Here it Comes New Push for an 8 Team College Football Playoff

KrAzY3 said:

Ok...
Some people don't understand the fact that head to head isn't the end all be all. FSU lost to Miami by 3 points at Miami! Any handicapper will tell you home field advantage is worth at least that.

But wait, Miami lost to Washington. So does that mean it should have been Washington instead of Miami? We need a playoff to solve that, but wait they already played each other and now we just have a confusing set of rematches.

How about this. Both Miami and FSU lost one game. Miami's SoS was 37. FSU's SoS was 3... 3! Computers do understand math fortunately.

Anyway, the spurious argument that head to head is the end all be all (that is the mantra of playoff supporters after all, but only the final head to head counts, ask Giants fans) aside, it still is irrelevant. Oklahoma was demonstrably the most deserving champion and mindlessly and idiotically throwing more obstacles in their path simply to settle the argument over who deserves a shot at that would have been a travesty. That's what's so wrong about all of this.

Oklahoma won two more games than anyone else, Oklahoma was the only undefeated team, and yet there's something wrong with that. No, there's something wrong with anyone who can't accept how clearly deserving and how demonstrably more worthy they were of being champions than anyone else. Any additional obstacles are in essence an attempt to undermine the proper outcome.

Click to expand...

Again the argument isn’t about Oklahoma being undeserving it’s about Miami being screwed out of a shot at a deserved national championship bout. Miami BEAT #1 FSU in the regular season and BEAT #2 VT in the regular season. Only a BCS computer zealot or an anti Miami fan believes FSU deserved to play Oklahoma that night. We knew who was the best team between FSU and Miami, or do you believe the regular season shouldn’t matter? Human polls were right and the computers were wrong just like they were in 2003. The BCS wasn’t a good system until 2005, and was horrible from 98-04.

Sorry but a playoff was clearly needed that year, and YOU KNOW IT but you will never admit the BCS was wrong.

DogPatch said:

Great rebuttal to the 8 team argument, which I hate. Regardless of the thoughts of fans who cry out for their team to be included, adding any more games/teams to the current 4 team playoff would be detrimental to the health and safety of the players. And my biggest complaint about adding anything else to the current system is the kids should be in school in January. Period.

Click to expand...

You need to give D2 & FCS a call and let them know of this discovery you’ve made.

I'm a fan of an expanded tournament but it's just personal preference. I would love a 16 or 24 team playoff. Regular season is still meaningful as you are playing for a playoff spot, seeding, and home field. Like every other college playoff FCS, D2, D3, NAIA, basketball, soccer, hockey, baseball, etc.), some teams will be happy qualifying, some will be happy for a win or two and others will be legitimate championship contenders. The occasional upset will be exciting. David vs. Goliath in a couple games would be fun. I'm not saying this is what they should do or it would be better, but I would enjoy it more.

If it expands beyond 4 I think the bowls are in danger. At that point you would have to rely on two fan bases traveling for as many as 4 games and that would be hard. You'll need to start using campus sites and home games. This gets worse with 16 or 24. The less the bowls are used the less value they have. The Rose and Orange Bowls won't want the 19th or 25th best teams so they will go away. The lesser bowls could possibly maintain for the teams that don't make the tournament but I bet they go away eventually. Ultimately you can have a playoff system or a bowl system, but it's hard to have both. Once they figure out how to collectively make more money at 15 or 23 playoff games than they do in 40 bowl/playoff games, they will be expanded.

I do love the bowl season but it doesn't work well to determine a champion. I would be fine if they just had conference champions and bowl champions, but that will never happen.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

81usaf92 said:

We knew who was the best team between FSU and Miami

Click to expand...

Really? So I guess that 2011 LSU was better than Alabama.

We all know that close games can essentially be decided on a coin toss.

What you are arguing though is basically the core part of why I loath playoffs. It's an argument for inclusion, it's an argument that ignores the champion entirely! You aren't even discussing Oklahoma, you don't care how head and shoulders ahead of everyone else they were, you still are here saying we need a playoff, for what? To prove their dominance further? Because 13-0 didn't mean anything but 14-0 or 15-0 or heck let's make it 16-0 then finally it means something. Please... We didn't even need the BCS that year. Just crown Oklahoma after they played their bowl game and be done with it.

The greatest professional football season in my lifetime was ruined by a playoff. A playoff is about inclusion, as you so clearly have elucidated. It's not about #1, it's not about the champion, it's not about how clearly superior they were. It's about giving other teams, as many as possible their shot.

That's why it goes from being about #2, to being about #4, to being about #8 (when it should have been about #1 all along). It never ends, because this type of playoff supporter at the end of the day doesn't care one bit about the sanctity of the championship. They just want a nice big fancy bracket with as much inclusion as possible, because undefeated regular seasons don't mean a single thing, excellent and exceptionalism plays second fiddle to inclusion.

USCBAMA said:

You need to give D2 & FCS a call and let them know of this discovery you’ve made.

Click to expand...

Their season+playoffs are too long, too. No need for college kids to play that many games.

KrAzY3 said:

Really? So I guess that 2011 LSU was better than Alabama.

We all know that close games can essentially be decided on a coin toss.

What you are arguing though is basically the core part of why I loath playoffs. It's an argument for inclusion, it's an argument that ignores the champion entirely! You aren't even discussing Oklahoma, you don't care how head and shoulders ahead of everyone else they were, you still are here saying we need a playoff, for what? To prove their dominance further? Because 13-0 didn't mean anything but 14-0 or 15-0 or heck let's make it 16-0 then finally it means something. Please...

The greatest professional football season in my lifetime was ruined by a playoff. A playoff is about inclusion, as you so clearly have elucidated. It's not about #1, it's not about the champion, it's not about how clearly superior they were. It's about giving other teams, as many as possible their shot.

That's why it goes from being about #2, to being about #5, to being about #9. It never ends, because this type of playoff supporter at the end of the day doesn't care one bit about the sanctity of the championship. They just want a nice big fancy bracket with as much inclusion as possible, because undefeated regular seasons don't mean a single thing, excellent and exceptionalism plays second fiddle to inclusion.

Click to expand...

Just admit it... you wish we would go back to the days in which bowls were just exhibition games and champions were chosen before hand where we didn’t have anything at risk. *** blue***

I mean seriously if you don’t understand 2000, 2001, and 2003 were horrible years for the BCS then you are just a BCS homer. Miami was the best team in the nation in 2000 and it was unquestionable. Hence why they were ranked #2 in all human polls. But your “lovely” computers ( the same ones that would have kept us out in 2011 had the formula not been changed in 2004) kept Miami out. But I suppose you would’ve been in favor of giving Okie Lite the shot against LSU in 2011 instead of Bama... because that is exactly what you are saying because it was the exact same setup ( one team owning all the human polls and the other owning all the computer and SOS rankings)

81usaf92 said:

Just admit it... you wish we would go back to the days in which bowls were just exhibition games and champions were chosen before hand where we didn’t have anything at risk. *** blue***

I mean seriously if you don’t understand 2000, 2001, and 2003 were horrible years for the BCS then you are just a BCS homer. Miami was the best team in the nation in 2000 and it was unquestionable. Hence why they were ranked #2 in all human polls. But your “lovely” computers ( the same ones that would have kept us out in 2011 had the formula not been changed in 2004) kept Miami out. But I suppose you would’ve been in favor of giving Okie Lite the shot against LSU in 2011 instead of Bama... because that is exactly what you are saying because it was the exact same setup ( one team owning all the human polls and the other owning all the computer and SOS rankings)

Click to expand...

Who do you believe the CFP comity would have chosen if they only had 2 teams to choose in 2011?

uafanataum said:

Who do you believe the CFP comity would have chosen if they only had 2 teams to choose in 2011?

Click to expand...

Key part of the committee choosing is HUMANS choosing. Had we been under the BCS from 97-04 it would’ve been Okie St instead of Bama because computers had more of a say of who was in the NC.

I heard a stat today that said no team ranked below 4 had ever won the FCS championship. Think about that for a minute and then come back and tell all of us how we need more teams in the playoff.

Bring it. That guarantees Alabama in the playoff until eternity.

81usaf92 said:

Miami was the best team in the nation in 2000 and it was unquestionable. Hence why they were ranked #2 in all human polls.

Click to expand...

First, allow me to say this. I hope my disdain for certain aspects of a playoff and the arguments to be made in support of those aspects do not appear to spill over to personal dislike. I think it goes without saying, but I just want to make it clear that my animus is entirely limited to the subject.

Having said that, please reread what you said again. I checked, 19 selectors picked Oklahoma. 1 picked Miami. That's actually a more clear cut result than the past couple of playoffs (did you know 3 selectors chose Alabama in 2016?). We're so far apart on this, that I'm not sure what we can discuss. I guess you meant better than FSU or something, but then you'd just be ignoring Oklahoma (who beat FSU by more points on a neutral field) again like they don't count. One point though that I think needs to be underlined is that you've multiple times alluded to the "best" team.

That's not at all what crowning a champion is about. It's about crowning the most deserving. I made another post recently pointing out how most games can be decided on a fluke. It happens, teams have bad games, but the question is if you think they should count or not. I for one think they should, and I'm not willing to sacrifice the regular season so the "best" team can get second chances.

To quote B1g when we were discussing one loss Alabama scenarios earlier, "just win". There's only one BCS season in which that wasn't enough, and that year the team had an SoS of 60... they did that to themselves. So basically, just don't schedule complete crap and win your games, problem solved.

KrAzY3 said:

First, allow me to say this. I hope my disdain for certain aspects of a playoff and the arguments to be made in support of those aspects do not appear to spill over to personal dislike. I think it goes without saying, but I just want to make it clear that my animus is entirely limited to the subject.

Having said that, please reread what you said again. I checked, 19 selectors picked Oklahoma. 1 picked Miami. That's actually a more clear cut result than the past couple of playoffs (did you know 3 selectors chose Alabama in 2016?). We're so far apart on this, that I'm not sure what we can discuss. I guess you meant better than FSU or something, but then you'd just be ignoring Oklahoma again like they don't count. One point though that I think needs to be underlined is that you've multiple times alluded to the "best" team.

That's not at all what crowning a champion is about. It's about crowning the most deserving. I made another post recently pointing out how most games can be decided on a fluke. It happens, teams have bad games, but the question is if you think they should count or not. I for one think they should, and I'm not willing to sacrifice the regular season so the "best" team can get second chances.

To quote B1g when we were discussing one loss Alabama scenarios earlier, "just win". There's only one BCS season in which that wasn't enough, and that year the team had an SoS of 60... they did that to themselves. So basically, just don't schedule complete crap and win your games, problem solved.

Click to expand...

Since the end of the poll era the job is producing a NC game to determine a clear champion by playing a NC that makes logical sense . Again it’s about getting the NC right not just the right champion. I think you are too hung up on the latter.

Oklahoma was gifted a championship by the computers choosing FSU over the overwhelming # 2 Miami in the human polls. Miami was clearly the best and most deserving challenger to Oklahoma and it made the most logical sense. But alas the computers had more power in the early going of the BCS and gave us questionable championship games like 00, 01, and 03 and even lead to a split championship in 03. Had we been in the same BCS in 2011 that we were from 1998-2004 I seriously doubt you would be for the BCS over a playoff because Okie St would’ve got in the NC over us.

Yes the BCS got better but 00,01, and 03 clearly point to why the BCS system was a flawed system. The over reliance on SOS, SOR, and other computer algorithms was harmful to the BCS’s reputation. It also produced BCS busters that started to get louder and louder because computers liked them more than humans. We needed a playoff but we need a small one that doesn’t overextend the season.

DogPatch said:

Their season+playoffs are too long, too. No need for college kids to play that many games.

Click to expand...

The DII season with playoffs is roughly the same as the D1 season with conf. champ and playoffs now. The DII Champship was today. Valdosta St (14-0) beat Ferris St (15-1). D2 finishes their season sooner for good and bad.

Be careful what you wish for. With an 8 team playoff and no conference championship I could see the SEC getting 3 teams, maybe even 4 teams, in that playoff scheme pretty consistently. Two teams almost guaranteed.

Anything beyond 8 teams is just ridiculous IMO. Having automatic bids for conference champions is even worse. You think teams play OOC cupcakes now? Just wait...

And even if the cupcake wins, it won’t matter since you’ll still be in the playoffs if you win your conference. Michigan losing to App St would be MEANINGLESS. That simply can’t be allowed to happen.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The only good thing I can say about an 8 team system is it would virtually guarantee 2 SEC teams in the playoff every year, sometimes 3 or 4. I just love how every time they come out with a new system that is designed to hurt the SEC, it ends up having the opposite effect.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

colbysullivan said:

Anything beyond 8 teams is just ridiculous IMO. Having automatic bids for conference champions is even worse. You think teams play OOC cupcakes now? Just wait...

And even if the cupcake wins, it won’t matter since you’ll still be in the playoffs if you win your conference. Michigan losing to App St would be MEANINGLESS. That simply can’t be allowed to happen.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

It could definitely hurt them. If they would have been a lower seed that year it could have pushed them out. Or it could have lowered the seed enough they would be on the road sooner than later. Any discussion of a playoff with 8 or more teams has to include moving the games to home sites rather than neutral sites so seeding and home field become critical.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It is ridiculous to think 8 teams need to be included to decide which is best.

81usaf92 said:

Again it’s about getting the NC right not just the right champion.

Click to expand...

I've said all along that it's getting the champion right that matters. That's the only way to make sure the regular season really truly matters. If we let this slide into becoming about who gets a shot and not who deserves to be champion, it can all go off the rails. What a playoff does is say ok you did this or that in the regular season, good for you, here's the games that really matter.

81usaf92 said:

Oklahoma was gifted a championship by the computers choosing FSU over the overwhelming # 2 Miami in the human polls.

Click to expand...

I think you, and most playoff proponents are way too hung up on the challenger and not the champion. That's why we're talking about 8 teams right now, because of the fixating on challengers.

Team A: 13-0, played 6 ranked teams. Played the 1, 2, and 3 ranked teams at the time. Sagarin SoS of 14. Won every game by 4 points or more.
Team B: 11-1, played 4 ranked teams. Played the 1 and 2 ranked teams at the time. Sagarin SoS of 12. Lost by 6 to Washington, beat FSU by 3 points at home.

Look, team B has a good resume, but I'd say oh, about 19 out of 20 people are going to clearly pick team A as being the most deserving, and I'd have serious doubts about the one that didn't. To come to the conclusion that is what a "gifted" championship looks like is to basically say the regular season is utterly meaningless. By the way, despite the fact I think it's irrelevant, the reason FSU ended up in the game was because they didn't schedule a single cupcake. Perhaps Miami should have thought twice about scheduling McNeese St. and Louisiana Tech because it cost them a chance of having one less win than Oklahoma and muddying the water completely.

The BCS got the champion right, and it wasn't even close.