Just for Fun: Arguments for NOT expanding the playoffs

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
18in32 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Washington Nationals.
 
Imagine if it was only 2 teams this year... they’d potentially leave out 2 out of 3 defending undefeated national champions because sec
 
KrazieJacket said:
Not going to happen
Click to expand...

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:
18in32 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.

/
 
OptionJacket said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
HurricaneJacket said:
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 ?
Click to expand...
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.
 
atlanta jacket said:
What has the committee done wrong since its inception
Click to expand...
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.
 
gtphd said:
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.
Click to expand...
We don’t care and UCF would never win a playoff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top