With an 8-team playoff, there would be no controversy tomorrow

[Quaoarsking]

There have been legitimate controversies in which teams were selected in 4 of the first 6 years, and it's going to be 5/7 tomorrow regardless of whether they pick Texas A&M or Notre Dame.

But with an 8-team format that includes an autobid for each P5 league, 1 reserved for the G5, and 2 at-larges, you don't get these controversies every year. Most of the bids are decided on the field, and even the at-larges tend to be pretty obvious. Would there still be some teams upset about getting left out? Sure, but who's going to be crying this year for Indiana, Georgia, USC, etc.? No one.

Notre Dame and Texas A&M are the clear at-large picks, and while some people might want Coastal Carolina in over Cincinnati for the G5, it's not going to be a particularly heated debate.


Alabama (SEC)
Clemson (ACC)
Ohio State (Big 10)
Texas A&M
Notre Dame
Oklahoma (Big 12)
Cincinnati (G5)
Oregon (Pac-12) [or USC/Colorado if the rule just requires representation, not necessarily the winner of the conference championship game]


This would be fun, increase the watchability of the regular season, decrease controversy, and the odds of a deserving and plausible playoff winner getting left out are basically nil. Not to mention this would bring in lots of money and end the boring "same teams every year" situation college football has gotten itself into.

[Liverpooldawg]

I don't know how many teams there are in the FBS, but if there are 120, and the playoff takes 119, there would be controversy.

[Quaoarsking]

Here's the playoff picture with this format for 2014 - 2019. There's very little controversy. Only once does a 3-loss team get in (because the Pac-12 is just a lame conference and in 2018 10-3 Washington was their best team), and usually 2-loss non-champions don't make it either, with only 2016 Michigan and 2014 us getting in without a loss coming in the CCG. Even better, not a single 1-loss P5 team doesn't make it (though that ends this year thanks to USC and Indiana playing only half-schedules).

Is it a perfect system? No, but the 8-team format is a lot less controversial. No one outside the fanbases of the "out" teams is going to complain much about any of these years, and none of the "out" teams has a strong case to get in, like teams routinely do in the 4-team format.

https://i.imgur.com/akF4QSo.png

[BeardoMSU]

Good stuff, man.

How about the 6 team format, with the top 2 seeds getting byes? How does that compare in your mind, re: controversy?

[chef dixon]

Traditionalists that aren't a fan of the top teams not wanting to expand the playoffs is bizarre. It won't devalue the regular season for us and 110 other FBS schools. Our seasons are literally valueless from the start. It should be 16 and they should have at least 2 spots for group of 5. It would be insanely popular and fun to watch.

[BrunswickDawg]

I wish they had kept the BCS formula and added playoffs to it instead of this stupid panel to select the teams. If they move to an 8 or 10 team playoff they should bring back the FCS formula.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

I'm a fan of the 8 team playoff. The ONLY arguments against it are 1) "there will still be controversy" (as if the #9 team really has an argument like the #5 team does) and 2) "it devalues the regular season".

But here's the thing, sure it devalues Bama or Clemsons regular season because they can be less than perfect and still make an 8 team playoff, BUT for every 1 of them there's 2-3 teams for whom it makes the regular season matter more. A&M's season should matter. The Big 12 and PAC's seasons would matter. Losing to Bama isn't necessarily the end of your season- go 11-1 and you're in even if Bama is 12-0. It would devalue some games, but make many more matter.

If the #6-7-8 teams get curbstomped by the #3-2-1 seeds, that will help expose the lack of parity even among the best of the best and will hasten change. If the #6-7-8 teams can get an upset, how much fun is that?

[Tbonewannabe]

Good stuff, man.

How about the 6 team format, with the top 2 seeds getting byes? How does that compare in your mind, re: controversy?

6 teams would either eliminate the auto champion bids or eliminate at large bids. It needs to be at least 8 teams.

[Leroy Jenkins]

I don't care how many teams you put in. You could put in 100 and the same 3-4 will be there in the end. It's boring.

[BeardoMSU]

I don't care how many teams you put in. You could put in 100 and the same 3-4 will be there in the end. It's boring.

Not necessarily. At least there would be ample opportunity for upsets. For example, ND would get boat raced by a lot of good teams in an 8 spot playoff.

[Quaoarsking]

I don't care how many teams you put in. You could put in 100 and the same 3-4 will be there in the end. It's boring.

Everyone said that about the BCS, and in the first year Ohio State beat #1 and #2 to prove the argument wrong. Then 2 years later, Alabama did it again.

[Dawgsfanalongtime77]

Teams that don?t make the conference championship game shouldn?t be in the mix. Just my opinion only.

[Lance Harbor]

16 game playoff minimum. More fun football. Less BS.



There have been legitimate controversies in which teams were selected in 4 of the first 6 years, and it's going to be 5/7 tomorrow regardless of whether they pick Texas A&M or Notre Dame.

But with an 8-team format that includes an autobid for each P5 league, 1 reserved for the G5, and 2 at-larges, you don't get these controversies every year. Most of the bids are decided on the field, and even the at-larges tend to be pretty obvious. Would there still be some teams upset about getting left out? Sure, but who's going to be crying this year for Indiana, Georgia, USC, etc.? No one.

Notre Dame and Texas A&M are the clear at-large picks, and while some people might want Coastal Carolina in over Cincinnati for the G5, it's not going to be a particularly heated debate.


Alabama (SEC)
Clemson (ACC)
Ohio State (Big 10)
Texas A&M
Notre Dame
Oklahoma (Big 12)
Cincinnati (G5)
Oregon (Pac-12) [or USC/Colorado if the rule just requires representation, not necessarily the winner of the conference championship game]


This would be fun, increase the watchability of the regular season, decrease controversy, and the odds of a deserving and plausible playoff winner getting left out are basically nil. Not to mention this would bring in lots of money and end the boring "same teams every year" situation college football has gotten itself into.

[Lord McBuckethead]

Teams that don?t make the conference championship game shouldn?t be in the mix. Just my opinion only.

Absolutely.

[Quaoarsking]

Teams that don?t make the conference championship game shouldn?t be in the mix. Just my opinion only.

What if you really were the 2nd best team in your conference (like Texas A&M) but didn't get to play in the conference title game because of geography? The Big 12 and ACC match up their top 2 teams, the SEC often doesn't.

[DawgNsuds]

An argument could be made that with a 2 team playoff there wouldn't be any controversy. Conventional wisdom says that Bama and Clemson are locks, we shall see.