Just for Fun: Arguments for NOT expanding the playoffs

CiraldoForever

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
1,066
The reason I want it expanded to include all Power 5 champs plus 3 others is because, under the four team system, if Tech wins the ACC with no losses --or maybe if any team wins the ACC with one loss-- that team could be left out for a one loss team from the SEC or some other conference. Until all P5 champs are guaranteed a spot, the playoffs will never be fair. A four team playoff system for five Power 5 conferences means an undefeated conference champ could be left out, and that makes the current system unacceptable.
 

OptionJacket

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
1,160
It’s going to expand. The money is too great and last year we just got a small taste of players sitting out meaningless bowl games. This year you are going to see a lot of marquee players not in the playoffs sitting out - and that trend will continue to the point that the bowls will become worthless. Once they went from 2 to 4 it opened the door to 8 and will go to 16 as well. The money and interest is just to great for it to not happen. It’s not a matter of “if” but “when”.

But to answer the op - there is no argument for it not to expand. For the “regular season won’t matter” crowd, it still will. Conference champs get auto bids and rivalries still exist. Sure, 2 loss SEC teams will get in, but that’s ok. Expansion is the only way for the little guy to make it and for a true champ to win it on the field.
 

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
27,979
I think the current system is great... except that I would only allow conference champs in. If you're not the best team in your conf, how can you be the best team in the country?

For people who say a flukey division loss can keep the best team out... then let the conferences change their rules so that whomever they think is the best team gets to play in the conf champ game (or select a conf champ however they want).

But if you aren't the best team in your conference, even according to your own conference, you can't be the best team in the country. Simple, country boy logic.
 

gtphd

What a time to be alive
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
23,285
I think the current system is great... except that I would only allow conference champs in. If you're not the best team in your conf, how can you be the best team in the country?
...
But if you aren't the best team in your conference, even according to your own conference, you can't be the best team in the country. Simple, country boy logic.
Washington Nationals.
 

gt2690b

PB time!
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
9,509
Imagine if it was only 2 teams this year... they’d potentially leave out 2 out of 3 defending undefeated national champions because sec
 

Flywheel

Wait, what year is it?
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
17,891
Not going to happen
It wasn't long ago that the SEC had Bama, Auburn, Miss St, and Ole Miss ranked 1-4. The talk was whether they could get 3 in rather than 2. They cried foul when only Bama got in and then all 4 lost their postseason games, some of them by big margins. (Thanks JT5)
 
Last edited:

77GTFan

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
9,397
I think the current system is great... except that I would only allow conference champs in. If you're not the best team in your conf, how can you be the best team in the country?

For people who say a flukey division loss can keep the best team out... then let the conferences change their rules so that whomever they think is the best team gets to play in the conf champ game (or select a conf champ however they want).

But if you aren't the best team in your conference, even according to your own conference, you can't be the best team in the country. Simple, country boy logic.
I completely agree with the conference championship argument. The highest ranked four conference champions get in. If we had eight teams in this year there would be serious arguments over who gets in. For me I would go with Oregon, App State, Memphis and Boise State - all conference champs, only Oregon with two losses. Of course that is not who would get in if we expanded to eight. I predict Oregon would be joined by Georgia, Alabama and Penn State. No thanks.

To your argument regarding the best team kept out of a conference championship game, I suggest doing away with divisions in the large conferences. Let the schools themselves pick three permanent opponents each. Let the conference cycle the other schools on to your schedule. Play eight or nine conference games. Let the two highest ranked teams play for the championship. This in effect gets two good teams into the championship games. Those games provide a play-in to the playoffs. Will there be some rematches? Yes. But Oklahoma-Baylor was a recent rematch and it was an entertaining game.
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
990
This year is a great example of 4 working perfectly. If only two, there would be unbelievable controversy right now. So 4 solves that.

We don't need 8. Think of this weekend's games as the play in:

- #4 Dawgs lost. They're out.
- #5 Utah lost. They're out.
- #7 Baylor lost. They're out.
- #8 Wisky lost. They're out.

Who do we need to see more of this year? A two loss Alabama team? A two loss Utah team? Oh, I know let's put a two loss Dawg team in...

The only controversy left is how to seed the four teams.

/
 

texstinger

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 12, 2002
Messages
8,816
It’s going to expand. The money is too great and last year we just got a small taste of players sitting out meaningless bowl games. This year you are going to see a lot of marquee players not in the playoffs sitting out - and that trend will continue to the point that the bowls will become worthless. Once they went from 2 to 4 it opened the door to 8 and will go to 16 as well. The money and interest is just to great for it to not happen. It’s not a matter of “if” but “when”.

But to answer the op - there is no argument for it not to expand. For the “regular season won’t matter” crowd, it still will. Conference champs get auto bids and rivalries still exist. Sure, 2 loss SEC teams will get in, but that’s ok. Expansion is the only way for the little guy to make it and for a true champ to win it on the field.
Some good points about players sitting out.

But 16 teams? This isn’t like the BB tourney where teams can play twice a week. Season would last too long.
 
F

flushed 01

Guest
From what I can tell the playoff will be expanded to 6 or 8 teams with P5 autobids in the near future.

What are your best arguments against expanding the playoff ?
The way it is has worked out, not broke dont fix it. Raising it to 8 teams would do one thing MORE MONEY. In the end MONEY will ruin college sports.
 

gtphd

What a time to be alive
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
23,285
What has the committee done wrong since its inception
In 2017 they proved that its not guaranteed to make the playoffs despite winning all games.

In 2018, they proved that its not guaranteed despite winning all games for two seasons and beating Auburn.

Regardless of your opinion of UCF, the committee proved that the playoffs are rigged towards certain teams.
 

KrazieJacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 12, 2002
Messages
8,936
In 2017 they proved that its not guaranteed to make the playoffs despite winning all games.

In 2018, they proved that its not guaranteed despite winning all games for two seasons and beating Auburn.

Regardless of your opinion of UCF, the committee proved that the playoffs are rigged towards certain teams.
We don’t care and UCF would never win a playoff.
 
Top