News Article: ESPN: The College Football Playoff Survey: 62 Coaches' Opinions and Harbaugh's Plan

[Saban4Ever]

What do you all think about this article? I thought it was very interesting. I personally would like to see 6 or 8 teams for the expansion, especially with years like this where there are maybe 6 great teams. (Also, because I want BAMA to get in every year even with 1 loss )

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...-survey-62-coaches-opinions-jim-harbaugh-plan

 

[TideEngineer08]

Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State: There should be eight. If you win your conference, there's five of us, you win that, you're in. Then the Central Floridas of the world, the Boises of the world, who are 12-0, or whoever is the highest-ranked team, they should be in. As it sits right now, there's not ever a school at that level that's going to get in the playoff. Not gonna happen. You had Central Florida go 12-0 twice. And they didn't get in, so that proves it's not gonna happen. If Central Florida were to get in, you take them and you play them against the No. 4 team. You don't put them against the No. 1 team. Let's just say if they come in as the 8 they play the 4. That way it will be a more exciting and competitive game for the country to watch on TV.

This guy is truly a buffoon. Why in the world would the last seeded team get to dodge the #1 seed? We don't do that in basketball. Oh well why can't the #16 seed in basketball get to play the #8 seed? It would be a more competitive game, right?

This is why people like this cannot have a say in the decision making process. They are too stupid. If we are going to let the Central Floridas and Boise States of the world into the playoff, then force them to beat the best and prove themselves. They have crowed for decades now that they deserve and then when we expand everything and let them in, we're going to give them an easier road? No.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Lincoln Riley, Oklahoma: Yes. Absolutely. I'd love to see us get to a point where every league, their conference championship game is 1 vs. 2. I think that's healthier for the sport. To me if you're going to do divisions, everybody needs to do divisions. If you're not going to do divisions, everyone needs to do 1 vs. 2. That's what creates the best conference championship games and the most valuable [résumé] the committee can evaluate on somewhat of an even playing field.

And then we have this gem. Well, Lincoln, I wonder why that one conference does the whole conference championship thing without divisions that produces a guaranteed rematch? I mean, it couldn't have been because of that conference's own doing, could it? I was under the impression we already had a system set up where every conference had to "do divisions" but then one particular conference petitioned to be able to be excluded from those rules. I can't quite remember which conference that was....

 

[B1GTide]

I fully support a 6 team playoff so long as there are no automatic qualifiers.

 

[Special K]

What I got out of the article:
Coaches are mostly biased towards what currently benefits them the most. Change conferences and I bet many of the answers change.

 

[cubzwin]

6 teams? How would that work? I understand 4 teams. I think if you expand you go to 8.

 

[Titans&Tide]

Even though it's far more complicated than a simple 8-team format, Harbaugh's idea is sensible. Can't believe I just typed that.

 

[KrAzY3]

I fully support a 6 team playoff so long as there are no automatic qualifiers.

I don't want to see any expansion, but if it did expand I'd much prefer 6 over 8. At least then those teams kind of have to earn it vs. just backing into a championship shot. The only expansion I ever was ok with was a 2 vs 3 with 2 playing at home and 1 getting a bye. I find it hard to find a worthy 6 team, but I'm not sure I've seen a worthy 8 team.

However, and this isn't to be overlooked... I don't see how we can go on and on about these poor downtrodden players being taken advantage of and then keep adding more games for them to play. Their scholarship value isn't going up with each one of these games. I already think there's one game too many.

 

[CajunCrimson]

What do you all think about this article? I thought it was very interesting. I personally would like to see 6 or 8 teams for the expansion, especially with years like this where there are maybe 6 great teams. (Also, because I want BAMA to get in every year even with 1 loss )

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...-survey-62-coaches-opinions-jim-harbaugh-plan

How can you say "this year" when we still have 4 games to play.....?

We thought one of the 6 great teams was Wisconsin just a few weeks ago.....

LSU could end up undefeated or with 2 losses.....
Penn State could end up with 2.....

I think when it's all said and done -- there will be 2 or 3 undefeated teams, and then 3 more with 1 loss --

It then comes down to - "who you beat" - "who beat you" - and "who you beat, beat"

But i'm not sure 6 teams are deserving, yet....it may work out that way -- but something tells me, it won't....

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I see I'm gonna be on Tidefans on this thread a lot in the next few days, which is good with a "must win" game approaching.

Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State: There should be eight. If you win your conference, there's five of us, you win that, you're in.

Why?

(I'm not saying yea or nay, but it amuses me how often this argument ASSUMES a bunch of things).


Then the Central Floridas of the world, the Boises of the world, who are 12-0, or whoever is the highest-ranked team, they should be in.

Why?

Here's the catch: if you ever let them in, you can NEVER EVER again criticize any team's SoS without being a stinking hypocrite.


As it sits right now, there's not ever a school at that level that's going to get in the playoff.

Good.

Not gonna happen. You had Central Florida go 12-0 twice.


I love how he edits out the part about "and then lost to an SEC mid-level team with 9 backups playing....."

And they didn't get in, so that proves it's not gonna happen.



They weren't even remotely close to one of the four "best" teams, either.

If Central Florida were to get in, you take them and you play them against the No. 4 team.

Out of one side of his mouth: they should get in
Out the other: they should be the #5 seed

He's assuming they're not good enough to be the one seed while assuming they deserve to be in the playoff.



You don't put them against the No. 1 team.

But why not?

Let's just say if they come in as the 8 they play the 4.

And you'll have one-loss teams clamoring to be the four seed.......

That way it will be a more exciting and competitive game for the country to watch on TV.


He literally just said they'd get blown out by the top seed.......

He also doesn't seem to realize that with a four-team playoff, we have yet to have a single year where BOTH semi-finals were decent games.

In fact, in 2016 and 2018, both semi-finals were duds.

 

[Power Eye]

I hate the idea of expanding the playoffs, especially to 8 or more. Think about how much less importance this weekend's game with LSU would have if it was an 8 team playoff. Both teams would almost certainly be in the playoff one way or another. As it stands, this is potentially an elimination game for both teams.

Also, the idea of getting rid of the conference championships bothers me. In 2009, who would have been the SEC champion? Florida, because they were ranked higher. That seems absurd.

As for the uniform scheduling argument, I would like to see that because I do get tired of seeing 3 home games each year that are non-competitive. However, Joel Klatt, who I enjoy listening to even though he rarely has great things to say about the SEC since we don't have any affiliation with FOX, did have a great point about uniform scheduling. His point was that the conferences, with the exception of the SEC, all went to 9 games purely for the money grab so that the networks would pay them more with more conference games, but the SEC has not chosen to to do that. The SEC shouldn't have to bow-down to the other conferences in an effort to make things more fair since their model has not worked to their advantage. I completely agree with the notion of not having to appease the other conferences, but I wouldn't mind us going to 9 games on our own terms.

 

[GP for Bama]

This guy is truly a buffoon. Why in the world would the last seeded team get to dodge the #1 seed? We don't do that in basketball. Oh well why can't the #16 seed in basketball get to play the #8 seed? It would be a more competitive game, right?

This is why people like this cannot have a say in the decision making process. They are too stupid. If we are going to let the Central Floridas and Boise States of the world into the playoff, then force them to beat the best and prove themselves. They have crowed for decades now that they deserve and then when we expand everything and let them in, we're going to give them an easier road? No.

I agree! Group of 5 teams want an easier route to the playoff and/or New Years 6 Bowls. To be considered they should have to play all of their non-conference games against Power 5 teams. This year Cincinnati got blown out by 40 to OSU. Memphis barely beat a bad Ole Miss team and SMU played no power 5 teams.

 

[EnterBama]

I don't want to see any expansion, but if it did expand I'd much prefer 6 over 8. At least then those teams kind of have to earn it vs. just backing into a championship shot. The only expansion I ever was ok with was a 2 vs 3 with 2 playing at home and 1 getting a bye. I find it hard to find a worthy 6 team, but I'm not sure I've seen a worthy 8 team.

However, and this isn't to be overlooked... I don't see how we can go on and on about these poor downtrodden players being taken advantage of and then keep adding more games for them to play. Their scholarship value isn't going up with each one of these games. I already think there's one game too many.

I agree with the poor downtrodden players. If we're going to have conference championships and national championship playoffs we need to expand the number of scholarship players allowed from 85 to at least 100 or even 125.

I know some teams can't compete with adding more scholarship players but those teams can't compete now anyway.

 

[MOAN]

The only way I see an 8 team playoff working is with major power 5 conference expansion. Notre Dame join the ACC in football and teams like UCF, BYU, Boise State, Memphis join a power 5 conference or be left out. These smaller conferences can have their own championship playoff. 5 automatic power 5 conference champions with 3 wild cards.

 

[Rama Jama]

I do not think it should got to 8 teams. I think 4 is plenty. How long before the number 8 seed has 3 losses? If you go to eight the mid majors will be screaming for an automatic bid for their league to expand to 16 teams. How long before an 8 seed gets hot and wins a championship? Adding more teams just devalues the games during the regular season even more than it already is now. The media is clamoring for more power 5 matchups every week and less "cupcake games" just so they might be able to get a few more eyeballs on Saturday. At some point, we have to start thinking of the health of the players. There is simply more chance of injury with more games and the 2 last teams already play 15 games as it is. I used to think coming out early was wrong, but I have come to change my mind over the years. Call it the "Tyrone Prothro" effect. I hate to see kids with NFL futures lose that opportunity because they played in a game 1 vs 8 playoff game that means almost nothing and then gets injured. Many of these coaches want it at 8 so the bar is lower simply so they can say I made the playoffs for job security reasons.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Scott Frost, Nebraska: Yes, it should expand. Any sport [where] a championship can be decided by a committee in a room, it's subjective and is not the right sport to me.



Never forget that the numb nuts who said this was the leading crybaby on a Nebraska team that got VOTED a national championship when they weren't even number one by....."a committee in a room," but it sure doesn't stop him from wearing his ring, I'm sure.

Scott Frost was the loudest mouth on the 97 Cornhuskers team wanting a third title in four years.


Let's admit - since I'm coming back to it - that subjectivity IS a problem here. He's right about that and so is Urban Meyer.

Gymnastics would frustrate the crap outta me.

I solve it by not watching it, Roll Tide.


People love the Cinderella, they love Loyola of Chicago in the basketball tournament or Butler.


Ah yes, but the only reason we really have Cinderellas there is because the powerhouse teams have a bunch of "one and done" five-star
recruits that have their minds on the next league. The Cinderella almost always is a senior-heavy team that has played together much of
four years and learned how to help each other.


And then we get the predictable whining for God's sake....

Mack Brown, North Carolina: I trust them more than the computers because they've got eyes. I've always said the computer wasn't at the game. They don't see who's hurt, they don't see the emotion. The committee's got an impossible job of pleasing everybody, but I think they've done the best possible job to this point.

Colt McCoy - the one-man Texas defensive wrecking crew that lost to Alabama because his replacement defense gave up 37 points.

 

[DogPatch]

6 teams? How would that work? I understand 4 teams. I think if you expand you go to 8.

With 6 teams, the top two seeds get a bye.

Or, if we use the Gundy bracket, then 5 and 6 would get the bye so that they would have a closer game when they get to play.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Let's admit at the outset that there IS a problem with the playoff. If we'll admit that then we can work on solving it.
The question, however, is whether it is a big enough problem to mandate solution or is it the kind we can accept?

(No right or wrong answer to this quite frankly).


Here's the problem: what do you have to do to make the playoffs?

First answer: 1) win all your games


Of course, there are 2 teams at most (most years) that do that so that leaves the next question...

What does a one-loss team have to do to make the playoffs?

Is winning your conference enough? No (see 2016 Penn St and 2017 Ohio St).
Is having the toughest SoS enough? No (see 2014 Ohio St)



We will admit the committee is subjective, but subjective is NOT a synonym for "wrong," either.

 

[PA Tide Fan]

I can describe my thoughts in 4 words: "Just leave things alone!"

 

[selmaborntidefan]

With 6 teams, the top two seeds get a bye.

Or, if we use the Gundy bracket, then 5 and 6 would get the bye so that they would have a closer game when they get to play.

And then comes the whining about "why did so and so get seed 2 when we beat them head-to-head/won the conference/played a tougher schedule?"