Fans deserve a real playoff

[PBR549]

At least 8 teams preferably 16. Having a committee pick the top four is unamerican. You tell me they will pick Ohio State over Penn State if they win the big 10 after they beat them head to head. That smells. ESPN might as well be CNN!

 

[RonJohn]

At least 8 teams preferably 16. Having a committee pick the top four is unamerican. You tell me they will pick Ohio State over Penn State if they win the big 10 after they beat them head to head. That smells. ESPN might as well be CNN!

I agree that I don't like it. However, it is extremely American because it is all about maximizing revenue.

At this point we still have to wait. We won't know who the committee has picked until next Sunday. All of the talk at this point doesn't mean anything.

 

[smathis30]

If Washington wins the Pac-12, I'm pretty confident they will pull an Ohio State and jump into the rankings a la precedent established in 2014.

Bama, Clemson, Washington, Big10 winner.

If Oklahoma state wins Bedlam it will be a **** show for the 4th spot.

 

[PBR549]

The fact that we have a committee picking anybody is the problem. Play it on the field. Have the 10 conference champions and let the committee pick 6 at large. Then we'll have a true champion. If the election had worked like the committee Hilary would be President.

 

[OldJacketFan]

The fact that we have a committee picking anybody is the problem. Play it on the field. Have the 10 conference champions and let the committee pick 6 at large. Then we'll have a true champion. If the election had worked like the committee Hilary would be President.

Can politics PLEASE be left out of a SPORTS conversation???? Sheesh I heard enough of that crap for months!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[PBR549]

It's the same deal. We're being told who the winners are rather than playing it in the field. We need to do what the electorate did and demand a playoff instead of the status quo the media tries to give us. The big 10 and SEC are crammed down our throats. Because some committee says they're better than the ACC? Take the bias out of it and demand a playoff where the best team actually wins.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

8...conference champs + 2. Still enough controversy to stir passion but gets settled on the field instead of by beauty pageant.

 

[FredJacket]

This is the time of year when there is much discussion on how to “make better” the whole CFB post-season. I’m reminded of one of my favorite quotes… I cannot attribute it properly; but it goes like this: “Better is the enemy of ‘good enough’.”

Regardless, I love the entertainment value of the whole discussion and I eagerly participate with my views on the whole thing.

Does anyone know if the NCAA has publicly explained their no kidding “goal” with the CFB playoff? Better stated… why did they decide to evolve in this direction?

End of season Poll --> BCS (top 2) championship game --> 4 team Playoff

Many people (not me) seem to actually KNOW the answer to this question. My guess is “pressure” to change because the consumer (us) was demanding something different…which translated to a no-brainer opportunity at more revenue. The problem seems to be that the something different still leaves us demanding something different still.

A POLL: It could be argued IF you are trying to crown the “best team” as champion the end of season poll is the fairest/best way to do that…assuming you have a knowledgeable group being polled. Obviously, that was no fun… so, we moved away from that. We Tech folks like to brag about our national titles… would we have all those national titles if we were required to win more games in a playoff? Would we actually have acquired more national titles? We’ll never know.

The BCS: The BCS system produced a championship game that one can reasonably say involved 2 of the best teams. The BCS did often leave plenty of argument over a 3rd or 4th team that was maybe worthy too; but ultimately, you got ONE game that did involve 2 of the best teams. This system seemed to die based on the annoying fact “a computer” determined the matchup (sort of).

A Playoff: I consider a playoff (4 or 8 or even 16) my ‘favorite’ system. I accept (even embrace) the fact that the more teams you place in a playoff, the more likely the “best” team will not end up the National Champion. In the 64+ team field of the NCAA basketball tournament, the ‘best’ team only needs to lose once in 6 games to fail to win it all. Odds are pretty overwhelming that this will happen...and the national champion in basketball is not the best team in the field.

So… I’m back to what are we (or the NCAA) trying to accomplish? Why 4 teams now (instead of 2)? What not 8 or 16? The consensus seems to be it is 4 to limit the number of games a college team plays. I have no problem with that explanation. I would also have no problem with one more game for 2 teams (8-team playoff).

I like all the discussion/argument over the CFB committee’s output each week…especially as we reach this point in the season. I also like hearing/reading everyone’s opinion which is nearly always tainted by their own biases; but rarely acknowledged. I have mine… go ACC, go “southern" teams, boooooo west coast and this year… too many B1G teams. My ideal final 4: Ala, OSU, Clem, anybody that will get steamrolled by Ala in semi-final game.

I love this time of year. I love all the discussion.

For what it’s worth, while not a lock… the BEST way to have the BEST team rise to the top via a playoff system is to do what’s done in the NBA, MLB, and NHL… have 5 or 7 games series in each round. Obviously, this is a non-starter for football...even the NFL doesn’t do this. However…as an example, I’m willing to bet if OSU played PSU 5 times, they’d win 4 times.

 

[1939hotmagic]

If the FCS can manage a 24-team playoff (top 8 teams get 1st-round byes), with FSC teams playing an 11-game regular season and no conference title games -- one would hope that the NCAA could manage to work out a mere 8-team playoff for the FBS-level programs. (Just a preference, but I wouldn't care for a 16-team playoff; too big. Twelve teams would be ok, but that would necessitate 1st round byes for four teams, and at this level of play, I'm just not a fan of opening round byes.) Four teams just isn't enough; eight would be better, even though there would be ongoing weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth by the 9th and 10th-ranked teams, rather than the 5th and 6th-ranked teams as is now the standard.

 

[Rock]

This is the time of year when there is much discussion on how to “make better” the whole CFB post-season. I’m reminded of one of my favorite quotes… I cannot attribute it properly; but it goes like this: “Better is the enemy of ‘good enough’.”

Regardless, I love the entertainment value of the whole discussion and I eagerly participate with my views on the whole thing.

Does anyone know if the NCAA has publicly explained their no kidding “goal” with the CFB playoff? Better stated… why did they decide to evolve in this direction?

End of season Poll --> BCS (top 2) championship game --> 4 team Playoff

Many people (not me) seem to actually KNOW the answer to this question. My guess is “pressure” to change because the consumer (us) was demanding something different…which translated to a no-brainer opportunity at more revenue. The problem seems to be that the something different still leaves us demanding something different still.

A POLL: It could be argued IF you are trying to crown the “best team” as champion the end of season poll is the fairest/best way to do that…assuming you have a knowledgeable group being polled. Obviously, that was no fun… so, we moved away from that. We Tech folks like to brag about our national titles… would we have all those national titles if we were required to win more games in a playoff? Would we actually have acquired more national titles? We’ll never know.

The BCS: The BCS system produced a championship game that one can reasonably say involved 2 of the best teams. The BCS did often leave plenty of argument over a 3rd or 4th team that was maybe worthy too; but ultimately, you got ONE game that did involve 2 of the best teams. This system seemed to die based on the annoying fact “a computer” determined the matchup (sort of).

A Playoff: I consider a playoff (4 or 8 or even 16) my ‘favorite’ system. I accept (even embrace) the fact that the more teams you place in a playoff, the more likely the “best” team will not end up the National Champion. In the 64+ team field of the NCAA basketball tournament, the ‘best’ team only needs to lose once in 6 games to fail to win it all. Odds are pretty overwhelming that this will happen...and the national champion in basketball is not the best team in the field.

So… I’m back to what are we (or the NCAA) trying to accomplish? Why 4 teams now (instead of 2)? What not 8 or 16? The consensus seems to be it is 4 to limit the number of games a college team plays. I have no problem with that explanation. I would also have no problem with one more game for 2 teams (8-team playoff).

I like all the discussion/argument over the CFB committee’s output each week…especially as we reach this point in the season. I also like hearing/reading everyone’s opinion which is nearly always tainted by their own biases; but rarely acknowledged. I have mine… go ACC, go “southern" teams, boooooo west coast and this year… too many B1G teams. My ideal final 4: Ala, OSU, Clem, anybody that will get steamrolled by Ala in semi-final game.

I love this time of year. I love all the discussion.

For what it’s worth, while not a lock… the BEST way to have the BEST team rise to the top via a playoff system is to do what’s done in the NBA, MLB, and NHL… have 5 or 7 games series in each round. Obviously, this is a non-starter for football...even the NFL doesn’t do this. However…as an example, I’m willing to bet if OSU played PSU 5 times, they’d win 4 times.

I am happy with 4, it is better than what we have had.
The problem is still similar to BB when you get outside of 4-8. The "best" team needs to have only 1 bad game. (Maybe they aren't the best then ??)
When you get to 8-16 teams, you get into those 3,4 loss teams, teams that didn't win their conference and you will multiple teams from 1 conference. If we had 16 teams, I wouldn't wanna see 8-9 from SEC & BIG10.

IMO, to play for it all, you have to earn it. and top 4 is earning it.

My .02.

 

[bke1984]

The "best" team is not supposed to win the National Championship every year. If that were the case why would we even play the games. You'd never situations like Eli and David Tyree beating the undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl if this is how sports were run...

 

[bke1984]

8 team playoff is the answer. 16 is too much. 8 is so simple if you take the conference champs automatically and have 3 at-large teams. Undefeated group of 5 cannot be left out for an at-large power-5 team...if there are more than 3 undefeated group of 5 teams, they can have their own little argument over which of those 4 are the best 3, and I don't think it will cause any real issues since they'd probably all lose in the first or second round anyhow.

When this happens I can say "I invented the playoff"

 

[Rock]

The "best" team is not supposed to win the National Championship every year. If that were the case why would we even play the games. You'd never situations like Eli and David Tyree beating the undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl if this is how sports were run...

that's why the game is played on the field. The "best team" will & should win. Numbers by your name don't make you the "best team".

 

[jeffgt14]

that's why the game is played on the field. The "best team" will & should win. Numbers by your name don't make you the "best team".

Tell that to Penn State.

 

[GTJake]

8 team playoff is the answer. 16 is too much. 8 is so simple if you take the conference champs automatically and have 3 at-large teams. Undefeated group of 5 cannot be left out for an at-large power-5 team...if there are more than 3 undefeated group of 5 teams, they can have their own little argument over which of those 4 are the best 3, and I don't think it will cause any real issues since they'd probably all lose in the first or second round anyhow.

When this happens I can say "I invented the playoff"

Agree, to elaborate;
16 team Power 5 conferences = 80 teams
5 bids to each Conference Champion
2 bids Power 5 At-Large
1 bid to the highest ranked of the rest
This pretty much gives everybody a shot and you have the opportunity for the big underdog to make a statement ala NCAA March Madness

 

[PBR549]

If that was the best way to determine the champion I can't believe ever other sport and every other football division would have a 4 team playoff. Guess what, none of them do. We need 16 to get a true champion imo.

 

[Rock]

Tell that to Penn State.

well there is where you win your games and win the conference and you don't have to worry about it. I don't see how they keep them out if they win the big10
there will always be an argument when people pick the teams.

 

[Rock]

Tell that to Penn State.

PSU lost to Pitt and hasn't played anyone ranked. they are 10-2. they are far from the best team, IMO.

 

[FredJacket]

That's Pitt who beat Clemson in Death Valley. This is why I love this stuff.

 

[jeffgt14]

PSU lost to Pitt and hasn't played anyone ranked. they are 10-2. they are far from the best team, IMO.

They beat Ohio State… You said the best team usually plays out on the field and Penn State beat Ohio State and might win their conference yet Ohio State will end up getting in over them.