Vegas-type metrics show they are much better. Not necessarily saying that's how we should pick a tournament but IU and SMU didnt beat anyone. They also dont have any bad losses but that's also because they didn't play anyone.
Will Playoff Format Be a Disappointment?
- Thread starter PittPanther44
- Start date
Vegas-type metrics show they are much better. Not necessarily saying that's how we should pick a tournament but IU and SMU didnt beat anyone. They also dont have any bad losses but that's also because they didn't play anyone.
Exactly. It's mostly transactional. Several playoff teams have players on their roster that have already hit the portal and skipped town.
I just don't understand why a few blow outs with an expanded playoffs is a big deal. You give more teams the opportunity and they lose to better teams by 17 or 24 and then the best teams end up playing each other anyways. That is exactly how it works in many sports.
The Steelers have been blown out a bunch in the first round recently and I don't hear anyone clamoring to reduce the size of the NFL playoffs. When was the last time a team seeded below 4 in any conference won an NBA title? No one wants to shrink the NBA playoffs, in fact they just expanded it. Why does the conventional thinking that applies to all other sports not apply to college football?
A bigger playoff field keeps the regular season more interesting for more teams and though it won't happen routinely, there will be 2 or 3 years every decade where a team like Indiana or SMU will pull off a couple upsets which will allow them to increase their profile and potentially attract better talent which will eventually lead to more parity (assuming they can figure out a solution to make the NIL less impactful in recruiting).
I can't help but to think this format would have yeiled a much more appealing bracket had the last round of conference realignment not happened and and the PAC remained intact.
This would mean they kept the format where the 6 highest ranked conference champions make the playoffs.
In terms of the 4 conference champions that get byes instead of:
Oregon
Georgia
Boise State
Arizona State
A likely outcome would have been:
Oregon (PAC champion)
Ohio State/Penn State championship game winner
Georgia (SEC champion)
Texas (Big 12 champion)
Boise State would have still be in as one of the top 6 ranked conference champions, but no longer gets a bye.
6th highest ranked conference champion likely would have been either winner of a Clemson vs Miami ACC title game or possibly SMU if they had an undefeated season in the American conference.
This is IMO a much better starting point for the bracket than what we got and really drives home the degree to which greed of the NCAA member institutions is diminishing the quality of the on the field product.
This would mean they kept the format where the 6 highest ranked conference champions make the playoffs.
In terms of the 4 conference champions that get byes instead of:
Oregon
Georgia
Boise State
Arizona State
A likely outcome would have been:
Oregon (PAC champion)
Ohio State/Penn State championship game winner
Georgia (SEC champion)
Texas (Big 12 champion)
Boise State would have still be in as one of the top 6 ranked conference champions, but no longer gets a bye.
6th highest ranked conference champion likely would have been either winner of a Clemson vs Miami ACC title game or possibly SMU if they had an undefeated season in the American conference.
This is IMO a much better starting point for the bracket than what we got and really drives home the degree to which greed of the NCAA member institutions is diminishing the quality of the on the field product.
With the 4 team playoff, there was only one year where we had 2 competitive games in the first round and then we still ended up with a blow out in the championship game.
Are Bama and Ole Miss really better than SMU and Indy? Impossible to know but you're arguing about the 11/12 teams so who cares?
Yeah, but that was a home game. It’s not like it was a different trip. But I get it - it’s still a commitment to go that wasn’t made months in advance.
So point taken. I would absolutely be into it if Pitt was in it. Just don’t know if my overall lack of interest in these first round games is just me, the fact they were blowouts, or something that will be common with this format.
They could have expanded to 8 teams in a playoff and then used a NVIDIA AI chip to pick the 8 best teams regardless of conference champions or not. They would have saved time and accelerated this playoff which could be 4 extra games for a team that gets hot. How about the wear and tear on some 19 year old kids body. How about all of the expenses to go to perhaps 3 playoff games that your school is participating in. Just spend more money. Don’t forget the 2 commissioners of the Big 10 and the SEC. These guys are on a mission to crush the very fabric of what really is americas game. Kill off as much of the competition as possible. Keep more money from the networks and streamers. I watched 8 minutes of the PSU game and shut it off. I don’t have any interest in this farce. I like a 4 team playoff better. But of course I also liked when Nixon told America that Texas was the national champs over Penn State way back when. Maybe we should just have Congress vote on who should be crowned champions.
Finally, ESPN sucks
Finally, ESPN sucks
The problem with the current set up is that you had "automatic qualifiers" to the quarter-finals. Boise State and ASU have no busy skipping the first round of games. They won their Conference title, so they should absolutely be in the playoffs because of that. That being said, they are not deserving of being the 3rd and 4th seed. The 12 teams that were selected (and I have no real issues with any of them) should have been seeded by the committee using the criteria presented to them. Seeing Ohio State play Oregon next is bad. They are quite possibly the two best teams in the country and they are playing in the second round? Doesn't make any sense.
In all honesty, the CFP need to be expanded to at least 16 teams and eliminate byes for any teams. Also, why are they not playing every week? Why have two weeks in between the games? Please don't tell me that they need the time off for finals, because I would be willing to bet that over 50% of the players on all teams, could care less about their grades and how many credits they have accumulated.
Note; Ticket pricing was set by the NCAA, not the schools. Those prices you’re seeing are secondary market.
Correct. But that gives you an idea of the demand for that game. 5000 unsold tickets meant brokers or people who bought tickets and decided against going, couldn't sell them for a decent price because there were so many "regular tickets" available. That's why they were $14 on Stubhub 30 minutes before kickoff. If you were late showing up, you probably could have gotten in for $5 but I didnt check.
Florida State winning every game is criminalto be left out. met a Clemson bag man. Fat guy. Before nil. Smu Qb didn’t toss layups against us.
Ok, so they get revenue from just ticket sales? What about consessions, retail, parking etc. Penn State is probably bringing in millions one way or another. Plus the added value to the community for hotel rooms, rental cars, restaurants, etc. In some ways, it seems better to get that home game then to wait. Look at Oregon. Number 1 overall seed and no home game. Then they need to play OSU instead of Arizona State. Lol.
This weekend was pretty much what a lot of us thought it would be. You can probably pencil in the final four in late September. These extra games are just for the revenue.
so far, nothing has changed. Great regular season of college football, underwhelming post season. Still have more to come but not real optimistic.
Most of the time they're just deep dark valleys that he thinks are the high ground.
Similar threads
