CFP methodology - Hate it or HATE it?

[PBR549]

Marshall deserves a chance. Share the wealth.

 

[Animal02]

Not all conferences are deserving of having a shot at a Ship. Everything out of the p5 is kinda iffy for the most part. Hence why Marshall was undefeated and stayed in the 20s in the top25 late into the season. Quality of competition isn't comparable

You could say that about any other sporting championship. The conference champion may not even be the best team in the conference. Even the winner of the playoff may not be the best team in the country. That is not the point. You win your conference you play on, if not you watch the game on TV.

Tech is a better BB team than several of the conference champions that will be playing in the tournament. Are you suggesting they should sit home and Tech play?

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Marshall deserves a chance. Share the wealth.

This! As long as the big schools refuse to play teams at their place or neutral sites, you never know how good teams are. Despite what Mark May says.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

How 'bout this:
8 team playoff,
all power 5 champs in,
the remaining spots are filled by 3 of the non-power 5 champs based on ranking.

upside: all contestants are conference champions
downside: two champs are left out (but they should be the weakest two)
other downside: independents left out as are any really good conference runner ups.

A Championship Playoff should be a playoff of champions, imo.

 

[PBR549]

I honestly think the 8 team playoff 5champs and 3 at large picked by committee or rankings will give us as true a champion as feasible but anything is better than the committee fiasco we had last year. 10, 12, or 16 teams settle it on the field also just less feasible IMO.

 

[B Lifsey]

I like your concept @dressedcheeseside . One tweak might be to consider independents in the mix for the 3 non-power conference champs.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

I'm partial to the power 5 champs plus 3 at larges with one of the out larges being the best non p5 team.

How many more times will Boise St have to prove themselves before they get a legitimate shot?

 

[awbuzz]

P5 plus 3 "at large" makes the most sense.

 

[GT Man]

Wait until the SEC gets left out completely....that would cause the earth to split in half.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

What I would like to see next year:
1- A 10-2 SEC champ left out
2- A 13-0 ACC champ and 11-1 non CG ACC team make it
3- A 10-2 independent get left out

Maybe the we would get ND to join and a true 8 team playoff. (I know, wishful thinking)

 

[DC Bee]

...anything is better than the committee fiasco we had last year.

There was no fiasco by the time the dust had settled, for the #4 team that got in at the expense of the Big XII (sic) co-champions won the whole thing.

I would be somewhat open to a P5 + 3 at large scenario, but bear in mind had that been the case this year, the overrated team that GT absolutely destroyed in the Orange Bowl probably would've had an invite.

 

[Animal02]

How 'bout this:
8 team playoff,
all power 5 champs in,
the remaining spots are filled by 3 of the non-power 5 champs based on ranking.

upside: all contestants are conference champions
downside: two champs are left out (but they should be the weakest two)
other downside: independents left out as are any really good conference runner ups.

A Championship Playoff should be a playoff of champions, imo.

So potentially a 7-6 P5 conference winner gets in, and a 12-1 non P5 gets left out
10 conferences could accommodate 160 teams, bottom 4 ranked conference champs play a first round. No champ is left out, indy's are forced to join or get left out.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

So potentially a 7-6 P5 conference winner gets in, and a 12-1 non P5 gets left out
10 conferences could accommodate 160 teams, bottom 4 ranked conference champs play a first round. No champ is left out, indy's are forced to join or get left out.

I believe a prereq of a nat champ is you must be a conf champ. Everybody has an equal chance to win their conf on opening day. That is fair enough.

 

[DC Bee]

So potentially a 7-6 P5 conference winner gets in, and a 12-1 non P5 gets left out

We can debate about such an injustice if it ever happens.

 

[Animal02]

We can debate about such an injustice if it ever happens.

By going with conference champs, every team in D1 has a shot at the championship, which I think is a far better option than a group of people deciding which 8-4 SEC teams are more deserving than conference champions.

 

[SouthernJacket]

It's perfect the way it is now. I don't understand why you need more teams in the playoff.

 

[Lurkerjack]

How 'bout this:
8 team playoff,
all power 5 champs in,
the remaining spots are filled by 3 of the non-power 5 champs based on ranking.

upside: all contestants are conference champions
downside: two champs are left out (but they should be the weakest two)
other downside: independents left out as are any really good conference runner ups.

A Championship Playoff should be a playoff of champions, imo.

I have been espousing something similar:
- 5 power champs but there has to be a champ game (sorry b12)
- 3 highest ranked remaining but 1 has to be non power 5
- no independents (yeah I know, nd won't join for a while if ever)

This allows everyone, in power 5 anyway, to play their way in. Think about how many teams are alive near the end if the season to make their champ game. The champ games are now, in essence, the first round of the playoffs. Think about the excitement that would create. This approach Takes the subjective decision (which I despise) out of it for the first 5. I admit picking the remaining 3 leaves the subjective in so I struggle with it.

I have heard some scary proposals where the champ game would be eliminated if the playoffs were to be expanded. That would be the totally wrong thing to do. We would be right back to ice skating, letting the Russian and French judges decide who is in.

 

[PBR549]

It's perfect the way it is now. I don't understand why you need more teams in the playoff.

If you want some dudes in a room who may or may not have ties to a school or conference or TV network who has alot of money invested in a team or conference or fan base then you're right. I prefer to settle it on the field.

 

[SouthernJacket]

If you want some dudes in a room who may or may not have ties to a school or conference or TV network who has alot of money invested in a team or conference or fan base then you're right. I prefer to settle it on the field.

That's the thing that I don't get. They do settle it on the field. During the regular season. That one of the things that makes college football so much better than the NFL. Every game counts. The debate between one or two teams getting in that last spot is not worth changing what's made college ball great.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

That's the thing that I don't get. They do settle it on the field. During the regular season. That one of the things that makes college football so much better than the NFL. Every game counts. The debate between one or two teams getting in that last spot is not worth changing what's made college ball great.

No, it's not settled on the field. It's settled by a select few opinions of what they see on the field, NOT ACTUAL RESULTS. Limiting the field of the playoffs to actual Champions is the only way to settle it with onfield results.