Just to Point out the obvious, we're in a 3 game playoff.

TraskiTideFan

1st Team
Apr 18, 2009
331
307
87
Savannah TN
So its been mentioned about the upcoming future Football-pocalypse known as the 4 team playoff for the official National Championship and the repercussions involved with the changes and shifts of power, etc, etc. Well, we are in a 3 game playoff right now and we are a number 1 seed verses a 13 seed for game number 1. And then it ramps up. I hope the boys play like it is 1's verses 1's and hand the Barners their hats at the end of the game.
 

theballguy

Hall of Fame
Nov 5, 2012
6,268
1,083
187
Roll Tide Roll, Colorado USA
Since this is related, I'll post here. Imagine if we were doing an 8-team playoff though with conference winners (Pac12, Big10, Big12, SEC, ACC only) and 3 at-large (in this case highest ranked conference non-champs) and seeding based on conference winners first and then at-large...


1.Alabama (assuming Bama wins SEC)
2.Kansas St
3.Stanford (assuming Stanford beats UCLA and wins Pac12)
4.Florida St (yeah they'll win it)
5.Nebraska (assuming Nebraska wins Big10 vs PSU)
6.Notre Dame (at large)
7.Florida (Georgia loses to Bama, they'll be ranked behind LSU)
8.Oregon


Round 1:
Alabama vs Oregon
Kansas St vs Florida
Stanford vs Notre Dame
Florida St vs Nebraska


Anyone who wants to play along at home, who wins these games?
 

Jack Bourbon

Hall of Fame
Aug 3, 2001
6,432
464
207
Miami FL
No it doesn't. Instead of games being relevant only for 2 spots, they will be relevant for 4. Which means, there will be more relevant play-in games with a 4-team playoff.
 

RedStar

Hall of Fame
Jan 28, 2005
9,628
0
0
39
The Shoals, AL
No it doesn't. Instead of games being relevant only for 2 spots, they will be relevant for 4. Which means, there will be more relevant play-in games with a 4-team playoff.
Yes it does. It's gone.

The NFL isn't that exciting right now, and it wont be for a while. I watch and I enjoy it, but it's not it's most exciting until the first few rounds of the playoffs. Every week of college football is exciting because every single week effects who the champion is.

There are NFL teams currently with 4-6 records who still have a shot to win the Super Bowl. That's ridiculous & laughable. It's why playoffs aren't the truest test of which teams are the best.

What college football has been able to do is remarkable. It's the best sport going and the major reason for that is it's regular season is so meaningful. It's a shame that's going by the wayside so that we can make it conform to what societies idea of a champion is.
 

jps1983

Hall of Fame
Aug 30, 2006
7,459
0
0
There are NFL teams currently with 4-6 records who still have a shot to win the Super Bowl. That's ridiculous & laughable. It's why playoffs aren't the truest test of which teams are the best.

What college football has been able to do is remarkable. It's the best sport going and the major reason for that is it's regular season is so meaningful. It's a shame that's going by the wayside so that we can make it conform to what societies idea of a champion is.
Completely agree. I will say that a small playoff bracket (only a plus-1 model) still keeps some meaning in the regular season and is truthfully a big help for the SEC. If we didn't get the breaks last weekend, we'd be looking at "just" an SEC title; under a plus one, we'd still be in the national picture. If they expand to more than 4, I'll be extremely disappointed. No one really watches the NBA or NCAA b-ball until the playoffs or March Madness; the NFL is going to be popular no matter what, but the regular season is fairly meaningless. A team shouldn't be able to sit guys for 1 or 2 games because they're already locked into the playoffs with home field advantage. It makes those games meaningless and simply takes money from the fans for a sub-par show.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Simple truth: the more teams that make the playoffs, the more diluted the regular season is. If Oregon had lost to Stanford last week then their fans would have shrugged their shoulders and said, "Looks like we're not the top seed." As it was the entire stadium nearly was in tears.

I have minor disagreements with krazy3 over some of what he says but his central point needs to be understood: you WILL necessarily dilute the greatest regular season in sports.

When we lost to aTm, there was immediate depression and anxiety; when the others lost there were bar celebrations. Neither happens in a four-team playoff and you don't even watch with an eight.

The danger of right now is a team could do everything right but because they weren't highly ranked in the pre-season they get left out. Or a team could do everything right but fall in the BCS because they scheduled Miami or Michigan when those teams had terrible years. A four-team remedies that.

An eight- team means not only do not we not care when we lost, we don't even watch Oregon or K State because they mean nothing to us. And this is not a three-game playoff because Auburn or USC does not advance with a win. This validates krazy's view more than a playoff view.

Be forewarned: a playoff like the NFL without the talent of the NFL will be as attractive as the AAA World Series in baseball. How many of you have ever watched one?
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,931
15,930
282
Boone, NC
Two things:

1. While a 4-8 team playoff might diminish some regular season matchups, it still will behoove a team to win them all as to assure a better seed. Actually, it will make it easier for the traditional top 5 team like us to make the playoff. For the record, I don't think our fan base will ever look at a regular season game as "meaningless" because they all will still matter (with the added grace of the playoff).

2. I don't think it's fair to compare a 4-8 team playoff with the NFL playoff system. There are only 32 NFL teams and 12 of them can make the playoffs. That is why so many with losing records can get in. When it comes to the college game, while there may only be 20-25 teams each year that have a legitimate chance to win it all, because there are 120 teams in the league we will never see a team with a losing record get into the playoff.
 

WalkaboutSean

1st Team
Nov 23, 2010
323
11
37
With only FOUR teams in the playoff, the excitement isn't going away.

There are 120 teams in the "league." It will be very tough to make the top four.
 

GreatDanish

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2005
6,079
0
0
TN
2. I don't think it's fair to compare a 4-8 team playoff with the NFL playoff system. There are only 32 NFL teams and 12 of them can make the playoffs. That is why so many with losing records can get in. When it comes to the college game, while there may only be 20-25 teams each year that have a legitimate chance to win it all, because there are 120 teams in the league we will never see a team with a losing record get into the playoff.
It won't this year, but I think it is pretty evident that the playoff field will not get smaller.
Virtually everything like it grows - the NCAA tournament, the number of bowl games, etc.

The over/under on years it takes before a debate over what team gets in as the #4 team: 1.5
The over/under on years following that event before teams #5 and 6 are added to the playoff: 1.5

Granted, there's a LONG way to go before, percentage-wise, the number of teams in the NCAA playoff even approaches the NFL. But, I think the issues of (A) growth of the field, and (B) diluting the regular season are still relevant.
 

theballguy

Hall of Fame
Nov 5, 2012
6,268
1,083
187
Roll Tide Roll, Colorado USA
The answer as always is somewhere in between. With a conference winner play-in, you can no longer say you didn't get a chance. Also, the regular season will still matter. With 3 at-large teams being selected by rankings, the regular season will still matter. You still get the best of traditional college football and added excitement of a "playoff." Everyone else gets a bowl game. There should be no issue with this.
 

RedStar

Hall of Fame
Jan 28, 2005
9,628
0
0
39
The Shoals, AL
With only FOUR teams in the playoff, the excitement isn't going away.

There are 120 teams in the "league." It will be very tough to make the top four.
The problem is, it wont be 4. By 2030, I can almost guarantee you that it will be 16+. Name me one sport that hasn't expanded it's playoff format since it began. Please. I'm seriously asking. I've yet to find one.

My problem isn't the 4 team playoff. Honestly, a 4 team playoff is better than what we've got, and teams 5-8 shouldn't have a horse in the race. Playoffs ALWAYS expand. Always.
 
Last edited:

crimsonbleeder

All-American
Dec 1, 2002
2,703
3
0
Birmingham, AL
It's sad that the NCAA is bowing to society's pressure of what a "Champion" should be, decided by a bunch of morons (in general) who don't really know anything about the real sport of football, or who are so busy whining about "their" little team not getting any of the big $$$, but worse yet, the NCAA had no choice due to the possibility of getting sued by the US Government under antitrust laws. I seriously believe that was the main impetus of this whole thing.

Unfortunately, college football's success (and the money it brought) is what is leading to its very demise---and it WILL decline in quality as these "WONDERFUL, FANTASTIC, STELLAR, JUST WHAT WE NEEDED" "playoffs" (sarcasm intended) expand---and they WILL expand just as RedStar said, because they WILL make money, and we WILL watch them...it really is the beginning of the end.
 

GreatDanish

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2005
6,079
0
0
TN
The problem is, it wont be 4. By 2030, I can almost guarantee you that it will be 16+. Name me one sport that hasn't expanded it's playoff format since it began. Please. I'm seriously asking. I've yet to find one.

My problem isn't the 4 team playoff. Honestly, a 4 team playoff is better than what we've got, and teams 5-8 shouldn't have a horse in the race. Playoffs ALWAYS expand. Always.
That's my beef (as evident from my post above). The catch-22 here is that there are two likely options: the 4-team playoff isn't generating as much revenue as the old system, and the 4-team playoff generates more revenue than the old system.
Either outcome is a rationale for expanding the field.
 

WalkaboutSean

1st Team
Nov 23, 2010
323
11
37
The NCAA powers-that-be have repeatedly emphasized the importance of maintaining "the most meaningful regular season in sports." There's no desire to undermine the regular season.

The old system of bowl conference lock-ins made no sense whatsoever.

The BCS, for all of its flaws, has been an improvement.

The four team playoff will be an improvement on the BCS (it's essentially the "plus one" model that Coach Saban has endorsed).

My major concern with the new system is the selection committee choosing the teams. In the four team playoff, we will have a small committee making the selection of teams. I fear that this will allow TV $$$ to wield heavier influence on the selection process. I would've preferred they kept the BCS system in place, but expanded the Championship to include the top four teams instead of the top two.
 

Jack Bourbon

Hall of Fame
Aug 3, 2001
6,432
464
207
Miami FL
How would the Oregon and Ks State games have been less important with a 4-team playoff? Would those teams just have mailed in the game, assuming they'd keep the top 4 ranking even if they'd lost? That would have been a mistake, because they both fell out of the top 4 with their losses to Stanford and Baylor. It's likely that in a playoff system, at least one of them, if not both, would be left out because of their 1-loss record coupled with other perceived deficiencies.

With the playoff, we would have been treating many other team's games as championship play-ins, ie the games of UGA, Fla, Oklahoma, LSU, FSU, SC, etc, even though they'd already had a loss. Under the current system, these teams had been written off long ago. The new system calls for more than only the teams with undefeated records to have games that can make or break their chance to finish in the top 4 and compete for a title. Now, 2-loss teams will still be in the hunt, perhaps hoping that the 1-loss team which would otherwise take the 4th seed will lose so that they can jump ahead of them and into the playoff.

The NFL comparison is flawed because there are more games during the season and more teams in the playoffs. The problem occasionally emerges where a team has a bye locked in and can mail in the last game or two (although this is pretty uncommon). Regardless, there are usually several critical games at the end of the NFL regular season, with teams at least fighting for home-field advantage if not for a playoff spot itself. Also, teams that are not in the playoff picture commonly shut down their A-game to protect their rosters from injury, preserving their personnel for the next season, which can make for boring games. College teams don't do this as most of the players are getting their only shot.

Regarding baseball, it is true that the wild card expansion is bad for the better teams. But it definitely makes more games relevant. Not only is there the division race, there is also the wild card race.

Given that in college there are still so few playoff spots under the new system, and so few games during the regular season, I sincerely doubt there will be a disregard for any of the games by any of the collegiate teams. It will be very tricky to get in, with nothing for certain for any team that loses.

Would anyone here have felt ok if Yeldon didn't score the game-winning touchdown against LSU, just because there were 4 playoff spots? Would the team have just thought, "no biggie, we'll get into the playoff anyway. . . we'll just mosey on past Texas A&M"? Obviously, with the A&M loss, Alabama is still in it this year. But a lot of that has to do with recently-earned favor due to winning titles. Most teams, like Oregon and Ks State, don't have that luxury, and Alabama can't assume it always will.

The nail-biters won't decrease in number because there are two more spots. I think the opposite will happen. Long story. :)
 
Last edited:

Florida Tom

All-American
Aug 15, 2011
4,449
0
0
Tampa, FL
We have been in a 2 game playoff for 20 years now, for us that's one more game.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not for the play offs at all because of what it does to the regular season, just my view. However, a well coached team that happens to have one down night just a shot at redemption, like we are fortunate to see this year.

Whatever system is settled on, I think Alabama above most schools will be prepared & focused on winning it all.
 

GreatDanish

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2005
6,079
0
0
TN
How would the Oregon and Ks State games have been less important with a 4-team playoff?
I think it was more from the standpoint that Alabama would be left out unless both teams lost. The games were still important for those teams, but the games were huge for Notre Dame and Alabama fans. They would not have been very important to us if the playoff were in effect because win or lose, we would still be in it most likely.
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,931
15,930
282
Boone, NC
I guess I agree that "too many playoff spots" (for sake of argument let's say 16) will hurt the regular season.

However, I don't see how it will be possible for the season to be lengthened enough to allow for anything beyond a 4 team playoff.

That's just two extra games. Go to eight team playoff and it would be three. Go to sixteen and it would be 4. That would lengthen the season by an entire month. And with finals taking place in December they'd have to allow for time for that too.

So I just can't see it going beyond 4 and for sure not beyond 8. JMO.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.