Playoffs and Conference Title Games

johncu said:
This is the ideal situation, IMO, but there's no way to enforce it. If the NCAA tried to force conferences to drop to 12 teams, the Power 5 conferences would rebel and start their own league. Also, there are currently 10 conferences and well over 96 FBS teams. Who gets left out?
Click to expand...
Let's be honest, if a team like UCF that wins 25 games in a row, as back to back undefeated conference champions with a bowl win over the team that beat both teams that ended up in the national championship game last year sandwiched in between, STILL gets left out in favor of a second SEC team or one loss OSU (I don't care which)... then why even have the group of 5 teams in the FBS subdivision?
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Let's be honest, if a team like UCF that wins 25 games in a row, as back to back undefeated conference champions with a bowl win over the team that beat both teams that ended up in the national championship game last year sandwiched in between, STILL gets left out in favor of a second SEC team or one loss OSU (I don't care which)... then why even have the group of 5 teams in the FBS subdivision?
Click to expand...

Agreed - we were talking about this last Sunday on the teebox: Why bother playing football if you are UCF? They can't do anymore than what they've done and yet are gonna get shutout 2 years in a row.
 
PS: Notre Dame doesn't belong in the CFP. I know they deserve it but they don't belong - they are gonna lose by 4 TDs in round 1. These jerks need to become full-fledged ACC members or get removed from the CFP. öööö 'em.
 
I'm for expanding it to 6. First round byes for 1 and 2 seeds. 5 conference champions and best group of 5 team.
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Let's be honest, if a team like UCF that wins 25 games in a row, as back to back undefeated conference champions with a bowl win over the team that beat both teams that ended up in the national championship game last year sandwiched in between, STILL gets left out in favor of a second SEC team or one loss OSU (I don't care which)... then why even have the group of 5 teams in the FBS subdivision?
Click to expand...
Agree 100%. I think it's dumb. There are P5 teams (Duke, Wake, Vandy, etc.) that are extremely unlikely to ever make the playoff, but the fact is that if they managed to go undefeated and win their conference, they would undoubtedly get in.

IMO, the new system needs to have 2 things:

1) Losing your conference disqualifies you.
2) Going undefeated gets you in.

Make a system that does those two things and I'm all for it.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
It'd be easier to get the conferences to come up to 16 teams, then make the conference championship games into the first round.

EDIT: This is assuming the Big Texas conference gets eaten. Which it would.
Click to expand...
right. 6 conferences, 16 teams (that's 96 of the 120 FBS teams), either 2 at-large bids or byes for the top 2 seeds.
 
The author’s scenario would never work. UCF would get replaced by LSU, and someone would get replaced by UF. Still not enough SEC teams, so someone else has to go. ESPN will not be satisfied until all 8 teams are SEC.
 
BranMart said:
Gross. there are not 8 teams worthy of a title shot.

6 team max playoff. No independents. Win a conference, highest ranked G5, best two teams get a bye.
Click to expand...

8 is the right number. Already at 4 people argue whether those 4 should be merit based or "the actual 4 best teams". At 8 you can satisfy both with taking 5 P5 champs, and 3 at large or an undefeated G5 champ.

I don't like 6 teams and giving 2 teams byes based on nothing but media bias and eye tests. Would rather see those teams play someone, even if those other 2 teams are "unworthy" atleast they're putting in work.
 
Architorture23 said:
right. 6 conferences, 16 teams (that's 96 of the 120 FBS teams), either 2 at-large bids or byes for the top 2 seeds.
Click to expand...
Or you could go even bigger and get rid of the cross-divisional game problem. What if you have conferences of 20 teams, 10 in either division, giving you a nice 9-team round robin on each division. It's big enough to accomodate most of the natural rivalries. For example, what is currently the Big 12 could have one side that looks like the old Southwest conference, and the other side like the old big 8. You could see how it would work in the ACC and across the rest of the country without much squinting.

Whether you have 5 or 6 such conferences, there are more seats at the table, and it's easier to figure out a playoff.
 
MidnightJacket said:
8 is the right number. Already at 4 people argue whether those 4 should be merit based or "the actual 4 best teams". At 8 you can satisfy both with taking 5 P5 champs, and 3 at large or an undefeated G5 champ.

I don't like 6 teams and giving 2 teams byes based on nothing but media bias and eye tests. Would rather see those teams play someone, even if those other 2 teams are "unworthy" atleast they're putting in work.
Click to expand...

It would make everyone schedule better out of conference games during the season to earn that 1 and 2 since only Conference Champs go. Doesn't matter if you lose all 4 OOC. At least in theory.

If 1 and 2 played a G5 and at large team more often then not it would be a blow out. Doesn't matter anyway, 8 teams is more games to make money off of, so that will happen. We are just going to see two games that aren't as competitive when the playoffs should be.
 
Buzz_PhD said:
How so?

It is superior to any of the other previously implemented MNC processes, IMO.
Click to expand...

It certainly slowed down Bama's accumulation of national titles. I think they've only had 5 in the last 10 years rather than the 12 they "earned" in the previous 80.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top