Conference Champions as automatic qualifiers.

[Iowama Red]

Well I thought that there was a push by the fans to have a playoff of the top two teams instead of letting the bowl games and the polls decide it. Then they expanded it because there was some question as to who the top 2 teams could be. Then it went to 4 teams. I think the general thinking is that they can identify who is most likely the top 4 teams and let them play it off. Now if the NCAA decides there isn't enough separation between 4 and 5 and decide to expand than that is fine. But the purpose is to decide the best team...….not the best conference/division winner. I can't imagine being the number 2 ranked team in the country and not being in it because you didn't win your conference. As many have said...….not winning your conference should be an automatic disqualifier. That doesn't seem right.

Just my opinion. Good discussion but I think at this point I'll let it go as we are just repeating our sides of the disagreement.

If you're talking about a 4 team playoff, it should be a disqualifier because you know they aren't the best team (they aren't the best in their conference) and you don't know if they are actually better than #3, #4, #5 who played different schedules.

If you're talking about an 8 team playoff, they would probably get in anyway as would the conference champions.

 

[Hville]

Last word..."2 ranked team"...as determined by who? That's the problem. You have teams entering the season ranked way high and never drop even if they dont look that good or lose. Then you have a team like UCF come out of the blue and blow everyone's doors off...yet because the pollsters didnt know who they were in August they have no chance.

The general college football fan and pollsters can do a pretty good job of seeing which teams deserve to be ranked where. The committee seems to be pretty consistent with the average computer poll and the average human polls. There will never be perfect because any day anything can happen. Holding a team to a standard of losing one game compared to another team who lost two but theirs happened to be in a division that the two loss team doesn't play in isn't equal.


The bottom line is I will never believe divisions are equal and thus you look at the big picture.

 

[Hville]

If you're talking about a 4 team playoff, it should be a disqualifier because you know they aren't the best team (they aren't the best in their conference) and you don't know if they are actually better than #3, #4, #5 who played different schedules.

If you're talking about an 8 team playoff, they would probably get in anyway as would the conference champions.

I'm not saying they are the best team in a 4 team playoff. What I am saying is they could be one of the best 4 teams even with a loss. Everyone who played in the CFP last year had a loss. What makes anyone believe Alabama wasn't one of the best 4? After all they won it.

 

[RedinIowa]

Yep. Essentially those title games are the start of the playoffs. No do-overs.

And appears that there is only a need for a two team playoff this year.

 

[Cardinal]

Haven't read the entire thread, so if repetitive, I apologize. But the reason I favor an 8-team playoff is because it actually would add many more meaningful games to the regular season. This weekend, for example, if there were 8 spots available, there would be as many as 14-16 teams that would know they still have a shot at making the playoffs, rather than the 6-8 that there are now. That would add dozens of additional "meaningful" games to the last three to four weeks of the regular season over what we have now. I enjoy the meaningful regular season games leading up to the playoffs as much, or more, than the playoffs themselves. Sure, the top one or two teams maybe would still make the playoffs if they lost a late game, making a couple of their games "meaningless", but there would be dozens of games made meaningful because of the increased playoff spots.

 

[Hville]

Haven't read the entire thread, so if repetitive, I apologize. But the reason I favor an 8-team playoff is because it actually would add many more meaningful games to the regular season. This weekend, for example, if there were 8 spots available, there would be as many as 14-16 teams that would know they still have a shot at making the playoffs, rather than the 6-8 that there are now. That would add dozens of additional "meaningful" games to the last three to four weeks of the regular season over what we have now. I enjoy the meaningful regular season games leading up to the playoffs as much, or more, than the playoffs themselves. Sure, the top one or two teams maybe would still make the playoffs if they lost a late game, making a couple of their games "meaningless", but there would be dozens of games made meaningful because of the increased playoff spots.

That is an excellent point I hadn't thought of. I'll be the first to admit that it gets to the point later in year that the only thing that matters is fighting for the 4 spots. Even bowl games now days are irrelevant. Fighting for those other 4 spots would add some interest. Again I don't have a problem with 8. I just hate automatic qualifying when the opportunity exists for going after the top 8 without guaranteeing a spot to a team that might not be ranked in the top 10 or 15.

 

[the fountainhead]

In the current scenario, a 12-1 NU team who won their title game could still be passed over for a 2 loss SEC team because of "metrics". At least make it so everyone knows going in exactly what it will take to get in the playoff, which is win your conference.

Agree. Win your conference and there is no doubt. Lose in OT and you are hoping for an at large...

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

Let's say bama was passed over last year for UCF. Who would bama blame...legitimately? They could only blame themselves because they had every opportunity to win their division/conference.

On the other hand let's say that Washington won what appeared to be a weak Pac 12 and did it going 13-0? They eye test and SOS and all that tells the committee "Bama deserves to be in at 11-1 despite not winning their conference and division". Who does washington blame? Not themselves. They did everything they could they just were unfortunate to have played in a down year in the Pac 12.

Demanding a conference title puts the blame on the team themselves for not making it. There obviously is still a selection process though, right? So we'd have 5 conference champs and maybe one or two others...like ND and UCF. So the committee is picking 4 out of 7ish teams. I think that is where you are able to DQ that 8-5 Northwestern team in a 4 team situation. So you're still getting a high quality field.

In the 8 team field where all 5 champs get in PLUS 3 "wild cards"...11-1 bama gets in. So what if NW gets in at 8-5? You've still got a high quality field. AND your team that EARNED the 1 seed gets to trash NW at home. AND you make the regular season pretty damn fun IMO. What is the downside of NW fans dreaming of the playoffs right now? How many programs would still be "in it", if at least only in theory, right now? that hardly makes the season "meaningless" as some have worried.

The one downside to this is something that Tebow mentioned about how this will place such an emphasis on the conference that the non-conference games will become unimportant, so nobody will want to schedule an unnecessarily tough non-conference game. I think that Alabama can already do that and probably Ohio State and Clemson, too, but I thought it was at least a valid point. I'd still choose 8.

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

I'll also say that playing on the road and losing by 8 is hardly getting smoked anymore than saying Nebraska was smoked on the road against Ohio State last week.

I'm not sure where you're getting the 8 points part because Auburn dominated that game and won 26-14. It should have been worse than that. There was absolutely no doubt after that game who was the better team.

Going with what you said about the conference champion not getting in, etc., how did it make sense to punish Auburn for playing in its CCG? They had already shown that they were the best SEC team in the regular season, but they had to play Georgia again while beat up. As crazy as it sounds knowing that Auburn lost to UCF, they actually would have had a good chance of making the championship if they had gotten in. If Auburn plays Georgia in the NC game, it would have been double-redundant.

What they're doing now makes no sense except that you know that they're going to pick Alabama every year. Alabama may as well start scheduling 4 cupcake non-conference games in November, just to make sure that they're rested up for the playoffs. Clemson can do the same. Notre Dame can do the same. The rest of the FBS will be playing for the one remaining spot, every year, and every year those three can start out ranked #1-3 so that if they lose an early game, they can bounce right back with some meaningless wins later on. How far is that from already happening this year?

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

On the surface I like that idea. I hate 14 team conferences...and talk of adding more is just insane IMO.

I agree, unless they go much bigger....

Eighteen team conferences would allow two sides of 9, where each side plays round robin. Everyone gets 3 non-conference games, and the 12th game would take the place of championship weekend when each conference team plays the opponent of the same rank from the other side. Everyone gets 12 games, and everyone plays on the same weekends. Probably not a lot of people tune in for that Illinois vs Rutgers toilet bowl, but all of the other games would have a bowl game feel to them. They could do neutral sites for the top games or rotate which side of the conference hosts all of the games from one year to the next.

Here's what's nice and radical (in a good way) about this arrangement: those 12th games can still take place over the long Thanksgiving weekend, like they do now.

There are lots of issues besides figuring out how exactly to expand the conferences, but it's fun to think about. Question/Issue #1 would be Notre Dame.

And yet at 4 teams we are still seeing teams that have better qualifications and ranked higher than conference champions that are being let in. Such as last year with USC and Ohio State. And that team ended up winning it all, had the best record in the NCAA and didn't win its division. Division/conference titles are over rated because they aren't equal.

Aren't you forgetting that UCF was undefeated and just happened to beat the one team that beat Alabama? Whatever you think of UCF last year, they did all they could, and they made a case for themselves.

We also don't know that USC or Ohio State would NOT have won it all. Because USC got pummelled by OSU we assume that they weren't that good, but they would have matched up very well with any of the other teams that made the playoff. If USC got in and won, we'd be talking about how the system worked. We can't prove what was never allowed to occur. If you watched that game, does anyone doubt that Ohio State could have held its own? How about in 2015 when Baylor and TCU were snubbed? They looked pretty dang good in their bowl games, and Ohio State was the only team besides Alabama that made CFP that year with a traditional heavy O-line, but what happens if they suddenly had to defend Baylor or TCU instead? It probably would have looked a lot like when 'Bama played Tex A&M when Manziel was there. How about Stanford in 2016? They looked pretty dang good to me.

We know what we know because it's what happened, and all of the rest is conjectures, opinions, politics, and arguing,... which is actually a big part of the fun of college football.

 

[BGRed]

With a 4 team playoff I dont thing there should be an "automatic qualifier". I absolutely...100% believe not winning your conference should be an automatic DISqualifier. The reason for a playoff is to find out who is the best of the best so to speak. If you aren't even the best in your conference, or worse....division!... then how can you make a claim to be the best overall? Defies logic and it gives ammo to those that fear making the regular season meaningless. For example...Alabama didnt even need to show up to that game last week. They did THIS time but they've gotten away with "ducking" their conference title game before.

Moving on to 8? 5 guaranteed slots and 3 wild cards. That leaves room for a team like in your scenario where someone was great all year and came down with the flu en masse. Also leaves room for a team like UFC last year. Still preserves the sacred regular season because you'd be playing first round on campus and bama, for example, wouldn't want to risk having to travel to lincoln in December so... it only risking missing the playoffs they risk seeding by losing to LSU this past week. Incentive.

Agreed. If all you need to do is win your conference to qualify, why schedule tough, entertaining out of conference games?

I'm not quite sure I'd say that not winning the conference always would automatically disqualify you. What if the conference champs are from B1G West, P12 South, and whichever ACC division Clemson is not in?

 

[goodnterribles]

Agreed. If all you need to do is win your conference to qualify, why schedule tough, entertaining out of conference games?

I'm not quite sure I'd say that not winning the conference always would automatically disqualify you. What if the conference champs are from B1G West, P12 South, and whichever ACC division Clemson is not in?

Wouldn't that work the opposite way? If you know that an early season loss won't kill your chances, wouldn't teams be more likely to schedule tougher nonconference games?

 

[bilsker]

The one downside to this is something that Tebow mentioned about how this will place such an emphasis on the conference that the non-conference games will become unimportant, so nobody will want to schedule an unnecessarily tough non-conference game. I think that Alabama can already do that and probably Ohio State and Clemson, too, but I thought it was at least a valid point. I'd still choose 8.

Thats the case now. If I was scheduling for an team that fancied itself a title contender and they were from any conference not named the pac 12 i would tell them to drop any losable non-con game immediately and fill the spot with literally ANYBODY.

If you go through the big 10, sec, big12 or acc 13-0 you're going to the playoffs. That's as close to a lock as there is in sports. 12-1 with a regular season conference loss...still pretty good shot if you're a name brand program. 11-2 with a non con loss...you better be bama otherwise good luck.

If you made conference champs auto qualifiers in an 8 team playoff then a non con loss doesn't hurt you. Now you are scheduling in case you DON'T win your conference and want one of the 2 or 3 wild cards...in which case big non con wins should be rewarded.

So the argument could be made that this current system stifles non con big games and "my" system would encourage them by taking away the downside.

 

[MartyHuskerFan]

Lots of good debate, too bad I missed it. I have this debate with a buddy of mine. He's a Texas fan, but always jumps to defend and promote Alabama because he knows it gets in my craw.

Hville, your position sounds eerily similar to my friends. I like how you twist it and try to get husker fans to agree because some day we'd get cheated like we are trying to 'cheat' the Tide this year. If my huskers were riding on top all season and were clearly the best team and then got beat in the CCG on some fluky thing. I would scream to the high heavens and try to lobby my team in. Then I'd say that it is what it is, and move on.

I am consistent on this issue. The whole point of a play-off is to name a champion. If the 'best' team happens to find their way through and win, then great. If not, then we have something fun to discuss. I said a mouthful there. So many people cannot stomach what I just said, but its ok. It does not matter who thinks Alabama is the best team in the country. It does not matter. Get over it already. With out Alabama, there will still be an awesome tournament and a champion will be crowned.

There are many good arguments to be made about choosing and seeding the tournament field. Conference championship needs to be the top qualifier for the reasons others have already mentioned. Since we only have 4 spots and we have 5 conferences, then non Conference champions need not apply.

Eight team play-offs is much better plan than 4 team. With 8 teams you can get the 5 conference champs, the UCF/ND type team and then fill in the rest of the slots with the SEC teams of your choice(sarcasm). I would consider all ideas for re-alignment and better scheduling. I would consider eliminating the conference championship games.

My preference is 16 teams. I enjoyed reading some of the discussion in this thread about the lower tier play-off seed causing teams to work harder during the regular season to earn those seeds, 16 seeds would encourage all of that. I enjoy that team outside the SEC could mingle in the early rounds with some of the vaunted wonders from the South and East.

 

[Hville]

Agreed. If all you need to do is win your conference to qualify, why schedule tough, entertaining out of conference games?

I'm not quite sure I'd say that not winning the conference always would automatically disqualify you. What if the conference champs are from B1G West, P12 South, and whichever ACC division Clemson is not in?

Wouldn't that work the opposite way? If you know that an early season loss won't kill your chances, wouldn't teams be more likely to schedule tougher nonconference games?

Early season losses still hurt more than early season wins.

The bottom line is if you make it conference Champions you reward weaker Conferences and Divisions.

The best example is what we are doing in the B1G today. Northwestern is going to be rewarded by playing in the conference championship game because they played in the west. There are 5 ranked teams from the B1G. 4 from the east and 1 from the west. They haven't even played the one from the West but are still pretty much a lock for getting into the playoff. Come December 1st we will probably have the number 1 and number 5 team in the conference playing against each other in the championship game.