I am sort of for expanding the CFP, but how many times have there been four legit contenders. Expansion will mean fewer top ten teams and top g5 complaining, but it would never end. Top 15 would cry, look at play in games added to NCAAs.
***Bowl Games Thread***
- Thread starter BigJCy
- Start date
I think the Iowa State thing is the problem. Losing to ISU is one thing, but then when the Clones take OU down to the wire in the CCG, that just proves OU is no good. They may have gotten a nod if OU beat ISU like they did FL.
Disagree, ND played 1 good team and OSU should have been beat by Indiana. Neither deserved it and both will get spanked.
I’m cut throat with this. Make it 6-team playoff with all P5 champs and the top G5 in the polls. That’s it. You get in because you actually won on the field and earned your spot. Could the second best team in the nation be left out because they just were in the conference with the best team? Sure. But you had your shot on the field and lost. In the end this way not a single person could say you didn’t have a chance. Win your league if you are the P5 and you get your shot. Don’t win your league, well that’s your fault.
Puts full emphasis on conferences championships and prevents sand bagging because you want one of the two byes in the playoffs.
I tend to agree. It’s typically 1 or 2 dominant teams, 5 or 6 good teams, and then a bunch of others. People complain every year about getting left out and that wouldn’t change. It also wouldn’t change that the 1 or 2 dominant teams would still destroy them.
A great season like ISU had by our standards still wouldn’t put us within 40 of this Alabama squad, regardless of how much koolaid is passed around. You’re just going to have even more lopsided games because #1 would now be playing #8.
the way Florida played ISU would have beat them nearly as much also..
Sport Hospitality. Is that like being the host for a game watch? You can get a degree in that?
We would likely get destroyed, but a championship is the goal. You take the playoffs every time.
Already have if kickoff spread was 18.5. I believe in game spread moved to 23.5 once Bama opened the early big lead.
But it's also possible that teams that would have been selected in the 5-8 spots would have won. Is it likely? No, but it's possible.
Also, with a 4-team playoff, it's possible for every P5 conference champion to go undefeated and someone gets left out. That wouldn't happen with an 8-team playoff. Plus, as it stands a G-5 team will never get in even if they are deserving. If you go to an 8-team playoff with auto-bids for the P-5 champions, 2 at larges, and the top ranked G-5 team, then everyone has a path to the playoff. You would still have complaints, but really the only team that could really complain would be the second highest ranked G-5 team. Otherwise it's " you should have won your conference or been one of the two at-larges."
It could also lead to better nonconference schedules because a loss wouldn't hurt your playoff chances nearly as badly.
I had ND +20 and got it. **** yea bois. With my under in the Cincy Georgia game. I am looking fine. Have Ohio State +7 to close out today
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
The reason I'm so against the 6-team playoff is the 1 & 2 seeded teams are going to have a large advantage by getting a bye. I think the committee's biased towards blue-bloods and the SEC and Big 10. If Alabama, Ohio State, and Iowa State are all battling for the top two seeds and Iowa State is not 100% without any doubt the best team, Iowa State's not getting a bye. Why do we want the committee to give teams that advantage?
I've kicked it around some, and it could be arranged that the top two G5 teams play conference championship weekend for the playoff spot, eliminating that complaint. I really don't think they would often perform well in their CFP playoff game, but I think if a G5 goes undefeated and beats the second best G5 to end the year they have a solid argument. That would normally be a top 25 win at the end of the year which is no different than whoever OSU typically beats in the B1G CCG to "earn" their ticket.
People whine about getting a seat at the table now they complain what seat? Again prove it on the field. You are in so let’s see what ya got. Also, the bye is sometime a curse for teams that like to be in rhythm. Too much time off can be a disadvantage for some teams, especially high octane offenses.
NFL uses byes and it’s worked perfectly in my opinion. It’s an advantage but not a guarantee you make the title game.
In the end I think the subjective nature of seeding is not nearly as bad as going to 8 and haven’t 2-3 wildcards basically where they are just going to add more SEC and Big Ten teams, so what’s the difference. I don’t and subjective reason for who gets in. Yes I know the G5 spot still technically is but they are getting a shot at least finally in my scenario. Shut up and take it.
If you are only taking conference champs and the top G5, YOU DON'T NEED A COMMITTEE. Criteria for seeding can be predetermined and transparent. Even the old BCS formula would do. The thing I like most about it is none of those criteria matter until you win your conference first.
hadn't done the math yet when I posted or even looked at the score really..
at the same time we would get 4-2 Oregon as an auto bid at this point as well.. who backed into the CCG due to Washington being unable to play... I would be fine with the BCS computers handling who the top 8 are and go from there...
