I realize some people don't want an expanded college football playoff. I agree with those folks that it will diminish the regular season. BUT, I believe such diminishment will be merely slight, not significant at all. I hope that the playoff numbers are increased to 16, in order to eliminate byes. If not, and if Clemson never is admitted into the SEC, the ACC champion along with others getting a bye, will have an advantage.
The Excitement Over The NCAA Tournament (Big Dance) Foreshadows What Will Result In The Coming Expanded College Football Playoffs.
- Thread starter gamecock stock
- Start date
I'm not so certain. They are two entirely different beasts. One of the huge things that makes March Madness is so exciting is that opening weekend. 48 games in 4 days, with games on all day long the first 2 days and multiple games going at once. College football can't come close to approximating that.
I don't generally watch college basketball (because we're no good) but I'm glued to the TV for that opening weekend of March Madness. I'm not sure the expanded playoff will have that effect.
For another, there is such a large gap between the top 3 or 4 teams and everyone else in college football. I think most folks clearly understand the purpose of expansion has nothing to do with giving other teams a shot at the title.
I don't generally watch college basketball (because we're no good) but I'm glued to the TV for that opening weekend of March Madness. I'm not sure the expanded playoff will have that effect.
For another, there is such a large gap between the top 3 or 4 teams and everyone else in college football. I think most folks clearly understand the purpose of expansion has nothing to do with giving other teams a shot at the title.
March Madness works great for basketball because it's the one time all year that the whole country is watching a bunch of teams they haven't watched or even cared about during the regular season. Not once this year did I watch or even think about Fairleigh-Dickinson or Princeton basketball. So, it was interesting to see them end the national championship hopes of a couple of big boys.
College football is a different animal. The body of work over the regular season has always been central to winning a championship. That's what made games like the Catholics vs. Convicts ND/Miami game game, the FSU/Miami games of the 80s and 90s, and the Tennessee/Florida games of the 90s bigger must-see events than any single NCAA tournament game.
College football is a different animal. The body of work over the regular season has always been central to winning a championship. That's what made games like the Catholics vs. Convicts ND/Miami game game, the FSU/Miami games of the 80s and 90s, and the Tennessee/Florida games of the 90s bigger must-see events than any single NCAA tournament game.
Yep.
The are just two entirely different beasts. Whether a person is in favor of expansion or not, I don't know why some of the pro-expansion folks point the popularity of March Madness to support using it as a model. They're just so different.
The # is 12 and it starts next season. This coming up fall season will be the last 4 team playoff. I think as soon as a #12 team knocks off a #1 team (or similar) it will cement the excitement going forward much like the little guys upsetting the big boys in the basketball tournament.
You may have a point there, When you get into the rankings, most everything is subjective after 1-4, so that day will happen when #12 beats a #1. My guess it will be sooner than later.
That's what I am thinking as well. Now 18isTheMan makes good points. Yet, there inevitably will be a "Cinderella" team(s). And it does not have to be the 12th ranked team. It could be 8th, 9th or 10th. The college football nation will get excited about a Cinderella team. America loves to pull for the underdog.
Last edited:
The good story will be the first time a team outside the top 4 beats a top 4 team. It'll be nice to have a "they wouldn't even be there under the old system" conversation.
I agree with stock in that I don't like the byes. I think there is a big talent gap in college football, and I think the bye will exascerbate that.
I agree with stock in that I don't like the byes. I think there is a big talent gap in college football, and I think the bye will exascerbate that.
Last edited:
Expanding the FBS playoffs means more $$$ in the pockets of the NCAA and the member schools, especially if the higher seed hosts.
For a 12 to beat a #1, that 12 will have to beat a team like UGA or Bama first, then turn around and beat the other one of those 2. The format has it set where the top 4 ranked power 5 conference champs get a first round bye.
This years matchups would have been:
Byes
1. UGA
2. Michigan
3. Clempson
4. Utah
5 vs 12 - TCU vs Washington
6 vs 11 - Ohio State vs Penn State
7 vs 10 Bama vs Southern Cal
8 vs 9 Tenn vs Kansas State
Now let's take a wonder at Washington beating TCU who beat the #2 ranked team and then had to play UGA, who just btw, scored again on them. You may see a 5 or 6 team beat a 1 seed, but the CFP will change the format before we ever see a 1 go down to a 12.
Not arguing with you, just pointing out something else I said that was missed I think - "or similar"
To your point about a 12 beating a 1 ... I understand but I was trying to make a larger point. When a cinderella team beats the mighty top dog/s for the first time in the new playoff format, that will cement the idea that "hey, we as CFB fans like this."
As someone else stated, we like to pull for the underdog. That's why I said "or similar" (upset)
The real reason for expansion to 12 teams is not about $$$... / It's to ensure that Noodle Lame is in the playoffs every freakin' year. <sarcasm> <ish>
Exactly. March madness is exciting in one aspect because a 15 or 16 seed that isn’t even ranked in the top 25 teams in the Country can still win it all. It would be like UNC making the football playoffs last year lol
Last edited:
A lot of things need fixing in America; college football isn't one of them. But here we go.
That's why I mentioned a team ranked 8th, 9th or 10th. Such a team could definitely upset a top ranked team, making that team a "Cinderella" in the playoffs.
LSU was #16. They beat Bama, which effectively knocked them out of the playoffs. I know UGA housed them in the SECCG, but I think it's unrealistic to say a team like that would never beat a #1. Hell, Mizzu lead #1 UGA for 58 minutes, and by all intents and purposes should have won that game. Look at the final rankings 10-16. There are a lot of really talented teams in there that could make some noise.
Yahoo! columnist Dan Wetzel posted an article over a dozen years ago with his 16-team proposal. I'll summarize:
- All FBS conference champions get an automatic bid (Dan contends that FBS integrity requires it. Unless a separate mid-major playoff is established, I agree with him). The balance to be awarded to "at large" teams, e.g., most likely the SEC runner-up would get one of those bids.
- Higher see hosts all rounds until the championship game
- Championship game to be played at a neutral site. Make it Pasadena, rotate it among the "major bowl" sites, or put it up for bidding. Dan doesn't care.
Like basketball, it's probably most likely to be #12 upsetting #5. But it would be much more difficult since the game would not be held at a neutral site.
I would not personally be at all excited about seeing a 3 or 4 loss national title team, which could conceivably happen, especially when playoffs expand to 16 teams. Who would be? When that day happens, college football will be garbage.
Just go ahead and give out 133 national title trophies each season and be done with it.
Read my first comment - a #12 will not win before they restructure the system. There isn't even 16 teams in under the new changes.
Correct. 12 is better than 4. 16, IMO, is the sweet spot. Beyond 16 is excessive, IMO (even though FCS and others have at least 24 teams in their playoffs).
March Madness had 64 teams and that wasn't enough to satisfy people.
You can mark it down. All expansion is gonna due is lower the bar further and further for teams that whine about not getting in.
If you want in, don't be a pu**y and win your regular season games.
You can mark it down. All expansion is gonna due is lower the bar further and further for teams that whine about not getting in.
If you want in, don't be a pu**y and win your regular season games.
Exactly! How many teams are crying every year in March when they aren't one of the 36 teams that get an at-large bid? 6-10 every single year. At 4 teams in the playoff, there's only 2 teams left out that have a reasonable argument. At 12, you'll have 4 or 5, at 16 make it 6 or 7. People will always B****
Entertainment value. There is a sweet spot. 64 (66?) appears to be it for basketball. It's 16 for football, IMO.
The FBS has made their larger playoffs work. Why not the FCS? With the way Shane is recruiting (plus he appears to have inherited Frank's coaching chops), I believe we will often make the expanded playoffs. As a Gamecock fan, that will exponentially increase my excitement.
That's an excellent point. By expanding the playoffs, you're actually increasing the number of excluded teams that feel they had a legitimate case to be included.
As you note, there are really only a couple of teams, at best, who aren't included in the 4-team playoff but feel they had a legitimate case. The further you go down in the polls, the greater the margin for error in the rankings, thereby increasing the number of disgruntled teams.
And that's the problem.
Playoff or no playoff, if we were ranked #12, it doesn't change who good we are. It's insane that people would look at the #12 ranking differently with a 4-team vs a 12-team playoff. 12 is 12. You're no better or worse.
I just can't stand the "lower the bar for achievement so people feel better about themselves" mentality that permeates society.
The flip side to that is you're going to have more teams going balls out in Nov trying to get those last few spots. So it should yield more exciting play all around. I don't know why people get so wound up about expanding it...I wish they could play all year long!! The more football on my TV the better! There's never been a good solution in CFB on the NC. A playoff is the only legit way to determine a champion. And a 4 team playoff is dumb. I would prefer the 16 option just b/c the byes are stupid. We have to stop relying on conference performance to have such a profound impact on it.
The current solution has a 100% success rate in determining the best team in college football. How much better of a solution can you get?
Our FF run likely wouldn't have happened if we didn't expand to 64. Unfortunately we didn't capitalize on it. But I think that's the biggest reason to do it. Get in and get hot. Then build on that success to further improve your program. You still have to go win games one you're in.
Teams that are in the top 12 are still "going balls out" in November regardless under the current format. The top 12 teams are always in the hunt for a conference championship because those teams will have no more than 2 losses. They aren't just giving up because of nothing to play for. To imply they wouldn't be trying currently but would if there was a chance at a playoff is a reach.
In my opinion, a 4 team playoff is absurd. It's not a playoff...it's a championship game with a play in. Technically, every way has a 100% success rate, b/c we crown a champion every year regardless of how it's done. I'm just saying, we're not having this discussion about basketball and baseball. We don't have this discussion in the NFL.
"It's not a playoff...it's a championship game with a play in" = you can extend that argument to any playoff structure. You could say the NCAAT is a championship game with x number of play-in games (I'm not gonna do the math).
"We don't have this discussion in the NFL" = The NFL is a completely different structure. If you want to make it like the NFL, then do away with a unified poll.
On merit alone, the expanded playoff is stupid. But people will probably love it because people are generally stupid and lack critical thinking. When it expands to 16 teams, fans of the #16 team will genuinely think they had a better season with an identical 8-4 record as the previous year when they missed the 12-team playoff. People are morons.
I think it should expand and I am not stupid or lack critical thinking. Every major sport at every level uses a tournament or playoff of at least 16 teams to determine a champion. Even FCS football uses a 16 team playoff. But FBS football is different just because.
I agree it's lowering the bar. That's obvious. However, to me, it makes the post regular season meaningful. Bowls means nothing to me.