Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Don't Say I Wanted a Four-Team Playoff

[Cardinal]

Should (probably "When") the four-team playoff proves down the road to have its own share of problems, I don't want the anti-playoff crowd to again claim that "this is what you wanted," as it has done the last however many years every time the pro-playoff crowd complained against the BCS.

For the record: I DO NOT WANT A FOUR-TEAM PLAYOFF.

I favor an eight-team or twelve-team playoff. The four-team playoff will still leave out deserving teams too many years, for example, major conference champs with one tough road loss in conference to another top team. The undefeated mid-majors likely will still have only a very limited chance to get a national title shot, though that chance is, of course, better than it was under the BCS, which gave those institutions zero chance.

So, as was the case with the change from the old bowl system to the BCS, I hope and believe the four-team playoff will be better than the BCS, but IT IS NOT WHAT I WANT.

To my friends who are also in favor of a larger than four-team playoff: now is the time to get on record, or you will be blamed for the four-team playoff's failures.

 

[Huskermedic]

Same here, I am a huge playoff guy. The only system that is fair is one that uses the conf's and regular season to determine the one or two best teams in each conf. (I am fine with one which would be the conf champ.) Then plays them off using home sites and the last few playoff games go to a bowl game site and other teams that don't win the conf get to go to a bowl game as well.

If any team get's in a playoff with out winning there conf it is a farce.

It blows my mind how hard these people are making this. They are so afraid of letting the field and game determine the best.

 

[Bo Pelinis Gum]

Same here, I am a huge playoff guy. The only system that is fair is one that uses the conf's and regular season to determine the one or two best teams in each conf. (I am fine with one which would be the conf champ.) Then plays them off using home sites and the last few playoff games go to a bowl game site and other teams that don't win the conf get to go to a bowl game as well.

If any team get's in a playoff with out winning there conf it is a farce.

It blows my mind how hard these people are making this. They are so afraid of letting the field and game determine the best.

It’s all about the money. FBS has needed a form of playoffs for some time imo. I think the challenge here is getting everyone on the same page that the benefits are for the game itself and the image of the game at the FBS level. But when millions of dollars are to be made or lost, sadly, the choices are made on just that, the lost or gained revenue.

What about the independents? Meaning, say Notre Dame or BYU does actually make it into the top 4 (please refrain from throwing rocks at me for that last sentence, mentioned only for sake of the statement.) Are they excluded because they didn’t win a conference? Now, I personally would just ban them period until they join a conference, but that’s one caveat I think needs to be addressed. But if you say, ok, everyone BUT Notre Dame, BYU, etc has to win their conference to be a part of the system. There’s the first asterisk of controversy. And if they are excluded and then you take numbers 1,2,4,and 5 (saying an independent was #3) then it’s not truly a top 4. I agree with an 8 team, maybe even a 12 team playoff. But then comes the whole argument of lost revenues over bowl games. In other words, if we keep the bowl games, fan base travel costs, i.e. choosing only the semi's for the fan base to show up. There’s a lot to it than just, get a playoff and that solves everything. Because of the system we’ve had in place, we’ve set up kind of a perfect storm of controversy and issues with a playoff system.

 

[Cardinal]

It’s all about the money. FBS has needed a form of playoffs for some time imo. I think the challenge here is getting everyone on the same page that the benefits are for the game itself and the image of the game at the FBS level. But when millions of dollars are to be made or lost, sadly, the choices are made on just that, the lost or gained revenue.

What about the independents? Meaning, say Notre Dame or BYU does actually make it into the top 4 (please refrain from throwing rocks at me for that last sentence, mentioned only for sake of the statement.) Are they excluded because they didn’t win a conference? Now, I personally would just ban them period until they join a conference, but that’s one caveat I think needs to be addressed. But if you say, ok, everyone BUT Notre Dame, BYU, etc has to win their conference to be a part of the system. There’s the first asterisk of controversy. And if they are excluded and then you take numbers 1,2,4,and 5 (saying an independent was #3) then it’s not truly a top 4. I agree with an 8 team, maybe even a 12 team playoff. But then comes the whole argument of lost revenues over bowl games. In other words, if we keep the bowl games, fan base travel costs, i.e. choosing only the semi's for the fan base to show up. There’s a lot to it than just, get a playoff and that solves everything. Because of the system we’ve had in place, we’ve set up kind of a perfect storm of controversy and issues with a playoff system.

Good post. I agree that a playoff of any size doesn't solve "everything." We all know that. I just want the title to be won on the field, like in every other sport, including the lower divisions of college football, which means we have to scoop up enough teams to make sure that happens. There will be sacrifices with such a system, undoubtedly. But as you said, college athletics, and football especially, has become so big that there are just too many divergent interests to have a clean system that everyone will be 100% satisfied with.

 

[huskernut]

See. I argued the playoff would automatically expand from 4 teams. Even before it starts, people are clamoring for more.

 

[G33K]

Should (probably "When") the four-team playoff proves down the road to have its own share of problems, I don't want the anti-playoff crowd to again claim that "this is what you wanted," as it has done the last however many years every time the pro-playoff crowd complained against the BCS.

For the record: I DO NOT WANT A FOUR-TEAM PLAYOFF.

I favor an eight-team or twelve-team playoff. The four-team playoff will still leave out deserving teams too many years, for example, major conference champs with one tough road loss in conference to another top team. The undefeated mid-majors likely will still have only a very limited chance to get a national title shot, though that chance is, of course, better than it was under the BCS, which gave those institutions zero chance.

So, as was the case with the change from the old bowl system to the BCS, I hope and believe the four-team playoff will be better than the BCS, but IT IS NOT WHAT I WANT.

To my friends who are also in favor of a larger than four-team playoff: now is the time to get on record, or you will be blamed for the four-team playoff's failures.

Don't worry, it won't be a 4 team playoff for too long. Once the universities and the public grow accustomed to the playoffs, I'm relatively certain that it will end up at 8 teams. I think there's a chance that they could eventually go all the way to 16, but I think 8 is a good number myself.

 

[DBP]

I also think a playoff larger than 4 would be better. I can't see going beyond 8 however.

 

[ShortSideOption]

It's only a matter of time before the 2 loss SEC team gets in over a one loss team from another conference and all heck breaks loose...

 

[Cardinal]

Don't worry, it won't be a 4 team playoff for too long. Once the universities and the public grow accustomed to the playoffs, I'm relatively certain that it will end up at 8 teams. I think there's a chance that they could eventually go all the way to 16, but I think 8 is a good number myself.

A 12-team playoff is an interesting number for me. The top 4 seeds get a first round bye and a second round home game, which should assuage those that fear that the top teams will have no reason to play their best the last game of a season (a CCG???) if they have a playoff berth cinched. With 12 you could have all BCS conference champs, plus two to four more from mid-majors (if they meet certain criteria, so we don't get 8-4 MAC champs, but we do get 11-0 MWC champs), then fill out the rest with 3-5 wild cards.

 

[Cardinal]

It's only a matter of time before the 2 loss SEC team gets in over a one loss team from another conference and all heck breaks loose...

Yes that, or a conference champ that is #3 or #4 in both AP and Coaches' poll gets left out by the "committee" for a #5 SEC runner-up.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

8 is the perfect number. Host week 1 on campuses, week 2 at the bowl sites and bid out the championship. I really don't care how the teams get picked. I'm getting to watch 7 epic college matchups. Even if the selection process is flawed at the margin, there will be a worthy champion.

 

[cm husker]

8 is the perfect number. Host week 1 on campuses, week 2 at the bowl sites and bid out the championship. I really don't care how the teams get picked. I'm getting to watch 7 epic college matchups. Even if the selection process is flawed at the margin, there will be a worthy champion.

You mean play about 70% of the games in front of an empty stadium.

Not to mention the physical toll on the player during finals time.

What great fun.

 

[Cardinal]

You mean play about 70% of the games in front of an empty stadium.

Not to mention the physical toll on the player during finals time.

What great fun.

Your numbers don't add up.

The four home games will of course be sellouts. That is 57% by itself. Semi's and Final could also very easily sell out. Especially if either team is within a day's drive to the locale.

First round games played early December before Dead Week (and before college basketball knocks off for finals). Semi's in New Years bowls (school is out). Championship the next week (school is out still for most; first week of new semester for some).

 

[cm husker]

Your numbers don't add up.

The four home games will of course be sellouts.

First round games played early December before Dead Week (and before college basketball knocks off for finals). Semi's in New Years bowls (school is out). Championship the next week (school is out).

You ever hear of practice?

Or do you think these teams will just show up and play on gameday?

 

[Cardinal]

You ever hear of practice?

Or do you think these teams will just show up and play on gameday?

They'll follow the same bowl practice schedule teams do now. A hard week or two before finals. A soft week, or no practice, during finals. Kids can go home for a few days around Christmas. Then back for the New Years' bowls/semifinals.

Not exactly re-inventing the wheel.

College basketball teams practice (and travel) far more than that during December.