Going to an 8 team playoff (Talking about likelihood of 8-team expansion)

I don't like the version we have now and I don't want it to expand. However, if it did, the version JessN proposed, 5 conference champs with 3 at large is the best model with one modification: the at large would have a play in game, like a wild card. Same number of games to the championship as conference champs. Another caveat, if at the end of the regular season, no team in a big 5 conference is in the top 20, there is another play in game.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

I don't mind the 8-team playoff in a vacuum but I'm a proponent that we don't get rid of conference championships in the process. I think it can exist in duality that generally keeps the season competitive. I'm starting to talk myself out of auto-bids altogether and just going for the 8 best teams with a committee and an RPI metric where the top 4 or so MUST be selected.

The media types will want more cross-sectionality because they think that is what will bring in the ratings (more markets interested in a single matchup) but I think they understate the regionalism of the sport. What we really need is just a tad more standardization in champion determination and scheduling agreed upon by the power conferences. Stop the FCS games and just give 'em a big pool of money off the playoff revenue or whatever. Everyone has a conference title game or everyone doesn't. One or the other. Establish some set methods to assure that at least 1 power conference OOC opponent is on every power conference team's schedule. All of this in the name of making better apple-to-apple resume assessment and not to make the championships at the conference level an auto-bid.

I don't like the 8-team playoff out of the vacuum. It is bad for the players. We ought to start paying these power conference kids if we're going to make them play so many games that risk their pro football futures.

I'm sure I'm somewhat jaded given the nature of our ongoing run under Saban. However, I'm not a fan of expanding to any number. The only benefit of expanding, to say 8 teams, is to the advantage of teams that perpetually finish somewhere between 8th to 15th in that rankings. An expanded playoff is their only realistic hope of getting in, outside of a 2010 auburn-like once in a generation magical season.

And there will be more trash in the playoffs. I don't like it and I hope they never do it.


Sent from my iPhone 7 Plus [emoji336] using Tapatalk

bamacon said:

Go NFL route with 6. 8 is just too many. Reward 1-2 with byes. On campus game with 3/4 hosting. Then start. I still like 4 though.

Click to expand...

I can't stand the idea of giving byes in a college playoff because the rankings are so subjective. The only way I would like an eight team playoff is the same thing I've said for years. I believe conference championships should mean something, so let the five conference champs automatically qualify and then add the three highest rated at large teams. Let those eight teams play in the four major bowls. The winners then play a final four.

CrimsonForce said:

With an 8 team playoff the OSU vs Michigan game yesterday would have been meaningless. I don't think that's what we want from CFB..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If 1-4 seeds hosted a home game in the playoffs then it would have meant a lot.

The only conference with a foolproof way of determining a champion is the Big-12 with their 9-game round-robin conference schedule w/ a 10-member conference. But they managed to screw that up in 2014 by playing coy with their tiebreaker rules in the hopes of producing two playoff participants and instead got none. Every other conference has a system that can produce a conference winner that isn't the definitive best team in the conference.

Was 2001 LSU the best team in the SEC that year? Heck no. They pulled off the biggest SECCG upset in the game's history and probably started the slow death of the Phillip Fulmer regime in Knoxville by keeping them out of the Rose Bowl against Miami. And Tennessee was very clearly the only team in college football with enough NFL talent on their roster to even think of beating that Miami team in 2001.

Since you just threw it out there. I think we should go back to the old BCS system, Why let 8 prima donnas sit at the Gaylord resort and pontificate and vote. I dont care that they are x football coaches or ad, or secretary of state. They all come with personal biases. If its not a full playoff like division II then let the bloodletting begin. I think it was more fun when the BCS had to take into count the AP, USA , and computer rankings. My god this crap on Tuesday nite is worse than watching Richard Simmons infomercials. I am sick of their ugly trophy, at least the BCS trophy had class. I just hope Penn State wins the Big10 and they committee chooses OSU instead. Then we will have calls for the cpf be disbanded . What say you.

It will turn CFB into the NFL and that's the absolute worst thing that can happen to my beloved sport.

colbysullivan said:

It will turn CFB into the NFL and that's the absolute worst thing that can happen to my beloved sport.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I definitely don't want to do that.


Sent from my iPhone 7 Plus [emoji336] using Tapatalk

The contract says the 4 team playoff runs through the 2025-26 season so hopefully we don't have to worry about it for another 9 years. I guess the contract could probably be broken however if there's a big outcry for change. Personally I liked the BCS.

I have always been a supporter of an 8 team playoff. I am glad we at least got it to 4 teams at this point even though I am not fond of a committee choosing the teams. I think that some of the folks here against an 8 team playoff might look at it a little different if Bama was a team that was ranked 5-10 with 2 losses and a chance to play for a conference championship. The poster who said the Mich-OSU game wouldn't have meant nothing if we had an 8 team playoff is being ridicules. No matter what system is in place, those two teams want to beat each other no matter what. Same with the Iron Bowl.

The NFL has 32 teams and 12 make the playoffs. There is a 37.5% chance an NFL team can make the playoffs. In the FBS you have 128 teams and only 8 can make the playoffs. That is only 6% but I understand some teams paths to the playoffs would have varying degrees of difficulty since not every team is in a conference. Don't kid yourselves people, every game would still count. Ohio St is one of the best teams in the country and no matter if you have a 4 or 8 team playoff, they deserve to be there even without winning their conference. What if Bama had been left out in 2011 under the old bcs system? A lot of us would have been wanting a playoff. Lets don't lie.

My eight teams would be the 5 conference champions with the same rules to win your conference championship. The 3 At-Large teams can be figured out with the old bcs formula or just strictly an average of the more famous computer rankings. I am sure Ohio St would get in as one of the At-Larges. Just because you are a 1 or 2 loss team doesn't mean you not a very good team. Things happen with injuries, fluke plays, and last but not least, bad officiating.

If there would have been a 4 or 8 team playoff in 2013, most Bama fans would have not been griping about Bama making the playoffs even though they didn't win their conference. AU might have griped!

Nobody with three losses should ever be playing for the national title. This almost assures some will be. Bama could have taken 2 more bye-weeks this year by starting the bench and taking the risk of a loss ... as could have anyone else in the country.

There are 128 teams in FBS, but in reality only those in P5 leagues are going to make it. So that narrows the potential field to about 64. Plus every league has a Vandy or Kentucky that is just happy to get to a bowl occasionally.

So maybe 50-55 can realistically start the season thinking they can make the playoffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JessN said:

Now, is that what I'd prefer? No. I actually would prefer the old bowl-driven setup. But if we're going to be in for a penny, be in for a pound.

Click to expand...

EXACTLY!!!

What the heck, let's have a 128 team playoff format. That way nobody feelings get hurt.

Four team playoffs, means #5 and 6 were complaining about being left out. Going to 8 team playoffs means #10 and 11 will be complaining and so on and so on. It's a slippery slope they need to end NOW. The playoffs needs to be a reward for the best teams that survive the season not some open invitation that any and all teams are allow to participate. Playoffs need to be for the best of the best, period. Four teams is it. Teams outside of the top 4 want to complain then get better and get in the next year. We need to raise the bar of competition not lower.

Anything outside of a four team playoff is a tremendous disservice to the sport.

CrimsonTheory said:

What the heck, let's have a 128 team playoff format. That way nobody feelings get hurt.

Four team playoffs, means #5 and 6 were complaining about being left out. Going to 8 team playoffs means #10 and 11 will be complaining and so on and so on. It's a slippery slope they need to end NOW. The playoffs needs to be a reward for the best teams that survive the season not some open invitation that any and all teams are allow to participate. Playoffs need to be for the best of the best, period. Four teams is it. Teams outside of the top 4 want to complain then get better and get in the next year. We need to raise the bar of competition not lower.

Anything outside of a four team playoff is a tremendous disservice to the sport.

Click to expand...

I probably could live with that if they could figure out a way to determine the 4 teams without the human element. Too much bias.