This whole Playoff System needs to be fixed.

[LandoComando]

you are the same guy saying the blowouts represented teams didn't deserve to be there. So now we should expand and have 1-4 playing 13-16. btw it is one thing to watch the March Madness that has multiple games at the same venue.

Why is that different to you? Who's mad about going to a home game and watching your team dominate?
1-8 should all have a bye--all games should be at the higher seed until the title game
FCS is a great tournament/playoff with a ton of blowouts and will get better adding the Ivy. Teams get their chance. Some years things go to chalk (this year) other times we've seen 8 and unseeded in the semis.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Now you're trying to compare 12 player basketball teams which can play 4 games in a week with 85-105 player football squads that are capable of 1 game a week. Tell me more about your grasp of statistical analysis, Bushey. 🙄🙄🙄

You're full of crap as per usual - what does that possibly have to do with how restricted the playoff is??? First you say the bottom half of D1A Football has no shot, but the bottom half of D1 Basketball does???, which is utter bullshat. The bottom half of D1 Basketball is every bit as uncompetitive as D1A football.... Beyond that, D1 Basketball puts 20% of the teams into the NCAA Playoffs - D1A Football as currently structured puts 9% of the teams into Playoffs. That's twice as restrictive using your ciphering Jethro. BTW, the top 20% of the universe (or top 9% for CFB) has ZERO, absolutely nothing, to do with the "bottom half" of the universe..... Now we're on to talking about how many players are on a team when it has zero to do with how restrictive Playoffs are between football and basketball at any other level including Pro Football or Basketball.... D2 Football or Basketball.... HS Football or Basketball.....

Care to bring up some more irrelevant canards, strawmen and tautologies Jethro?

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Limit the playoffs to 8 teams. P4 winners + 4 at large.

Why, the ACC and B12 don't deserve to be there any more than the others. If it's only 8, makes more sense to not guarantee any Conferences and just seed the Top 8 from Final CFP Selection Rankings. This year it would have been #8 Indiana v #1 Oregon, #7 Tenn v UGa, #6 duhO$U v #3 Texas and #5 ND v #4 PSU.

Still unnecessarily way too restrictive - it doesn't account for a team like Boise State who is 12-1 with their only loss coming to #1, undefeated Oregon on a last second FG by Oregon.... or a team like 10-2 Conference Champion ASU (#12 in CFP Selection Rankings) who we don't really know how competitive they are yet. 16 is a better number as it allows for all 1 and 2 loss teams as well as the bubble 12-16 teams.

 

[AWS1022]

More bullshit and nonsense - D1 Basketball has 352 Teams and fully 20% make the NCAA Championship. You clearly flunked all of your math and statistics classes. LMAO.

There are too many teams in the college basketball tournament as well.

 

[LandoComando]

There are too many teams in the college basketball tournament as well.

Yet, they're looking at expanding...so how are there too many?
People want more

 

[AvgUser]

Yet, they're looking at expanding...so how are there too many?
People want more

The television money being paid versus the realism to win are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
Using only 16 teams would be fine. 17 and above have no chance

The desire to expand is a whore seeking payday

 

[LandoComando]

The television money being paid versus the realism to win are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
Using only 16 teams would be fine. 17 and above have no chance

The desire to expand is a whore seeking payday

Right--because FANS want to see more games
Just like they'd rather see more playoff games than these absurd bowls games
Jacksonville State (or anyone that wins the Sun Belt/CUSA) deserve a bid--and that's why we'll get to 24 teams--we're just decades behind

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

The television money being paid versus the realism to win are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
Using only 16 teams would be fine. 17 and above have no chance

The desire to expand is a whore seeking payday

16 Teams is not too many for D1A football - it is only 12% of the teams. Of course there is a significant difference between the Top Quartile and Bottom Quartile teams (i.e., 1-4 versus 12-16), but this is true with any Playoff Field.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

16 Teams is not too many for D1A football - it is only 12% of the teams. Of course there is a significant difference between the Top Quartile and Bottom Quartile teams (i.e., 1-4 versus 12-16), but this is true with any Playoff Field.

If you did expand from there, it would be "Top 20" with 13-20 playing in 1st RD for final 4 slots.

 

[heckmans]

You're full of crap as per usual - what does that possibly have to do with how restricted the playoff is??? First you say the bottom half of D1A Football has no shot, but the bottom half of D1 Basketball does???, which is utter bullshat. The bottom half of D1 Basketball is every bit as uncompetitive as D1A football.... Beyond that, D1 Basketball puts 20% of the teams into the NCAA Playoffs - D1A Football as currently structured puts 9% of the teams into Playoffs. That's twice as restrictive using your ciphering Jethro. BTW, the top 20% of the universe (or top 9% for CFB) has ZERO, absolutely nothing, to do with the "bottom half" of the universe..... Now we're on to talking about how many players are on a team when it has zero to do with how restrictive Playoffs are between football and basketball at any other level including Pro Football or Basketball.... D2 Football or Basketball.... HS Football or Basketball.....

Care to bring up some more irrelevant canards, strawmen and tautologies Jethro?

If there are only 12 players on a basketball team and 100 on a football team, how many teams do you suppose could find enough players to compete at a certain level in each? I'll pause while you think about that ⏰⏰⏰
.
.
.
.
Never change Bushwood. I'm not sure if the world you live in is blissful or terrifying, but it's certainly devoid of reality.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

If there are only 12 players on a basketball team and 100 on a football team, how many teams do you suppose could find enough players to compete at a certain level in each? I'll pause while you think about that ⏰⏰⏰
.
.
.
.
Never change Bushwood. I'm not sure if the world you live in is blissful or terrifying, but it's certainly devoid of reality.

Yet this doesn't hold true for Football and Basketball Playoff Structures at any other level including the Pro's, other college levels, HS.... etc.... Amazing how arrogant you are being such a dumbass moron. Let's just ignore the fact that you're trying to uae this as an argument why Football Playoff Structures at all levels are far more restrictive than Basketball Playoff Structures are at those levels..... all except for THE FACT that they aren't you raving arrogant douche.

 

[NewEra 2014]

You nailed it and I think everyone is seeing the problem now. The Mountain West champ Boise State getting a bye over runner-ups and 3rd place teams from powerful conferences like the B1G and SEC ? Give me a break ! That's why I have to believe they'll fix this in the near future. Do away with the byes for the conference champs. Include them but seed them based on their strength and rankings. Boise and ASU would have probalby been in the 9 to 12 spots

I mean PSU was #6 and is an 11 point favorite over conference champ #3 Boise ? Texas a whopping 13 point favorite over #4 ASU ? Good God - that's ridiculous.

I would be ok if teams got a first-round home game for winning their conference. I think a first-round bye is too much of a reward for Boise or ASU to receive, but if they hosted a game last week, it would have been a reasonable compromise.

 

[AvgUser]

16 Teams is not too many for D1A football - it is only 12% of the teams. Of course there is a significant difference between the Top Quartile and Bottom Quartile teams (i.e., 1-4 versus 12-16), but this is true with any Playoff Field.

I must have missed it. Will you point me to the law of Football Physics which states that a playoff SHALL have a certain percentage of teams involved? Your entire line of thinking is that the playoffs must have a certain percentage, as if it is a fact. I can’t find it in the rules.

 

[DrJC]

I agree that this system is flawed. But I think the greater issue is the damage to the quality of the games that is caused by players entering the portal before the playoffs or opting out. You actually do not have the team that was playing during the regular season.

 

[LandoComando]

I would be ok if teams got a first-round home game for winning their conference. I think a first-round bye is too much of a reward for Boise or ASU to receive, but if they hosted a game last week, it would have been a reasonable compromise.

What would be the matchups here? Are ND and/or Ohio State on the road?

I don't think there's a good option other than by ranking but this may be better. Though if it results in Ohio State at Notre Dame it's worse no matter how much I'd like to have seen ND lose

 

[lowhandicapper]

The structure is ridiculously inequitable - you have the #1 Team in the entire Bracket playing a team in the Quarterfinals, that they shouldn't have to face via their CFP Selection Ranking until the Finals! (duhO$U is #6 in the Final CFP Selection Rankings). Ditto #2 UGa - they are getting a Semi-Final quality matchup via Final CFP Selection Rankings in the Quarters. Two teams that should have played in the 1st RD via their Final CFP Selection Ranking (#9 and #12) have been given byes into the 2nd RD??? And the #11 team via the Final CFP Selection Rankings has been eliminated without ever playing a game.

The economics of this thing are also not sustainable imo - no fanbase is going to travel to three different Bowl Games in the span of 3 weeks to attend a Quarterfinal, Semifinal and Final Game. This aspect has not been well thought out just like the structure. It's frankly stupid, just like the structure, and likely created to placate the "5 Major Bowls" - no way this works longterm imo. They should just fully populate a 16 Team Bracket and have the lower ranked team play at the higher ranked team through the "College Super Bowl". Let the 5 Major Bowls rotate every 5 years for the "College Super Bowl" and just sponsor a non-playoff game in the other years

OMG chill dude. It's ground zero.
Nothing worse than the guy who has all the answers.
Maybe we should go back to letting the media vote on who is the best team.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

I must have missed it. Will you point me to the law of Football Physics which states that a playoff SHALL have a certain percentage of teams involved? Your entire line of thinking is that the playoffs must have a certain percentage, as if it is a fact. I can’t find it in the rules.

Ummmmm........, where'd I day there's a rule??? If you do the math, D1A Football has a much more restrictive Playoff than any other sport or even football played at any other NCAA Level, the Pro's, high school......

 

[bourbon n blues]

Your "math" is completely absurd. Many of the "134 FBS schools" have an almost zero chance of being in the top 25, let alone competing for a National Championship. Comparing the playoff structure of 32 team pro sport leagues to CFB, is one of the most illogical premises I've ever heard. There is no program outside the Top 10 that's going to compete for a championship. The CFB playoff is not "restrictive" by any logical measure.

You're right, back in the day I used to call for a 16 team playoff. The reason why I did it because I've seen multiple times for Penn State was playing very well at the end of the year and they might've been just outside the top eight or 10. If you recall the 1981 season would be one of those years, maybe 1991 also where they started off 0-2.

But realistically if we take 8 to 12 teams we're probably OK. I'm pissed me all right with this field right now, I mean a 12 team field. I do think we have to look at how things are seated and who gets a bye and they should not be automatic for winning a conference.

 

[AvgUser]

Ummmmm........, where'd I day there's a rule??? If you do the math, D1A Football has a much more restrictive Playoff than any other sport or even football played at any other NCAA Level, the Pro's, high school......

And…. So what?

You keep arguing and throwing out the percentage. Why?

Teams after 8 probably don’t deserve any chance.

 

[LandoComando]

Teams after 8 probably don’t deserve any chance.

But why? They may not win a title but what's the logic if you're in the top 20 of 134 teams you "don't deserve a chance"
Either break this into tier so there's 4 playoffs or it going to continue to expand--eventually 24--maybe as many as 32-36

 

[AvgUser]

But why? They may not win a title but what's the logic if you're in the top 20 of 134 teams you "don't deserve a chance"
Either break this into tier so there's 4 playoffs or it going to continue to expand--eventually 24--maybe as many as 32-36

In general, the top 8 teams will have been determined through their year long, sustained success. Eight then makes for a nice three week playoff. If you haven’t proven your worth to be in the top 8, then you aren’t deserving of a chance. Not everyone needs to get a trophy.

Making the field 12, 26, 24, 32, … only allows the chance for an undeserving team to get lucky at the right time. Expanding the field beyond 8 tends toward rewarding mediocrity.

 

[heckmans]

But why? They may not win a title but what's the logic if you're in the top 20 of 134 teams you "don't deserve a chance"
Either break this into tier so there's 4 playoffs or it going to continue to expand--eventually 24--maybe as many as 32-36

If it expands, I can only hope that the regular season is shortened.

 

[LandoComando]

In general, the top 8 teams will have been determined through their year long, sustained success. Eight then makes for a nice three week playoff. If you haven’t proven your worth to be in the top 8, then you aren’t deserving of a chance. Not everyone needs to get a trophy.

Making the field 12, 26, 24, 32, … only allows the chance for an undeserving team to get lucky at the right time. Expanding the field beyond 8 tends toward rewarding mediocrity.

Then why have 134 teams
9-3 isn't mediocre

 

[LandoComando]

If it expands, I can only hope that the regular season is shortened.

It should go to 11 and CCGs are eliminated. Even if it stays at 12 that's not impacting the total number of games played

 

[Hotshoe]

If folks actually don't believe teams belong? I give you...7, yes, 7, NFL Wildcard teams who won a Superbowl. That's 12% of Superbowl winners. Wtf do folks hate additional games? Turn the frking channel.

 

[Hotshoe]

Furthermore, like the idiots on tv who never get anything, one year is not a measurable statistic. The only thing that needs changed is the auto byes, that's it. Just do the playoffs on rankings. Problem solved.

 

[bourbon n blues]

If folks actually don't believe teams belong? I give you...7, yes, 7, NFL Wildcard teams who won a Superbowl. That's 12% of Superbowl winners. Wtf do folks hate additional games? Turn the frking channel.

I'm ok with 12 teams.

 

[bourbon n blues]

Furthermore, like the idiots on tv who never get anything, one year is not a measurable statistic. The only thing that needs changed is the auto byes, that's it. Just do the playoffs on rankings. Problem solved.

Yep

 

[LandoComando]

I'm ok with 12 teams.

But even the NFL now has 14 out of 32
Unlike 12 of 134--no one is asking for a 58 team playoff to keep it balanced

 

[AvgUser]

Then why have 134 teams
9-3 isn't medicore

Why have 134 teams? That’s an asinine question. That is the number of schools that field teams. The vast majority stand no chance of winning a championship.

Cream will rinse tot he top. There is really no sense in diluting the playoffs to give the little sisters of the poor the chance to win.

And I did not say 9-3 is mediocre. I said that it “tends towards rewarding mediocrity” specially because i know you’d get your panties in a bunch over the comment.

 

[LongJakk]

Just drop the P4 bye rule. Maybe you only guarantee the P4 conference champions a top 8 seed. If you are top 4 you get a bye otherwise you get a home game.

 

[LandoComando]

Why have 134 teams? That’s an asinine question. That is the number of schools that field teams. The vast majority stand no chance of winning a championship.

Cream will rinse tot he top. There is really no sense in diluting the playoffs to give the little sisters of the poor the chance to win.

And I did not say 9-3 is mediocre. I said that it “tends towards rewarding mediocrity” specially because i know you’d get your panties in a bunch over the comment.

Name another collegiate sport that's comparable to college football in regards to the % of teams that get in. Playoff sports should largely be based on a % of the field. Even more so with less games.

 

[joeaubie21]

I smell fart pollution.

 

[Westcoast24]

I smell fart pollution.

EEE-eee-ee

 

[joeaubie21]

The stench continues.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

And…. So what?

You keep arguing and throwing out the percentage. Why?

Teams after 8 probably don’t deserve any chance.

Are you just being obtuse??? Dividing the number of Playoff teams by the the total number of teams is how you determine how restrictive a Playoff Field is mensa. BTW, 12-1 BSU, whose only loss is to #1 Oregon and who had the outright 2nd best record in all of FBS, was outside the Top 8 of the Final CFP Selection Ranking - as was 11-2 ASU, who was tied for the 3rd best record in all of FBS (ASU and BSU were ranked #12 and #9 respectively in the Final CFP Selection Ranking) but neither of these teams "deserved" to be in the National Championship Playoff according to you???

BTW, could you show me another football Playoff structure - including the PROs, any other NCAA Division, NAIA, high school, etc........ - that is even remotely this restrictive??? Why should ONLY FBS Football be this absurdly, and unnecessarily, restrictive???

This is a word-for-word quote of one of your a-hole, arrogant douche statements:

In general, the top 8 teams will have been determined through their year long, sustained success.

So, according to you, the outright 2nd Best, and tied for 3rd Best, records in FBS haven't demonstrated season-long success??? Contradict yourself much oh all-knowing Oz who shall lecture all parties with their pedantic arrogance who question their declarations as to who is "worthy"?

The only reason BSU and ASU are in the Playoffs is because it is 12, not 8. 8 is not nearly big enough if you're going to guarantee the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions (and the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions probably do need to be guaranteed given mindsets like the one you have expounded - where teams should be excluded regardless of their record, or Conference Champion Title, if they don't play in the b2g or SEC. That is not a "National Championship" - that is a b2g / SEC Championship.). 12 is not large enough if you want to guarantee that 5 highest Conference Champions and all legitimate "at large" teams as this year proved.

They should have just fully seeded the Top 16 (w/ 5 auto-bids for highest ranked Conference Champions), eliminated the absurd 1st RD byes and had the lowest-ranked team play at the highest-ranked teams homefield - #1, #2, #3 and #4 playing #16, #15, #14 and #13 respectively at their homefield is plenty-&-enough reward and advantage for finishing top 4.

 

[bourbon n blues]

Are you just being obtuse??? Dividing the number of Playoff teams by the the total number of teams is how you determine how restrictive a Playoff Field is mensa. BTW, 12-1 BSU, whose only loss is to #1 Oregon and who had the outright 2nd best record in all of FBS, was outside the Top 8 of the Final CFP Selection Ranking - as was 11-2 ASU, who was tied for the 3rd best record in all of FBS (ASU and BSU were ranked #12 and #9 respectively in the Final CFP Selection Ranking) but neither of these teams "deserved" to be in the National Championship Playoff according to you???

This is a word-for-word quote of one of your a-hole, arrogant douche statements:



So, according to you, the outright 2nd Best, and tied for 3rd Best, records in FBS haven't demonstrated season-long success??? Contradict yourself much oh all-knowing Oz who shall lecture all parties with their pedantic arrogance who question their declarations as to who is "worthy"?

The only reason BSU and ASU are in the Playoffs is because it is 12, not 8. 8 is not nearly big enough if you're going to guarantee the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions (and the 5 highest ranked Conference Champions probably do need to be guaranteed given mindsets like the one you have expounded - where teams should be excluded regardless of their record, or Conference Champion Title, if they don't play in the b2g or SEC. That is not a "National Championship" - that is a b2g / SEC Championship.). 12 is not large enough if you want to guarantee that 5 highest Conference Champions and all legitimate "at large" teams as this year proved.

They should have just fully seeded the Top 16 (w/ 5 auto-bids for highest ranked Conference Champions), eliminated the absurd 1st RD byes and had the lowest-ranked team play at the highest-ranked teams homefield - #1, #2, #3 and #4 playing #16, #15, #14 and #13 respectively at their homefield is plenty-&-enough reward and advantage for finishing top 4.

You do realize that you're insane right? Any expansion of playoffs is going to be directly for money. The expansion of the baseball playoffs are football playoffs or NBA playoffs or hockey playoffs did not make the game any better. It just increased revenue.

Back in the late 60s 290s it was my belief that Penn State was often very underrated. They were undefeated and untied four times, and if we had an 8 to 12 game playoff I'm pretty convinced Joe Paterno would've had more than two national championships. Some of those seasons where PSUvhad one or two losses Joe might've made the field of eight or our current 12. 1981 is a good example, maybe 1991 too. And don't forget 05 and 08.

We don't need to fix anything, 3,potentially worthy teams have had a chance to win a national championship for about 10 years now and with this year they've expanded out to 12. You could argue with number nine or number 12 should even be in the field but that does allow for those two loss teams that maybe are a little underrated but are now playing very to have a shot at the title .

 

[HailToPitt725]

Here’s a radical idea I shared on the national board:

The two biggest issues facing college football today are the devaluation of the regular season and bowl games. You fix that by taking the top eight teams in having them face each other head-to-head in the NY6 bowls. 1v8, 2v7, 3,6, 4v5. If #1 and #2 win their games, they advance to the national championship. If one of them loses, #3 advances if they win their bowl game. And if 2/3 were to lose, #4 leapfrogs them if they win. For 2024, it’d look something like this:

Cotton Bowl: 3 Texas vs 6 Ohio State
Orange Bowl: 4 Penn State vs 5 Notre Dame
Rose Bowl: 1 Oregon vs 8 Indiana
Sugar Bowl: 2 Georgia vs 7 Tennessee

It’s a de-facto 6-team playoff that rewards regular season performance while making the bowl games significantly important again. If Oregon and Georgia win, they’d play for the national championship. If either of them lose, Texas would have a chance to advance with a win. Penn State would need two of those three to lose in order to make it, assuming you win the Orange Bowl.

The best part is the games would be played back-to-back, with 4v5 playing first and 1v8 playing last. Could you imagine the suspense of waiting to see whether #7 or #8 would play spoiler? It’s like if you mixed the CFP with Russian roulette.

 

[LandoComando]

Here’s a radical idea I shared on the national board:

The two biggest issues facing college football today are the devaluation of the regular season and bowl games. You fix that by taking the top eight teams in having them face each other head-to-head in the NY6 bowls. 1v8, 2v7, 3,6, 4v5. If #1 and #2 win their games, they advance to the national championship. If one of them loses, #3 advances if they win their bowl game. And if 2/3 were to lose, #4 leapfrogs them if they win. For 2024, it’d look something like this:

Cotton Bowl: 3 Texas vs 6 Ohio State
Orange Bowl: 4 Penn State vs 5 Notre Dame
Rose Bowl: 1 Oregon vs 8 Indiana
Sugar Bowl: 2 Georgia vs 7 Tennessee

It’s a de-facto 6-team playoff that rewards regular season performance while making the bowl games significantly important again. If Oregon and Georgia win, they’d play for the national championship. If either of them lose, Texas would have a chance to advance with a win. Penn State would need two of those three to lose in order to make it, assuming you win the Orange Bowl.

The best part is the games would be played back-to-back, with 4v5 playing first and 1v8 playing last. Could you imagine the suspense of waiting to see whether #7 or #8 would play spoiler? It’s like if you mixed the CFP with Russian roulette.

This is basically ND joining the Big Ten then a super conference playoff. Add Bama Ole Miss USCe and Illinois to play 5-8 in the first round and this is what we'll have eventually. A 12 team superconference playoff. Then the next level would also generate good TV money

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

You do realize that you're insane right? Any expansion of playoffs is going to be directly for money. The expansion of the baseball playoffs are football playoffs or NBA playoffs or hockey playoffs did not make the game any better. It just increased revenue.

Back in the late 60s 290s it was my belief that Penn State was often very underrated. They were undefeated and untied four times, and if we had an 8 to 12 game playoff I'm pretty convinced Joe Paterno would've had more than two national championships. Some of those seasons where PSUvhad one or two losses Joe might've made the field of eight or our current 12. 1981 is a good example, maybe 1991 too. And don't forget 05 and 08.

We don't need to fix anything, 3,potentially worthy teams have had a chance to win a national championship for about 10 years now and with this year they've expanded out to 12. You could argue with number nine or number 12 should even be in the field but that does allow for those two loss teams that maybe are a little underrated but are now playing very to have a shot at the title .

Yeah, I'm insane because I think the 2nd Best, and tied for 3rd Best, records in all of FBS (both of whom have FBS Conference Champion Titles) deserve a shot in a "National Championship" Playoff??? LMAO. Your absurd hyperbole is really cute douchey.

BTW, the current system didn't work "just fine", when it unnecessarily eliminates the #11 CFP Selection Ranked Team before a game has been played. Then gives unnecessary 1st RD byes to the #12 and #9 CFP Final Selection Ranked teams in the name of rewarding their Conf Titles creating a situation where the #1 Ranked team is having to play a CFP Selection Ranked team in the Quarterfinals that they shouldn't have to face until the Finals! (Ditto #2 having to face a quality of team in the QTRs that they shouldn't have to face until the Semis had the brackets just been fully seeded without the absurd byes). But according to you, this is all working just dandy - LMFAO!

This entire complicated, absurd byes 12-Team system is utterly unnecessary. Simply fully-populating the 16-Team Bracket makes Infinitely more sense and generates infinitely more equitable outcomes!

They should have just fully seeded the Top 16 (w/ 5 auto-bids for highest ranked Conference Champions), eliminated the absurd 1st RD byes and had the lowest-ranked team play at the highest-ranked teams homefield - #1, #2, #3 and #4 playing #16, #15, #14 and #13 respectively at their homefield is plenty-&-enough reward and advantage for finishing top 4. This would not have extended the Playoff a single day and would have eliminated all the absurdities of this silly 12-Team Structure.

Your massive over-reaction and hyperbole is so cute in ever so douchey way. [Insert eyeroll].