The 8 team playoff would have been

[Pitt79]

A single championship of Bama vs Clemson would have worked fine this year. I am fine with a Final 4, but u do not need anymore. If you lose more than 1 game, then u have no say. You had your chance already and blew it.

This comment is totally invalid. Then just select a Final 4 only for basketball, that way you can make sure the same "best" teams always win, in November every year, just select Duke, Kentucky, Kansas and UNC and be done with it. EIGHT TEAMS is the minimum to make it a valid football championship playoffs, without every conference champ represented, the regular season is meaningless.

 

[oldpantherfan]

1

I'd be all for it. No tears for the LOSING rich guys. Or make it 12 teams with a bye round and add 4 LOSERS. tOSU, Michigan, whoever, Wisconsin and USC.

here is how your (12 team ) expansion would look like .

9. SAN DIEGO STATE
10. WEST VIRGINIA
11.WISCONSIN/COLORADO/ NAVY (SPOTS 11 & 12 BASED ON AN ESTABLISHED CRITERIA)..

Notice the inclusion of the BIG12 and the inclusion of OHIO STATE (they were third in conference).

 

[Pitt79]

OK, you're leaving out anybody that doesn't reach their conference championship game.

I don't think any of this will go this far, I'd settle for the P5 conference champs being automatic bids. Myself, for me, it's more important that at least there be a path based JUST on winning certain games that get you in, without considering subjective BS like "body of work" than getting perceived "best" teams in..

 

[Piranha]

This comment is totally invalid. Then just select a Final 4 only for basketball, that way you can make sure the same "best" teams always win, in November every year, just select Duke, Kentucky, Kansas and UNC and be done with it. EIGHT TEAMS is the minimum to make it a valid football championship playoffs, without every conference champ represented, the regular season is meaningless.

You are comparing apples to oranges. COLLEGE football and basketball are completely different.

 

[Pitt79]

You are comparing apples to oranges. COLLEGE football and basketball are completely different.

So what? I still want all the conference champs in. I want every team to have a legit path into the playoff, just by winning certain games on the field. The regular season was meaningless for Penn State, Oklahoma for example, they went through 12-13 games, they achieved at a high level, they where champions of 2 of the 5 best leagues in the country and the regular season meant nothing for them. You see it the way you do, I see it the way I do, to me, it's more important to gain entry by being a champion of something, than by being subjectively deemed best team. I honestly don't see reason for opposition to P5 Champs getting automatic bids? If winning one of those leagues doesn't make you "deserving", I don't know what does.

 

[yc_ballcat]

Why does him being on cocaine matter? Still the CHAMPIONS. '84, '85, my point is the same, there was also the 11 loss NC State team that was NCAA CHAMPION, UCONN several years ago that ran the table of the BET and the NCAAT, these are DESERVING CHAMPIONS because they won the games that defined champion.

That was just an aside related to that game. Probably should have excluded it as it's not relevant at all to the discussion. In any case, I agree with your overall sentiment; I'm all for determining it on the field or on the court. How could you not enjoy what 1983 NC State or (on a lessor scale) 2006 Boise State did? Anyone who's seen the 30 for 30 on that NC State team would never want to go back and change history. They had to win the ACC tournament just to get a bid ... and they barely avoided a loss in the first round of the ACC tournament! UConn over UK in 2014 was awesome. Napier and Boatright were great. I hope Washington beats Bama.

 

[Jpripper88]

This is the main argument for 8, at least with 8, EVERY Power 5 team controls it's own destiny to make the playoff and that's what I care about most, teams qualifying based on winning a league championship by winning certain games ON THE FIELD. Entering the tournament BECAUSE OF winning a certain game, not on subjective criteria, like "body of work" and BS like that.

Myself, I'd also add a stipulation that the best of the non-P5 champions get an automatic bid too, because I think it's stupid that they call those leagues D1, then exclude them from participation. That would leave 3 wild cards, only two in my plan. And I know I have no sympathy for the blue bloods, so that's OK by me.

IMO wild cards are corporate welfare, for the subjectively decided best teams, that fail ON THE FIELD and you want to give them extra chances, sorta like bailing out failed banks and CEOs, so I'm fine if only 2-3 "best teams" get welfare to stay in, I'm not crying about the 3rd-4th-5th-6th best LOSER who is left out, why? Because it's sports to decide things by game results alone and not perceived best talent or "body of work", I personally will not be watching the playoff this year, or probably any year, until they either give automatic bids to the P5 Conference Champs, or Pitt makes it.

Except many times the best teams are in the same divisions or conferences. The committee and the overwhelming majority of fans want the best teams to get in and subjectivity is amazing for the sport to stay relevant and interesting, so there is essentially no chance they would remove that completely.

I see what you are saying, but you aren't even relatively close to the target audience. You have readily admitted you don't care at all about the playoffs/championship and don't even watch. If Pitt isn't in, you don't care.

Also, the G5 teams have, essentially, no value, so there is no way the P5 (and especially the powers of the P5) should give them a true seat at the table. They would be much better off just delegating them even further than giving them a true piece of the pie.

 

[Jpripper88]

That's not true, IMO anybody that wins their conference, then beats 2-3 teams in a playoff system is definitely deserving of the title any year. Because being the best team, doesn't have anything to do with being champion.

And being a conference champion doesn't have anything to do with being the best team in the country, which is the stated goal for the committee and the playoff.

 

[Jpripper88]

If they're so good, why do you want corporate welfare, to make it easier for them? I'd rather see them have to fight through a gauntlet of inferior teams with the threat of being tripped up. It's almost like you want to rig it for the rich guy to make sure there's no chance he fails? Makes no sense, I ENJOY when some undeserving David Nobody rises up and slays Goliath.

But you don't watch the games anyway...

The way you guys are setting this up is no different than the CFP and is based on popularity. If ever played a sport and competed in a playoff then you know that from youth to pros no 3rd place teams ranks higher than champions or runner ups except in the corrupt, money based NCAA. If this was true than there would be no need for conference championship games, which the NCAA put emphasis on . Why to make more money !!!! It doesn't matter if you win if the committee likes someone better, or looks better to advertisers, or sells more tickets.
Here is how a REAL 8 team playoff should look :
1. ALABAMA
2. WESTERN MICHIGAN
3.CLEMSON
4. WASHINGTON
5.PENN STATAE
6.OKLAHOMA
7.TEMPLE
8. WESTERN KENTUCKY

Boy would that be terrible. And why is Clemson above Washington? How are you making that arbitrary distinction? Why Temple over Western Kentucky or San Diego State or even Appalachian State?

THIS IS A BUSINESS!!! So is the NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL. Guess what? Yes, some of those leagues give preferential seeding/advantage to non division winners over division winners, so there goes that theory.

 

[Pitt79]

Except many times the best teams are in the same divisions or conferences. The committee and the overwhelming majority of fans want the best teams to get in and subjectivity is amazing for the sport to stay relevant and interesting, so there is essentially no chance they would remove that completely.

I see what you are saying, but you aren't even relatively close to the target audience. You have readily admitted you don't care at all about the playoffs/championship and don't even watch. If Pitt isn't in, you don't care.

Also, the G5 teams have, essentially, no value, so there is no way the P5 (and especially the powers of the P5) should give them a true seat at the table. They would be much better off just delegating them even further than giving them a true piece of the pie.

I would care and I would watch if all the champs where included, what makes me not care is that to me, it seems like a handout to rich people, like tOSU getting in, I don't care if it's Ped State! They beat them head to head and won the conference, I don't care who's "better" I truly feel like PSU and teams like them are ripped off every year in favor of name brand teams for TV ratings, it's not interesting to me, I'd RATHER see a lesser team get in, than see it rigged by giving a failed better team a free pass when would of been there if they'd won a game on the field.

 

[Piranha]

So what? I still want all the conference champs in. I want every team to have a legit path into the playoff, just by winning certain games on the field. The regular season was meaningless for Penn State, Oklahoma for example, they went through 12-13 games, they achieved at a high level, they where champions of 2 of the 5 best leagues in the country and the regular season meant nothing for them. You see it the way you do, I see it the way I do, to me, it's more important to gain entry by being a champion of something, than by being subjectively deemed best team. I honestly don't see reason for opposition to P5 Champs getting automatic bids? If winning one of those leagues doesn't make you "deserving", I don't know what does.

If a 3 loss team wins their Conference Championship, then they do not deserve a spot in the playoffs. What is this fixation on winning a conference championship? Pick the best 4 teams. The end.

 

[paulbl99]

A single championship of Bama vs Clemson would have worked fine this year. I am fine with a Final 4, but u do not need anymore. If you lose more than 1 game, then u have no say. You had your chance already and blew it.

Yep
And it's not going to 8 anytime before the contract is up which is quite a while.

They could go back to the original bowl setups And have a plus one game between 1/2 after the bowls and get it right just as well.
Btw when's the first bowl....let Bowl Season begin!!!!!

 

[Pitt79]

If a 3 loss team wins their Conference Championship, then they do not deserve a spot in the playoffs. What is this fixation on winning a conference championship? Pick the best 4 teams. The end.

NO, make it like all the other NORMAL sports, where winning your league, division, conference means something! College football is the most ridiculous sport, the only one left that still has "mythical championships", every other sport decides their championships by PLAYING GAMES, not committees and panels voting on their "opinions'' about who's subjectively "best team". A 3 loss team conference champ deserves to be in a playoff, yup, even a 5 loss champ does, if they WIN A CHAMPIONSHIP GAME ON THE FIELD to get there. It's not like the "best teams" would be cheated, they could of won the games that would send them there too. A team isn't more deserving because they have more talent. If you have more talent and lose your championship, you're less deserving, if your so "BEST" why didn't you win?

 

[GT74]

While I agree a conference championship should hold some water, I feel it should only be one of the criteria of an overall 'body of work'. Would Florida deserve a playoff spot had they beaten Alabama? They won a division of teams with 3 losses. That upset of Bama would not be a reason to put them in and take out another 1 or even 2 loss team. An 8 team playoff with the 5 conference champs and 3 at-large teams is a much fairer system to me, not to mention much more profitable for the conferences.

 

[Pitt79]

While I agree a conference championship should hold some water, I feel it should only be one of the criteria of an overall 'body of work'. Would Florida deserve a playoff spot had they beaten Alabama? They won a division of teams with 3 losses. That upset of Bama would not be a reason to put them in and take out another 1 or even 2 loss team. An 8 team playoff with the 5 conference champs and 3 at-large teams is a much fairer system to me, not to mention much more profitable for the conferences.

"Body of work" is the STUPID BS I want eliminated or reduced to selecting wild card teams THAT FAILED on the field but are deemed BEST BY OPINION! I want teams getting into a playoff based on something OBJECTIVE, like win this division, play the winner of another division, and the winner of that GAME is automatically in! Giant celebration ensues ON THE FIELD after the game.

Florida would absolutely DESERVE an automatic bid as a conference champ if all the champs got into an 8+ team tournament.

An 8 team playoff with the 5 conference champs and 3 at-large teams is a much fairer system to me too, that's the minimum that I would consider to make the champion not a "mythical" creature.

 

[Jpripper88]

I would care and I would watch if all the champs where included, what makes me not care is that to me, it seems like a handout to rich people, like tOSU getting in, I don't care if it's Ped State! They beat them head to head and won the conference, I don't care who's "better" I truly feel like PSU and teams like them are ripped off every year in favor of name brand teams for TV ratings, it's not interesting to me, I'd RATHER see a lesser team get in, than see it rigged by giving a failed better team a free pass when would of been there if they'd won a game on the field.

You said you didn't watch last year and it was 4 P5 champions, so I am calling BS.

Real CFB fans, the committee, and TV all want the best teams.

 

[Pitt79]

You said you didn't watch last year and it was 4 P5 champions, so I am calling BS.

Real CFB fans, the committee, and TV all want the best teams.

Not every champ was automatically included, there are 5 leagues not 4.

You don't decide who the real CFB fans are. it's a difference of opinion, plenty are posting in agreement with me.

How would you feel if Pitt beat Clemson in the ACC title game and they took FSU instead?

This "best team" and "body of work" nonsense is subjective BS and doesn't decide titles on the field.

I don't get the obsession with "subjective" best team, just like you don't care about OBJECTIVE championships, determined by PLAYING GAMES.

I'd definitely watch an entire 8 team playoff that was way less subjective and not a "made for TV" thing with teams chosen mostly for what TV wants.

 

[Pitt79]

Like Ohio State? They lost on the field, they didn't even make their league title game, THEY FAILED! Why is there this obsession to give a FAILURE a 2nd chance? I'm so glad no other sports have a BS system like this.

 

[Jpripper88]

Not every champ was automatically included, there are 5 leagues not 4.

You don't decide who the real CFB fans are. it's a difference of opinion, plenty are posting in agreement with me.

How would you feel if Pitt beat Clemson in the ACC title game and they took FSU instead?

This "best team" and "body of work" nonsense is subjective BS and doesn't decide titles on the field.

I don't get the obsession with "subjective" best team, just like you don't care about OBJECTIVE championships, determined by PLAYING GAMES.

I'd definitely watch an entire 8 team playoff that was way less subjective and not a "made for TV" thing with teams chosen mostly for what TV wants.

I think people who don't actually watch college football, the best games, and championships are not real fans. That is certainly my opinion, but I imagine would jive with 90% of those asked. You have said you don't even watch top regular season matchups with championships and spots on the line. You may be a Pitt fan, but you aren't a college football fan. That's cool, just don't pretend you are.

How would I feel about Pitt being left out in some scenario where they have more losses than another P5 team who got in? Not happy, but understanding. We should have lost less games.

 

[Pitt79]

You may be a Pitt fan, but you aren't a college football fan. That's cool, just don't pretend you are.

I'm not a fan of CFB the way it is now, because it's "mythical" and they even admit it, because they seem to want the same "blue blood" teams in the playoffs and best bowl games every year, and they even admit it, Because bowl games are partially decided by business reasons and not based on playing the game.

Now I love the March Madness and watch tons of that, even games not involving Pitt, why? Because ANY TEAM IN THE COUNTRY can get in by winning their conference, no matter how many losses, or "body of work". The whole thing is decided on the court, you can get there 18-12 and pull the upset on the 30-2 team and move on, BY WINNING A GAME. I don't think it's too much to ask to make college football include at least the conference champs and have an 8 team playoff, at least with that, every P5 team would be able to PLAY THEIR WAY into a championship playoff. It amazes me that people like you don't think it would be more interesting and not less, if Pitt was say 7-3 and still had a path to the playoff?

Now, as it stands, by week 10 or 11, there might be 2-3 meaningful games for the playoff, under what I'd propose there would be 10-15, and you think that's less entertaining and less interesting? More teams, more fans engaged, way more games meaning a lot? The NFL has it right, the whole parity thing, college football would be better if the door was open for a playoff run for more than just the 8-10 blue blood usual suspects 9 out of 10 years.

 

[Pitt79]

We should have lost less games.

But why don't you apply that to teams like tOSU, who could have been in their conference championship, but lost a game and FAILED on the field? Why do you want to give them a pass?

 

[Jpripper88]

I'm not a fan of CFB the way it is now, because it's "mythical" and they even admit it, because they seem to want the same "blue blood" teams in the playoffs and best bowl games every year, and they even admit it, Because bowl games are partially decided by business reasons and not based on playing the game.

Now I love the March Madness and watch tons of that, even games not involving Pitt, why? Because ANY TEAM IN THE COUNTRY can get in by winning their conference, no matter how many losses, or "body of work". The whole thing is decided on the court, you can get there 18-12 and pull the upset on the 30-2 team and move on, BY WINNING A GAME. I don't think it's too much to ask to make college football include at least the conference champs and have an 8 team playoff, at least with that, every P5 team would be able to PLAY THEIR WAY into a championship playoff. It amazes me that people like you don't think it would be more interesting and not less, if Pitt was say 7-3 and still had a path to the playoff?

Now, as it stands, by week 10 or 11, there might be 2-3 meaningful games for the playoff, under what I'd propose there would be 10-15, and you think that's less entertaining and less interesting? More teams, more fans engaged, way more games meaning a lot? The NFL has it right, the whole parity thing, college football would be better if the door was open for a playoff run for more than just the 8-10 blue blood usual suspects 9 out of 10 years.

I think the best construct would be 8 teams with 5 P5 Champs and 3 at large. However, I am still a college football fan and watch and very much enjoy the games, championships, and rivalries. You don't. I guess you never have because now, more than ever, there is more access and chances for lower level programs than there would be if we were still counting on the AP to vote a champ.

 

[Jpripper88]

But why don't you apply that to teams like tOSU, who could have been in their conference championship, but lost a game and FAILED on the field? Why do you want to give them a pass?

I do. They lost only 1 (while playing a much harder schedule) game. Penn State lost 2.

 

[Pitt79]

I think the best construct would be 8 teams with 5 P5 Champs and 3 at large. However, I am still a college football fan and watch and very much enjoy the games, championships, and rivalries. You don't. I guess you never have because now, more than ever, there is more access and chances for lower level programs than there would be if we were still counting on the AP to vote a champ.

I was never into gambling or anything like that. And I really need a true "rooting interest" to sit there for 3-4 hours watching a sports event. If it's 2 teams I don't care about, I honestly don't give a crap. Sure, if I turn on Michigan/tOSU and it's a close game in the 4th, I'll watch the ending. Same with the conference championship games or bowls, I'll flip from one to the other. I actually like NFL Redzone, I can sit there and watch parts of multiple games, when the only game I demand to see every minute of is the Steelers. And March Madness, I can sit there watching that for hours going from game to game, other than watching every second of Pitt's games.

As a sports fan, I don't want to obsessively be watching sports 24/7/365. So basically, I watch, and/or DVR every Steelers, Penguins, Pitt football & basketball, and certain soccer games game there is available, and watch as many of those I can, from beginning to end, and then maybe rewatch it if it was good enough. The reason I can do that, is that I ACTUALLY CARE who wins. If 'Bamas playing Auburn, I just DON'T CARE.

 

[Pitt79]

(while playing a much harder schedule) .

That's what I want to get rid of, the subjective, opinion based stuff.

 

[Jpripper88]

I was never into gambling or anything like that. And I really need a true "rooting interest" to sit there for 3-4 hours watching a sports event. If it's 2 teams I don't care about, I honestly don't give a crap. Sure, if I turn on Michigan/tOSU and it's a close game in the 4th, I'll watch the ending. Same with the conference championship games or bowls, I'll flip from one to the other. I actually like NFL Redzone, I can sit there and watch parts of multiple games, when the only game I demand to see every minute of is the Steelers.

As a sports fan, I don't want to obsessively be watching sports 24/7/365. So basically, I watch, and/or DVR every Steelers, Penguins, Pitt football & basketball, and certain soccer games game there is available, and watch as many of those I can, from beginning to end, and then maybe rewatch it if it was good enough. The reason I can do that, is that I ACTUALLY CARE who wins. If 'Bamas playing Auburn, I just DON'T CARE.

Ok. That is fine. Nothing is wrong with that, at all. However, it does mean you aren't really a college football fan. That isn't an affront on you as a person or even sports fan. You just don't really care about college football. Glad you care about Pitt, though. That is great. Hail to Pitt!

 

[oldpantherfan]

If a 3 loss team wins their Conference Championship, then they do not deserve a spot in the playoffs. What is this fixation on winning a conference championship? Pick the best 4 teams. The end.

Piranha have you ever played or coached a sport ? THERE IS NO FIXATION on college champonships it is reality. You tell me in what sport at any level does a 3rd place team get invited to a playoff over a champion or runnerup except college football. And it's not apples and oranges in college basketball CONFERNCE CHAMPIONS get the automatic bid and regular season champs get an at large bid. THAT is how it should be.Wake up championships should be won on the filed not in the advertisers board rooms, other wise you are cheating the athletes.
And get over your hate for PSU and give credit where it is due. They beat OhioState on the field and won the championship and they deserve to go.
What the CFP is doing and you condone is a beauty contest , and its a matter of opinion but everybody has a different one. That's why they play the game.