Playoffs need to extend to at least 8 teams

duckboy33 said:
The same people in the BCS days would have said we don't need shitty semifinals because "we know" Clemson is the 2nd best team. We all saw how that played out on the field. So far seeding hasn't made a difference which shows there's no gap between the top 4 teams. The playoff skeptics were proven wrong on that. The question is whether that would change with 8. It may but it's hilarious the same people are making the same arguments against the 4 team playoff (which were proven to be nonsense)
Click to expand...

For me 8 will make the regular season mean more. That's the most important thing.
 
duckboy33 said:
The same people in the BCS days would have said we don't need shitty semifinals because "we know" Clemson is the 2nd best team. We all saw how that played out on the field. So far seeding hasn't made a difference which shows there's no gap between the top 4 teams. The playoff skeptics were proven wrong on that. The question is whether that would change with 8. It may but it's hilarious the same people are making the same arguments against the 4 team playoff (which were proven to be nonsense)
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you probably think Cincinnati with 2 4-stars on its roster is capable of winning 3 games in a row against teams with 50*.
 
Rolltide94 said:
I have difficulty understanding how people looked at this year's bowl games and decided we needed more shitty football.

What did Georgia's struggle win over Cincinnati say about either team that said they were playoff contenders? Georgia got boat raced by the other two playoff/NY6 teams they played and Cincinnati lost to them.

Did you watch the Oklahoma game and think, man this team deserves a playoff spot, for beating a team missing 4 offensive players responsible for 34 of 41 touchdowns and 4 starters on defense...

Texas A&M over North Carolina...Don't care they got boat raced by Alabama and Notre Dame respectively.

The answer to two shitty semi-finals is not more shitty football.
Click to expand...
We are lucky if we get one good game out of the first round of playoffs and that is from what is supposed to be the 4 best teams. It makes zero sense to add two more rounds of what will amount to blowouts 90% of the time.

This argument is being made so the Big 12 and PAC 12 can get automatic bids and don’t have to put the work in. This won’t give teams a bigger incentive to schedule better regular season games it will actually give them less because SOS will matter less.

The committee has gotten it right each year and no one has a legit argument otherwise so no need to change.
 
stakesarehigh said:
Don't necessarily disagree but I do believe the schools need to do something to break away from the NCAA
Click to expand...

The NCAA has no involvement with the College Football Playoffs now. Hard to break away from 0.
 
Wild Turkey said:
So allowing P5 teams the opportunity to lose 2 games and still get in makes the regular season mean more? I think quite the opposite.
Click to expand...

It will. Because you will get better games and each conference race actually means something

This year unless you GAF about the PAC or Big 12 you weren't paying attention. Would you have watched their title games if it was for a place in the playoff?

Suddenly Iowa state had a shot at history.
 
Wild Turkey said:
We are lucky if we get one good game out of the first round of playoffs and that is from what is supposed to be the 4 best teams. It makes zero sense to add two more rounds of what will amount to blowouts 90% of the time.

This argument is being made so the Big 12 and PAC 12 can get automatic bids and don’t have to put the work in. This won’t give teams a bigger incentive to schedule better regular season games it will actually give them less because SOS will matter less.

The committee has gotten it right each year and no one has a legit argument otherwise so no need to change.
Click to expand...
:agree::10::dingdingding:
 
4 teams is fine.. Again outside of two seasons #4 is a sitting duck for the #1 seed. Y'all really want to see more blowouts and potential injuries if your school is that much better than a 6 to 8 seed?

All the flack people gave ND this year or even ou the past two CFPs, yet open it up to 4 more schools who are pretty much equal to ou or ND?
 
Thiefery said:
4 teams is fine.. Again outside of two seasons #4 is a sitting duck for the #1 seed. Y'all really want to see more blowouts and potential injuries if your school is that much better than a 6 to 8 seed?

All the flack people gave ND this year or even ou the past two CFPs, yet open it up to 4 more schools who are pretty much equal to ou or ND?
Click to expand...

Id rather watch more games that have championship impact regardless of score
 
Wild Turkey said:
This argument is being made so the Big 12 and PAC 12 can get automatic bids and don’t have to put the work in. This won’t give teams a bigger incentive to schedule better regular season games it will actually give them less because SOS will matter less.
Click to expand...
Wait why would the Big12 be advocating for this? had ou only lost one game this season they would have jumped ND.. but since they had two losses, it was over.

Big 12 has only been shut out of the CFP 3 times (out of 7 seasons). And they would have been in the first CFP had the conference actually crowned Baylor or TCU as champions. That being said, no one loss big 12 champ has been shut out.

This past season, even though the Big 12 was clearly out once osu had lost it's second game to UT, it was a fun season down the stretch to see who would actually play in the CCG. I'm enjoying the way the conference puts up the top 2 schools in the CCG rather than how the others go by divisions.

Everyone says that there's only a top 3 or 4 teams that will make the CFP year after year and the gap is increasing.. But hell man..no one 10 years ago would have ever said Clemson was going to do what it did.. and they recently got better on the recruiting rankings. It can be done, but people want handouts thinking hey look we made the CFP at #8 so recruits will look at us differently even though we get blown out?
 
Thiefery said:
4 teams is fine.. Again outside of two seasons #4 is a sitting duck for the #1 seed. Y'all really want to see more blowouts and potential injuries if your school is that much better than a 6 to 8 seed?

All the flack people gave ND this year or even ou the past two CFPs, yet open it up to 4 more schools who are pretty much equal to ou or ND?
Click to expand...

The #4 seeds have more championships than the #1 seeds in the CFP era
 
duckboy33 said:
The #4 seeds have more championships than the #1 seeds in the CFP era
Click to expand...
only twice has the #4 seed won it all and it happened to be Bama and tosu but you think if we opened it up to 8 #5-#8 will win?
 
Thiefery said:
that's the regular season for ya...
Click to expand...

Disagree

We've reached a point of outright dominance of a few schools over the rest. That isn't good for the health of cfb.

And thats with me rooting for one of them. You expand the field you extend opportunities. It makes the recruits stop and think a bit when they make their choice if they can make the playoff by simply winning a conference.
 
Thiefery said:
only twice has the #4 seed won it all and it happened to be Bama and tosu but you think if we opened it up to 8 #5-#8 will win?
Click to expand...

It could. The same people who were against the 4 team playoffs argued it wasn't needed because it would always be #1 vs. #2.
 
duckboy33 said:
The #4 seeds have more championships than the #1 seeds in the CFP era
Click to expand...

Thiefery said:
only twice has the #4 seed won it all and it happened to be Bama and tosu but you think if we opened it up to 8 #5-#8 will win?
Click to expand...
Bama should have been a higher seed but they didn't want to replay the SEC Championship game all over again back to back. There is some gamesmanship going on with the seeding to avoid repeats if possible so the "4th seed" argument doesn't move the needle for me.
 
duckboy33 said:
It could. The same people who were against the 4 team playoffs argued it wasn't needed because it would always be #1 vs. #2.
Click to expand...
Wild Turkey said:
Bama should have been a higher seed but they didn't want to replay the SEC Championship game all over again back to back. There is some gamesmanship going on with the seeding to avoid repeats if possible so the "4th seed" argument doesn't move the needle for me.
Click to expand...
everyone was hoping that the CFP would have left Bama out KNOWING they were the best team that season despite it's loss..
 
Wild Turkey said:
Bama should have been a higher seed but they didn't want to replay the SEC Championship game all over again back to back. There is some gamesmanship going on with the seeding to avoid repeats if possible so the "4th seed" argument doesn't move the needle for me.
Click to expand...

Nick Saban didn't throw the Iron Bowl. It's only Monday, save some nonsense for later this week.
 
Sure open it up to 8 teams then we'll hear the same thing in about 4 years.. first rd of the CFP sucks outside the #4/#5 matchup
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top