are hungry. If 10 people eat the 10. One is hungry. By saying there is always one extra person to complain you are completely missing the logic of how many people can now eat.

[Lord_Byron]

You could add games at the end of the year pitting non tournament teams against eachother to get teams back up to the 12 games a year.

To what end? They're playing ostensibly for nothing...who would care?

Or as we like to call them today: Bowl Games

[Flipper]

You could add games at the end of the year pitting non tournament teams against eachother to get teams back up to the 12 games a year.

To what end? They're playing ostensibly for nothing...who would care?

Those games don't matter for the non playoff teams now either. Right now the games don't matter for 5 entire conferences for the entire year and the bottom half of the Big 5 conferences after about week 6. Many many many more games would matter with this system. Those last games would just be fun.

Those games are not pointless when you view them as being a preparation for conference play. They certainly aren't wothless to P5 powers who make $$$$ off of them and build a resume to play for the title. The teams that draw more people to their opener than we do for a season aren't going to give up one of those early meaningful games to play a road to nowhere friendly.

They decide the rules for the rest of us

[Flipper]

There's always someone left to complain...and there's a far cry between Michigan and PSU and the G5 12-15th ranked team ...it's called a resume. And no...being unbeaten playing largely no one at #15 isn't a resume for a "National Title" shot.

Besides, LEGITIMATE controversy and discussion ...like that surrounding Michigan... is good for the sport and the "tournament". It builds interest in the product. Widen it to Eight and you're watering it down with teams that obviously don't belong.

This logic is wanting. If there are 10 pieces of pizza and 11 people. If one guy eats all 10 pieces. 10 people are hungry. If 8 people eat the 10, 3 people are hungry. If 10 people eat the 10. One is hungry. By saying there is always one extra person to complain you are completely missing the logic of how many people can now eat.

Because it doesn't matter...in this instance what matters is who owns the pizza. The people who bought it are fine with four of them eating