Link: It's hard to argue that the CFP has been better than the BCS

[Redwood Forrest]

This was discussed on radio today. My feeling is when we go to eight teams we will double the number of blowout games for people to whine and carp about. Never-the-less we ARE GOING to have eight teams soon.

It's time to consider contracting the College Football Playoff back to just two teams - CBSSports.com

 

[4Q Basket Case]

If we go to 8 teams, that’ll mean doing away with conference championship games, or having some teams play 14-16 games...with all the negatives on the players that implies.

Alternatives include:
— No Non-conference games. Whining about inability to evaluate teams in different conferences.
— No cupcake games, however that might be defined. Voluminous whining about small-college teams being financially unsustainable...precisely because they no longer have the big payday from a game against a P5 team. Also no easy games to ameliorate the grind for players on the P5 team.

Of course, the very people whining about a CFP that’s too small will also whine about the unintended consequences of their advocacy.

The press, both broadcast and print/internet, cannot see more than one step beyond what they advocate. They are bat-blind as to second-level implications and beyond.

Same song, 937,593rd verse.

Did I say I have less than no respect for the analytical capabilities of the talking heads / ink-stained wretches?

With egos that can fit in BDS, they equate the ability to eloquently express a flawed position, with the logical validity of said position.

 

[JayBama_in_PCOLA]

Finally, something logical.

 

[Ole Man Dan]

This was discussed on radio today. My feeling is when we go to eight teams we will double the number of blowout games for people to whine and carp about. Never-the-less we ARE GOING to have eight teams soon.

It's time to consider contracting the College Football Playoff back to just two teams - CBSSports.com

IMO: Blowouts will be common. Nobody likes a blowout, unless you are on the giving end. Fans with no skin in the game will be vocal about the bad games.
Mostly the winners will be Power 5 Teams. Roll Tide.
Anything new about that? It's the best teams.

 

[crimsonaudio]

The BCS rarely got it 'wrong'. I've said his for years.

There have been some good CFP games, but there have been a lot of blowouts. I've long contended that there's rarely ever a time when the #4 ranked team at the end of the season has a legitimate claim to being the best team in the country.

 

[AUDub]

Until we come up with a system where it's decided on the field rather than by committee, the complaint will always remain.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Until we come up with a system where it's decided on the field rather than by committee, the complaint will always remain.

I'd love to hear how it can be decided on the field when there are ~130 teams, roughly 100 of which shouldn't be in the conversation.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Until we come up with a system where it's decided on the field rather than by committee, the complaint will always remain.

Yes, it should be decided on the field because we have been playing checkers up until now.

I guess 12 games plus a conference championship just isn't enough for anyone with a fully functioning brain to come up with the 4 best teams. We just need to pointlessly add 4 more teams that don't deserve it because money.

 

[AUDub]

I'd love to hear how it can be decided on the field when there are ~130 teams, roughly 100 of which shouldn't be in the conversation.

It's a broken system and I don't know how to fix it either. Spare me your facepalms, @DzynKingRTR

Nearly every major sport has understandable criteria for acceptance to the playoff (or a table to decide a champion, like soccer) except D1 football or basketball.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

I'm pretty happy with the 4-Team CFBP because I'm not really concerned about the games being close.

I just want Alabama to 1) Make the Cut... 2) Win and..... 3) Win by a LOT if possible.

It's been good to Bama so far as we've...Made the cut 6 out of 7 times.....Played for the NC 5 out of 7 times....and Won the NC 3 out of 7 times.

The only argument against it would be over the 3rd and 4th seeds routinely not making the Championship game and thus making the Semi's absolutely unnecessary.

But that's not the case so far...

The #4 Seed has made the NCG twice and won both times.

The #3 Seed has made the NCG 3 times and has yet to win but it's hard to say they didn't deserve the chance when they beat the #2 Seed on the field to get there.

I want to say there is an article somewhere online showing the CFBP Final 4 would have been the same 4 teams every single year if selected by the BCS computers.

I mean maybe that makes the committee unnecessary but the 4-Team Playoff itself is fairly solid imo.

Now an 8-Team Playoff would be a trainwreck. I'm not in favor of that at all.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

Instead of adding four more teams they could just play a double elimination with four teams. This year it would have been Clemson (0-1) playing N.D. (0-1) for the THIRD time this season. Ohio St (1-0 )playing Alabama (1-0.) Then the loser of OSU vs Bama (1-1) would play the winner of Clemson vs N.D. (1-1). and so forth. It makes as much sense as adding four teams just so they can get Cincinnati and Boise or UCF into the mix.

 

[81usaf92]

I say 6 is the maximum number it should be if we expand.

 

[Elefantman]

Keep it a 4 and use a BCS type formula to pick the teams.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

This was discussed on radio today. My feeling is when we go to eight teams we will double the number of blowout games for people to whine and carp about. Never-the-less we ARE GOING to have eight teams soon.

It's time to consider contracting the College Football Playoff back to just two teams - CBSSports.com

Actually, the claim the CFP hasn't been better than the BCS and for anyone who uses that argument, here's all I have to day:

2019.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around how out of one side of the mouth folks can complain about "the committee" and grant some level of infallbility to "polls" when the only way to settle things is to (wait for it) PLAY games.




Prior to the CFP, what would have happened? TWO teams from among LSU, Clemson, and Ohio State would have played, and the third would have screamed bloody murder.

Clemson was defending champs, so unless you're a hypocrite (note to Alabama fans, 1966), they're the champs, undefeated, and ridiing a long unbeaten streak....they're in.

If LSU gets in, screaming about "SEC bias."
If Ohio State gets in after the year LSU had, it's "always the money!"


And I can't say for 100% certainty I knew it would turn out the way it did. I THOUGHT LSU was the best, but I didn't KNOW it.

 

[JayBama_in_PCOLA]

Keep it a 4 and use a BCS type formula to pick the teams.

This is what I’ve been saying. Nothing will be good enough. It’ll be up to 32 before it’s over.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

It is tempting to dismantle this one wholesale.

At least with the BCS, there was a cut-and-dry approach to how the two teams that would play were to be determined. It was a combination of computer polls and the Coaches Poll. Put all the numbers in a formula, and that formula would spit out the rankings, and we were done.

Uh, and this formula turned out insanity like a team getting blown out by 28 points in the conference title game and still getting to play for the championship and another getting blown out in their regular season finale by 26 points and getting to play.....both in the same conference which was NOT the SEC by the way. SURE - that made sense....

Now, all we do is debate which team should be No. 4 and whether it's fair that teams from Group of Five conferences have no chance.

Oh they have a chance. It starts with....you know, actually playing someone worth a damn.

Instead of a set of rankings, we have a group of rotating characters with personal biases
Which happens in every single poll ever compiled....

The College Football Playoff has made the season one four-month-long debate show in which people yell opinions they don't really believe back and forth...

You mean like when they say absolute trash like "UCF could compete with Alabama"???

1993 - Notre Dame beats Florida State, unbeaten Nebraska is on the horizon. "Nobody wants to see FSU play Nebraska, they've beaten them repeatedly in bowl games in recent years."

Two weeks later - "The best game is FSU-Nebraska."

Anyone who thinks is new probably is writing for a TV network. Oh wait...

The BCS wasn't perfect. It should never have included the Coaches Poll in its formula. First of all, the conflicts of interest there are incredible.
Nice to know every single coach's poll national champion is now considered illegitimate by this guy.

By only having the two best teams play, we got better title games by and large

The BCS never had THREE GAMES IN A ROW (2015-16-17) come down to the very last play.
I also don't recall that BCS title game where the guy who'd never taken a meaningful snap came off the bench down 13 points and won it with a bomb in overtime. Of course, I don't remember things so well in my old age so maybe he has one for me.....

The last 3 CFP title games have been blowouts. You can actually blame all 3 of those on Clemson. Also, he's comparing SEVEN games with SIXTEEN games, which is hardly fair. In the first seven BCS games, there was one all-time classic (Ohio St-Miami), two absolute nuclear bombs (Miami-Nebraska, OU-USC), and one year the right two teams didn't even make the final (OU-LSU). Comparing the first seven games rather than pretending you can include the 2010 and 2013 games to shorten the average is ludicrous and fails to make your point.

If we went back to a BCS system, I wouldn't miss the semifinals.

No, you'd find an undefeated team that didn't make the game and tell us, "Well, we don't really know what would happen."


This does not mean I think the setup is perfect. The PRIMARY PROBLEM has been touched on by everyone from Urban Meyer to AUDub - "what are the criteria? What do we have to do to make it?" This article is 100% correct at the incredible 180 turns people make - "Oh, you can cover the margin of Ohio State and Alabama with a fingernail" oh, never mind (after Ohio St rolls Wisky), "It was never that close in the first place."

That criticism is legit. By the same token, "win your games" is entry if you're a P5 team. I didn't think Oklahoma deserved to be there in 2019, and the LSU game turned out about like I thought it would. But you couldn't say, "OK, the other two teams are going to play and LSU (or Ohio St or Clemson) gets a week off," either.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The BCS rarely got it 'wrong'. I've said his for years.

There have been some good CFP games, but there have been a lot of blowouts. I've long contended that there's rarely ever a time when the #4 ranked team at the end of the season has a legitimate claim to being the best team in the country.

The only "real" problem with the BCS was "what do you do when you have 3 equally appearing teams?" I mean, for all the disagreements, krazy3 was RIGHT about this part - it was ALWAYS about NUMBER THREE, it was NEVER about number four.

Of course, folks will then say, "But I can go back and find".....well, yes you can back when there were a bunch of Independents and more conferences, you can. That really has no relevance to modern CFB, though.

With the exception of 2003 (and this wasn't the fault of the BCS), the BCS DID produce legit champions, but no more so than we have now. The debate with the BCS pretty much always seemed to be about which "other team" needed to oppose the favorite in the coronation game.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I'd love to hear how it can be decided on the field when there are ~130 teams, roughly 124 of which shouldn't be in the conversation.

fify

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Keep it a 4 and use a BCS type formula to pick the teams.

That was my solution in the first place.

However...they have to make sure Boise or TCU or Utah or UCF doesn't get in because of easily impressed morons that vote in the polls. (It's hilarious; there was no big push for Tulane to get it in 1998).

 

[Redwood Forrest]

No matter how we slice it, it comes down to a beauty contest because it all boils down to which teams the polls, committee or computers LIKE the best. The question is do we want the Miss America, Miss USA or Miss World? And whichever beauty contest we select will have to have either the top 2, 4, 8 or 16 brought out on stage for the "final" in front of the judges.

My actual complaint is not which poll. It is the sentiment that if Liberty, Coastal Carolina, Boise or Cincinnati go undefeated they DESERVE to be in. Polls and (all?) computers put extra weight for going undefeated. BYU for example. Played a bunch of bad pickup teams because their real schedule was COVIDed. Polls and computers had them Undefeated they were AWESOME. On the field they were just average and undefeated until they ran up against Liberty or Coastal Carolina -- can't remember which one.

Since nothing is perfect I would like to see a 2 team playoff between (this year) Cincinnati and Liberty (or BYU) and that winner be the 4th spot. The sentimentalists would be appeased and the upstart who has no business being there would have to have beaten two of the THERE legitimate contenders for the title instead of being a "one game" wonder.

My playoff would be four teams chosen by five computer averages in which no computer used undefeated as a bonus. I do not have the computer programing skills to write a professional system but my home made looked like this for the playoffs: 1 Alabama 2 Ohio State 3 Clemson & 4 Georgia. Cincinnati, BYU, Liberty or Coastal Carolina never made the Top 10 in my home made system because it only rates how many points you scored as opposed to how many you were supposed to score. Notre Dame failed that test. Georgia passed.