ESPN: Results are in: Expanded playoff wouldn't mean more competition

I largely agree, but we don't know that Ohio State would lose to Clemson.
We think we know, and most would agree with us, but we don't know.

This is it. We think we know Clemson>Ohio State. But the “experts” all thought Oklahoma >>> Clemson just 48 hours ago, and now no one in the universe believes that anymore.
It is interesting how thoroughly it was ignored that that Alabama was tied to the Citadel (at home) at halftime late in the season. And, even after that, the narrative was still that they could easily beat any team in any other P5 conference.
 

8 team playoff? I wouldn’t have minded this:

Alabama vs UCF
Clemson vs Michigan
Notre Dame vs Ohio St
Oklahoma vs Georgia

Semis:

Alabama vs Georgia
Clemson vs Ohio St


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My only change would be Washington in for Michigan. You have to reward winning a P5 championship.

My field would be the P5 champions, the top G5 team if in the CFP top 15, and 2 (or 3 if no G5 team qualifies) wild cards.
 

The Division I Football Championship at the FCS Level with 24 teams involves every conference champion in the playoffs and serves to lift up the whole of FCS college football. You can goto any school and have an avenue to the championship. A 4 team championship would be very damaging to this championship level, and make the season much more meaningless.

With Bowls being exhibition games and many bowls being de-Emphasized by players, coaches, and fans as mostly meaningless, extending the playoff to make it inclusive of all FBS leagues will be needed at some point soon to bring meaning back to the FBS football season. Winning a championship in any FBS league should afford you an avenue to compete for the championship.

The Patriot League (like the MWC) has little or no shot to ever win the title, but their champion is in the playoff, and it’s good for their league. Either include the G5 (why not?), or kick them out of FBS football.

This seems like a good reason to reduce the number of bowl games. The NFL has a playoff with 12 of 32 teams, 37.5%, most sports that have a format where about 20% or more of the teams make it to whatever playoff they have (even college basketball). I don't believe FBS football could withstand such a playoff without destroying what makes it unique and enjoyable to a large chunk of its fans. I could buy into a statement that the current bowl format includes greater than 37.5% of teams, so therefore there are too many bowl games - or at least that's why people have that perception.
 

This seems like a good reason to reduce the number of bowl games. The NFL has a playoff with 12 of 32 teams, 37.5%, most sports that have a format where about 20% or more of the teams make it to whatever playoff they have (even college basketball). I don't believe FBS football could withstand such a playoff without destroying what makes it unique and enjoyable to a large chunk of its fans. I could buy into a statement that the current bowl format includes greater than 37.5% of teams, so therefore there are too many bowl games - or at least that's why people have that perception.

NHL and NBA are both have >50% of their teams making the playoffs right now (NHL will be exactly 50% when Seattle's team joins the league)
 

How does a 4 team playoff make the regular season more meaningless than a 24 team playoff? The regular season was most meaningful when there was no playoff at all.


It only is meaningful at the end of the year to about 5 or 6 teams fighting for those 4 spots. Adding teams that make it into the playoffs would make it meaningful until the end of the season to probably 38-44 teams....if you have a 32 team playoff like I suggested in this post:

** I added records of each team after the conference championship game...


I know that I'm probably the only one who thinks this on this board....but I would love to see a 32 team playoff. That is an extra 3 games for the Champion and Runner Up, but these teams have rosters of over 100 players, unlike high school and professional teams which are usually much smaller. In Minnesota, high school teams play 8 regular season games, possibly 3 section games and then three games in the state tournament. In the NFL, there are 4 preseason games (I know they don't count for anything), 16 regular season games, and at least 3 more games to win the Super Bowl. The added schedule for the NCAA doesn't bother me.

I know that conferences don't want to give up their conference championship games, because those mean big money for conferences. So you would still have to have them. I would move the season up one week (possibly two....explained later), so the conference championship games, and the Army-Navy game would be moved up to Thanksgiving weekend. I would give the Automatic Bids to all conferences, with 22 at large bids. The NCAA basically gives away three weeks in December to the NFL...I don't think they need to give away the whole month.

Here is what I think would be cool. Have the conference championships Thanksgiving week (or possibly the week before), with a selection and seeding show that Sunday night. Have one half of the field play their round of 32 games the next Saturday (December 5 next year or Thanksgiving weekend), with the other half of the bracket the Saturday (December 12 or December 5) after that. Those games would be played at the higher seed. The 8 Sweet 16 games would all be played on December 18 and 19 or (December 11 and 12). If you wanted to give those games to the non New Years 6 Bowls that would be fine with me, but I would probably have those games at the higher seed as well.

Now we are down to 8 teams. If you moved the season up two weeks, you could have these games staggered throughout the week around Christmas like the Bowl games are now. I would rotate the quarterfinals and semifinals within the New Years 6 Bowls. We've already given away a lot of the conference tie-ins with the Bowls, so whats the difference now. Texas has played in the Rose Bowl for crying out loud!! The National Championship Bowl would be the National Championship Game, and that could move around to different sites like the Super Bowl.

Here is what the seeding could have looked like this year:

Alabama Region:

Alabama 13-0 (1 SEC West) vs UAB 10-3 (32 Conference USA West)
West Virginia 8-3 (16 Big 12) vs Syracuse 9-3 (17 ACC Atlantic)


Clemson Region:

Clemson 13-0 (2 ACC Atlantic) vs Buffalo 10-3 (31 Mid-American)
Kentucky 9-3 (15 SEC East) vs Utah 9-4 (18 Pac 12 South)


Notre Dame Region:

Notre Dame 12-0 (3 Independent) vs Appalachian State 10-2 (30 Sun Belt East)
Texas 9-4 (14 Big 12) vs Mississippi State 8-4 (19 SEC West)


Oklahoma Region:

Oklahoma 12-1 (4 Big 12) vs Cincinnati 10-2 (29 American Athletic East)
Washington State 10-2 (13 Pac 12 North) vs Texas A&M 8-4 (20 SEC West)


The Ohio State Region:

Ohio State 12-1 (5 B1G East) vs North Carolina State 9-3 (28 ACC Atlantic)
LSU 9-3 (12 SEC West) vs Fresno State 11-2 (21 Mountain West ~ West)


Georgia Region:

Georgia 11-2 (6 SEC East) vs Iowa State 8-4 (27 Big 12)
Penn State 9-3 (11 B1G East) vs Utah State 10-2 (22 Mountain West Mountain)


Central Florida Region:

UCF 12-0 (7 American Atlantic East) vs Army 10-2 (26 Independent)
Florida 9-3 (10 SEC East) vs Northwestern 8-4 (23 B1G West)


Michigan Region:

Michigan 10-2 (8 B1G East) vs Missouri 8-4 (25 SEC East)
Washington 10-3 (9 Pac 12 North) vs Boise State 10-2 (24 Mountain West Mountain)

This year in some of the Bowl games, teams best players sat out because the games didn't mean anything. I guarantee if they had this playoff tournament, the Michigan defensive starters wouldn't have sat out the game. I understand that the Gophers wouldn't have played in a Bowl game this year with this system, but they were 3-6 in the conference...did they deserve to play a post season game? I think there are too many Bowl games presently anyway. I watched most of the Bowl games this year and some of them looked like they had the same number of fans as the Prep Bowl.

The NCAA basketball tournament used to be 25 teams throughout the 50's until the early to mid 70's. Expanding it 32, 48, 64, 65 and now 68 was the best thing that has happened to the tournament. I think some of the first round games are awesome the way I have it set up, and I don't think you can include all conference champions unless it was a 32 team tournament.

The Orange Bowl would host the Alabama Region vs the Michigan Region

The Cotton Bowl would host the Oklahoma Region vs the Ohio State Region

The Peach Bowl would host the Clemson Region vs UCF Region

The Fiesta Bowl would host the Notre Dame Region vs Georgia Region

The Rose and Sugar Bowls would host the Semi-Finals and the National Championship Bowl would move around. Just a quick thought of what I would like to see. Imagine the excitement if the Gophers made the tournament....
 


It only is meaningful at the end of the year to about 5 or 6 teams fighting for those 4 spots. Adding teams that make it into the playoffs would make it meaningful until the end of the season to probably 38-44 teams....if you have a 32 team playoff like I suggested in this post:

** I added records of each team after the conference championship game...


I know that I'm probably the only one who thinks this on this board....but I would love to see a 32 team playoff. That is an extra 3 games for the Champion and Runner Up, but these teams have rosters of over 100 players, unlike high school and professional teams which are usually much smaller. In Minnesota, high school teams play 8 regular season games, possibly 3 section games and then three games in the state tournament. In the NFL, there are 4 preseason games (I know they don't count for anything), 16 regular season games, and at least 3 more games to win the Super Bowl. The added schedule for the NCAA doesn't bother me.

I know that conferences don't want to give up their conference championship games, because those mean big money for conferences. So you would still have to have them. I would move the season up one week (possibly two....explained later), so the conference championship games, and the Army-Navy game would be moved up to Thanksgiving weekend. I would give the Automatic Bids to all conferences, with 22 at large bids. The NCAA basically gives away three weeks in December to the NFL...I don't think they need to give away the whole month.

Here is what I think would be cool. Have the conference championships Thanksgiving week (or possibly the week before), with a selection and seeding show that Sunday night. Have one half of the field play their round of 32 games the next Saturday (December 5 next year or Thanksgiving weekend), with the other half of the bracket the Saturday (December 12 or December 5) after that. Those games would be played at the higher seed. The 8 Sweet 16 games would all be played on December 18 and 19 or (December 11 and 12). If you wanted to give those games to the non New Years 6 Bowls that would be fine with me, but I would probably have those games at the higher seed as well.

Now we are down to 8 teams. If you moved the season up two weeks, you could have these games staggered throughout the week around Christmas like the Bowl games are now. I would rotate the quarterfinals and semifinals within the New Years 6 Bowls. We've already given away a lot of the conference tie-ins with the Bowls, so whats the difference now. Texas has played in the Rose Bowl for crying out loud!! The National Championship Bowl would be the National Championship Game, and that could move around to different sites like the Super Bowl.

Here is what the seeding could have looked like this year:

Alabama Region:

Alabama 13-0 (1 SEC West) vs UAB 10-3 (32 Conference USA West)
West Virginia 8-3 (16 Big 12) vs Syracuse 9-3 (17 ACC Atlantic)


Clemson Region:

Clemson 13-0 (2 ACC Atlantic) vs Buffalo 10-3 (31 Mid-American)
Kentucky 9-3 (15 SEC East) vs Utah 9-4 (18 Pac 12 South)


Notre Dame Region:

Notre Dame 12-0 (3 Independent) vs Appalachian State 10-2 (30 Sun Belt East)
Texas 9-4 (14 Big 12) vs Mississippi State 8-4 (19 SEC West)


Oklahoma Region:

Oklahoma 12-1 (4 Big 12) vs Cincinnati 10-2 (29 American Athletic East)
Washington State 10-2 (13 Pac 12 North) vs Texas A&M 8-4 (20 SEC West)


The Ohio State Region:

Ohio State 12-1 (5 B1G East) vs North Carolina State 9-3 (28 ACC Atlantic)
LSU 9-3 (12 SEC West) vs Fresno State 11-2 (21 Mountain West ~ West)


Georgia Region:

Georgia 11-2 (6 SEC East) vs Iowa State 8-4 (27 Big 12)
Penn State 9-3 (11 B1G East) vs Utah State 10-2 (22 Mountain West Mountain)


Central Florida Region:

UCF 12-0 (7 American Atlantic East) vs Army 10-2 (26 Independent)
Florida 9-3 (10 SEC East) vs Northwestern 8-4 (23 B1G West)


Michigan Region:

Michigan 10-2 (8 B1G East) vs Missouri 8-4 (25 SEC East)
Washington 10-3 (9 Pac 12 North) vs Boise State 10-2 (24 Mountain West Mountain)

This year in some of the Bowl games, teams best players sat out because the games didn't mean anything. I guarantee if they had this playoff tournament, the Michigan defensive starters wouldn't have sat out the game. I understand that the Gophers wouldn't have played in a Bowl game this year with this system, but they were 3-6 in the conference...did they deserve to play a post season game? I think there are too many Bowl games presently anyway. I watched most of the Bowl games this year and some of them looked like they had the same number of fans as the Prep Bowl.

The NCAA basketball tournament used to be 25 teams throughout the 50's until the early to mid 70's. Expanding it 32, 48, 64, 65 and now 68 was the best thing that has happened to the tournament. I think some of the first round games are awesome the way I have it set up, and I don't think you can include all conference champions unless it was a 32 team tournament.

The Orange Bowl would host the Alabama Region vs the Michigan Region

The Cotton Bowl would host the Oklahoma Region vs the Ohio State Region

The Peach Bowl would host the Clemson Region vs UCF Region

The Fiesta Bowl would host the Notre Dame Region vs Georgia Region

The Rose and Sugar Bowls would host the Semi-Finals and the National Championship Bowl would move around. Just a quick thought of what I would like to see. Imagine the excitement if the Gophers made the tournament....

Not a bad plan.
The SEC bias would still be alive with your bracket :p

This would make the Conf. Champ. games a little less meaningful as I could see teams resting guys, knowing they have a spot locked up.
 

In short, an expanded playoff would have meant inclusion of the team that ended up ranked #3.
 

NHL and NBA are both have >50% of their teams making the playoffs right now (NHL will be exactly 50% when Seattle's team joins the league)

The NHL for a very long time had 2/3 of teams in the playoffs (4 of 6 & 8 of 12).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

It only is meaningful at the end of the year to about 5 or 6 teams fighting for those 4 spots. Adding teams that make it into the playoffs would make it meaningful until the end of the season to probably 38-44 teams....if you have a 32 team playoff like I suggested in this post:

** I added records of each team after the conference championship game...


I know that I'm probably the only one who thinks this on this board....but I would love to see a 32 team playoff. That is an extra 3 games for the Champion and Runner Up, but these teams have rosters of over 100 players, unlike high school and professional teams which are usually much smaller. In Minnesota, high school teams play 8 regular season games, possibly 3 section games and then three games in the state tournament. In the NFL, there are 4 preseason games (I know they don't count for anything), 16 regular season games, and at least 3 more games to win the Super Bowl. The added schedule for the NCAA doesn't bother me.

I know that conferences don't want to give up their conference championship games, because those mean big money for conferences. So you would still have to have them. I would move the season up one week (possibly two....explained later), so the conference championship games, and the Army-Navy game would be moved up to Thanksgiving weekend. I would give the Automatic Bids to all conferences, with 22 at large bids. The NCAA basically gives away three weeks in December to the NFL...I don't think they need to give away the whole month.

Here is what I think would be cool. Have the conference championships Thanksgiving week (or possibly the week before), with a selection and seeding show that Sunday night. Have one half of the field play their round of 32 games the next Saturday (December 5 next year or Thanksgiving weekend), with the other half of the bracket the Saturday (December 12 or December 5) after that. Those games would be played at the higher seed. The 8 Sweet 16 games would all be played on December 18 and 19 or (December 11 and 12). If you wanted to give those games to the non New Years 6 Bowls that would be fine with me, but I would probably have those games at the higher seed as well.

Now we are down to 8 teams. If you moved the season up two weeks, you could have these games staggered throughout the week around Christmas like the Bowl games are now. I would rotate the quarterfinals and semifinals within the New Years 6 Bowls. We've already given away a lot of the conference tie-ins with the Bowls, so whats the difference now. Texas has played in the Rose Bowl for crying out loud!! The National Championship Bowl would be the National Championship Game, and that could move around to different sites like the Super Bowl.

Here is what the seeding could have looked like this year:

Alabama Region:

Alabama 13-0 (1 SEC West) vs UAB 10-3 (32 Conference USA West)
West Virginia 8-3 (16 Big 12) vs Syracuse 9-3 (17 ACC Atlantic)


Clemson Region:

Clemson 13-0 (2 ACC Atlantic) vs Buffalo 10-3 (31 Mid-American)
Kentucky 9-3 (15 SEC East) vs Utah 9-4 (18 Pac 12 South)


Notre Dame Region:

Notre Dame 12-0 (3 Independent) vs Appalachian State 10-2 (30 Sun Belt East)
Texas 9-4 (14 Big 12) vs Mississippi State 8-4 (19 SEC West)


Oklahoma Region:

Oklahoma 12-1 (4 Big 12) vs Cincinnati 10-2 (29 American Athletic East)
Washington State 10-2 (13 Pac 12 North) vs Texas A&M 8-4 (20 SEC West)


The Ohio State Region:

Ohio State 12-1 (5 B1G East) vs North Carolina State 9-3 (28 ACC Atlantic)
LSU 9-3 (12 SEC West) vs Fresno State 11-2 (21 Mountain West ~ West)


Georgia Region:

Georgia 11-2 (6 SEC East) vs Iowa State 8-4 (27 Big 12)
Penn State 9-3 (11 B1G East) vs Utah State 10-2 (22 Mountain West Mountain)


Central Florida Region:

UCF 12-0 (7 American Atlantic East) vs Army 10-2 (26 Independent)
Florida 9-3 (10 SEC East) vs Northwestern 8-4 (23 B1G West)


Michigan Region:

Michigan 10-2 (8 B1G East) vs Missouri 8-4 (25 SEC East)
Washington 10-3 (9 Pac 12 North) vs Boise State 10-2 (24 Mountain West Mountain)

This year in some of the Bowl games, teams best players sat out because the games didn't mean anything. I guarantee if they had this playoff tournament, the Michigan defensive starters wouldn't have sat out the game. I understand that the Gophers wouldn't have played in a Bowl game this year with this system, but they were 3-6 in the conference...did they deserve to play a post season game? I think there are too many Bowl games presently anyway. I watched most of the Bowl games this year and some of them looked like they had the same number of fans as the Prep Bowl.

The NCAA basketball tournament used to be 25 teams throughout the 50's until the early to mid 70's. Expanding it 32, 48, 64, 65 and now 68 was the best thing that has happened to the tournament. I think some of the first round games are awesome the way I have it set up, and I don't think you can include all conference champions unless it was a 32 team tournament.

The Orange Bowl would host the Alabama Region vs the Michigan Region

The Cotton Bowl would host the Oklahoma Region vs the Ohio State Region

The Peach Bowl would host the Clemson Region vs UCF Region

The Fiesta Bowl would host the Notre Dame Region vs Georgia Region

The Rose and Sugar Bowls would host the Semi-Finals and the National Championship Bowl would move around. Just a quick thought of what I would like to see. Imagine the excitement if the Gophers made the tournament....

Well for one, I don't think having a chance at the NC is the only thing that is meaningful. But if that is your view, the end of the regular season is now only meaningful to a few teams, so is the end of the playoffs, doesn't seem like much difference to me, you are just extending the amount of games until you get to a select few. Also what do two thirds of the teams that are eliminated from the playoff contention by October play for?
 



In short, an expanded playoff would have meant inclusion of the team that ended up ranked #3.

Which is probably pretty common if the #5 team wins their bowl, since three teams in front of them will aquire a loss.
 

Which is probably pretty common if the #5 team wins their bowl, since three teams in front of them will aquire a loss.

In 2014 Ohio State was the 4th team in the playoff and there were a lot of people who thought both Baylor or TCU should have gotten into the playoff instead. They were both 1 loss teams and the Big 12 didn't have a championship game and both schools were penalized because of it. Honestly, if they had played each other in a Big 12 Championship game, the winner would have gotten in and Ohio State, the team that ended up beating the #1 Alabama team and then the #2 Oregon team to win the National Championship, would have been out of the playoff. I'm sure if that had happened, people would have been saying Ohio State wouldn't have been able to beat Alabama or Oregon anyways, especially if Alabama had won the National Championship.

Would Ohio State have been able to beat Clemson or Alabama this year? Maybe not....the team that played Purdue, for sure not, but the team that beat Michigan? I'm not so sure. That's the point....let the games be decided on the field rather than in our minds, because most people didn't think Clemson would beat Alabama either.

And for people who are going to come back and talk about Michigan getting beat by Florida in the Best Buy Tony Roma's Peach Bowl....they had 4 starters on defense who decided not to play in the game because it was basically a exhibition game. If that game was a Sweet 16 game in a NCAA Tournament (they would have been the 7th and 10th seeds based on end of year rankings), no one would have skipped that game and people would have actually watched it.
 
Last edited:

In the Power 5 conference, the other Group of 5 Conferences and the independent schools that don't play in a conference for football, there are about 120-130 teams. I don't think having a tournament of 32 teams is too much. Will there be blowouts? Yeah of course, but St. Johns and other schools have beat teams by 80 points in the Division 3 tournament as well. Give them a reward for winning their conference, and once and a while, you might have an upset, which would be awesome.
 

How does a 4 team playoff make the regular season more meaningless than a 24 team playoff? The regular season was most meaningful when there was no playoff at all.

There are 10 FBS Leagues. Every year, with a 4 team playoff, 6 or 7 of those League champions have no shot to get into the playoff. That list has included the B1G the past two years. You think Jim Delaney is happy about that exclusion from the playoff? Is that good for your League? Does that make your season meaningful as a league champion for your season to end with an exhibition game, which any of your players with a pro opportunity will skip without giving it much thought?

Is that good for College Football as a whole? Does that help to balance recruiting nationally lift the game?
 
Last edited:



There are 10 FBS Leagues. Every year, with a 4 team playoff, 6 or 7 of those League champions have no shot to get into the playoff. That list has included the B1G the past two years. You think Jim Delaney is happy about that exclusion from the playoff? Is that good for your League? Does that make your season meaningful as a league champion for your season to end with an exhibition game, which any of your players with a pro opportunity will skip without giving it much thought?

Is that good for College Football as a whole? Does that help to balance recruiting nationally lift the game?

I don't care about what makes Jim Delaney happy and more wealthy. The B1G is never excluded from the playoff. Sorry, osu got rolled by a mediocre Purdue team that excludes osu, not the fact that they were in the B1G. In other sports anyone can get on a hot run or have incredible luck, in college football it is unique, or was unique in the fact that the team everyone thought was best, based on season long performance, was crowned champion, and then the two teams everyone thought best were selected to play each other. They earned it by playing an entire season, in other sports these great teams can be done in by a playoff fluke and forgotten to history a few years later. The season seems meaningful to me to plenty of teams that have no shot at the championship, plenty of teams take the bowl games very seriously. Sure sometimes you get teams feeling sorry for themselves because they think they under achieved, but I don't think we need to appease them. Also not all players with a pro opportunity will skip the bowl, and I think it's crazy to think players would not skip if they were in a playoff which would require more risk due to more games. I do not think a playoff would do anything to balance recruiting either, and the game doesn't need lifting, what ever that means.
 

In the Power 5 conference, the other Group of 5 Conferences and the independent schools that don't play in a conference for football, there are about 120-130 teams. I don't think having a tournament of 32 teams is too much. Will there be blowouts? Yeah of course, but St. Johns and other schools have beat teams by 80 points in the Division 3 tournament as well. Give them a reward for winning their conference, and once and a while, you might have an upset, which would be awesome.

And what do the 100 teams that won't be in the playoff play for? I bet they would miss having a chance to play a "meaningless exhibition game".
 

And what do the 100 teams that won't be in the playoff play for? I bet they would miss having a chance to play a "meaningless exhibition game".

An interesting fallout could be people leaving P5 conferences to try exploiy a perceived weaker conference to make the playoff. Sounds wild
 

And what do the 100 teams that won't be in the playoff play for? I bet they would miss having a chance to play a "meaningless exhibition game".

If you wanted to still have the Independence Bowl or Quick Lane Bowl for the 7-5 or 6-6 teams that don't make the playoff, that would be fine....it would be like the NIT is in basketball. Not every team makes a Bowl game so it wouldn't have to change that much. Hopefully the Gophers would be striving to make the playoff rather than be 6-6 again and play in a Bowl game in Detroit.

The reason to not have a playoff is it would take too much time away from classes, and I can understand why the university presidents might not want to do it. That's why I scheduled a week off in December for all teams....its just 16 teams would have one week off and the other 16 teams would have the other week off. The reason not to have a playoff isn't because of lack of interest or money, because it would make way more money and have way more interest than the system we have now.
 

I don't care about what makes Jim Delaney happy and more wealthy. The B1G is never excluded from the playoff. Sorry, osu got rolled by a mediocre Purdue team that excludes osu, not the fact that they were in the B1G. In other sports anyone can get on a hot run or have incredible luck, in college football it is unique, or was unique in the fact that the team everyone thought was best, based on season long performance, was crowned champion, and then the two teams everyone thought best were selected to play each other. They earned it by playing an entire season, in other sports these great teams can be done in by a playoff fluke and forgotten to history a few years later. The season seems meaningful to me to plenty of teams that have no shot at the championship, plenty of teams take the bowl games very seriously. Sure sometimes you get teams feeling sorry for themselves because they think they under achieved, but I don't think we need to appease them. Also not all players with a pro opportunity will skip the bowl, and I think it's crazy to think players would not skip if they were in a playoff which would require more risk due to more games. I do not think a playoff would do anything to balance recruiting either, and the game doesn't need lifting, what ever that means.



And Oklahoma got beat by Texas who got beat by an even weaker Maryland team. The Ohio State/Purdue game was a very emotional game for Purdue, and sometimes the better team doesn't win. It's hard to be up for 13 straight games. Ohio State was ranked ahead of Oklahoma all year while both teams were undefeated. The only reason Oklahoma got in and Ohio State didn't is because Ohio State got beat after Oklahoma did.
 

An interesting fallout could be people leaving P5 conferences to try exploiy a perceived weaker conference to make the playoff. Sounds wild

It seems unlikely that current P5 teams would “move down” to G5. There’s just too much money attached to P5 conferences to sell that vision in boardrooms.

But if a playoff expansion to either 6 or 8 that makes it more likely a G5 team is included actually happens, there is definitely going to be a flood of FCS teams (and probably entire FCS conferences) reclassifying to FBS. NDSU and the MO Valley Conference would be likely first-movers.
 

And Oklahoma got beat by Texas who got beat by an even weaker Maryland team. The Ohio State/Purdue game was a very emotional game for Purdue, and sometimes the better team doesn't win. It's hard to be up for 13 straight games. Ohio State was ranked ahead of Oklahoma all year while both teams were undefeated. The only reason Oklahoma got in and Ohio State didn't is because Ohio State got beat after Oklahoma did.

Huh? Your logic makes no sense. If you're going to play the transitive game (which is stupid in the first place), OSU lost to Purdue, who lost to Eastern Michigan. You'd be comparing Eastern Michigan to Maryland, not Purdue to Maryland.

Oklahoma got in instead of OSU on a virtual tiebreaker because they were roughly equivalent teams with roughly equivalent schedules. That virtual tiebreaker was a 29-point loss to Purdue. It was, by FAR, the worst loss of any team in contention, and probably the worst loss in the last several years for teams in that position. Teams deserving of a playoff spot don't lose to mediocre teams by 29 points.
 

Huh? Your logic makes no sense. If you're going to play the transitive game (which is stupid in the first place), OSU lost to Purdue, who lost to Eastern Michigan. You'd be comparing Eastern Michigan to Maryland, not Purdue to Maryland.

Oklahoma got in instead of OSU on a virtual tiebreaker because they were roughly equivalent teams with roughly equivalent schedules. That virtual tiebreaker was a 29-point loss to Purdue. It was, by FAR, the worst loss of any team in contention, and probably the worst loss in the last several years for teams in that position. Teams deserving of a playoff spot don't lose to mediocre teams by 29 points.

The only comparable loss I can think of is Ohio State getting crushed by Iowa last year (2017), but I don't think they were really in contention after that 2nd loss anyway.
 

And Oklahoma got beat by Texas who got beat by an even weaker Maryland team. The Ohio State/Purdue game was a very emotional game for Purdue, and sometimes the better team doesn't win. It's hard to be up for 13 straight games. Ohio State was ranked ahead of Oklahoma all year while both teams were undefeated. The only reason Oklahoma got in and Ohio State didn't is because Ohio State got beat after Oklahoma did.

My point is why are we arguing about either of these teams deserving a shot? I'd be fine if neither of them got a shot.
 

Huh? Your logic makes no sense. If you're going to play the transitive game (which is stupid in the first place), OSU lost to Purdue, who lost to Eastern Michigan. You'd be comparing Eastern Michigan to Maryland, not Purdue to Maryland.

Oklahoma got in instead of OSU on a virtual tiebreaker because they were roughly equivalent teams with roughly equivalent schedules. That virtual tiebreaker was a 29-point loss to Purdue. It was, by FAR, the worst loss of any team in contention, and probably the worst loss in the last several years for teams in that position. Teams deserving of a playoff spot don't lose to mediocre teams by 29 points.

The issue is last year OSU missed because of their loss to Iowa in blowout fashion.
Iowa was 7-5 / 8-5 last year.

That was a worse loss than Clemson losing at 4-8 Syracuse in 2017.

So evidently blowout losses against solid 0.500 teams who played 10 power 5 teams is worse than a loss by a smaller margin to a 4-8 team who played 9 Power 5 teams.

If you are going to lose, lose narrowly to a bad team instead of losing by a larger margin to a good team.
 

The issue is last year OSU missed because of their loss to Iowa in blowout fashion.
Iowa was 7-5 / 8-5 last year.

That was a worse loss than Clemson losing at 4-8 Syracuse in 2017.

So evidently blowout losses against solid 0.500 teams who played 10 power 5 teams is worse than a loss by a smaller margin to a 4-8 team who played 9 Power 5 teams.

If you are going to lose, lose narrowly to a bad team instead of losing by a larger margin to a good team.

That was Ohio State's 2nd loss though in 2017.
 


That was a worse loss than Clemson losing at 4-8 Syracuse in 2017.

Inapplicable, because the Iowa loss was OSU's second loss. You'd have a point had it been their first loss. And if OSU had beaten Iowa, they would have been a lock to be in, as their one loss to that point was Oklahoma.
 

Huh? Your logic makes no sense. If you're going to play the transitive game (which is stupid in the first place), OSU lost to Purdue, who lost to Eastern Michigan. You'd be comparing Eastern Michigan to Maryland, not Purdue to Maryland.

Oklahoma got in instead of OSU on a virtual tiebreaker because they were roughly equivalent teams with roughly equivalent schedules. That virtual tiebreaker was a 29-point loss to Purdue. It was, by FAR, the worst loss of any team in contention, and probably the worst loss in the last several years for teams in that position. Teams deserving of a playoff spot don't lose to mediocre teams by 29 points.

I'm not arguing that Ohio State got screwed. I'm talking about a playoff system that is screwed up. The point is that two teams both had one loss and were really close. What about Ohio State killing Michigan, which was a better win than any Oklahoma win. Why force yourself to have to make a decision like that? It could happen that you have 5 teams all with one loss that you have to decide which one is knocked out. Then politics is involved. Why not just have an actual playoff like they do in every other sport at every other level? Not one where you have to make a subjective decision. What about 2014 when TCU and Baylor didn't get in as deserving 1 loss teams from the Big 12?
 

My point is why are we arguing about either of these teams deserving a shot? I'd be fine if neither of them got a shot.

I agree, with the screwed up playoff system we have now, no matter which team you picked, you could make a reasonable argument that the other team should have gotten picked. My point has been why not have a system that takes all of that out of the equation? Like they do in every other sport at every other level.
 

Which is probably pretty common if the #5 team wins their bowl, since three teams in front of them will aquire a loss.

FWIW, the Buckeyes were rated #3 in the Sagarin computer ratings before the playoff even started.
 




Top Bottom