Playoff expansion idea.

Printable View

01-01-2018, 02:39 PM
WCUdawg88

Playoff expansion idea.

So I have an idea for playoff expansion. Expand to 6 teams. You have the top 4 P5 teams then for the final 2 spots you have two play in games for the non p5 conferences in the form of bowl games in early/mid Dec.

So have a bowl game for Cusa champ vs MWC champ, And a bowl game with AAC vs Sunbelt champs, Winner of those games makes playoffs. Then top 2 seeds have byes..

What yall think?
01-01-2018, 02:43 PM
99jc

It needs to be 8 teams no more no less...6 won't solve the main issues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WCUdawg88

So I have an idea for playoff expansion. Expand to 6 teams. You have the top 4 P5 teams then for the final 2 spots you have two play in games for the non p5 conferences in the form of bowl games in early/mid Dec.

So have a bowl game for Cusa champ vs MWC champ, And a bowl game with AAC vs Sunbelt champs, Winner of those games makes playoffs. Then top 2 seeds have byes..

What yall think?

It's time to end the controversy every year. The top eight teams conference champs plus some at large should suffice the main players.
01-01-2018, 02:44 PM
Todd4State

I'd rather it be the top 8 teams. All five conference champs of the power five, one group of five and two wild cards.
01-01-2018, 02:54 PM
Apoplectic

IMO it?s perfect right now. Don?t change anything. Conf CG are playins and teams like ucf should never be considered for one of the spots.

Sec champ will always make it and as we see sometimes two which is more conf/MSU money.

You?ll never please everyone with more playoff teams as we see with NCAA bktb and baseball
01-01-2018, 02:57 PM
99jc

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apoplectic

IMO it?s perfect right now. Don?t change anything. Conf CG are playins and teams like ucf should never be considered for one of the spots.

Sec champ will always make it and as we see sometimes two which is more conf/MSU money.

You?ll never please everyone with more playoff teams as we see with NCAA bktb and baseball

You will feel different when we end up 5-8 next season. You probably would like the old AP. UPI vote.
01-01-2018, 03:24 PM
Quaoarsking

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I'd rather it be the top 8 teams. All five conference champs of the power five, one group of five and two wild cards.

Yep this. It would take almost all controversy away because no one would feel bad for the first team out (this year, a 3-loss Auburn team). The only real argument against it is that occasionally 3- and 4-loss teams can win major conferences, but that's almost always due to a bad team lucking into the conference championship game and pulling an upset. If all conferences dropped divisions and just took the top 2 (like the Big 12 does now), the chances of that would be very low.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apoplectic

IMO it?s perfect right now. Don?t change anything. Conf CG are playins and teams like ucf should never be considered for one of the spots.

Sec champ will always make it and as we see sometimes two which is more conf/MSU money.

You?ll never please everyone with more playoff teams as we see with NCAA bktb and baseball

I agree that UCF isn't a top 4 team this year, but hypothetically teams in those conferences should have a chance to win. I wouldn't say that they should "never" be considered. In fact, including one G5 team gives teams extra incentive to keep playing hard and secure that #1 seed even when they've already clinched a playoff spot, because the G5 will almost always be the #8 seed and a much easier opponent than whoever the #2 seed has to play.
01-01-2018, 03:25 PM
maroonmania

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I'd rather it be the top 8 teams. All five conference champs of the power five, one group of five and two wild cards.

I'm in favor of this as well and the first round should be at the home site of the top 4 seeds 2 weekends after the conference championships (weekend after the Army-Navy game). That weekend is usually a pretty dead weekend for sports anyway. Beyond that everything could stay the same. You could even pre-invite the 4 playoff losers to a bowl game if you wanted.
01-01-2018, 03:30 PM
BrunswickDawg

If they expand the playoffs to more teams, then they need to go back to the old BCS formula (or something similar) to rank the teams and seed them. It would cut the subjectivity of the committee.
01-01-2018, 03:36 PM
Quaoarsking

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg

If they expand the playoffs to more teams, then they need to go back to the old BCS formula (or something similar) to rank the teams and seed them. It would cut the subjectivity of the committee.

Absolutely can't be the BCS formula. 5 of the 6 computer polls had secret formulas that were not based on any valid math/statistics, and could not be audited. The 1 poll that did have a public formula had a mistake one year (2010) and the BCS had to release rankings a few days later. Thankfully it didn't affect the top 2, but LSU and Boise State swapped ranks. Over the 16 years of the BCS, that probably happened at some point with one of the secret formulas, and we'll never know.

What's worse is that the formulas were forbidden to use things like homefield advantage or margin of victory.

I would support a transparent, mathematically valid formula, but the Committee (even with all of its flaws) is a big improvement over the nonsense BCS formula.
01-01-2018, 05:40 PM
iPat09

And there should be no rankings until half the season has been played so everyone starts on a level playing field.
01-01-2018, 05:55 PM
Apoplectic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Yep this. It would take almost all controversy away because no one would feel bad for the first team out (this year, a 3-loss Auburn team). The only real argument against it is that occasionally 3- and 4-loss teams can win major conferences, but that's almost always due to a bad team lucking into the conference championship game and pulling an upset. If all conferences dropped divisions and just took the top 2 (like the Big 12 does now), the chances of that would be very low.

I agree that UCF isn't a top 4 team this year, but hypothetically teams in those conferences should have a chance to win. I wouldn't say that they should "never" be considered. In fact, including one G5 team gives teams extra incentive to keep playing hard and secure that #1 seed even when they've already clinched a playoff spot, because the G5 will almost always be the #8 seed and a much easier opponent than whoever the #2 seed has to play.

Hypothetically G5 have a chance to win it now. CF schedule was garbage. If these teams want to make a top 4 then schedule all nonconf majors. With a good schedule this year they would have had an argument
01-01-2018, 05:58 PM
DownwardDawg

It should have been 8 since day one.
01-01-2018, 06:09 PM
MetEdDawg

I think you take the 5 P5 conference champs, the highest ranked G5 team, and 2 at large bids. A team like UCF should be able to play in a playoff game. If you say their undefeated means nothing because they play weaker teams, then you devalue coaching and place priority on recruiting. We can?t expect a team to schedule 3 P5 non conference games. We don?t hold anyone else to that standard. UCF should have a chance.

This to me catches everything. You would have Clemson, Oklahome, Georgia, Clemson, USC, UCF, Bama, and Ohio State. It won?t always work out like that, but to me those are clearly the 8 teams that have a viable claim to a title and I think all 8 could potentially win.
01-01-2018, 06:18 PM
Apoplectic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Yep this. It would take almost all controversy away because no one would feel bad for the first team out (this year, a 3-loss Auburn team). The only real argument against it is that occasionally 3- and 4-loss teams can win major conferences, but that's almost always due to a bad team lucking into the conference championship game and pulling an upset. If all conferences dropped divisions and just took the top 2 (like the Big 12 does now), the chances of that would be very low.

I agree that UCF isn't a top 4 team this year, but hypothetically teams in those conferences should have a chance to win. I wouldn't say that they should "never" be considered. In fact, including one G5 team gives teams extra incentive to keep playing hard and secure that #1 seed even when they've already clinched a playoff spot, because the G5 will almost always be the #8 seed and a much easier opponent than whoever the #2 seed has to play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetEdDawg

I think you take the 5 P5 conference champs, the highest ranked G5 team, and 2 at large bids. A team like UCF should be able to play in a playoff game. If you say their undefeated means nothing because they play weaker teams, then you devalue coaching and place priority on recruiting. We can?t expect a team to schedule 3 P5 non conference games. We don?t hold anyone else to that standard. UCF should have a chance.

This to me catches everything. You would have Clemson, Oklahome, Georgia, Clemson, USC, UCF, Bama, and Ohio State. It won?t always work out like that, but to me those are clearly the 8 teams that have a viable claim to a title and I think all 8 could potentially win.

How many P5 teams did the 4 cfp teams play? How many did ucf play?
01-01-2018, 07:03 PM
MetEdDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apoplectic

How many P5 teams did the 4 cfp teams play? How many did ucf play?

Bama played 1. It was a big one, but only one P5.
Clemson played 2. Auburn plus the built in SC rivalry
Oklahoma player 1 but it was also a big one. They have 9 conference games though.
Georgia played 2 with ND and the built in Ga Tech rivalry

UCF had a game against Ga Tech canceled due to hurricane. That in the end probably hurt them a tad because they didn’t get to make that game up.

But I’ll say this. There has been no incentive to schedule big by G5 teams. Why would you? No matter what they do they aren’t getting in the playoff. Only chance they have is to go undefeated and get very lucky. So why schedule 2 P5 games? No benefit to them because it would be on the road most likely. Plus we already know the history of those teams struggling to find decent P5 teams to play them.

But give the G5 a spot to get in and I guarantee those teams will start busting doors down to schedule a little bigger. And you maybstart seeing P5 schools seek those good G5 schools out to build the resume.
01-01-2018, 07:06 PM
JoseBrown

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I'd rather it be the top 8 teams. All five conference champs of the power five, one group of five and two wild cards.

That’s what I’d like to see. You should have everyone covered that should be in the playoffs, and with two at-large teams included there shouldn’t be much said about this one or that one was left out.
01-01-2018, 07:25 PM
Mutt the Hoople

I think it should go the other way. We have too many college games now. Go back to 10 games. Have a bunch of bowl games, and after the games are over 5-6 teams can claim a National Championship.
01-01-2018, 07:51 PM
Quaoarsking

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt the Hooplovich

I think it should go the other way. We have too many college games now. Go back to 10 games. Have a bunch of bowl games, and after the games are over 5-6 teams can claim a National Championship.

When did you go soft, Komrade?
01-01-2018, 07:55 PM
Mutt the Hoople

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

When did you go soft, Komrade?

Because it's just a game. One hundred years from now, nobody's going to care.
01-01-2018, 08:07 PM
RocketDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetEdDawg

Bama played 1. It was a big one, but only one P5.
Clemson played 2. Auburn plus the built in SC rivalry
Oklahoma player 1 but it was also a big one. They have 9 conference games though.
Georgia played 2 with ND and the built in Ga Tech rivalry

UCF had a game against Ga Tech canceled due to hurricane. That in the end probably hurt them a tad because they didn’t get to make that game up.

But I’ll say this. There has been no incentive to schedule big by G5 teams. Why would you? No matter what they do they aren’t getting in the playoff. Only chance they have is to go undefeated and get very lucky. So why schedule 2 P5 games? No benefit to them because it would be on the road most likely. Plus we already know the history of those teams struggling to find decent P5 teams to play them.

But give the G5 a spot to get in and I guarantee those teams will start busting doors down to schedule a little bigger. And you maybstart seeing P5 schools seek those good G5 schools out to build the resume.

I think you misunderstood his question. P5 means members of the big conferences as I understand it. We played 8 P5 teams plus BYU; Alabama played 9 and will have played 10 after tonight's game; UCF played 1 in the regular season: Maryland. And now Auburn.
01-01-2018, 08:28 PM
Apoplectic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Yep this. It would take almost all controversy away because no one would feel bad for the first team out (this year, a 3-loss Auburn team). The only real argument against it is that occasionally 3- and 4-loss teams can win major conferences, but that's almost always due to a bad team lucking into the conference championship game and pulling an upset. If all conferences dropped divisions and just took the top 2 (like the Big 12 does now), the chances of that would be very low.

I agree that UCF isn't a top 4 team this year, but hypothetically teams in those conferences should have a chance to win. I wouldn't say that they should "never" be considered. In fact, including one G5 team gives teams extra incentive to keep playing hard and secure that #1 seed even when they've already clinched a playoff spot, because the G5 will almost always be the #8 seed and a much easier opponent than whoever the #2 seed has to play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RocketDawg

I think you misunderstood his question. P5 means members of the big conferences as I understand it. We played 8 P5 teams plus BYU; Alabama played 9 and will have played 10 after tonight's game; UCF played 1 in the regular season: Maryland. And now Auburn.

Thanks that was the point I was making as part of my case closed argument. Ucf should not have even been in the conversation of top 4 or 8 teams by cfp committee with their schedule