This is why I like the reduced playoff.
- Thread starter mcdawg22
- Start date
To borrow your analogy, an early season loss in the NFL can absolutely matter in terms of seeding, homefield advantage, and even whether or not a team gets in.
Those things will still matter in the expanded college playoff. An early season loss can still be the reason you get left out or it can be the difference in you getting a first round bye or having to play a first round game in a blizzard in Ann Arbor in December.
Valid argument. The other side is that Duke could go 11-1 or 12-0 and not make the small playoffs due to lack of past pedigree, but a school like Michigan can get in with 11-1. The larger playoff field will let some of the have-nots have a chance.
The version of Clemson I saw tonight will be doing good to get to bowl eligibility. They don’t belong anywhere near the playoff conversation barring a shocking turnaround.
NFL has 32 teams and what 12 in the playoffs. We have a loooong way to go to have 37% in the playoffs. We're at 3% right now and bump to 6% next year. I think all the games will still count.
basketball =18%
Baseball - 20%
Football could get to 16 teams and still be lower than all the others. 8 is a good number.
basketball =18%
Baseball - 20%
Football could get to 16 teams and still be lower than all the others. 8 is a good number.
I see it the opposite way. A reduced field means there's only 4-6 teams that still care after 1 loss, making the regular season boring.
The more teams that have a chance to win it all, the more exciting the season is.
The more teams that have a chance to win it all, the more exciting the season is.
Didn’t Ohio State do that in 2014? Lost to 6-6 Pitt in game one. They not only made the playoff, but one the title.
Agree 100%. I can see a scenario where an 11-1 Duke (loss to FSU) is still not ranked in the top 4. I see very few scenarios where an 11-1 Duke is not at least ranked in the top 8.
Clemson is over and out. FSU/UNC/ND all are better. Unless Dabo has a top flight QB who can do all, he is a citrus bowl coach
Games will have more impact in a 12 team playoff. How many top 15 matchups do we see in November where those games have little impact on the playoff? Now those games will matter. 12 team playoff includes more teams and more regular season games. Also conference championship games will have more meaning
If you watched that game, and ever decided to vote Clemson in the top 10 again this season, you should not have a vote.
I don’t believe this will be the case with Clemson… but if the point is to get the best team as your national championship, then you gotta let them play it out. Sometimes **** happens in a game and I don’t think a team should be judged on a single **** performance.
No to mention the obvious- we can get in a 12 team. But not a 4 team.
No question about this. And it also lures the top teams to sleep maybe 1-2 more times per year, giving a have-not a chance to knock them off. I see no downside to the expanded playoff. It used to be more games, well, now with the money flowing in, the players can STFU.
The only way the OP's argument holds water was during the BCS. Every game mattered, but if you lost, you still cared, because you were playing for bowl game slotting. That part absolutely went out the window with the 4-team playoff. Hot or cold is fine, but lukewarm gets spewed out. The 4-teamer is the definition of lukewarm.
The % tells the story. I think 16 should be the number honestly. Just give the top 4 seeds an easier draw at home.
All games matter (definitely for Duke in this post), but lets say if Clemson gets its shat together and runs through the rest of their schedule in impressive fashion, then why shouldn't they be rewarded with a playoff spot? A larger playoff field makes the playoff teams earn their championship and rewards teams playing their best ball at the end of the season. I'm for a larger playoff field. 4 team playoffs only lend itself to politics and a popularity contest.
Downvote. Totally disregard his absolutely valid point to nail him on a detail. Pretty obvious he accidently used 8 instead of 12. American Politics 101.
It cannot be argued that the % of teams that make the playoff is so far out of whack that it's comical. And we act like it's pulling teeth to go from 4 to 12. It should be a no-brainer.
Close. They lost game 2 to Virginia Tech, who ended up with a 6-6 regular season.
If Clemson runs the table, they would get back in the top 10, just like Ohio State did with a week 2 loss in 2014.
It would mean they beat FSU (probably twice), UNC, and Notre Dame and that would be enough to forgive a week one loss at Duke.
12 team > 4 team > 2 team bcs
Every iteration will be better. The 12 team playoff will make the last few weeks of the season really exciting. Fringe teams trying to get in. Top teams trying to get seeding. It’s a no brainer.
Every iteration will be better. The 12 team playoff will make the last few weeks of the season really exciting. Fringe teams trying to get in. Top teams trying to get seeding. It’s a no brainer.
For some reason I decided they went to 8 last night 12 is still just a weird number of teams. It'll be 16 eventually.
They will eventually find the right number, one that is fair to everyone, and that all the fans are happy about.....and then change it like they have done with basketball, going from 64 to 68 and threatening to go even higher. Sankey loves to use the Bears baseball championship as a rationale for why basketball should expand, but that's a terrible argument and he probably knows it.
That's not a valid comparison. Every team in the NFL has virtually the same resources and the same salary cap. There aren't 20 programs in college football that have even close to the same resources as the richest programs.
Who are these teams that stop playing after a loss? If it’s Bama, LSU, OSU, Clemson, and UGA, sign me up. I’d love to see them sleepwalk to 7-5.
You keep mentioning the BCS era and how bowl games mattered, but I don’t think it had to do with the format, it had to do with the players attitudes. The teams going to good bowls have NFL talent and like it or not that is their focus now. 25 years ago when a player visited campus the first thing they were told was you are going to help us win a championship, now it’s we are going to get you to the NFL. In 98 there weren’t players skipping bowl games. Now there are 50 guys that consider it.
I’ll also clarify that I am in favor of the 12 team for many of the reasons listed in the thread. I just think it’s fun when a potential playoff team sh!ts the bed in the current format.
Even the elite teams have a couple of down games every year when they either get beat, or come close to it. Now, with margin for error, they may drop their guard for another game or two. Don't read too much into what I'm saying here.
On the BCS and bowls, you make a fair point. That system likely was unsustainable. And even the new system will have its downfalls. The teams that are obviously out of playoff contention will no doubt quit and start building for the following year. But more will have a shot, at least. And from this point in time, there's nothing left to do BUT expand the playoff. There's no other options, because the 4-teamer is the worst system there is.
We have a 0.5% chance of making a 12-team CFP compared to the current 0% chance of making a 4-team, so yes its an improvement. But with the current NIL landscape, I think we will gradually approach 0% once again as the haves and have nots continue to divide.
Even in 2014, we would have barely made it if you applied one G5 autobid and scrutinized the order of teams 5-12 the same way you did 1-4. And if somehow there were 2 G5 autobids, we wouldn’t have made it at all.
We make it in as the #10 team in 2014. There were no worthy G5 teams.
Hell, if we beat Ole Miss in 2017 we are on the borderline.
That's plenty fine for me.
We actually would have very likely been #11, which would have been the very last at-large in any system that guarantees an autobid to the top G5 team….which has been what has been proposed for most all of the future models. Kansas State would have been the ultimate loser to see their bid go to the G5 team.
We already know the committee favored Michigan State over us, and only swapped us at the end to get the TV matchups they wanted.
Ole Miss would have jumped us for sure, they beat the hell out of us head-to-head with a one legged QB, dealt the only loss to the final CFP #1 team, and would have finished with the same record and ahead of us in the conference standings if not for a fluke play with a would-be game winning TD being stopped by a fumble from the player’s leg snapping like a twig.
Georgia Tech jumps us for sure, also. Finished with the same regular season record, had wins over final CFP ranked #13 and #17 teams (both better than our 2 best which were #19 / #23), played in their conference title game, and only lost by 2 to the CFP #3 team.
Arizona also would jump us for the same reasons as Tech. Wins over CFP #2 and #15 teams were both better than any of ours. Also had the same regular season record, and also played for their conference championship.
But thats still one year we would have made it or at worst been in the thick of it. And we are probably a win in the Egg Bowl away in 2017. That’s a heck of a lot better than what we have now. Now we just play for bowl games no one cares about or wants to play in. We effectively play so we can tailgate.
I doubt we are materially worse in recruiting in the NIL era. It’s helped give us the talent we have this year. Next year will be rough bc I’m just not sure how well Leach and Co evaluated or recruited.
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.