Finebaum ALREADY BITCHING... 😂

[doctornick]

What about Illinois then? Three losses, Oregon, Penn State, and Minny at the end of the game. Would they then have a complaint?

Exactly - there is always going to be some "next team" that has as much of an argument to being included as the last team(s) in and is complaining about not being included. There's literally no way to avoid that. Bama, Miami-FL, Ole Miss, etc had their shot and failed by losing too many games. It wasn't like they were excluded by something outside of their control - don't look inept against a bad Oklahoma team and Bama would have made it in.

I don't see anything that happened this year that suggests that something "needs" to change. The good teams that have legit shots at the title all made it in (and are still playing).

 

[ryoder1]

It's okay if we don't agree. It all depends on what you're trying to solve for. Are you trying to create a playoff of teams that belong, or are you trying to create a spectacle?

I'm a proponent of a champion of champions concept and I've said it many times on this boards, but just as I wouldn't suggest including bids for FCS teams, I'm not a proponent fo auto-bids for the "mid-majors."

When there was a P5, I was in favor of a 6 team playoff.
5 highest ranked conference champs.
6th team is either:
-ND if ranked in Top 8 (or something like that)
-6th ranked conf champs if ranked in top ~14?
-Highest ranked conference runner-up if neither of the above.

In my mind, it's up to the conferences to determine their champion. If their system is incapable of determining who the best team is, that's their problem.

In the end, I'm not a proponent of the spectacle. Spectacle playoffs reduce the importance of the regular season. If you want expanded playoffs, the regular season should be shortened.

If you want to really preserve the importance of the red season then stick with 4. We needed to beat OSU or Oregon and could not, we're out. OSU needed to beat Michigan. They did not, they are out. Left with Oregon, Georgia, Notre Dame and probably Texas.

 

[ryoder1]

Basketball has automatic bids for conference champions for all conferences in Division 1.

Yes I know but they are filling a 68 team field and can do a conference tournament with the whole league. Auto bids make it exciting and serve a purpose there. Different in football. With a 12 team format, stupid that Clemson is in. Never should have had a shot in a CCG. The CCG should not exist. Georgia over seeded. Let them in a 12 team format but not #2. Boise #3, ASU #4, c'mon ridiculous. Just dumb and not well thought through. These auto bids and CCG just muddy everything up. Just pick the top 16. Don't overcomplicate it. With 16 it is enough not to exclude someone who could have a gripe (Bama, Ole Miss, South Carolina for example). Boise and ASU can make it just not way over seeded.

 

[heckmans]

Eliminate CCG. Don't need them. The reg season conference champs from quality conferences like B10 and SEC should naturally fall to the top. Why give auto bids? What if a conf champ from a weak ACC or B12 has 2 losses? Maybe 3? No auto bids for anyone. A Boise or team from non power 4 can get in with a 16 team format just not ridiculously over seeded at #3. In a 6 team playoff you could have better non conf champs. Penn State is better than SMU and they were the ACC reg season champ. Not all conferences are the same.

Just do it like basketball does. Pick the top 16, no byes, first 8 games at home fields then move to the quarters with bowls and so on.

FWIW, basketball does auto-bids.

 

[LandoComando]

It doesn't solve the issue. This is a playoff. If you are truly calling it a playoff all teams have to have a chance. Look at the NFL. The best teams in the NFC South are 8-7 right now. Someone is getting in and having a bye. Green Bay is currently 10-4 and the 6th seed. So, they will play on the road versus either Atlanta or LA Rams. Same with Washington at 10-5. It isn't necessarily fair but that is the system.

It happens every year sometimes the 14 teams that make the playoffs aren't the best 14. Sometimes they are but everyone has the same chance.

Yes, basketball is different from football, but it can still happen. Vanderbilt and Oklahoma beat Alabama. Why do people talk about Boise? it isn't because they are in the SEC or B1G. It is because they went out and beat P5 teams in bowl games they didn't deserve to be in.

If you are really going to call it a playoff everybody in that division needs a path.

Then you expand to 24 and do so

 

[LandoComando]

No because my point is the complaining is coming from the fact that these blue bloods or good programs that beat some good teams are not getting in and an Indiana or SMU are. People think Bama or Ole Miss are clearly better than SMU or Indiana and I think they are right at least based off their horrific first round playoff performances. No one is going to say Indiana or an SMU could certainly lose to Illinois or is not as good even with a lousy first rd play off performance. That's my opinion. Same with BYU and Mizzou. No real quality wins from those teams like Illinois. The more teams you add then this problem starts to dissipate but it still is there to some degree. You go to 24 and teams 25-27 will complain.

I think 12 sets it up though where you can have weak one loss teams from weak conferences or in Indiana's case playing a very weak schedule get in over teams with more losses (3) but better wins and a harder schedule. I think a good solve is to expand a bit more to 16 and get both of those types of teams in.

Someone will always complain. See March Madness. But the more teams you have the less relevant that complaining is

 

[AWS1022]

They don't win in basketball either but no one wants to go back to a 48 team tournament because 16 seeds can't win the NC.

I'm telling you a Bama or Ole Miss could do damage in the playoff. You don't want to include them because they have too many losses. I agree and that is fine. Wins and losses need to matter. I am saying that if you expand to 16 then those 12-16 teams are probably 3 loss SEC teams or 3 loss B10 teams. I think it is a good thing because those teams are pretty good and I like more teams getting a shot even though I can't stand Bama. To me the solution is to include the supposed "undeserving" teams like Indiana and SMU but also include these 3 loss teams. Settle it on the field.

A 16 team format is just like in March Madness taking the top 4 seeds from each region and thatis your only bracket.

Not go back to fewer teams, but I’d rather see the 8th ranked Big 10 team or SEC team playing instead of the number one or two team from one of these scrub conferences. The small conferences should only get their regular season champ in, not their tournament champ. That way they’re only getting one team in.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

What about Illinois then? Three losses, Oregon, Penn State, and Minny at the end of the game. Would they then have a complaint?

No, they really wouldn't imho as #16 is Clemson - who had the same record but won the ACC CCG to get to #16 (and would have had the auto-bid as the 5th Highest Ranked Conference Champion even if they weren't #16, which they were.). Populating a full 16-Team Bracket makes way more sense than the convoluted, and frankly "stooooopid", 12-Team w/ 4 byes System currently being used - especially if you're going to give auto-bids to 5 highest ranked Conference Champions - that gave 1st RD byes to the #12 and #9 Ranked Teams in the Final CFP Rankings. AND kicked the #11 Ranked team in the Final CFP Rankings out of the Playoffs altogether?????? (you give a 1st RD bye to the #12 team and kick the #11 team out of the Playoffs altogether when it is completely unnecessary had you just fully populated the 16-Team Bracket 1-to-16????).

People bitching about the uncompetitive nature of the 1st RD games make zero sense saying this is an argument to keep it at 12 when ASU is LESS COMPETITIVE than three of the teams in the 1st RD according to the Final CFP Rankings used to select the 12 and this stoooooopid system gave them a 1st RD Bye!!!! What f'ing sense does that possibly make and how does it support their silly argument??? (Of course you expect 10 - 16 to get beat in the 1st RD of a full 16-Team Bracket because they're playing the absolute top of the bracket - it's no revelation that #1 - 7 are going win their matchups most of the time in a well-seeded 16-Team Bracket, including lots of blowouts, so it makes ABSOLUTELY ZERO SENSE to give the absolute lowest Seed, and the 4th lowest seed, in your 12-Team w/byes Bracket 1st RD Byes!!!! They're less competitive then several of the 1st RD teams that got beat handily in the 1st RD games the convoluted 12-Team System created! In fact, I'd argue that the stooooopid 12-Team Convoluted System they used artificially created some of the bad 1st RD matchups by giving BYES to teams at the bottom of the bracket (including the absolute bottom) that should have been forced to play in the 1st RD and forced other teams that should have had easier draws in the 1st RD to play teams they should have been playing in the 2nd RD (i.e., the Quarter Finals).... AND eliminated the #11 Ranked team (which was higher ranked than TWO of the teams in the 12-Team Bracket - i.e., almost 20% of Bracket) without even letting them play on the field???? And one of the lower ranked teams, they gave a freaking 1st RD bye to - that is beyond absurd.

 

[AWS1022]

If you want to really preserve the importance of the red season then stick with 4. We needed to beat OSU or Oregon and could not, we're out. OSU needed to beat Michigan. They did not, they are out. Left with Oregon, Georgia, Notre Dame and probably Texas.

Why Notre Dame? They didn’t win anything.

 

[heckmans]

If you want to really preserve the importance of the red season then stick with 4. We needed to beat OSU or Oregon and could not, we're out. OSU needed to beat Michigan. They did not, they are out. Left with Oregon, Georgia, Notre Dame and probably Texas.

It's too hard to narrow it to 4. Too much variety across conferences and schedules to be able to compare teams effectively. IMHO, you need to let in a few teams with little chance, to ensure you don't exclude a team that does.

It's either 6 which is basically conf champs or something like 12(w/ some tweaks to how the seeding works)

The balance between the regular season and playoff is...we'll, a balance.
In the last few years, we've added an additional regular season game, a CCG and now a potential for 4 playoff games. 17 games is too much.

The MLB playoff expansion has negated winning a long-ass 162 game season. Half the NHL and NBA teams making playoffs is absurd.

 

[PurposePitch]

My nephew works in production/creation at ESPN. He'll be over tonight for Xmas Eve ... anything in particular you guys want me to ask him about SEC/Finebaum ... other than the derelict ranting that typically pervades these boards?

 

[GSPMax]

My nephew works in production/creation at ESPN. He'll be over tonight for Xmas Eve ... anything in particular you guys want me to ask him about SEC/Finebaum ... other than the derelict ranting that typically pervades these boards?

Ask him who created finebums ears and what he does with them at night.

 

[PAgeologist]

My nephew works in production/creation at ESPN. He'll be over tonight for Xmas Eve ... anything in particular you guys want me to ask him about SEC/Finebaum ... other than the derelict ranting that typically pervades these boards?

Can he sneak a filter in next time Finebaum is on to make him look like a donkey or something similar?

 

[PSUMATT85]

My nephew works in production/creation at ESPN. He'll be over tonight for Xmas Eve ... anything in particular you guys want me to ask him about SEC/Finebaum ... other than the derelict ranting that typically pervades these boards?

Are they allowed to talk positively about the Big 10

 

[KCLion]

Eliminate CCG. Don't need them. The reg season conference champs from quality conferences like B10 and SEC should naturally fall to the top. Why give auto bids? What if a conf champ from a weak ACC or B12 has 2 losses? Maybe 3? No auto bids for anyone. A Boise or team from non power 4 can get in with a 16 team format just not ridiculously over seeded at #3. In a 6 team playoff you could have better non conf champs. Penn State is better than SMU and they were the ACC reg season champ. Not all conferences are the same.

Just do it like basketball does. Pick the top 16, no byes, first 8 games at home fields then move to the quarters with bowls and so on.

Tell the athletic directors and the conferences that they don’t need the additional money generated by the CCG and see what response you get. Good luck!

 

[KCLion]

If you want to really preserve the importance of the red season then stick with 4. We needed to beat OSU or Oregon and could not, we're out. OSU needed to beat Michigan. They did not, they are out. Left with Oregon, Georgia, Notre Dame and probably Texas.

Most believe that this was the best regular season in a long time because you still had something to fight for if you lost a game or two. In this new era, how many “Bears” would try here be if your season was over with a loss?

 

[LandoComando]

Tell the athletic directors and the conferences that they don’t need the additional money generated by the CCG and see what response you get. Good luck!

They can more than make up for it in an expanded playoff

 

[fastlax16]

They don't win in basketball either but no one wants to go back to a 48 team tournament because 16 seeds can't win the NC.

I'm telling you a Bama or Ole Miss could do damage in the playoff. You don't want to include them because they have too many losses. I agree and that is fine. Wins and losses need to matter. I am saying that if you expand to 16 then those 12-16 teams are probably 3 loss SEC teams or 3 loss B10 teams. I think it is a good thing because those teams are pretty good and I like more teams getting a shot even though I can't stand Bama. To me the solution is to include the supposed "undeserving" teams like Indiana and SMU but also include these 3 loss teams. Settle it on the field.

A 16 team format is just like in March Madness taking the top 4 seeds from each region and thatis your only bracket.

I’m fine expanding to 16 when the sec goes to 9 games. They artificially inflate half the conference every year relative to the big ten because of it.

 

[LandoComando]

I’m fine expanding to 16 when the sec goes to 9 games. They artificially inflate half the conference every year relative to the big ten because of it.

The Big Ten and SEC will either go to 10 or 9 + one against each other
10's going to be the standard by 2032

 

[SUPERTODD]

Can he sneak a filter in next time Finebaum is on to make him look like a donkey or something similar?

No one would notice a difference.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

It's too hard to narrow it to 4. Too much variety across conferences and schedules to be able to compare teams effectively. IMHO, you need to let in a few teams with little chance, to ensure you don't exclude a team that does.

It's either 6 which is basically conf champs or something like 12(w/ some tweaks to how the seeding works)

The balance between the regular season and playoff is...we'll, a balance.
In the last few years, we've added an additional regular season game, a CCG and now a potential for 4 playoff games. 17 games is too much.

The MLB playoff expansion has negated winning a long-ass 162 game season. Half the NHL and NBA teams making playoffs is absurd.

What the hell are you talking about - FBS has 130 teams, neither MLB or NBA (or any other Pro Sport for that matter) has anywhere near 130 teams in the universe.

 

[heckmans]

What the hell are you talking about - FBS has 130 teams, neither MLB or NBA (or any other Pro Sport for that matter) has anywhere near 130 teams in the universe.

You win dumbest post of the day Bushey. Drink some more egg nog! Merry Christmas!

 

[PurposePitch]

Can he sneak a filter in next time Finebaum is on to make him look like a donkey or something similar?

He's not a fan of Finebaum, though he doesn't interact with him that much.

I did get the lowdown that there are numerous "beefs" between on-air personalities - a lot of them truly don't like each other.

 

[roswelllion]

The best two can be a blowout but that doesn't have anything to do with Indiana and SMU being rewarded for weak schedules. Neither were good.

Do you need told again? Once Stone visited Northwestern I won that fight

Stone, the back up to the back up??

 

[ryoder1]

He's not a fan of Finebaum, though he doesn't interact with him that much.

I did get the lowdown that there are numerous "beefs" between on-air personalities - a lot of them truly don't like each other.

That female anchor they have now with Michael Eaves is horrible. Any chance they can her. Forget her name. Take Finebaum with her.

 

[Aardvark86]

I was listening to a pundit on sports talk radio over the weekend. He seemed to believe that the problem was that there was too big an advantage for the schools hosting a home game and that those games should be played at a neutral site (bowl?).

I don't know. That will make for a significant amount of travel and cost for the fan base of any team that played in the 1st round and made it to the championship game.

The people who like to point out that the after market price of our tickets for the game against SMU need to understand the price of admission is but one component in the cost of attending a home game in State College.

Nepotism hire Jack Hillgrove (son of Pitt play by play announcer Bill Hillgrove) made relative low cost and availability of tickets to our game the theme of his show on Pitt SportsTalk 93.7 the FAN in Pittsburgh.

I quickly turned it off as I don't suffer fools well. I heard that there was a significant amount of negative feedback regarding that obnoxious tool from PSU nation.

I’m very interested to see what attendance looks like at these quarter/semifinal games. From a purely economic perspective, I’d think they’ll be way down. Even if you think your team could make a run, with the cost of three tix, why wouldn’t you do the home game over the semi if you were a first round team?

 

[LandoComando]

Stone, the back up to the back up??

He was the primary backup

 

[olelion]

Then you expand to 24 and do so

That's what it's all about. Expansion going to 12 boosted TV revenue during the season and it has been a bonanza in post season. Keep expanding until you reach a saturation point.....Benjamins, Benjamins, Benjamins. When, if ever, has there been more than 5 teams capable of winning it all?

 

[LandoComando]

That's what it's all about. Expansion going to 12 boosted TV revenue during the season and it has been a bonanza in post season. Keep expanding until you reach a saturation point.....Benjamins, Benjamins, Benjamins. When, if ever, has there been more than 5 teams capable of winning it all?

Every once in awhile you may see a 6-9 seed win. Ohio State may win this year as the 9 but in reality they're the 6.
In 2016 USC I believe was 9 and may have been the best team despite having 3 losses. They're really the posted child (along with Penn State the same year or even USCe this year) of a team that improved and could be a threat.
But yes $$$$$$$

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

This 12-Team Bracket w/ byes is absurd - the CFP Final Rankings with auto-bids for 5 highest Conf Champs is what determines who gets in the field. But then they used a convoluted seeding system that took 2 teams that should have been playing in the 1st RD per their raw-seeding (i.e., CFP Final Rankings) and gave them a bye into 2nd RD), made 2 teams that should have had byes in a 12-Team Braket via their raw-seeding (Texas and PSU were #3 and #4 respectively in the CFP Final Rankings) and finally made Clemson, SMU, Indiana and Tennessee play teams that they shouldn't of had to play until the 2nd RD! (Using raw-seeding w/o the absurd bye system they used #5 ND should have hosted #16 Clemson [auto-bid slots them at 12], #6 duhO$U should have hosted #12 ASU [auto-bid slots them #11], #7 Tennessee should have hosted #10 SMU and #8 Indiana should have hosted #9 Boise).

This is why the 1st RD games were terrible mismatches - because of the absurd structure they used which gave byes to teams that likely would have lost their 1st RD games! And forced most of the 1st RD losers to play quality of teams that they shouldn't have been seeing until the 2nd RD had they won their 1st RD Game!

There is nothing gained by using a 12-Team Bracket - it does not extend the Playoffs a single day. There is a tremendous amount of damage the 12-Team format used causes - not just the above, but it also eliminated the #11 Ranked team before the Playoffs even started!

The reality is that playing @home vs #16 Seed is a huge reward for #1 Seed and a bye is not necessary - especially when the convoluted 12-Team structure used causes all the absurdities listed above. The reality is that this Bracket was way over-thought.... they should have just fully-seeded a 16-Team Bracket, easy-peezy and much better result (and it is only allowing the top 6% of the field into the field.

 

[roswelllion]

He was the primary backup

When they put in a back up why didn't he play?

 

[roswelllion]

Why Notre Dame? They didn’t win anything.

And Texas lost to Georgia TWICE!!!!!

 

[roswelllion]

I think you need to be careful expanding.Most of this thread agrees that at a minimum probably less than 8 have a legit shot. We may disagree on who 9-12 are [SEC vs ACC/B1G] but not if they can win. And this year is one of the most balanced we have ever had [only 1 undefeated and the 2 with 1 loss are or were big underdogs. What I think will happen if you expand to 16+ is now you will get opt outs even for the play offs. I heard 2 talking heads both who played in the league debating is it better to get a week off but a worse draw [Oregon vs Penn State. fro example] both agreed and said they have talked to coaches and almost all have said playing 1 less game is still a big advantage. The seasons are getting longer and longer and with each week the chance for injury increases. extending yet another week and adding 2-12 teams with no chance only increases that risk and now kids will opt out of the play offs. They cited the ND DL who sounded like their best DL who sustained "a long term injury" and he was a senior with no eligibility left.

 

[LandoComando]

When they put in a back up why didn't he play?

Because they were just running clock at that point--it's very likely Snow refused to go in at that point if they tried to put him in

 

[PsuLIT]

View embedded media

Finebaum is another talking head trying to get eyeballs by saying controversial garbage. Other than re-seeding after the first round, I wouldn't change anything. The 4 team playoff was flawed bc there were teams that deserved a shot that got shut out. The 12 team playoff fixed that. I couldn't give a crap who the 10-11-12 teams are, the top 6 are what matters. Any team with 3 losses has nothing to cry about - and if it was PSU, i would say the same thing. Finebaum is an idiot.

 

[mcpat]

The BCS was needed because we often didn’t get #1 vs #2. 1994 PennState, for example.

The 4-team playoff was needed because there were often more than two teams worthy to play for a title.

It needed to expand from 4 because P5 champions were left out. 2016 PSU for example.

The only reason it had to go 12 instead of 8 was because the lack of separation around 6-9.

But to say we have to expand to 16 because a team that had three losses was left out? Crazy talk. Be glad it’s 12 instead of 8 and that two losses doesn’t knock you out.

There aren’t 16 teams capable of winning a championship. There aren’t 12 either. There may be 6 or 7 and an 8 team playoff isn’t big enough to ensure they are all identified. 12 is the right number.

Seeding needs looked at, though.

 

[doctornick]

I think you need to be careful expanding.Most of this thread agrees that at a minimum probably less than 8 have a legit shot. We may disagree on who 9-12 are [SEC vs ACC/B1G] but not if they can win. And this year is one of the most balanced we have ever had [only 1 undefeated and the 2 with 1 loss are or were big underdogs. What I think will happen if you expand to 16+ is now you will get opt outs even for the play offs. I heard 2 talking heads both who played in the league debating is it better to get a week off but a worse draw [Oregon vs Penn State. fro example] both agreed and said they have talked to coaches and almost all have said playing 1 less game is still a big advantage. The seasons are getting longer and longer and with each week the chance for injury increases. extending yet another week and adding 2-12 teams with no chance only increases that risk and now kids will opt out of the play offs. They cited the ND DL who sounded like their best DL who sustained "a long term injury" and he was a senior with no eligibility left.

There’s been a lot of “who would have made the playoffs” hypotheticals in recent years looking at what the bracket would have been with 12 teams. I rarely looked at them and thought that the first or second team out was “screwed” or would have been a threat to win the CFP if they were in. 12 is a solid number to make sure all contenders are included

 

[roswelllion]

There’s been a lot of “who would have made the playoffs” hypotheticals in recent years looking at what the bracket would have been with 12 teams. I rarely looked at them and thought that the first or second team out was “screwed” or would have been a threat to win the CFP if they were in. 12 is a solid number to make sure all contenders are included

Doc, 12 seems like a good number. Probably too many for those with a shot but it made for great last 3 weeks of "regular" season.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

The BCS was needed because we often didn’t get #1 vs #2. 1994 PennState, for example.

The 4-team playoff was needed because there were often more than two teams worthy to play for a title.

It needed to expand from 4 because P5 champions were left out. 2016 PSU for example.

The only reason it had to go 12 instead of 8 was because the lack of separation around 6-9.

But to say we have to expand to 16 because a team that had three losses was left out? Crazy talk. Be glad it’s 12 instead of 8 and that two losses doesn’t knock you out.

There aren’t 16 teams capable of winning a championship. There aren’t 12 either. There may be 6 or 7 and an 8 team playoff isn’t big enough to ensure they are all identified. 12 is the right number.

Seeding needs looked at, though.

Laughable, this system as currently oriented gave two teams outside the top 8 by the Final CFP Selection Rankings byes in the 1st RD (#12 and #9)! It required two teams ranked top 4 by the Final CFP Selection Rankings to play in the 1st RD (#3 Texas and #4 PSU)! It replaced the #11 ranked team in the Final CFP Selection Rankings with the #16 Team! And you claim this is a good system??? It's a ridiculously stupid and grossly inequitable "playoff" system. Out of one side of your mouth you say #1 v #16 @home, #2 v #15 @home, #3 v #14 @home and #4 v #13 @home are easy wins for the higher seeds especially with home-field advantage, so what on earth could be your problem with letting them play???? (It does not extend the playoff a single day) - you actually imply that #5 v #12 @home, #6 v #11 @home and #7 v #10 @home are easy wins for higher ranked team.... Keep in mind, this is ABSOLUTELY NOT what this absurd system gave us in the 1st RD! Using the actual Final CFP Selection Rankings, this system gave us #3 v #16, #4 v #10, #5 v #8 and #6 v #7 at the home of higher ranked team in the 1st RD???? It also put the #12 and #9 Selection Ranked teams into the 2nd RD without playing a game???? It eliminated the #11 Selection Ranked team without playing a game???? And due to it's beyond absurd 12-Team Re-Seeding System (it reseeded the Selection Rankings/Seeding

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

) it is forcing the #1 Ranked Team to play a team they shouldn't even be able to play until the Finals if they both made it that far (#6 duhO$U) and the #2 Ranked team to play a quality of team that they shouldn't see until the semifinals????

What they should do to create proper advantage and reward is fully populate the 16-Team Selection Bracket and play the first two Rounds at the home of the higher ranked team.