I haven't had time to follow it - does anybody have any thoughts on any changes to the 4 team format?
College Football Playoff Format - Any Changes Coming?
- Thread starter Ipartiedwithhopgood
- Start date
I actually have a new perspective about increasing the number of games in the CFP system. For the typical fan and his family, it will be difficult to afford to go to more than 2, let alone 1 playoff games. For example, I have some close friends who are diehard Clemson fans. They had to make a choice (couldn’t afford both) whether to see Clemson play ND, knowing they wouldn’t be able to go to the championship game or take a chance and hope Clemson won knowing if they lost they wouldn’t be able to see them in a bowl game. I know there will still be a lot of fans there but it will definitely affect your finances.
That’s why the playoff games should be on campus at the stadium if the highest-seeded team. Only the college super bowl should be at a neutral site.
Huh? There are no visiting teams now. It’s a neutral site. A team that gets to play at home is not going to want to share 50/50.
IMO the real interest will be in seeing who gets to join them. Teams such as OU, UGA and OSU were not that far behind this year. In the end, the best two teams played for the National Championship. That is what I want to see.
I think the one thing that helps the playoffs more than anything is moving to 9 conference games and limiting the power 5 teams to playing a max of two non power 5 games each year. Most of these teams play 3, if not 4 bums every year and there are always 2-3 conference games that are gimmies, more than that for the top end teams. I get the financial impact to the non power 5 schools, but they need to come up with somehting anyways, as its obvious a non power 5 is not going to make the final 4!
Your last sentence is intriguing and makes me think about the wasted games fbs teams play against fcs teams every year. Every time the argument is made that playing the FCS teams is a waste of time, someone counters saying that “those schools need the money to support their programs” or something to that effect. If those schools NEED that money to support their programs then maybe they shouldn’t have a football program.
The playoffs should expand to 9.
7 conference champions get “semiautomatic” bids (the 7 highest rated champions). Then 2 wildcard teams play each other for the last spot. This way, everyone plays the same number of games and nobody is sitting out CCG week. Also, it’s more fair to guarantee at least 2 spots to G5.
To qualify for a wildcard, you have to have a road win out of conference. This qualifier will make schedules more interesting going forward.
7 conference champions get “semiautomatic” bids (the 7 highest rated champions). Then 2 wildcard teams play each other for the last spot. This way, everyone plays the same number of games and nobody is sitting out CCG week. Also, it’s more fair to guarantee at least 2 spots to G5.
To qualify for a wildcard, you have to have a road win out of conference. This qualifier will make schedules more interesting going forward.
The teams would be rated the same way they are now. I’d like to take human rankings out of it entirely, but there are too many conferences. In most years, it will likely be the P5, AAC and Mountain West that get in. The MAC, C-USA and Sunbelt are typically a notch below (although the Sunbelt had one hell of a champ this past year, amirite!).
This format would encourage the conferences to have no divisions, which the B1G, PAC, SEC and ACC should do anyway.
This format would encourage the conferences to have no divisions, which the B1G, PAC, SEC and ACC should do anyway.
I'm against anything involving committees and opinions. As long as that is involved, the system is not legitimate. There should be objective criteria known to all before the season starts, with NO OPINIONS. If the G5 are to be included, we need to go to 16 teams. I really want just a P5 playoff with 8 however. My system is based on conference championships with the champs seeded by total wins. Ties are broken first by P5 wins, then total wins in schedule (opponents wins), then by a game control statistic. Seeds 6-8 would be non champs ranked the same way.
Agree with 8, but dont like the conference champ automatic berth. Pac12 hasnt deserved a birth and "what-if" a #25 ranked PITT upsets a Clemson in the championship. Has to be the best 8 teams by whatever formula. Could care less about watching Washington get beat by 30 vs Clemson or OSU.
This is why conferences should go to 0 divisions, as I mentioned in my post. Get the 2 best teams in your conference, not the 2 division champs. Auto bids take out the human judgement (aka bias) factor. Also, you would get better quality games as every team that is still mathematically alive for the conference championship is still alive for the national championship. This ups the intensity level for all league games.
If you get Pitt, you get Pitt. Why? Because they won the games they needed to win. It wasn’t opinion-based. THEY WON GAMES. I like the idea that teams can PLAY their way in- no committees, no opinions, no “resumes”, no “body of work”. Think if it this way - say you lose a game or two in September, but by November you’re killing it. Why should you be out? Think about the ACC Costal or the PAC-12 South. Almost all the teams were still in it in November. How energizing would that be for all those fan bases? It would add excitement. I like the idea that you’ve WON something to get in the playoff. 8-5. Ok by me.
This does not change my opinion that, as always, Pitt sucks.
LOL, I hear ya on PITT. I like your point about the additional excitement it would bring to more fanbases. That would mirror more of the NCAA basketball tournament with the build-up. At the end of the day in its current form it probably doesnt matter as Clemson in Bama are so dominant, but in upcoming years that could change, maybe by 2025!
Yeah, you’re proving my point, Louis III. The PAC should be left out because they suck, in your OPINION. In some people’s opinion, the 2006 Louisville Cardinals would’ve been excluded from a Playoff. See how that works?
Take opinions out of it for at least 7 teams; let 2 wild cards play a play-in game so that their schedules have the same number of games as those teams in CCGs.
Take opinions out of it for at least 7 teams; let 2 wild cards play a play-in game so that their schedules have the same number of games as those teams in CCGs.
