Just for Fun: Arguments for NOT expanding the playoffs

The basketball ball conference championship is basically worthless
 
gt2690b said:
The basketball ball conference championship is basically worthless
Click to expand...
Technically incorrect.

Cannot agree more with 77gt above.

The little conference games this weekend would have been much, much more awesome if they meant making the playoff. People would care. They would want to watch memphis/cinn to see who Clemson was going to get in round 1. Going to 8 with only conf champs in is like going to 16 because the conf champ games is the round of 16. Oregon losing 2 games and Oklahoma 1 means they have the toughest 1st round matchup, so regular season wins matter to set up the most optimum path to the championship.
 
One advantage of expanding that appeals to me is the major bowls would have meaning every year and not just in the years they host one of the playoff games. It's sad that this year the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls are irrelevant games featuring also-rans and probably lots of empty seats.
 
atlanta jacket said:
When you play nobody it sure does, if not strength of schedule means zero
Click to expand...
That's the point. Strength of schedule should mean zero. All that should matter is if you win or lose games. If you set the playoff system up properly, only 1 team can win all their games.

Bad team goes undefeated in the Sun Belt? They'll get slaughtered in the first round of the playoffs.

If people desperately want to keep the beauty contest going, use the committee to seat teams in the bracket. As long as all conference champions are guaranteed a bid, I'm good because that means all teams have a way to play into the championship.

For all any of us know, UCF could have won the national championship in 2017. They beat an Auburn team that beat Alabama and Georgia.
 
Last edited:
gtphd said:
That's the point. Strength of schedule should mean zero. All that should matter is if you win or lose games. If you set the playoff system up properly, only 1 team can win all their games.

Bad team goes undefeated in the Sun Belt? They'll get slaughtered in the first round of the playoffs.

If people desperately want to keep the beauty contest going, use the committee to seat teams in the bracket. As long as all conference champions are guaranteed a bid, I'm good because that means all teams have a way to play into the championship.

For all any of us know, UCF could have won the national championship in 2017. They beat an Auburn team that beat Alabama and Georgia.
Click to expand...
You have got to be joking, do you honestly think they would have beat Auburn before they had lost to Bama. Strength of schedule according to you should mean zero, then schedule 12 patsies and play for the championship, give me a break.
 
atlanta jacket said:
You have got to be joking, do you honestly think they would have beat Auburn before they had lost to Bama. Strength of schedule according to you should mean zero, then schedule 12 patsies and play for the championship, give me a break.
Click to expand...

We don't know if the 2017 UCF team would have beaten Alabama, Georgia, or Clemson. We'll never know, and that's a problem. You can say "they wouldn't" until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it a fact, just like "UCF won't beat Auburn" wasn't a fact.

Also, Strength of Schedule shouldn't matter. Don't like that the MAC champion gets in just like the B10 champion (though in my model a MAC champion has a play-in game)? Join the MAC and live off $5 M per year of TV revenue. Actually, a model where conference champions are guaranteed in might create more big games. When the OOC games don't matter, teams are more likely to schedule big-time OOC match ups to drive excitement for the program and TV revenue.
 
gtphd said:
We don't know if the 2017 UCF team would have beaten Alabama, Georgia, or Clemson. We'll never know, and that's a problem. You can say "they wouldn't" until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it a fact, just like "UCF won't beat Auburn" wasn't a fact.

Also, Strength of Schedule shouldn't matter. Don't like that the MAC champion gets in just like the B10 champion (though in my model a MAC champion has a play-in game)? Join the MAC and live off $5 M per year of TV revenue. Actually, a model where conference champions are guaranteed in might create more big games. When the OOC games don't matter, teams are more likely to schedule big-time OOC match ups to drive excitement for the program and TV revenue.
Click to expand...
We will just have to agree to disagree.
 
After getting caught up in this thread, i realized that outside of just enjoying college football on tv, i really don't give a crap about the cfp. Be it 2 teams or 16 teams.

If we beat ugag - i don't give s..t after that. In the cfp - fine. If left out - fine.

Just beat f.....g ugag.
 
As it stands right now, the ACC, PAC, and Big 12 have to win more games than the SEC or BIG to get in. That’s a disadvantage from the get go.
 
8 teams with all P5 champs, top conf champ of rest and 2 at large. First round at home for top 4 champs. Reseed after each round. This maintains the importance of regular season, conf champs means something. Top 15 teams or so have a shot. Now it is hard to tell a kid you have a shot at title if you aren't at one of about 6 schools, and GT isn't one of them. With 8, we could say we have a shot.
 
ETBee said:
One advantage of expanding that appeals to me is the major bowls would have meaning every year and not just in the years they host one of the playoff games. It's sad that this year the Orange, Sugar, and Rose Bowls are irrelevant games featuring also-rans and probably lots of empty seats.
Click to expand...

You just hit the nail on the head as to why it will expand to 16. The old guard big bowls have been fighting against playoffs for decades because they had the upper hand (tradition over money). They were very successful doing it until the tipping point of money vs. tradition moved to the money side. So the past 15 years or so we’ve been in this weird era of the big bowls trying to exist with a modified playoff system. But the tipping point has come again and the bowls have now realized they are meaningless scrimmages and attendance and interest has been trending lower every year. This year the Rose, Orange, and Sugar will be disasters for attendance and ratings. Add to it that players are sitting these games out and these old guard bowls will be the reason behind an expanded playoff. The rotating years currently used won’t pay the bills. Once it goes to 16, everyone will make money. The higher seeds will get an extra home game. Then you’ll have 6 bowl games to get from 8 to 1. So, everyone will be happy with a rotation between Peach, Cotton, Fiesta, Sugar, Rose, Orange. Then the Natty.
 
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...
we finally got there.

8 team playoff starting with quarters in existing ny bowl structure. then semis mid jan and finals week before superbowl.

5 P5 champs get in. p5 championship games now mean something again. let committee rankings determine 6-8. 6 should be highest ranked other conf champ (as mentioned by others) as long as in top 15. let committee determine 7 and 8.

my reasoning is this: what other ncaa sport doesn't allow a p5 conference winner to compete for the natty? it's f'n ridiculous that one or two get left out every year.

someone else also said we'd get to 16. might happen, but probably 20 years away. i think 8 solves 99.3% of all issues.

*hey just think if we still lived in the two team playoff system. can you imagine the venom coming out of klempson right now, as they head to the orange bowl without a chance at a natty?
 
Killick said:
There has been 7 different Coastal winners in the last 7 years. Of those seven, which team was best? I say Tech in 2014 was the best Coastal winner. I think that team would have gone deep into an expanded playoff field.
Click to expand...
Ballz Deep
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top