Turns out it was just another “BCS Year” after all.

[Perd Hapley]

After all the drama and hot takes of Bama vs. FSU vs. Texas, none of it mattered. There were only 2 resumes with no obvious flaws the whole time, and those 2 teams are now meeting for the championship. Had the BCS still been in place, you’d have had no trouble just picking Michigan and Washington, leaving everyone else at home to play for pride, and nothing would have changed.

Looking back at the 10-year history of the CFP, its kind of humorous / sad how blatantly they are just chasing dollars for with the expansion to 12 teams.

- One of the Top 2 will have won 7 of the 10 titles

- At least one of the Top 2 will have been in 9 of the 10 title games.

- The 4-seed actually won 2 of the first 4 CFP championships. Since then, the 4-seed has been not won a single CFP game (0-6).

Pretty hard to make a case that the number of deserving teams to compete for the NC is closer to 12 than it is to 2.

 

[HotMop]

Yawn.

 

[MississippiTexan]

After all the drama and hot takes of Bama vs. FSU vs. Texas, none of it mattered. There were only 2 resumes with no obvious flaws the whole time, and those 2 teams are now meeting for the championship. Had the BCS still been in place, you’d have had no trouble just picking Michigan and Washington, leaving everyone else at home to play for pride, and nothing would have changed.

Looking back at the 10-year history of the CFP, its kind of humorous / sad how blatantly they are just chasing dollars for with the expansion to 12 teams.

- One of the Top 2 will have won 7 of the 10 titles

- At least one of the Top 2 will have been in 9 of the 10 title games.

- The 4-seed actually won 2 of the first 4 CFP championships. Since then, the 4-seed has been not won a single CFP game (0-6).

Pretty hard to make a case that the number of deserving teams to compete for the NC is closer to 12 than it is to 2.

Your stats are a bit misleading because this is only the 4th time in the playoff era (10 years) that the top two teams have both made the championship game. This would mean that your BCS system which only picked the top two teams was only correct in picking the tops two teams 40 percent of the time.

In any playoff system, the top 1 and 2 teams are supposed to win which why they have soon to be 7 of 10 times. However, if I'm a 3 or 4 seed I sure like 30 percent odds of winning the championship better than 0 percent.

I'm not sure how there is any argument that the playoff is better than the BCS or how an expanded playoff will be better than the 4 team playoff. I'd honestly be happy if they expanded it even more and got rid of bowl games. Maybe even create a pointless tournament like we have with the NIT for the next tier that don't make the real playoff rather than bowls. Tournaments are more fun to watch than exhibition bowl games.

 

[ronpolk]

After all the drama and hot takes of Bama vs. FSU vs. Texas, none of it mattered. There were only 2 resumes with no obvious flaws the whole time, and those 2 teams are now meeting for the championship. Had the BCS still been in place, you’d have had no trouble just picking Michigan and Washington, leaving everyone else at home to play for pride, and nothing would have changed.

Looking back at the 10-year history of the CFP, its kind of humorous / sad how blatantly they are just chasing dollars for with the expansion to 12 teams.

- One of the Top 2 will have won 7 of the 10 titles

- At least one of the Top 2 will have been in 9 of the 10 title games.

- The 4-seed actually won 2 of the first 4 CFP championships. Since then, the 4-seed has been not won a single CFP game (0-6).

Pretty hard to make a case that the number of deserving teams to compete for the NC is closer to 12 than it is to 2.

Were you offended by watching 2 great games?

 

[mcdawg22]

Were you offended by watching 2 great games?

Yeah. Because I was tired today as a result of being glued to the TV late last night watching a great game.

 

[StateCollege]

Pretty hard to make a case that the number of deserving teams to compete for the NC is closer to 12 than it is to 2.

Big time strawman here. That’s not the argument. The argument for the playoff is that there is too much subjectivity in rankings to be sure that the Top 2 from the BCS poll are the clear two most deserving teams to play for a national championship.

This is proven by the CFB Playoff Final including a 3 or 4 seed more times than not.

The case for expanding the playoff was demonstrated this year and I’m not even talking about FSU. We had UGA and Ohio State, two teams that won every game EXCEPT close losses to teams that did make the playoff. There’s no question that UGA was a national championship caliber team, regardless of the SECCG result. I’m not saying they would for sure win it, but they are of the same level as those who made the playoff. The expanded playoff will now give a team like UGA a chance to win it all, which is more than deserved.

 

[ronpolk]

Yeah. Because I was tired today as a result of being glued to the TV late last night watching a great game.

Haha for real… I think it’s pretty obvious at this point we will get San Francisco and Baltimore in the Super Bowl… so just cancel the rest of the NFL playoffs*****

 

[Perd Hapley]

Your stats are a bit misleading because this is only the 4th time in the playoff era (10 years) that the top two teams have both made the championship game. This would mean that your BCS system which only picked the top two teams was only correct in picking the tops two teams 40 percent of the time.

In any playoff system, the top 1 and 2 teams are supposed to win which why they have soon to be 7 of 10 times. However, if I'm a 3 or 4 seed I sure like 30 percent odds of winning the championship better than 0 percent.

I'm not sure how there is any argument that the playoff is better than the BCS or how an expanded playoff will be better than the 4 team playoff. I'd honestly be happy if they expanded it even more and got rid of bowl games. Maybe even create a pointless tournament like we have with the NIT for the next tier that don't make the real playoff rather than bowls. Tournaments are more fun to watch than exhibition bowl games.

I’m not advocating for going back to only 2 teams. I’m simply noting that when the #4 seed goes 6 straight years without winning a game that maybe its hard to argue that 8 more teams should be added to the fold for merit / fairness reasons.

Its obviously not hard to argue that it makes sense to add 8 more teams for financial windfall reasons…..which is of course the only thing anyone cares about anymore. Everyone knows teams like Mizzou or Liberty aren’t going to ever stand a chance in this thing, and pitting them against a 5-seed UGA or 6-seed Oregon or someone like that isn’t going to be very entertaining.