Kinda OT: Axing Conference Championships for More Playoff Slots?

[KaiserUEO]

If they are the best teams why do we want to give them more of an advantage? Especially in college - where the top teams are even less prone to upsets due to greater disparity in talent?

they get an 'advantage' because they earned it.

the other thing is, IMO, the team talent pool really drops after 4 or 5.

i would be in favor of the 'old' NFL way of 4 play 5 as a true 'wild card' game, but im sure some years the argument would be that 3 is no better than 4 blah blah blah.

cant please everyone and need to draw a line in the sand.

im ok with 4, would like to see 6, no need for 8...enjoy the bowls 7 & 8.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

they get an 'advantage' because they earned it.

the other thing is, IMO, the team talent pool really drops after 4 or 5.

i would be in favor of the 'old' NFL way of 4 play 5 as a true 'wild card' game, but im sure some years the argument would be that 3 is no better than 4 blah blah blah.

cant please everyone and need to draw a line in the sand.

im ok with 4, would like to see 6, no need for 8...enjoy the bowls 7 & 8.

There is no depth for more than 6, and even 6 is a stretch. This isn’t the NFL where the gap in talent is minimal.

Do people really want to see this?

1. Ohio State vs 8. Memphis
2. LSU vs 7. Florida
3. Clemson vs 6. Georgia
4. Utah vs 5. Oklahoma

Or worst case, this?

1. Georgia vs 8. UVA
2. LSU vs 7. Cincinnati
3. Ohio State vs 6. Oregon
4. Baylor vs 5. Wisconsin

With Clemson left out?

 

[Ozzie0075]

I can live with 8 if it has only 2 at large bids. But why do we want the best G5 in automatically? I rather have it like the old BCS where a conference champ (whether P5 or G5) gets in if Top 15.

This would force the conferences to scrap divisions entirely and just take the two best teams for the conference championship game. But even then 6 is better than 8. Just look at this year:

G5 no likely Top 15
B1G, Big 12, SEC, P12 auto bids
ACC if Clemson wins auto but if UVA wins none
So should UVA win you will have FOUR at large bids in an 8 team playoff. That is dumb. With 6 teams you reduce it to two which is still too much IMO but not horrible.

I agree with this. There needs to be a set criteria for the G5. I like the top 15 cut off personally.

 

[Alsacs]

I think an eight team playoff makes more sense than a six team playoff. The P5 conference champions get an autobid. This year Wisconsin is likely going to be hurt by playing in the B1G Championship. They have no shot at a playoff spot if they win and probably will be leapfrogged by Penn State for the Rose Bowl when they lose.

If we went to six instead of eight, I would be okay with it being the P5 conference champions and the highest ranked G5 conference champion. Would this mean a worthy (and by "worthy" I mean a second SEC team) gets left out? Maybe, but I highly doubt television sets are going to be shut off throughout the south because either LSU or Georgia was left out of the playoff.

Wisconsin has a way in but it’s a Long shot.
Everything has to break there way.
Georgia loses
Utah loses
Oklahoma loses

It becomes Wisconsin vs. Baylor.

I think the committee could pick Wisconsin in that scenario as long as they look good in beating Ohio State.

 

[Eric15]

The P5 conference champions get an autobid. This year Wisconsin is likely going to be hurt by playing in the B1G Championship. They have no shot at a playoff spot if they win and probably will be leapfrogged by Penn State for the Rose Bowl when they lose.

Wisconsin still has a shot -- right now at 31% to make the playoff if they beat Ohio State. I bet PSU would sign up for that opportunity in a second.

 

[hoopsupstate]

Anything more than four teams Is a waste of time. There’s no doubt there’s a drop off in talent after the top four teams. Teams 5-8 or 5-16 are not going to win the championship. Keep it the way it is or it will take even more away from the regular season.

 

[KaiserUEO]

There is no depth for more than 6, and even 6 is a stretch. This isn’t the NFL where the gap in talent is minimal.

Do people really want to see this?

1. Ohio State vs 8. Memphis
2. LSU vs 7. Florida
3. Clemson vs 6. Georgia
4. Utah vs 5. Oklahoma

Or worst case, this?

1. Georgia vs 8. UVA
2. LSU vs 7. Cincinnati
3. Ohio State vs 6. Oregon
4. Baylor vs 5. Wisconsin

With Clemson left out?

lets just say the season ended with everyone holding serve.

3. Clemson v 6. Georgia/Wisconsin/Baylor/Florida/Penn St
4. Oklahoma v 5. Utah

whomever is 6 is the true winner here. no one really deserves it.

the old school 1 wild card would suffice.

6 is still better.

 

[Alsacs]

6 doesn’t water down the playoff.
8 does.

If the regular season is supposed to matter then no need for more 2 loss teams making the CFB playoffs.

Since there are 5 P5 conferences theoretically there could be 5 worthy champions and room for 1 additional team.

I can find 6 quality teams this year but honestly the 4th-6th are razor close.
Georgia/Utah/Oklahoma.

 

[KaiserUEO]

6 doesn’t water down the playoff.
8 does.

If the regular season is supposed to matter then no need for more 2 loss teams making the CFB playoffs.

Since there are 5 P5 conferences theoretically there could be 5 worthy champions and room for 1 additional team.

I can find 6 quality teams this year but honestly the 4th-6th are razor close.
Georgia/Utah/Oklahoma.

a 2 L Georgia team makes me go...ehhh, whatever.

 

[shantydaze]

Wisconsin has a way in but it’s a Long shot.
Everything has to break there way.
Georgia loses
Utah loses
Oklahoma loses

It becomes Wisconsin vs. Baylor.

I think the committee could pick Wisconsin in that scenario as long as they look good in beating Ohio State.

Wisconsin still has a shot -- right now at 31% to make the playoff if they beat Ohio State. I bet PSU would sign up for that opportunity in a second.

As I am not a talking head that needs to fill up a column or the airwaves, I can honestly say that there is virtually no chance the Committee is going to put a two loss Wisconsin into the Playoffs over a one loss Baylor. The only way it might be remotely possible would be if Clemson lost as well. Then, a two-loss conference champion Wisconsin and a one-loss conference champion Baylor might both leapfrog a one-loss non-conference champion in Clemson. I still think there is much less than a 31% chance of this occuring.

 

[Alsacs]

As I am not a talking head that needs to fill up a column or the airwaves, I can honestly say that there is virtually no chance the Committee is going to put a two loss Wisconsin into the Playoffs over a one loss Baylor. The only way it might be remotely possible would be if Clemson lost as well. Then, a two-loss conference champion Wisconsin and a one-loss conference champion Baylor might both leapfrog a one-loss non-conference champion in Clemson. I still think there is much less than a 31% chance of this occuring.

Baylor’s nonconference schedule was a joke
Stephen . Austin
Rice
UT-San Antonio.

That is a joke and they will have just split with Oklahoma.

Wisconsin played
At South Florida
Central Michigan(who is playing in the MAC title game)
Kent State

Plus Wisconsin played Ohio State, Michigan, Minnesota

Baylor best wins are Kansas State, Iowa State, Oklahoma State.

I put Wisconsin in if they beat Ohio’s State and Utah, Georgia lose and Baylor beats Oklahoma.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Baylor’s nonconference schedule was a joke
Stephen . Austin
Rice
UT-San Antonio.

That is a joke and they will have just split with Oklahoma.

Wisconsin played
At South Florida
Central Michigan(who is playing in the MAC title game)
Kent State

Plus Wisconsin played Ohio State, Michigan, Minnesota

Baylor best wins are Kansas State, Iowa State, Oklahoma State.

I put Wisconsin in if they beat Ohio’s State and Utah, Georgia lose and Baylor beats Oklahoma.

If you would put Wisconsin in over Baylor (who beat every team on their schedule including Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State), why wouldn’t you also put them in over Utah should they beat Oregon. They have no other wins and played a weak OOC.

 

[Alsacs]

If you would put Wisconsin in over Baylor (who beat every team on their schedule including Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State), why wouldn’t you also put them in over Utah should they beat Oregon. They have no other wins and played a weak OOC.

BYU on the road is a tough game. They atleast scheduled 1 tough non-conference game.
Baylor played 3 tomato cans.
Baylor lost at home. Utah lost at USC they lost their star RB in that game.
I think Utah's win at Washington would be better than winning at Kansas State or Oklahoma State.
That Washington win is the only other Pac-12 game Utah didn't win by atleast 18.
Baylor was really lucky to beat TCU. Style points matter when you don't play tough schedules.
Oregon = Oklahoma to me.
Little things matter.

If the committee wanted to put Wisconsin in over Utah. I wouldn't object.
I think Oklahoma will jump Utah if both are 12-1 actually. Baylor won't.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

BYU on the road is a tough game. They atleast scheduled 1 tough non-conference game.
Baylor played 3 tomato cans.
Baylor lost at home. Utah lost at USC they lost their star RB in that game.
I think Utah's win at Washington would be better than winning at Kansas State or Oklahoma State.
That Washington win is the only other Pac-12 game Utah didn't win by atleast 18.
Baylor was really lucky to beat TCU. Style points matter when you don't play tough schedules.
Oregon = Oklahoma to me.
Little things matter.

If the committee wanted to put Wisconsin in over Utah. I wouldn't object.
I think Oklahoma will jump Utah if both are 12-1 actually. Baylor won't.

I wouldn’t have Utah ahead of Baylor. One would have five quality wins. The other would have two. Utah’s SOS is worse than Baylor’s even with the tomato cans. I am all for punishing teams for weak OOC schedules. Which means Utah should be punished too.

 

[Alsacs]

Pac-12
Utah
Oregon- top 10
Washington- top 25
USC- borderline top 25
Washington State
Arizona State
California
Oregon State
Colorado
UCLA
Stanford
Arizona

Big XII
Oklahoma-top 10
Baylor
Oklahoma State- top 25
Iowa State- borderline top 25
Kansas State- borderline top 25
Texas-
TCU
West Virginia
Texas Tech
Kansas

I really don't see much difference between the two conferences except 1 more tougher game. I would say beating BYU on the road in a nasty rivalry game would count.

I think the Big XII isn't anything special. After Oklahoma. Those are all solid not complete teams. If Texas was better maybe but they went 7-5.

I am not putting Baylor in over Utah. If you say Oklahoma I agree.
I would have Oklahoma 5th right now and believe they will jump Utah if both win and LSU beat UGA.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Pac-12
Utah
Oregon- top 10
Washington- top 25
USC- borderline top 25
Washington State
Arizona State
California
Oregon State
Colorado
UCLA
Stanford
Arizona

Big XII
Oklahoma-top 10
Baylor
Oklahoma State- top 25
Iowa State- borderline top 25
Kansas State- borderline top 25
Texas-
TCU
West Virginia
Texas Tech
Kansas

I really don't see much difference between the two conferences except 1 more tougher game. I would say beating BYU on the road in a nasty rivalry game would count.

I think the Big XII isn't anything special. After Oklahoma. Those are all solid not complete teams. If Texas was better maybe but they went 7-5.

I am not putting Baylor in over Utah. If you say Oklahoma I agree.
I would have Oklahoma 5th right now and believe they will jump Utah if both win and LSU beat UGA.

Ranking at the time they played is meaningless. See SU or MD. Rankings now mean more. How can you count a 7-5 Washington team as a good win but poo poo beating Texas?

I do not think Baylor is a playoff worthy team. They are only in the conversation because they were undefeated for so long. But I also do not think Utah is a playoff worthy team and on paper they are a worse choice than Baylor.

I don’t it happens but Georgia deserves to make it in over either. Why should losing to LSU drop you below? It also sends a message to stop with these joke OOC schedules.

 

[Alsacs]

Ranking at the time they played is meaningless. See SU or MD. Rankings now mean more. How can you count a 7-5 Washington team as a good win but poo poo beating Texas?

I do not think Baylor is a playoff worthy team. They are only in the conversation because they were undefeated for so long. But I also do not think Utah is a playoff worthy team and on paper they are a worse choice than Baylor.

I don’t it happens but Georgia deserves to make it in over either. Why should losing to LSU drop you below? It also sends a message to stop with these joke OOC schedules.

Georgia has the worst loss of any potential playoff team.
Wisconsin lost on the road to 6-6 Illinois.

Georgia doesn’t deserve a playoff spot at 11-2 they lost AT HOME to 4-8 South Carolina.
Clemson gets dinged for beating North Carolina on the road by 1. That UNC team beat South Carolina.

Georgia hasn’t even passed the eye test either they haven’t been complete.

Georgia has to win to get in.

 

[TheCusian]

Because you want the best teams to win the title not a fluke team. An 8 seed winning renders the regular season meaningless. The more at large spots there are the worse it is for the sport.

You say this as if it's fact. If CFB were strictly about crowning a champion based on the regular season, we might as well go back to pre-BCS.

The playoffs are good because we *think* we know who the best teams are - but we want to *see* it play out. Giving two teams a week off based on who we *think* the two best are is dumb. If they are a true #1, they should handle the #8 with no problem. Plus, it's fun to watch more football, rather than less.

(I always find the "x renders the regular season meaningless" argument weak. I mean, we literally wouldn't have an idea how to seed the teams without the regular season)

 

[TheCusian]

People who post on a message board advocating for less football against top ten teams need to get their heads examined

the downside is maybe we get games that are blowouts. You guys are Cuse fans and can’t drink during a blowout?!

 

[ColoradoB]

You say this as if it's fact. If CFB were strictly about crowning a champion based on the regular season, we might as well go back to pre-BCS.

The playoffs are good because we *think* we know who the best teams are - but we want to *see* it play out. Giving two teams a week off based on who we *think* the two best are is dumb. If they are a true #1, they should handle the #8 with no problem. Plus, it's fun to watch more football, rather than less.

(I always find the "x renders the regular season meaningless" argument weak. I mean, we literally wouldn't have an idea how to seed the teams without the regular season)

This is my line of thinking. Plus a team that gets in the playoff and beats the teams it will need to beat to become champion would not be a fluke by any means, like you said a 1 seed should not have a problem beating an 8 seed, if those are truly 1 and 8 seeds. There is no way how to distinguish who the top teams really are unless those in the discussion have played head to head. Why can every division of football get a playoff system right except for the top division?