No, I'm using it accurately here. Neither am I wrong.
Playoffs need to extend to at least 8 teams
- Thread starter Volbound1700
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2020
- Posts
- 14,935
- Reaction score
- 30,159
- Bookie:
- $ 1,286.00
Absolutely false.
Not absolutely false. You can complain all you want, won't change anything.
trojanfan12
Super Moderator
I've never understood the "it'll make the regular season less important" argument. As it stands now, many teams are out as soon as they lose 1 game. If a team with playoff aspirations loses a game, their season is essentially over. That's a big part of the reason that those "cupcake games" that we all complain about happen. Teams are trying to get to their conference schedule with a shot at the cfp still intact.
Imo, if you expand the playoff, it becomes less likely that 1 loss will cost a team a cfp bid and teams may become more willing to test themselves OOC.
I also believe it will help recruiting for some schools which should eventually make the earlier cfp games more competitive. Right now, there are 3, maybe 4 schools in the entire country who can legitimately sell recruits on making the cfp, let alone actually win an NC. More schools allowed in, means more schools that can sell that opportunity to recruits. Maybe then, some of them start picking other programs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2020
- Posts
- 14,935
- Reaction score
- 30,159
- Bookie:
- $ 1,286.00
Me saying that "I'd rather my team not get a chance to play in CFP rather than getting absolutely boat-raced in the CFP" is in no way, shape or form even remotely the same thing as a Sooner fan saying he/she "would rather be 0-0 in the CFP than 0-4," let alone "exactly."
I'm sorry you're handicapped.
No they are the same thing, because every Oklahoma playoff game except for one they have been boat-raced. To say you'd rather not be in the CFP because "ooooo we'll get boat-raced" is applicable for Oklahoma fans since that's usually the get-go. How do you not want to be recognized on a national level instead of playing a meaningless bowl game? Jesus Christ your take was idiotic as hell.
I'll end this by quoting a similar statement:
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2020
- Posts
- 14,935
- Reaction score
- 30,159
- Bookie:
- $ 1,286.00
Holy shit. How do you feed yourself, kid?
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2020
- Posts
- 9,414
- Reaction score
- 10,332
- Bookie:
- $ 30,270.00
100 percent agree
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2020
- Posts
- 14,935
- Reaction score
- 30,159
- Bookie:
- $ 1,286.00
ITT, "Oklahoma always gets boat raced in the CFP, except for when they don't."
What a fucking tard.
What a fucking tard.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Posts
- 1,524
- Reaction score
- 1,637
- Bookie:
- $ 1,414.00
Your argument would have more validity if there weren't more playoff teams with a loss than without. Unless you're a G5 team, one loss isn't going to derail your chances. Playing a shit schedule can though.
trojanfan12
Super Moderator
Depends on the conference. A PAC champion with 1 loss isn't getting into the playoffs unless another conference champion has 2 losses. The Big 12 champ isn't getting in with 1 loss if they're up against any conference champion other than the PAC champion.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2020
- Posts
- 17,023
- Reaction score
- 27,721
- Bookie:
- $ 10,500.00
If the playoffs are expanding it mainly will do the following:
1. Basically give all P5 conference champs an automatic bid so the focus will switch to winning the conference vs being in the title hunt. An example of this being bad is Oregon winning the PAC this year. No one wants to see them there.
2. It will allow teams like Oklahoma, Ohio State and Alabama 2 losses and they will still get in every single year. Coaches aren't stupid and you could see them to start making business decisions with who they play.
3. Strength of schedule will basically go out the window because you take the SOS hit if you win the games because of expanded slots. Again, coaches aren't stupid they will play the game to maximize their opportunities.
Final and most important reason: We rarely get 3 teams that really should be there anyway so expanded the playoffs is just going to make that situation worse. People have dreams of a Cincinnati type team getting hot and winning it all but it isn't going to happen. At best they will shock in the first round (because against teams are in that shouldn't be) and get throttled in the next round. Statistics don't lie and for the last 36 years not one team has won the national championship that didn't have at least one top 10 recruiting class in the 4 years prior to winning. In a way, it sucks but the reality is we know who has a shot at the title before the first kickoff.
It would be better to create another playoff for G5 schools and allow them to claim a championship and that would be the best option for actually getting a better slate of games.
You can’t incorporate the FCS model to FBS and keep the “bowls”. FCS plays at home fields not random neutral site games because they don’t want an embarrassing attendance like Alabama vs Clemson in Santa Clara.Just adopt the I-AA playoff system format:
I never understood it either but some still hold to it dearly.
I'm also thinking most potentially high draft picks will start opting out earlier in the season once their teams have no chance left at significantly important post season games. They are already opting out of NY6 games. Those games should count as the first games for the next season!
Already doing it. It might get worse...but not by much because it is now the norm anyway. They might...emphasis on might...schedule one decent OOC game like they do now. BFD. Very damn few are scheduling two right now.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2020
- Posts
- 6,494
- Reaction score
- 20,864
- Bookie:
- $ 73,044.00
I still like 6 more than 8 at this point
trojanfan12
Super Moderator
That's not necessarily bad. Upsets happen. But not often enough that it should stop the playoff being expanded.
First off, we've already had teams in with 2 losses. Additionally, so what? There probably will be teams with 2 losses. Chances are, if they have 2 losses, it's because they actually tested themselves OOC instead of playing cupcakes.
SOS is a pretty stupid measure anyway. It's not provable when the teams aren't playing each other and have very few, if any, common opponents. SOS is basically a made up thing that doesn't really say anything because it's about name recognition more than anything else.
Initially, yes. However, as more teams are able to sell making the cfp to recruits, recruits that are only going to certain schools will be more likely to look at other schools. Programs aren't going to just be happy to get to the cfp and get their heads kicked in. They'll work on making the necessary improvements.
In NCAA basketball, it has taken awhile, but schools that never used to have a chance, are now serious NC contenders. Gonzaga is a good example. Made the tourney a few times. Kept getting back and improving and turned just getting there into a couple of good runs. They are currently ranked #1 in the country and are in the mix annually. We've also seen teams like Butler and VIrginia Commonwealth make deep runs.
Your "Get off my lawn" complaints and concerns just don't hold water anymore. Obviously it's a different sport. But the point is, teams will adjust.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2020
- Posts
- 37,403
- Reaction score
- 43,174
- Bookie:
- $ 10,650.00
No team with 2 losses has ever made the playoffs. One made the BCS NCG, but none have made the playoffs. Auburn would have in 2017 had they won the SECCG, but they lost.
When the committee picked Alabama over Ohio State in 2017 and when they picked Ohio State over Penn State in 2016, they showed keeping your losses to 1 is more important than winning your conference
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Posts
- 1,524
- Reaction score
- 1,637
- Bookie:
- $ 1,414.00
Perhaps the Pac-12 should try not being 4-19 versus ranked OOC opponents over the last 4 years and it might improve their playoff prospects...