The Great Debate ⋆ Expanding the College Football Playoffs

We did better than Notre Mame

 

Disagree. Who here was interested in the Cotton Bowl game and thought the game had any meaning for this season, other than confirming that our defense is terrible? What about the playoff games? The non-playoff bowl games are already meaningless.

With a committee choosing the teams, it comes down to a beauty contest that isn’t really any different than the pre-BCS situation, except the perceived top teams play each other on the field. Schedules aren’t uniform between conferences, as Clemson and ND both played one team of consequence, and that was each other. Ohio State only played six games, and played no one with a pulse. Alabama played 3 teams in the top 10. TAM played 2 teams in the top 10. UF played 3 teams in the top 10. Cincinnati played as tough a schedule as Ohio State, went undefeated winning more games, and still got left out because of their name.

Unless we go and use the BCS system for choosing the top 4 teams, the only option is to expand the playoffs to lessen the name bias that exists. As for resting players, isn’t that essentially what the schedule of certain playoff teams allow them to do? In an eight team playoff, losses during the regular season remove any mulligan that a team could be given if they lose their championship game. A two loss team that lost their championship game is out of the playoffs anyway, so the regular season does matter.

 

I prefer 12 with top 4 getting byes.

It gives G5 teams a chance. Rewards regular season. And adds a lot of meaningful games

I don’t find the argument that it waters down the playoffs. The alternative is a bunch of bowls nobody cares about. OU v FL for the right to play Ohio State is a million times more meaningful than what we just saw.

 

Exactly

 

To your point, a couple of years ago, a #1 seed (Virginia) was finally beaten by a 16 seed. It was amazing, but I feel very comfortable in saying that we would never see an FBS powerhouse like Bama lose to the lowest seed team. It just wouldn’t happen.

 

Needs to be a 8 game playoff system. Today's bowl games are not even interesting any longer unless it's a bowl game involved in the the top 4. Teams.

 

I really do need to see Alabama "settle it on the field" with BYU.

4 teams is too many in some years. I could see going to 6 w/ the top 2 getting a bye, but 8? C'mon.

 

If you don't want to see a crappy game, what makes you think a rested #1 seed playing a team that just went head to head with a #6-#3 team is going to be any better?

 

I have not made up my mind on whether the playoffs need to expand. Since most discussions start with discussing the smallest expansion I will work backwards and ask “What is the largest field for a football playoff?”

The argument for 68: Since every game matters, why not play 5 games regular season and a maximum of 5 games of a bracket tournament? Teams that lose in the round of 64 (plus 4 like NCAA basketball for 68 teams) would play 6 games and be done, unless this were a two-and-out system leaving the minimum season 7 games in length. This concept has been discussed on other sites, but they never seem to discuss what happens when teams lose. If the point of expanding playoffs is to bring more teams into the mix while giving more money to the powers that would make this happen, then there also needs to be at least 5-game regular season for teams to make money off 2-3 home games. There might need to be a system of rotating stadiums for hosting playoff games for 68 teams over 6 weeks (including byes), with some of the hosts being teams that were eliminated early. Otherwise, teams like Alabama would keep getting richer by playing at least 8 home games every year while teams like Vanderbilt would only get 3 or 4 home games a year. There are plenty of arguments against a 68-team playoff, but it shows that 68 is probably the maximum field size.

The case for keeping the field at 4: Statistically in Division I/FBS there are about four teams that have the on-field talent, the coaching, and miscellaneous resources to win a single-elimination championship. It is more fun to discuss options to expand beyond 4, so I will leave this discussion hanging here.

The case for 6 or 8 is basically the same if we include the Power 5 conference championships as qualifiers. The next question is how we let Group of 5 teams and independent teams in. Some say that the G5 should have a mini-playoff to get the last slot or last couple slots. However this works, the powers that be will have to make decisions that will hurt the collective feelings of several G5 programs who will be at the bottom of the playoff bracket.

As a fan of the Gators, all I care about is the opportunity to watch my team play in 6 or so home games at the Swamp plus a pro stadium sprinkled in. I would be fine with a playoff field of 4, 6, 8, or 68.

 

10-12 with a first round bye.

 

You take 12 and give the best four first game off for first week

Then with rest those four play the winners of the first game to leave four teams then two and then one

Should satisfy more this way

 

I think the concept of byes are absurd in a game not known for its parity. It seems like an arbitrary choice to protect the top teams when they need no protection.

 

A big double elimination would be cool. Never gonna happen. Hah!

 

Agreed. But it’s possible a #8 could give #1 a game though. Beyond that I don’t think they should be in the mix.

It’s been discussed before, but this year #5 tamu, #6 okla, and #7 uf could have played #1 as good as #4 ND did. In my opinion, this year #6 okla and #7 uf were a better match up vs #1 bama than #4 ND or #5 tamu were/would have been.

Eight is enough. And no byes... that’s a gigantic advantage for already-advantaged teams to have another week off in a sport that plays once a week

 

That would be a bone for those who say the regular season would have no meaning. You want the first round bye and the advantage it gives, then you win all your games and don’t take any of them off. The regular season would be important for seeding, just like in the NCAA Tournament.

The downside to that is Big10/ACC teams with a weaker conference already have several rest games built in due to how weak their conference is. Similar to FSU from 1990-2013(ish), they have 2-3 meaningful games on their schedule to prep for, and then the post-season. All other games are a chance to rest starters/play backups and prep for the meaningful games.

However, differences in strength of schedule will always exist between conferences. The only good teams ND and Clemson played during the year were each other. Ohio State played Northwestern as their toughest game. This year’s playoff teams were decided based on name recognition, as Alabama was the only team that deserved its spot in the playoff.

 

Yeah, but the people who claim an 8 team playoff would diminish the regular season are full of shit.

 

Eight is good and elimates ND getting the spot that we all know they didn’t deserve. It’s supposed to be the four best teams period. How many teams outside looking in would have been favored against ND? It’s all about cash is why they continue to get in.
If there were eight, at least the real top four would almost be guaranteed to be in and the games wouldn’t have so many opt outs and our game may have not had an * .