The truth about the inception of the CFP is that it is was more about spreading the wealth across the country than finding the 4 best teams. The problem with the people that believe in “spreading the wealth” is that the 2nd committee has went to the “4 best teams” logic where as the 1st was “spread the wealth”.
And then they'll be arguing about how unfair it is to the 17th-25th ranked teams that they're aren't in. It's never ending.
The whiners are always the same. They are the people who support teams that didn't make it or people who are of the "everybody deserves a trophy" mentality. Really - they are people who should have no voice in this conversation. They spend nothing on the sport and don't watch it enough to really understand it.
Surely you don't think that would solve the problem. Just look at NCAA basketball. I think the number 64 sets up perfectly for the brackets and provides plenty of fairness for any team with a legitimate claim. However, they did the dumbest thing I think I have ever seen the NCAA do, and that is saying a lot, when they added the play in games and stretched it to 68. Sixty-eight? That's just lame. That tournament hasn't been the same to me ever since because it just seemed so lame. Why not just go to 128 and have one more round for everyone to play on either Tuesday or Wednesday. Of course, I think 64 was perfect for basketball and wish they would have left it alone. Anyway, people are going to complain no matter how many teams are put in because there will still be teams that are left out. The ones left out will whine about fairness and bad officiating or favoritism or whatever the complaint du jour is.
Where in that post did you think I was suggesting it. I’m more for the 1 vs 2 BCS system to be completely honest. I think 6 is the most I would say I’m willing to go for a playoff. 8, 16, 32 is just way too much
I wasn't saying that you were suggesting it, only that it wouldn't solve the problem because people just like to complain. I was also fine with the BCS, and I hope they don't add more than four to the current system. If they do, however, I hope they go to eight and not the lame idea of six with two teams getting a bye. These teams play schedules that are way too different to be comparable in order for any teams to receive a bye. As always, these are just my humble opinions.
Yeah, I put together my system many years ago and shared it here back in the early 2000s. I wouldn't be opposed to having five conference champs with three wild cards if they went that direction. I put it together so teams could keep their conference alignments and we could keep the four major bowls at that time, ie. the SEC champ would play in the Sugar, Big 10 and Pac 10 in the Rose, etc. They could rotate who the winners played each year in the College Football Final Four after the four major bowls were played. I liked that plan then and still think it is solid because league champions earn a spot. Anyway, we have fared pretty well so far in the playoff, so I have enjoyed it. Roll Tide!
The problem with 8 is that you get into that realm of “who really deserves a NC shot”. In a given year it’s 4-5 teams.
I like 6 a lot but I think it would work better if the Big 12 or something no longer existed. The benefit of 8 IMO is you could have the power 5, the top ranked group of 5 and then 2 wild cards. It feels like it would be a lot of games at that point though.
Personally I wish the Big XII would stop delaying the inevitable in that we are eventually going to 4 geographic Super conferences. I can get behind 2 WCs but I think more than that is just hoping for tournament chaos. I really think top seeding should be a reward so 6 with 2 byes seems more far than 3 games to prove you are #1.
That's incredibly hard to accurately gauge when there are so few common opponents. IMO if you have wild card spots I'm not all that worried about leaving out the 3rd best team in a conference because they might be better than a conference champ. and if you have 2 wild cards you could likely get 3 teams from 1 conference if they really look like the best 3 teams. After that? who cares if you leave out the 4th best team in a conference? I certainly don't.
Where do you get two wildcards? Are we moving to >6 teams in this discussion now? If conference chaps get it automatically then six slots give us one wildcard.
At some point there will be either this massive playoff or AQs with WCs. The latter is the lesser of the two evils because less games and less chances for flukes or injuries. To do it you need either 6 or 8 and I’m a fan of 6 because it’s more rewarding to the top 2 and less games.
I had mentioned the possibility of 4 power conferences and a 6 team playoff or an 8 team playoff.
4 is okay for me and I rather stay at 4, but everybody knows it’s not going to stay at 4 for much longer. So given the choice the NFL playoff system works far and away better for NCAA football than the tournament system.
I get what you are saying and I don't completely disagree. The problem is that there isn't really a perfect system. The reason I like the 6 or 8 team playoff is because it gives people less opportunity to complain. That said there will ALWAYS be some disagreement and personally I'd be ok with the 4 team playoff staying the way it is.
