Will Playoff Format Be a Disappointment?

[PittPanther44]

As someone that wanted an expanded playoff (you know, settle it on the field), I’m getting a weird vibe with these playoffs.

Maybe it’s because we tanked after as late as early November we thought we had a shot. Maybe it’s seeing PSU do well. Maybe it’s the blowouts. But I’ve probably watched two total hours so far (NFL and holiday stuff a factor too).

But maybe it goes beyond that. Is it the lack of real contenders outside the top half? Is it just a huge home field advantage when you are a better team? Is it that college football moments are built around rivalries?

NFL playoffs are awesome because you watch a group of teams that you know very well slug it out. Who knew 2 months ago that your appointment watching would be Indiana, Boise, or SMU. College football feels “big” when you have big rivalries or elite teams playing each other to win at all. It’s had none of that, and I think some of the ticket demand reflects that. I mean the PSU thing shows that many of their fans would rather go to a meaningless night time white out game, because creating that is more important to them than this (at least early round)

This all might change in the subsequent rounds. And I’m not not saying go back. Just saying it’s been underwhelming and I didn’t think it would be.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

As someone that wanted an expanded playoff (you know, settle it on the field), I’m getting a weird vibe with these playoffs.

Maybe it’s because we tanked after as late as early November we thought we had a shot. Maybe it’s seeing PSU do well. Maybe it’s the blowouts. But I’ve probably watched two total hours so far (NFL and holiday stuff a factor too).

But maybe it goes beyond that. Is it the lack of real contenders outside the top half? Is it just a huge home field advantage when you are a better team? Is it that college football moments are built around rivalries?

NFL playoffs are awesome because you watch a group of teams that you know very well slug it out. Who knew 2 months ago that your appointment watching would be Indiana, Boise, or SMU. College football feels “big” when you have big rivalries or elite teams playing each other to win at all. It’s had none of that, and I think some of the ticket demand reflects that. I mean the PSU thing shows that many of their fans would rather go to a meaningless night time white out game, because creating that is more important to them than this (at least early round)

This all might change in the subsequent rounds. And I’m not not saying go back. Just saying it’s been underwhelming and I didn’t think it would be.

A 6-team playoff is good enough. If people insist on 8, then okay.

 

[forbesfield]

Not sure what you mean about the PSU thing. The place was loud and full. As was OSU. Didn't see much of Clemson/Texas.

I'd love to have one of these games at Acrisure.

That said, it's all window dressing for the most part. There are still only 3-4 real contenders.

 

[Upg bobcat]

Maybe I'm nostalgic, but I like the pageantry and tradition of college football, which is quickly falling by the wayside. I liked the BCS, or even pre-BCS, better than the playoff era, whether the 4 team or 12 team playoff. I think the BCS with a "plus 1" game would have been ideal (as opposed to a 4 team playoff). Obviously you would have massive fights about who are #1 and #2 and deserves to play in that extra game--and you even have the risk of a rematch in that extra game which would be problematic in my opinion. But the conferences meant more back then, and bowl games having a conference affiliation made them better.

 

[S.R.M.]

As someone that wanted an expanded playoff (you know, settle it on the field), I’m getting a weird vibe with these playoffs.

Maybe it’s because we tanked after as late as early November we thought we had a shot. Maybe it’s seeing PSU do well. Maybe it’s the blowouts. But I’ve probably watched two total hours so far (NFL and holiday stuff a factor too).

But maybe it goes beyond that. Is it the lack of real contenders outside the top half? Is it just a huge home field advantage when you are a better team? Is it that college football moments are built around rivalries?

NFL playoffs are awesome because you watch a group of teams that you know very well slug it out. Who knew 2 months ago that your appointment watching would be Indiana, Boise, or SMU. College football feels “big” when you have big rivalries or elite teams playing each other to win at all. It’s had none of that, and I think some of the ticket demand reflects that. I mean the PSU thing shows that many of their fans would rather go to a meaningless night time white out game, because creating that is more important to them than this (at least early round)

This all might change in the subsequent rounds. And I’m not not saying go back. Just saying it’s been underwhelming and I didn’t think it would be.

I think in the pre NIL world the expanded playoff would have led to more parity in the long run. Expanding the playoff allows for a school like Boise St. to get their name out there and compete with the big boys year in and year out if they continue to dominate their conference the way they have for the last 20 years. This would lead to more visibility and the appearance of the ability to compete which helps them upgrade their talent, get better TV deals, grow their fan base, etc. I was hoping that an expanded playoff would create the football version of Gonzaga, a team that literally no one heard of in 1997 that is now one of the top 5 programs in the country year in and year out. Gonzaga took advantage of the compounding nature of consistently being a good team in a lower level conference and now they field teams that are on paper as good as Kansas, Duke, and Kentucky and they have consistently hung with and beaten the blue bloods for the last 10 years. Unfortunately attracting talent now comes down to money and money only. A recruit doesn't care that Boise made the playoffs when they are offering them $100K in NIL and a mediocre Florida or Texas A&M program can offer them $1.2M.

 

[MorningCoffee13]

As someone that wanted an expanded playoff (you know, settle it on the field), I’m getting a weird vibe with these playoffs.

Maybe it’s because we tanked after as late as early November we thought we had a shot. Maybe it’s seeing PSU do well. Maybe it’s the blowouts. But I’ve probably watched two total hours so far (NFL and holiday stuff a factor too).

But maybe it goes beyond that. Is it the lack of real contenders outside the top half? Is it just a huge home field advantage when you are a better team? Is it that college football moments are built around rivalries?

NFL playoffs are awesome because you watch a group of teams that you know very well slug it out. Who knew 2 months ago that your appointment watching would be Indiana, Boise, or SMU. College football feels “big” when you have big rivalries or elite teams playing each other to win at all. It’s had none of that, and I think some of the ticket demand reflects that. I mean the PSU thing shows that many of their fans would rather go to a meaningless night time white out game, because creating that is more important to them than this (at least early round)

This all might change in the subsequent rounds. And I’m not not saying go back. Just saying it’s been underwhelming and I didn’t think it would be.

They definitely needed seeding and not defer to conference champions. The first round would have seen:

Clemson vs ND
ASU vs OSU
SMU vs Tennessee
Indiana vs Boise

Likely less blowouts and an opportunity for an underdog to get to next round.

Oregon would get Clemson/ND winner
Georgia would get OSU/ASU winner
Texas would get Tennessee/SMU winner
Penn State would get Indiana/Boise winner

I don't know if it would be better or not.

 

[PittPanther44]

Not sure what you mean about the PSU thing. The place was loud and full. As was OSU. Didn't see much of Clemson/Texas.

I'd love to have one of these games at Acrisure.

That said, it's all window dressing for the most part. There are still only 3-4 real contenders.

True, me too. But the get in price secondary market was $25. Get price in South Bend was like $600. So for a school that thinks they are the best, it reflects less demand than other games they have had.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

1) This is good for accessibility and exposure, which should help level the playing field a bit. Under what other format would Boise State have a chance? Under what other format would we be talking about Arizona State in January? If you're a fan of a school that isn't named Alabama, Ohio State, etc. you'd be foolish to think of this as anything other than a positive.

2) This is good for entertainment. The games have sucked so far, so everybody has their instantly-gratifying pitchfork jabs down; I get it. But the players have told you that bowl games don't matter anymore. So do you want to watch more meaningful college football or less?

3) If anything, I would make the damn thing bigger:

- Each conference plays ten games

- At the end of those ten games, they all have their own 4-team tournament to determine a champion

- G5 also has a tournament

- Lowest-rated conference champion faces the G5 champion in a play-in game

- Then you have a 4-team tournament representing all the P4 conferences (or three + one G5), but the process as a whole is more expansive and more objective

- Get rid of bowl games, because they're an insult to televised competition

 

[mlvnsmly]

True, me too. But the get in price secondary market was $25. Get price in South Bend was like $600. So for a school that thinks they are the best, it reflects less demand than other games they have had.

Looks like whoever decided to stay home was right. Biggest blowout of the playoffs.

 

[S.R.M.]

1) This is good for accessibility and exposure, which should help level the playing field a bit. Under what other format would Boise State have a chance? Under what other format would we be talking about Arizona State in January? If you're a fan of a school that isn't named Alabama, Ohio State, etc. you'd be foolish to think of this as anything other than a positive.

2) This is good for entertainment. The games have sucked so far, so everybody has their instantly-gratifying pitchfork jabs down; I get it. But the players have told you that bowl games don't matter anymore. So do you want to watch more meaningful college football or less?

3) If anything, I would make the damn thing bigger:

- Each conference plays ten games

- At the end of those ten games, they all have their own 4-team tournament to determine a champion

- G5 also has a tournament

- Lowest-rated conference champion faces the G5 champion in a play-in game

- Then you have a 4-team tournament representing all the P4 conferences (or three + one G5), but the process as a whole is more expansive and more objective

- Get rid of bowl games, because they're an insult to televised competition

Agree with a lot of this. I'd expand it to 24 teams and get rid of all the bowl games. Who cares if the games suck until the semis it will be a big upgrade over the Bad Boy Mowers bowl. Maybe 4 years out of 5 years it is chalk but if 20% of the time a lesser team makes a magical run it is better than a bunch of sports writers who never played or coached a college football game arbitrarily picking a national champion. These are the same people that gave Jason White the hesiman over Larry Fitzgerald so I don't know how anyone could trust their judgement.

I will never understand why college football fans object to a title being settled by a playoff while that is the way it works in every other American sports league including every other NCAA sport.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Agree with a lot of this. I'd expand it to 24 teams and get rid of all the bowl games. Who cares if the games suck until the semis it will be a big upgrade over the Bad Boy Mowers bowl. Maybe 4 years out of 5 years it is chalk but if 20% of the time a lesser team makes a magical run it is better than a bunch of sports writers who never played or coached a college football game arbitrarily picking a national champion. These are the same people that gave Jason White the hesiman over Larry Fitzgerald so I don't know how anyone could trust their judgement.

I will never understand why college football fans object to a title being settled by a playoff while that is the way it works in every other American sports league including every other NCAA sport.

"Reckon it didn't used to be this way! Let's just play the season out and vote if we want Georgia or Ohio State to be the champion each year, cause there were some blowouts yesterday!"

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Not sure what you mean about the PSU thing. The place was loud and full. As was OSU. Didn't see much of Clemson/Texas.

I'd love to have one of these games at Acrisure.

That said, it's all window dressing for the most part. There are still only 3-4 real contenders.

90K. $14 tickets on Stubhub. WPIAL Championships cost more.

 

[PittMan2003]

A 6-team playoff is good enough. If people insist on 8, then okay.

Yeah, I think 8 would have been the sweet spot. There are teams that don’t belong and then they also are playing on the road so it’s really just not a great product. At least if they were playing on a neutral field it wouldn’t be as lopsided.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Yeah, I think 8 would have been the sweet spot. There are teams that don’t belong and then they also are playing on the road so it’s really just not a great product. At least if they were playing on a neutral field it wouldn’t be as lopsided.

I could just as easily say it should be 16 because Alabama and Ole Miss would probably win at Penn State.

If anything, Miami is probably better than SMU, Alabama is probably better than Tennessee, Ole Miss is probably better than Indiana, South Carolina is probably better than Clemson, etc.

So I don't think there are too many teams. But that's the way it all shook out because, at some point, the season has to matter.

 

[joefromlancaster]

Yesterday was a complete joke and a embarrassment to college football.
I wonder what the decision makers think about the games?
As a fan we have no option. But if the brain trusts take a bath cashwise. ' m sure changes will be made

 

[forbesfield]

True, me too. But the get in price secondary market was $25. Get price in South Bend was like $600. So for a school that thinks they are the best, it reflects less demand than other games they have had.

I get what you are saying, and not to defend anyone, but I've said already that the fanbase sent a bunch of people already to the CCG in Indy, or wherever it was. On top of that, they are looking at potentially two more games after this one. I mean, something has to give somewhere. I could see some of them figuring that they'd rather go to the Fiesta Bowl if they win, and if they don't, then, they didn't miss anything. I don't see how any of these teams can expect their fans to basically travel 4 times in a very short period of time for lots of money.

 

[forbesfield]

90K. $14 tickets on Stubhub. WPIAL Championships cost more.

Dude, you need to just move on with this. We have games where tickets can be had basically for free that only draw 35K or less. Does that make us losers?

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Yesterday was a complete joke and a embarrassment to college football.
I wonder what the decision makers think about the games?
As a fan we have no option. But if the brain trusts take a bath cashwise. ' m sure changes will be made

Last 6 national championship games (all under the 4-team format):

2023: Michigan 34 - Washington 13
2022: Georgia 65 - TCU 7
2021: Georgia 33 - Alabama 18
2020: Alabama 52 - Ohio State 24
2019: LSU 42 - Clemson 25
2018: Clemson 44 - Alabama 16

Are your nails as bitten down to the cuticles as mine?

 

[PittMan2003]

I could just as easily say it should be 16 because Alabama and Ole Miss would probably win at Penn State.

If anything, Miami is probably better than SMU, Alabama is probably better than Tennessee, Ole Miss is probably better than Indiana, South Carolina is probably better than Clemson, etc.

So I don't think there are too many teams. But that's the way it all shook out because, at some point, the season has to matter.

Yeah I agree they could have picked better teams. But then you have to let in teams with 3 losses which isn’t great either.

 

[pittbb80]

I could just as easily say it should be 16 because Alabama and Ole Miss would probably win at Penn State.

If anything, Miami is probably better than SMU, Alabama is probably better than Tennessee, Ole Miss is probably better than Indiana, South Carolina is probably better than Clemson, etc.

So I don't think there are too many teams. But that's the way it all shook out because, at some point, the season has to matter.

Yup. Ageee 100 pct. Got to 16

Just because there are no upsets the first year doesn’t mean this will always be the case

And to your point in the earlier post im not sure how any Pitt fan can be against expanding to 16. It’s the only chance of a team like Pitt ever playing a meaningful game. The bowl games beyond perhaps the big 4 have always been garbage but now even more so with the transfer portal and kids opting out.

I would expand it to 24 teams just like FCS has done for yers

 

[pittbb80]

Last 6 national championship games (all under the 4-team format):

2023: Michigan 34 - Washington 13
2022: Georgia 65 - TCU 7
2021: Georgia 33 - Alabama 18
2020: Alabama 52 - Ohio State 24
2019: LSU 42 - Clemson 25
2018: Clemson 44 - Alabama 16

Are your nails as bitten down to the cuticles as mine?

Seems like the games this week were far more competitive. Ha

 

[Seneca_Valley]

Yesterday was a complete joke and a embarrassment to college football.
I wonder what the decision makers think about the games?
As a fan we have no option. But if the brain trusts take a bath cashwise. ' m sure changes will be made

You have the option to turn the TV off. I did. A twelve-team format is pretty much going to hand fans opening-round blowouts. In the future, the semis and the final are the only games worthy of my time.

 

[King Of All Message Boards]

Re: PSU attendance comments...glass houses, stones, etc. Comical. And a few are PATHETICALLY obsessed. And for what?

Acrisure has 25-30K and some of the (probably same) boneheads here proclaim there were 45k+.

 

[forbesfield]

Yup. Ageee 100 pct. Got to 16

Just because there are no upsets the first year doesn’t mean this will always be the case

And to your point in the earlier post im not sure how any Pitt fan can be against expanding to 16. It’s the only chance of a team like Pitt ever playing a meaningful game. The bowl games beyond perhaps the big 4 have always been garbage but now even more so with the transfer portal and kids opting out.

I would expand it to 24 teams just like FCS has done for yers

If the reason to get to 16 or 24 is to just give more teams the opportunity to get shellacked, I'm not sure I'm on board. There will still be blowouts. The first round or so will just exist to pick the teams that will ultimately be on the receiving end of that blowout. It's the ultimate pyrrhic victory.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

Yup. Ageee 100 pct. Got to 16

Just because there are no upsets the first year doesn’t mean this will always be the case

And to your point in the earlier post im not sure how any Pitt fan can be against expanding to 16. It’s the only chance of a team like Pitt ever playing a meaningful game. The bowl games beyond perhaps the big 4 have always been garbage but now even more so with the transfer portal and kids opting out.

I would expand it to 24 teams just like FCS has done for yers

A 16-team playoff is only going to add more blowouts and repeat matchups among teams that have already played. The Big Dance is interesting because upsets occur every year and you have the potential for a Cinderella making a deep run. That simply isn’t going to happen in college football.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Yeah I agree they could have picked better teams. But then you have to let in teams with 3 losses which isn’t great either.

I want objective qualifications. No one would question when a 8-8 division winner made the playoffs over a 10-6 team, because those were just the rules.

 

[pittbb80]

If the reason to get to 16 or 24 is to just give more teams the opportunity to get shellacked, I'm not sure I'm on board. There will still be blowouts. The first round or so will just exist to pick the teams that will ultimately be on the receiving end of that blowout. It's the ultimate pyrrhic victory.

As someone else pointed out there have always been blowouts in the big bowl games and the “championship” game. It’s gonna happen. There will also be years when there are huge upsets. It’s crazy to dismiss the expanded format based on one data point this year Just like March madness some years there are tons of upsets and others there are very few

I’d much rather watch a play off series than any of the prior crappy bowl games.

 

[Franb]

90K. $14 tickets on Stubhub. WPIAL Championships cost more.

PSU had 106,000 attendance, which is 500 below capacity. Of course prices would be higher for Norte Dame: much smaller stadium and both teams from Indiana.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Yup. Ageee 100 pct. Got to 16

Just because there are no upsets the first year doesn’t mean this will always be the case

And to your point in the earlier post im not sure how any Pitt fan can be against expanding to 16. It’s the only chance of a team like Pitt ever playing a meaningful game. The bowl games beyond perhaps the big 4 have always been garbage but now even more so with the transfer portal and kids opting out.

I would expand it to 24 teams just like FCS has done for yers

I'm afraid it gets to a point where we might as well select the field before the season. Like, yeah, I'd pick 9-3 Alabama to represent me over 11-1 Indiana if I had to choose a team to play for my life. Everybody knows they're better.

But the season has to mean something. You can't just go throwing 8-4 SEC teams over 10-2 ACC teams based on recruiting rankings.

I'd be fine with 24 teams and objective standards. Some of these blowouts have to do with the format as much as anything else. If we had a true 24 vs 1, 12 vs 13, etc. format there would be a mixture of close games and blowouts... which would be fine.

This being the first year of this is a bad time to have these lopsided games, because it's causing people to overreact. That's why it's good that Tennessee got ran of of the stadium, so people don't just view this as an ACC/Indiana thing.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I think the CFP committee has to revisit the "best vs deserved" argument and make it clear what they are looking for. I don't think there is any argument at all that Alabama and Mississippi were better than Indiana and SMU. But they lost 3 games against a much more difficult schedule.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Dude, you need to just move on with this. We have games where tickets can be had basically for free that only draw 35K or less. Does that make us losers?

$14 for playoff tickets. Couldn't sell out their stadium. Their reign as attendance champions is over forever. That is pathetic.

 

[kma0043]

To answer the thread title: yes

 

[Pitt2009]

The expanded CFP makes the regular season more interesting, but the postseason less interesting.

 

[HailtoPitt]

As someone that wanted an expanded playoff (you know, settle it on the field), I’m getting a weird vibe with these playoffs.

Maybe it’s because we tanked after as late as early November we thought we had a shot. Maybe it’s seeing PSU do well. Maybe it’s the blowouts. But I’ve probably watched two total hours so far (NFL and holiday stuff a factor too).

But maybe it goes beyond that. Is it the lack of real contenders outside the top half? Is it just a huge home field advantage when you are a better team? Is it that college football moments are built around rivalries?

NFL playoffs are awesome because you watch a group of teams that you know very well slug it out. Who knew 2 months ago that your appointment watching would be Indiana, Boise, or SMU. College football feels “big” when you have big rivalries or elite teams playing each other to win at all. It’s had none of that, and I think some of the ticket demand reflects that. I mean the PSU thing shows that many of their fans would rather go to a meaningless night time white out game, because creating that is more important to them than this (at least early round)

This all might change in the subsequent rounds. And I’m not not saying go back. Just saying it’s been underwhelming and I didn’t think it would be.

I used to think the playoffs would be the greatest thing ever. Now I couldn't give a damn. Part of that is because I know that Pitt has zero chance to get there. Partly because the admin at Pitt doesn't care enough. Partly because the SEC and BIG are slowly but surely becoming the only teams that matter. Partly because of the NIL debacle. It all adds up to a narrowing of competition and elimination of Pitt from ever having a chance again.

Also, it's stupid that the top 4 teams don't get a home game, but 5-8 do. Did Boise State lose out on revenue from not hosting a game?

 

[TD_6082]

I think the CFP committee has to revisit the "best vs deserved" argument and make it clear what they are looking for. I don't think there is any argument at all that Alabama and Mississippi were better than Indiana and SMU. But they lost 3 games against a much more difficult schedule.

Alabama lost to Vanderbilt, Tennessee, and Oklahoma. Not sure there is a any convincing argument for them being any better IU or SMU.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Alabama lost to Vanderbilt, Tennessee, and Oklahoma. Not sure there is a any convincing argument for them being any better IU or SMU.

It's not hard. If you want to make the playoffs and you are an SEC team, don't lose three games. If yoyur Pitt, don't lose more than one.

 

[Burgh15]

1. The seeding is difficult. There are 4 byes, but there's the odd arrangement with a P4 that is a step above the rest conferences eligible to participate (the P4 and then the rest should be playing for separate championships). Since it's an invitational and not an actual playoff, I'd rather see true seeds. I'd argue that Oregon and Ohio State were the two best teams and they have to meet in the second round. At worst, Ohio State should've been the 4 seed.

2. Why were there blow outs? There is a talent gap. There was also too much time off between games and that gap expands because of both talent and coaching with prep time. The season ended 11/30 with some playing games the next week. Dump conference championship games and start the playoffs the first weekend of December. They should've played the first round 12/7, second on 12/14, third, 12/21, and championship 12/28 or whenever they want around New Year's Day.

3. They need to dump the bowl games and have all teams have homefield throughout the playoffs with a neutral site for the championship.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Yesterday was a complete joke and a embarrassment to college football.
I wonder what the decision makers think about the games?
As a fan we have no option. But if the brain trusts take a bath cashwise. ' m sure changes will be made

My guess is that the decision makers haven't really had a chance to think about it yet, because they are still counting all the cash they made.

Maybe by the time the next round of games rolls around they'll have completed the count, and then they can think about what happened on the field before they start counting the next giant pile of cash.

 

[forbesfield]

$14 for playoff tickets. Couldn't sell out their stadium. Their reign as attendance champions is over forever. That is pathetic.

I hope someone gifts you a life for Christmas.

 

[forbesfield]

I used to think the playoffs would be the greatest thing ever. Now I couldn't give a damn. Part of that is because I know that Pitt has zero chance to get there. Partly because the admin at Pitt doesn't care enough. Partly because the SEC and BIG are slowly but surely becoming the only teams that matter. Partly because of the NIL debacle. It all adds up to a narrowing of competition and elimination of Pitt from ever having a chance again.

Also, it's stupid that the top 4 teams don't get a home game, but 5-8 do. Did Boise State lose out on revenue from not hosting a game?

The CFP gets the revenue and controls the stadium. They probably just pay a rental fee, which is likely substantial.