Seems to be Momentum for 8 Team Playoff This Morning....

[ShotgunDawg]

I can't reiterate how GREAT this would be for Mississippi State.

With an 8 team playoff & the trajectory of MSU's program, we are potentially talking about something that we can reasonably hope to achieve.

What an 8 team playoff would essentially do for MSU is take the Alabama game, that we lose every year, out of the equation & offer us a chance to make the playoff without having to beat Alabama.

Can we win the national championship? Maybe not, but I think what most MSU fans want is to stand on that field vs Oklahoma, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, USC, Washington, etc with something on the line.

I think what frustrates most MSU fans is that we believe we can beat the teams I listed above but because they are in weak conference, they are given a bye of sorts in becoming a college football blue blood program.

While, we wouldn't often make the 8 team playoff, it would give us a reasonable chance to qualify & that is awesome news for MSU's future.

https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/1072870858002063360

[StarkVegasSteve]

An 8 team playoff does bring more teams to the table per se. I think with a 4 team there's probably 10-12 teams who are going to be in it on a given year(Bama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Oklahoma, Texas, Michigan, Ohio St., USC, Washington, Clemson, Notre Dame). They'll always be outlier years where a program like a Florida St., Oregon, or Michigan St make it, but by and large those teams are in the same tier as we are. Going to 8 brings in around 25-30 teams who realistically have a shot to win it and I do believe we're in that group. Along with Florida, Miami, Texas A&M, etc.

However, the down side to 8 is two fold. 1) It devalues the other bowl games even more than a 4 team playoff already has. 2) If you expand to 8, what's to stop you from 16? or 32? 64? I mean where would be the cutoff cause someone is always going to be on the outside looking in screaming that they should've been in. Personally I'd love to see an 8 team playoff, but I think the best we could hope for would maybe be a 6 team playoff.

[MedDawg]

I can see it now:

Woohoo! State made the playoff...

...as the #8 seed playing #1 seed Alabama.

I agree with what you said, though.

[parabrave]

When you look back to the 1st BCS game you will probably come to this same conclusion, they have gotten it right so far. With the exception of one year, Okie over Auburn 2004. I think they have consistently picked the 2 best teams. The CFB has gotten it right also. You don't need a round of 8 cause pretty soon it's going to be a round of 16 with a play-in game for 17 &18 like the NCAA mens basketball or how many teams they have now. When do you stop.

[ShotgunDawg]

An 8 team playoff does bring more teams to the table per se. I think with a 4 team there's probably 10-12 teams who are going to be in it on a given year(Bama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Oklahoma, Texas, Michigan, Ohio St., USC, Washington, Clemson, Notre Dame). They'll always be outlier years where a program like a Florida St., Oregon, or Michigan St make it, but by and large those teams are in the same tier as we are. Going to 8 brings in around 25-30 teams who realistically have a shot to win it and I do believe we're in that group. Along with Florida, Miami, Texas A&M, etc.

However, the down side to 8 is two fold. 1) It devalues the other bowl games even more than a 4 team playoff already has. 2) If you expand to 8, what's to stop you from 16? or 32? 64? I mean where would be the cutoff cause someone is always going to be on the outside looking in screaming that they should've been in. Personally I'd love to see an 8 team playoff, but I think the best we could hope for would maybe be a 6 team playoff.

- I don't think anyone cares about devaluing the bowl system. The bowl system is archaic & not worth saving.

- I think most everyone agrees that 8 is the right number. I doubt you see an expansion

[1bigdawg]

- I don't think anyone cares about devaluing the bowl system. The bowl system is archaic & not worth saving.

- I think most everyone agrees that 8 is the right number. I doubt you see an expansion

The bowl system provides a lot of money to P5 conferences/teams.

Most everyone thought 4 was the right number until we went to 4.

[TUSK]

I'm totally down with an 8 team playoff if the idea is to get the 8 "best teams", regardless of conference...

However, this is what they'll want (I'll apply it to 2018 with the CFP Poll):

1) Bammer - SEC Champ (Automatic Bid)
8) Washington - PAC Champ (Automatic Bid)

4) Oklahoma - Big 12 Champ (Automatic Bid)
5) Georgia - SEC (At Large Bid)

2) Clemson - ACC Champ (Automatic Bid)
7) Michigan - B1G (At Large)

3) Notre Dame - Independent (At Large Bid)
6) Ohio State - B1G Champ (Automatic Bid)

UCF would still be left out.... And while I don't like em, I think that's a lil questionable...

[Scared_Hitless]

I have always thought this made the most sense honestly. All power 5 champs get an auto-bid and 1 non-power five can enter every year they have an undefeated. At that point the debate will be for the last two teams and your still going to have problems. But they could fall back on well you could have won your conference title.

[ShotgunDawg]

The bowl system provides a lot of money to P5 conferences/teams.

Most everyone thought 4 was the right number until we went to 4.

The bowl system will still exist & an 8 team playoff would create more money, not less.

I don't think anyone ever thought 4 teams was the right amount

[Dawgology]

When you look back to the 1st BCS game you will probably come to this same conclusion, they have gotten it right so far. With the exception of one year, Okie over Auburn 2004. I think they have consistently picked the 2 best teams. The CFB has gotten it right also. You don't need a round of 8 cause pretty soon it's going to be a round of 16 with a play-in game for 17 &18 like the NCAA mens basketball or how many teams they have now. When do you stop.

I'm good with that and I think most fans are good for a 16 team playoff. Use your current bowls to make those games. People would have a vested interests in those games and attendance would shoot through the roof. It would be great for the sport and cut down on the bs meaningless bowls out there.

[Dawgology]

I'm totally down with an 8 team playoff if the idea is to get the 8 "best teams", regardless of conference...

However, this is what they'll want (I'll apply it to 2018 with the CFP Poll):

1) Bammer - SEC Champ (Automatic Bid)
8) Washington - PAC Champ (Automatic Bid)

4) Oklahoma - Big 12 Champ (Automatic Bid)
5) Georgia - SEC (At Large Bid)

2) Clemson - ACC Champ (Automatic Bid)
7) Michigan - B1G (At Large)

3) Notre Dame - Independent (At Large Bid)
6) Ohio State - B1G Champ (Automatic Bid)

UCF would still be left out.... And while I don't like em, I think that's a lil questionable...

But I would watch every...single...one of those games. As it goes now I will watch the State game and that's about it. More playoff teams equal more games that have meaning and less pointless bowl games. With 8 or 16 teams it would be madness because there would be so much room for interesting upsets and matchups.

[TUSK]

But I would watch every...single...one of those games. As it goes now I will watch the State game and that's about it. More playoff teams equal more games that have meaning and less pointless bowl games. With 8 or 16 teams it would be madness because there would be so much room for interesting upsets and matchups.

I wrote a proposal around the time the BCS went into effect...

the season wasn't extended
all the bowls all were retained and/or incorporated in the playoffs
8 "super conf" auto bids & 8 "at large" bids
no rematches and avoid same conference matchups...

I can't find the original doc, but I think about it every 2 or 3 years when people try to solve this thing...

It was "solved" 20 years ago...

[Johnson85]

The bowl system provides a lot of money to P5 conferences/teams.

Most everyone thought 4 was the right number until we went to 4.

The bowl system provides a lot of money to us and it provides a way for our players to regularly get rewarded for winning seasons.

I think I'd be for an 8 team playoff decided by the old BCS formula, but I'm not sure it'd be all good for MSU. If we started that season while we're at a peak, it'd be a great way for us to do something special, but if it started and we continued in a 6-8 win pattern, it might further separate the top tier SEC teams from the middle tier. Right now, it's really just Bama and to a lesser extent UGA that has completely pulled away. If Bama, UGA, LSU, and FL start regularly showing up for playoff games and the rest of the SEC doesn't, then we might end up being further separated from those additional teams.

[AusTexDawg]

One of the things mentioned by some in the recent discussion of expanding to an 8-team playoff is getting rid of conference championship games or just taking the top two teams from a conference instead of division champs into the championship game. I think that MSU has a better shot, in a post-Saban world, of making the playoff by winning a tiebreaker in the division race and then winning the SEC championship game than we would of ever being chosen as one of the top two teams from the SEC by the playoff committee. The committee is not our friend if it’s down to us can UGA or LSU for the second spot from the SEC in the 8-team field

[Dawgology]

One of the things mentioned by some in the recent discussion of expanding to an 8-team playoff is getting rid of conference championship games or just taking the top two teams from a conference instead of division champs into the championship game. I think that MSU has a better shot, in a post-Saban world, of making the playoff by winning a tiebreaker in the division race and then winning the SEC championship game than we would of ever being chosen as one of the top two teams from the SEC by the playoff committee. The committee is not our friend if it’s down to us can UGA or LSU for the second spot from the SEC in the 8-team field

This. It's laughable that MISSOURI played in the SEC champ game in 2013 and 2014. A freaking joke!

[Todd4State]

Here's how I would like to see them do it:

8 team playoff.

Sugar, Rose, Orange, Cotton, Peach, Fiesta, Citrus, and Alamo bowl sites as the playoff sites and rotate them.

Keep the above bowls separate from the playoff bowl. For example- there would be a Sugar Bowl and then another separate playoff game played at the Sugar Bowl site. So, you could have say MSU at the Sugar Bowl and then Alabama in the playoff gam within a week of each other.


Keep the championship games.


First round is played December 23rd


Second round is played January 1.


Third round is played January 8th or so.

[dawgs]

An 8 team playoff does bring more teams to the table per se. I think with a 4 team there's probably 10-12 teams who are going to be in it on a given year(Bama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Oklahoma, Texas, Michigan, Ohio St., USC, Washington, Clemson, Notre Dame). They'll always be outlier years where a program like a Florida St., Oregon, or Michigan St make it, but by and large those teams are in the same tier as we are. Going to 8 brings in around 25-30 teams who realistically have a shot to win it and I do believe we're in that group. Along with Florida, Miami, Texas A&M, etc.

However, the down side to 8 is two fold. 1) It devalues the other bowl games even more than a 4 team playoff already has. 2) If you expand to 8, what's to stop you from 16? or 32? 64? I mean where would be the cutoff cause someone is always going to be on the outside looking in screaming that they should've been in. Personally I'd love to see an 8 team playoff, but I think the best we could hope for would maybe be a 6 team playoff.

Washington is one of the 10-12 and Oregon is in the same tier as MSU? Oregon has made the playoff natty game and played for a natty in the BCS. Washington made the playoffs once and got trounced in the semis. Oregon is also back on the upswing (beating Washington h2h this year, returning a ton of experience next year), and is currently sitting on a top 5 recruiting class. I'd say it'd be a toss up between this 2 programs as which one might win a natty moving forward and neither belong in the same tier as bama, uga, LSU, f$u, Texas, usc, Ohio st, Michigan, Clemson, Florida etc. right now.

Also, f$u is down the last couple years, but f$u is still in the top tier. A program like that will never be far from turning it around almost immediately with the right coach. To throw Texas in the top tier and consider f$u an outlier is laughable consider f$u has won a title far more recently than Texas has even competed for one, much less won one.

[dawgs]

When you look back to the 1st BCS game you will probably come to this same conclusion, they have gotten it right so far. With the exception of one year, Okie over Auburn 2004. I think they have consistently picked the 2 best teams. The CFB has gotten it right also. You don't need a round of 8 cause pretty soon it's going to be a round of 16 with a play-in game for 17 &18 like the NCAA mens basketball or how many teams they have now. When do you stop.


Slippery slope is a fallacy. You stop when you take a common sense look around and decide it's best to stop. The dumbass play-in games for the ncaa tourney is not a common sense approach, but that doesn't mean every decision is doomed to be equally as dumb.

[dawgs]

8 team playoff needs to have opening round games on campus.

2 reasons:
1) it rewards the higher seeded teams for going undefeated or having one of the best 1 L resumes.

2) you'd otherwise be asking fanbases to travel in significant numbers on short notice 3 times within a month spanning over the holidays. Those 1st round games played off campus would be terrible atmospheres of half filled stadiums in places like Charlotte and Tampa bay and Tempe. CFB thrives because of the fans and the crowds. Playing in a muted atmosphere will just end up being a less talented version of the nfl.

[Quaoarsking]

When you look back to the 1st BCS game you will probably come to this same conclusion, they have gotten it right so far. With the exception of one year, Okie over Auburn 2004. I think they have consistently picked the 2 best teams. The CFB has gotten it right also. You don't need a round of 8 cause pretty soon it's going to be a round of 16 with a play-in game for 17 &18 like the NCAA mens basketball or how many teams they have now. When do you stop.

But how can we know? Had the BCS been in place in 2014 and 2016, Ohio State and Alabama wouldn't have been considered for the championship game. Twice in 4 years the 4 seed won it and earned a well-deserved national title. Its reasonable to assume it would have happened some during the 16-year BCS era.

[Pit Bull]

I can't reiterate how GREAT this would be for Mississippi State.

With an 8 team playoff & the trajectory of MSU's program, we are potentially talking about something that we can reasonably hope to achieve.

What an 8 team playoff would essentially do for MSU is take the Alabama game, that we lose every year, out of the equation & offer us a chance to make the playoff without having to beat Alabama.

Can we win the national championship? Maybe not, but I think what most MSU fans want is to stand on that field vs Oklahoma, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, USC, Washington, etc with something on the line.

I think what frustrates most MSU fans is that we believe we can beat the teams I listed above but because they are in weak conference, they are given a bye of sorts in becoming a college football blue blood program.

While, we wouldn't often make the 8 team playoff, it would give us a reasonable chance to qualify & that is awesome news for MSU's future.

https://twitter.com/slmandel/status/1072870858002063360

I'm all for an 8 team playoff, however, it is imperative that we take the committee OUT of the selection process. A predetermined preapproved computer formula must be used to seed the teams that don't win their conference championship. AND.....the same ranking formula can seed the conference champions in the playoff bracket as well. I would start with the 5 P5 Conference champions (however the respective conferences want to determine their champion). Then use the computer rankings to seed the 8 team playoff. Now, we could reduce the reg. season schedule by one game back to 11 games, OR.....have one game in the spring that counts toward the ranking formula. (replacing the Spring game)...probably an OOC game of sorts. That would certainly put a charge into Super Bulldog Weekend wouldn't it?

[RocketDawg]

I'm all for an 8 team playoff, however, it is imperative that we take the committee OUT of the selection process. A predetermined preapproved computer formula must be used to seed the teams that don't win their conference championship. AND.....the same ranking formula can seed the conference champions in the playoff bracket as well. I would start with the 5 P5 Conference champions (however the respective conferences want to determine their champion). Then use the computer rankings to seed the 8 team playoff. Now, we could reduce the reg. season schedule by one game back to 11 games, OR.....have one game in the spring that counts toward the ranking formula. (replacing the Spring game)...probably an OOC game of sorts. That would certainly put a charge into Super Bulldog Weekend wouldn't it?

Pit, that's the longest name for a link I've ever seen. :) The link doesn't work, by the way.

[Pit Bull]

Pit, that's the longest name for a link I've ever seen. :) The link doesn't work, by the way.

I didn't link anything. You must be talking about the quote stuff above my comments.

[maroonmania]

The bowl system provides a lot of money to P5 conferences/teams.

Most everyone thought 4 was the right number until we went to 4.

I don't agree that most everyone thought 4 was the right number. Its just all they would consider and all we could get. I've personally always felt 8 is the most optimal number. Gets all the P5 champions and one G5 rep and still leaves 2 wild cards. That covers everyone that would deserve to be in. If they played the first round of an 8 team playoff this coming weekend it would be terrific. Instead we have no college football at all except for 1 or 2 of the worst bowls. I don't see how it helps anyway to put nearly a month between the conference championship games and the first playoff games. Football teams are meant to take a month off from live play.

[maroonmania]

Here's how I would like to see them do it:

8 team playoff.

Sugar, Rose, Orange, Cotton, Peach, Fiesta, Citrus, and Alamo bowl sites as the playoff sites and rotate them.

Keep the above bowls separate from the playoff bowl. For example- there would be a Sugar Bowl and then another separate playoff game played at the Sugar Bowl site. So, you could have say MSU at the Sugar Bowl and then Alabama in the playoff gam within a week of each other.


Keep the championship games.


First round is played December 23rd


Second round is played January 1.


Third round is played January 8th or so.

I'm down with this. I would personally prefer to play the first round 2 weeks after the conference championship games at the home of the top 4 seeds and then keep everything else as it is now. For this year, that would mean that the first round would be this weekend.

[TimberBeast]

I'm totally down with an 8 team playoff if the idea is to get the 8 "best teams", regardless of conference...

However, this is what they'll want (I'll apply it to 2018 with the CFP Poll):

1) Bammer - SEC Champ (Automatic Bid)
8) Washington - PAC Champ (Automatic Bid)

4) Oklahoma - Big 12 Champ (Automatic Bid)
5) Georgia - SEC (At Large Bid)

2) Clemson - ACC Champ (Automatic Bid)
7) Michigan - B1G (At Large)

3) Notre Dame - Independent (At Large Bid)
6) Ohio State - B1G Champ (Automatic Bid)

UCF would still be left out.... And while I don't like em, I think that's a lil questionable...

It?s not questionable. UCF shouldn?t even be in the top 20.

[QuadrupleOption]

This. It's laughable that MISSOURI played in the SEC champ game in 2013 and 2014. A freaking joke!

A lot of people thought the same thing when we played in the SEC Championship game in 1998. I read about 4 articles talking about how the East was obviously superior (Florida, Tennessee, and Georgia) and the top two from that division should be playing for the championship, not a "lowly" 6-2 team from a weak division that had no business being there.

The worm's definitely turned on that one. The East has won 1 championship in the last 10 years.

[Tbonewannabe]

It?s not questionable. UCF shouldn?t even be in the top 20.

Unfortunately Auburn shit the bed last year or there wouldn't be a question. I like that UF offered the same that they offered USF. UCF of course turned it down because they don't want to earn respect the way Boise St did years ago. Almost every single SEC team would be undefeated with their schedule the past two years but LSU needs to prove that by beating the shit out of them this year.

[thf24]

UCF would still be left out.... And while I don't like em, I think that's a lil questionable...

I'm out of sympathy for UCF after that article about playing Florida a few days ago. One win over a legit P5 team along with going undefeated in the AAC and three OOC cupcakes would easily get them into a hypothetical top 8, and even 11-1 with a close loss against that kind of team might be enough. If you sincerely want to compete for a real championship and your best opportunity to get the opponent you need on your schedule is a 2-for-1, you take it without question. The fact that they instead publicly deemed that scenario an insult and beneath them proves to me that all they're really interested in is winning the press conference and putting up fake banners; not actually laying something significant on the line to get in the picture for real.

[Tbonewannabe]

I'm out of sympathy for UCF after that article about playing Florida a few days ago. One win over a legit P5 team along with going undefeated in the AAC and three OOC cupcakes would easily get them into a hypothetical top 8, and even 11-1 with a close loss against that kind of team might be enough. If you sincerely want to compete for a real championship and your best opportunity to get the opponent you need on your schedule is a 2-for-1, you take it without question. The fact that they instead publicly deemed that scenario an insult and beneath them proves to me that all they're really interested in is winning the press conference and putting up fake banners; not actually laying something significant on the line to get in the picture for real.

They don't want to risk actually losing. This is the same team that thinks they should replace teams in the SEC.

[DownwardDawg]

The bowl system will still exist & an 8 team playoff would create more money, not less.

I don't think anyone ever thought 4 teams was the right amount

I agree 100%. I laughed when they went with four because I knew that?s exactly what they would do. Screw up a great idea. The number should be 8. It should have started with 8 and should stay at 8. Stop with the BS of ,?what?s next? 16???? No. Eight is the number.

I don’t know a single person that thought 4 was the right number.

[Pit Bull]

It?s not questionable. UCF shouldn?t even be in the top 20.

Predetermined, preset, and preapproved computer ranking system would say where UCF would seed. If they played a tough OOC schedule and won, then won their conf. championship....I'm pretty sure the computer would spit out them out in the top eight.