Pate on major college football playoff expansion coming
- Thread starter Cruloc
- Start date
Though I said a while back that I wouldn't mind seeing 1/2 still play for a conference title while 3/6 and 4/5 play for auto-bids on championship weekend, I can honestly get behind Pate's vision of giving 1/2 auto-byes and playing the other two games. First, it creates a great incentive to finish 1/2, and second, it doubles the amount of quality football games on Championship Weekend, thereby giving additional teams a chance to play their way into the playoff. After all, even if 3 and 4 both lost, they'd likely have resumes strong enough to garner strong consideration for an at-large slot.
Let's just take how 2024 went down in terms of conference standings as an example. Under the above model, we would have had as many as nine teams in contention for one of the six spots as late as Thanksgiving. If that doesn't make the regular season more valuable, I don't know what would, and what's not to love about that?
Let's just take how 2024 went down in terms of conference standings as an example. Under the above model, we would have had as many as nine teams in contention for one of the six spots as late as Thanksgiving. If that doesn't make the regular season more valuable, I don't know what would, and what's not to love about that?
I have no problem with a 16 format like the one proposed. It sure beats the 12 format from last year.
Just make it a 10-game regular season, with a 64-team field / 6 round playoff, for a max 15 game season.
Seed according to the old BCS combination of computer and human rankings.
Everybody gets a trophy, and now all we have to kvetch about is seeding.
Couldn’t decide whether this is (1) a cynical prediction, or (2) a blue-font absurdity.
It’s so hard to tell the difference these days. No blue font at all on that last sentence.
Seed according to the old BCS combination of computer and human rankings.
Everybody gets a trophy, and now all we have to kvetch about is seeding.
Couldn’t decide whether this is (1) a cynical prediction, or (2) a blue-font absurdity.
It’s so hard to tell the difference these days. No blue font at all on that last sentence.
I agree. Use the existing bowl games (and there are plenty) and go:
16
8
4
2
National Championship
If they go to 16 in the playoff, they're going to have to shorten the regular season. Or eliminate conference championship games. Or both.
12 regular season games, a conference championship, and 4 rounds of playoffs = 17 games. That's just too many, especially when you consider that the extras are against top-flight competition.
12 regular season games, a conference championship, and 4 rounds of playoffs = 17 games. That's just too many, especially when you consider that the extras are against top-flight competition.
With a 16 team playoff, it would be possible (if not probable, especially for an SEC team) to play a dozen games a year against ranked teams. Looking at Bama's 2025 schedule, if things shake out well for Mizzou, OU and AU, there are potentially 7 ranked teams on tap in the conference schedule alone, plus P4 OOC games against FSU and Wisconsin. An SEC championship opponent plus four games in the CFP would mean 12 games against ranked teams in one season if Bama made the CFP title game, which is an unreal gauntlet.
In summary, I agree with 4Q's assessment that the season needs to be shortened, but most people are going to say "get rid of one of the cupcake games like ULM or Eastern IL", which doesn't help that much other than fractionally reducing the chance of injury.
I agree that that's what most people, especially talking heads will say. But they're incredibly short-sighted -- much like they were when clamoring for the transfer portal and pay-for-play.
The so-called cupcake games are vital for getting through the season. First, those programs aren't sustainable without playing the big boys. Their athletic budgets depend on these games. Cut out the cupcakes and you cut out those programs, along with the opportunities they provide for players not quite at the P4 level.
Second, they provide much-needed breathers for the P4 teams. If you cut the P4 season to 10 or 11 games, but have them all against P4 teams, you have a bunch of battered teams at the end of the year....when playoffs start.
Third, they provide a great opportunity for reserve players to get meaningful playing time. Which gives starters a much-needed rest. Cut out these games, and player development takes a big hit. Not to mention starters being exposed to greater risk of injury than they already have -- both from more game reps and the greater physicality of higher-level teams.
So-called cupcake games have a meaningful place in the P4 programs, and they benefit both sides, though in different ways.
People who advocate eliminating them are exceedingly myopic.
IMO: The SEC Championship Game will have
outlived it's usefulness.
I’m not sure what the best fix is because you are absolutely right that it’s too many games for teams in CFBP contention.
But if CFB reduces the number of regular season games that probably hurts all the other schools not in contention.
The Conference CGs might have to go away and I agree unfortunately.
It’s just unnecessary and muddies the Playoff field by adding teams that get in by pulling off an upset.
They should just name the Champions off regular season records like they use to and if there are ties so be it and use some kind of tie breakers.
The regular season should probably be cut by a 1-2 games too but I’m not sure how they navigate having to redo conference schedules.
Cupcake games could be removed but that will kill the smaller programs.
The whole thing is a mess and it should have been left as a 4 team field.
I agree with you, but let me play devils advocate.
The City of Tuscaloosa and the University of Alabama make a lot of money hosting a home football game. But South Carolina and the city of Columbia do as well. Based on past performance, one has a statistically better chance of making the playoffs than the other. Cutting the season back to 10 for everybody so the "haves" can have more playoff games is going to be a tough sell in Columbia, Starkville, Nashville.
And Western Kentucky and UT Chattanooga do not have much of a chance to make the playoffs, but playing Bama in the week before the Iron Bowl garners UTC a hunk of money that allows them to run their program the rest of the year.
Cutting the season back to ten games.means Bama vs UT Chattanooga or Western Carolina, is most likely to get dropped and the "have nots" will lose out on that revenue.
Does the world revolve around USCe, MSU, WKU and UTC? Of course not, but that is a consideration for those programs.
I can easily see the SEC and B1G walking and forming their own leaagure.
As Pate explains, there are logical agruments for both the SEC/B1G position and the ACC position, but there is no agreed-upon referee, and its a Hobbesian world out there.
As Pate explains, there are logical agruments for both the SEC/B1G position and the ACC position, but there is no agreed-upon referee, and its a Hobbesian world out there.
Whatever.
He's literally talking about the equivalent of what color to paint the Titanic as it sinks. I stopped paying attention to Pate when it became obvious he would always pimp hope in the face of reality as it benefited his 'following'.
He's literally talking about the equivalent of what color to paint the Titanic as it sinks. I stopped paying attention to Pate when it became obvious he would always pimp hope in the face of reality as it benefited his 'following'.
If they move to have more than one SEC game on the day of the SECCG, then I'll agree with you.
If we eliminated the SECCG and shifted the schedule that might allow for another off week during the season. That would be a very good thing for the players.
None of this matters if we don’t get the portal and NIL under control.
I think the portal is a bigger deal than pay-for--pay. But yeah, we need sanity on both. Don't see it happening without a CBA, though. Otherwise, the solution won't stand the inevitable court challenge.
Teams like ULM and Western Kentucky, among others, heavily depend on games against P4 teams to help fund their athletic department's budget. Not having these games will put a massive shortfall in their budgets.
The problem is that the federal courts (if I'm not mistaken) have already ruled that there can hardly be any restrictions on the players' ability to transfer. So right now, the NCAA and everyone in CFB have their hands tied. But we should have known when we started getting the courts involved, things weren't going to be done logically.
Trending content
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thread 'Why has Bama been terrible on both sides of the line for 4 or 5 years?'- SMOKIESBAMAFAN
Replies: 47
Latest threads
-
ESPN: Ex-South Carolina star QB Taneyhill dies at 52- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
-
ESPN: VaTech gets $20m anonymous athletics donation
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Cincy's Sorsby awaits draft grade, to enter portal
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Big Ten boasts 10 first-team AP All-Americans
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Best fits for transfer QB DJ Lagway: Five schools that make the most sense
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0