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

Yeah this topic was covered from all directions in this THREAD. I'm not crazy about expanding the playoffs, but it's going to happen.

It is an eventuality. It was the moment we went to a 4 team playoff. It is why I was always against a playoff of any kind.

Greg Sankey issued a statement yesterday, strongly refusing to hear any suggestion of playoff expansion that included the end of the conference championships (as many have said would be a good idea). I agree with him. I saw a lot of clowns saying that of course the SEC would come out in protection of a system that has benefited it. Like the BCS did not also benefit the SEC immensely. We will see SEC domination in any system.

But, the SEC has the only truly successful conference title game that has stood the test of time. I can see the other conferences having little issue giving their games up and embracing an 8 team playoff. The only exception to that would be the Big Ten. Theirs has always been very well supported and probably makes a great deal of money. The Pac 12 probably asks itself every year why it thought it could pull a championship game off. The ACC's is always sparsely attended. The Big 12's is a guaranteed rematch and while this year's game was well attended, the conference never wanted to reboot the game and only did so because it felt it needed to in order to remain competitive for playoff consideration.

In conclusion, the vast majority of college football fans have the attention span and critical thinking skills of a gnat and only want entertainment and an expanded playoff grants that. The barn door was opened when we went to a 4 team system. The horses are now walking out of the barn.

I love how so many people claimed that a 4 team playoff would solve everything (even if most years there was nothing to solve).

I'm pretty sure my stance all along is it will always center around who ever is left out, because playoffs are always about inclusion. The 4 team playoff was driven by the notion that #3 deserved to be in, and the 8 team playoff is being driven by the notion that #5 deserves to be on, so on so forth, The desire to expand it will never end.

Edit: Of course the Big 12 is trying to expand it though, they've been for automatic inclusion from the start.

GrayTide said:

https://sports.yahoo.com/big-12-com...nding-college-football-playoff-160802776.html

I know this has been discussed on here many times and the general consensus has always been against it. Now it seems that some of the college football power brokers are starting to toss this idea around. I do think it is an eventuality, what say you.

Click to expand...

Well, everybody's trying to fix something that's not broken. Instead of 8 teams, what about 6 teams. 1 and 2 get a bye, and then you have play-in games of 3 vs 6, and 4 vs 5. You could have those game whenever you want. You still end up with four teams with #1 playing the 4 vs 5 winner, and #2 playing the 3 vs 6 winner. That would get you a little more participation and clean up the "#5 should have been in over #4" debate. This is just a thought as I don't know what's wrong with the current plan.

I agree it’s happening but I would only support it conditionally—if the top two get byes and we eliminate CCG’s.

As long as we do not get automatic entries based on conference champions, I don't care. Changes nothing for me. But we would then be at a 16 game season for teams that appear in conference championship games and make the playoff. You can expect teams to stop scheduling tougher OOC competition.

More games with Mercer coming to a P5 team near you.

Krymsonman said:

That would get you a little more participation and clean up the "#5 should have been in over #4" debate.

Click to expand...

Remember the previous debate was 3 should have been in over 2. This method just moves it to 7 should have been in over 6. I haven't seen a playoff selection process yet that didn't have this sort of a debate.

B1GTide said:

As long as we do not get automatic entries based on conference champions, I don't care.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure there's really room for more games, not to mention doing this to the athletes. The playoffs and currenct climate have already disrupted the bowl games, players are sitting those out. I can guarantee you some players would look at a 3 game playoff and nope their way right out of it.

The only way I could see this at all working was if they just did away with conference championship games and used that week for the first round. So yes, you'd have 5 automatic entries, and 3 at large bids (so basically the same number of deserving teams getting in, give or take) but all the widdle conferences get their representatives, which is why this is even being discussed. If conferences weren't getting left out they wouldn't be discussing this.

B1GTide said:

As long as we do not get automatic entries based on conference champions, I don't care. Changes nothing for me. But we would then be at a 16 game season for teams that appear in conference championship games and make the playoff. You can expect teams to stop scheduling tougher OOC competition.

More games with Mercer coming to a P5 team near you.

Click to expand...

Yeah I love how these fans gripe and complain about FCS teams on SEC schedules in November, and in the same breath call for automatic playoff berths for conference champions.

And I hate how these people drone on about how every other level off football has playoffs, so why can't major college football? Well, for starters the NFL gets paid to abuse their bodies for sport. At the lower levels, while contact is still contact, and injuries still happen, it's nothing like major college football. And 99% of those guys have no NFL future on the line. FBS, particularly Power 5, is a completely different animal. 15 games is already too many.

GrayTide said:

This and doing away with the conference championship games, stays at 15 games. As I said before, if it is 6 or 8 teams, it is the committee's selection and no automatic inclusions.

Click to expand...

The SEC is not giving up the SECCG. It is a huge cash cow. It only takes one conference to block something like this, and the SEC would.

Here's the solution...

Just make the season a single-loss elimination tournament. You lose week 1 then your season is over...win and you move on. At the end of the season an undefeated champion will be crowned. Everyone should be happy because theoretically all teams had a shot at winning it all. We can even give participation trophies to the ones that lost early so everyone feels good.

Is the goal to find a #1 National Champion? If people can't figure out the top four, hang it up. A number 8 team has no business playing for #1. And if my team, Bama, should wind up on the outside looking in from #5 or 6...well, they should have won all of their games. This Country is becoming a bunch of me too's, participation trophies and all that.
Be the best you can, and if that's not good enough to win it all...well. endeavor to persevere, and ROLL TIDE!

mrusso said:

Here's the solution...

Just make the season a single-loss elimination tournament. You lose week 1 then your season is over...win and you move on. At the end of the season an undefeated champion will be crowned. Everyone should be happy because theoretically all teams had a shot at winning it all. We can even give participation trophies to the ones that lost early so everyone feels good.

Click to expand...

So o o o . . . some years there won't be a national champion or is it there are no schedules anymore, just a season-long tournament?

What do the teams do that lose week 1, week 2 and so on? Do they play each other for the heck of it?

Are the conferences abolished in this scenario?

Is there seeding?

What?

Jacie said:

So o o o . . . some years there won't be a national champion or is it there are no schedules anymore, just a season-long tournament?

What do the teams do that lose week 1, week 2 and so on? Do they play each other for the heck of it?

Are the conferences abolished in this scenario?

Is there seeding?

What?

Click to expand...

I am kinda hoping that he was kidding, or maybe drunk. :biggrin:

Yes, the Big 12 is pushing for this but the SEC will gain the most from it. I can see the SEC getting three teams in on a regular basis, and 2 every year. It won’t solve anything for the G5 it will just free up more P5 schools. Then they’ll be a push for 16. Not in favor of it but it will happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The example given in the article proves 8 is too many as 3 loss Washington is not worthy of appearing in the playoff, nor is 3 loss anyone IMO.

B1GTide said:

As long as we do not get automatic entries based on conference champions, I don't care. Changes nothing for me. But we would then be at a 16 game season for teams that appear in conference championship games and make the playoff. You can expect teams to stop scheduling tougher OOC competition.

More games with Mercer coming to a P5 team near you.

Click to expand...

I am with you on that point. Not all conferences are created equally, and I could make a strong argument for several teams getting ahead of any team from the PAC. But the suggestion I keep hearing is the champ of each P5 conference, the best G5 team, and two at large bids. I would only be ok with this plan (not that my opinion matters) if each of those stipulations include a * with them. That * would be maximum two losses to get the bid for a G5 champ, otherwise it goes to an at-large team, and **undefeated G5 team or it goes to another at-large team.

I would have to think about it more, but right off the top of my head, I don't care for the 6 team playoff with byes for the top 2. Most of the 8 team scenarios I hear include an initial home game for the top team (so, we would host UCF in Tuscaloosa if that were in effect now). The Bye Plan basically takes that away from the top 2 teams.

PA Tide Fan said:

The example given in the article proves 8 is too many as 3 loss Washington is not worthy of appearing in the playoff, nor is 3 loss anyone IMO.

Click to expand...

That is why I am opposed to automatic bids for conference champions. More than 2 losses should be an automatic disqualification.

B1GTide said:

I am kinda hoping that he was kidding, or maybe drunk. :biggrin:

Click to expand...

Yeh, probably should have put that in blue font.