ESPN reporting that playoffs will expand to 12 teams in 2024

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,075
It will double to 24 within a decade. The TV money will be huge and the on campus games will drive huge bucks to the communities. I can’t wait.
 
Randy Carson

Randy Carson

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,306
Location
Apex, NC
Let's say that the CFP takes the top two from each P5 and two at-large bids.

This means that one or two conferences would get a third or fourth team (looking at you, SEC). Or that a really good independent or G5 team gets invited. Whatever.

My question is: why play a conference championship game if those two teams are already in the CFP? I mean, bragging rights and trophies, etc. are nice, but so are healthy players going into the tournament that really counts.

This isn't basketball...guys don't generally break a collarbone (or worse) in the conference tournament. And you can actually play four games in four days in basketball meaning that VERY rarely, an underdog might knock off the regular season champions.

So, while I'm in favor of expanding the CFP (eight seems adequate, IMO) to prevent the inevitable argument that some #5 or #6 was actually more deserving or better than a team with a better record against a weaker schedule, I just don't see the purpose of the conference title game after the expansion.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,530
Randy Carson said:
My question is: why play a conference championship game if those two teams are already in the CFP? I mean, bragging rights and trophies, etc. are nice, but so are healthy players going into the tournament that really counts.
Click to expand...
An excellent question. Other than for seeding (and $$$) there isn't a good reason. I wonder if they will be abandoned in favor of the expanded playoffs...
 
Randy Carson

Randy Carson

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,306
Location
Apex, NC
stech81 said:
may have to cut a game from the schedules
Click to expand...
The downside to that is that it penalizes EVERY school/fanbase with one less game just so two teams can go to the playoffs.

I don't think that's going to fly. Consequently, the top teams will be playing 15-16 games a season.

That's NFL-level mental and physical stress for <ahem> student athletes.
 

malak05

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
277
Boy...how are the lower seeds gonna be decided by committee??? Talk about the top 4 being hard basically 8-12 will be a blood bath with a bigger pool of "close" teams
 

WrongShadeOfGold

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
358
Randy Carson said:
The downside to that is that it penalizes EVERY school/fanbase with one less game just so two teams can go to the playoffs.

I don't think that's going to fly. Consequently, the top teams will be playing 15-16 games a season.

That's NFL-level mental and physical stress for <ahem> student athletes.
Click to expand...
Not sure why 15-16 games is a problem. Only a few teams would be playing that many. Also, like the other poster said, drop conference championship games since they will no longer matter, and that will save you one game. Also, FCS teams that advance to the championship play 17 games and it's ok for those student athletes so why not FBS?
 
roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
Randy Carson said:
Let's say that the CFP takes the top two from each P5 and two at-large bids.

This means that one or two conferences would get a third or fourth team (looking at you, SEC). Or that a really good independent or G5 team gets invited. Whatever.

My question is: why play a conference championship game if those two teams are already in the CFP? I mean, bragging rights and trophies, etc. are nice, but so are healthy players going into the tournament that really counts.

This isn't basketball...guys don't generally break a collarbone (or worse) in the conference tournament. And you can actually play four games in four days in basketball meaning that VERY rarely, an underdog might knock off the regular season champions.

So, while I'm in favor of expanding the CFP (eight seems adequate, IMO) to prevent the inevitable argument that some #5 or #6 was actually more deserving or better than a team with a better record against a weaker schedule, I just don't see the purpose of the conference title game after the expansion.
Click to expand...

Under the new system, the Playoff field be composed of the top six conference champions among the 10 active conferences, plus six wild-card teams, guaranteeing a spot for a Group of Five team.
 
GaTech4ever

GaTech4ever

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,525
Randy Carson said:
Let's say that the CFP takes the top two from each P5 and two at-large bids.

This means that one or two conferences would get a third or fourth team (looking at you, SEC). Or that a really good independent or G5 team gets invited. Whatever.

My question is: why play a conference championship game if those two teams are already in the CFP? I mean, bragging rights and trophies, etc. are nice, but so are healthy players going into the tournament that really counts.

This isn't basketball...guys don't generally break a collarbone (or worse) in the conference tournament. And you can actually play four games in four days in basketball meaning that VERY rarely, an underdog might knock off the regular season champions.

So, while I'm in favor of expanding the CFP (eight seems adequate, IMO) to prevent the inevitable argument that some #5 or #6 was actually more deserving or better than a team with a better record against a weaker schedule, I just don't see the purpose of the conference title game after the expansion.
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble following your argument when literally five conference championship games this weekend would have significant implications in an expanded playoff. The rare case when both teams would be in regardless of outcome is not the standard.

How many college football teams actually play meaningful games in November as the system currently stands? 8? 10?
 

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,045
Randy Carson said:
Let's say that the CFP takes the top two from each P5 and two at-large bids.

This means that one or two conferences would get a third or fourth team (looking at you, SEC). Or that a really good independent or G5 team gets invited. Whatever.

My question is: why play a conference championship game if those two teams are already in the CFP? I mean, bragging rights and trophies, etc. are nice, but so are healthy players going into the tournament that really counts.

This isn't basketball...guys don't generally break a collarbone (or worse) in the conference tournament. And you can actually play four games in four days in basketball meaning that VERY rarely, an underdog might knock off the regular season champions.

So, while I'm in favor of expanding the CFP (eight seems adequate, IMO) to prevent the inevitable argument that some #5 or #6 was actually more deserving or better than a team with a better record against a weaker schedule, I just don't see the purpose of the conference title game after the expansion.
Click to expand...
The conference chamionships should be the first round of the playoffs.
 

Billygoat91

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
483
I am in favor of the 4 teams system that we have currently. It seems to work out fairly well every year with a pretty clean dividing line between #4 and #5 most years. That, and the 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 games have never really been that close. I think the subjectivity involved with a 12-team playoff will be pretty wild if it is all at-large bids. If they do autobids (5 - power five, 1 -G-5 Conference champ), 6 at-large teams may be easier to select from the pack.

Regardless, I will be excited for an expanded playoff because it means more exciting football games for us all to watch, especially if playoff games are on-campus
 
Top