"Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle" (1500sand535)
12/06/2016 at 12:27 • Filed to: None
1
7|
"Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle" (1500sand535)
12/06/2016 at 12:27 • Filed to: None | 1
| 7 |
So every year since the inception of the college football playoff, people have argued about what the right number of teams to have in the college football playoff is. I don’t think the author here really believes 8 is the right number but he’s going through the motions:
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Case in point here is that I don’t think anyone really thinks that USC is deserving of being in the CFP. I do think each year there has been talent deeper than 4, and really I would be satisfied if just one more team got the ability to play their way in.
2014 - Big 12 collectively with its 11-1 Baylor/TCU co-champs. I think one of them should have been included. Flip a coin or argue on the Internet as you please.
2015 - Stanford was a really good 2 loss team. (And then you had the two one loss Big 10 teams. This year might be considered 3 odd men out I guess but I think you give Stanford the “go” in my proposed format because I think they were ending the season surging.
2016 - Penn State. Come on, they were the champs!
So maybe make 4/5 play against each other and that winner goes on to play 1.
And none of this matters to me because I’m in Oregon. Sad trombone.
ncasolowork3
> Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
12/06/2016 at 12:40 |
|
Penn State lost to Michigan by 39. You’ll have a hard time convincing me they deserved to be in more than Michigan. I think the committe just ranked them ahead of Michigan because it was a meaningless spot.
Michigan lost a night game on the road to an Iowa team that finished the season ranked 5th last year. Their offense played like crap the whole game, but they still shouldn’t have lost. They took Ohio State to overtime on the road in a rivalry game.
Penn State lost to Pitt and lost to Michigan by 39. Michigan beat Penn St, Wisc. and Colorado. Penn St beat Wisc, OSU, and nobody.
But 8 would be a bit better IMO. Gets each of the power 5 champs in and 3 at large. It would have given real meaning to the Florida/Alabama game. Alabama was in win or lose and florida wasn’t getting in win or lose. It would also eliminate the need to debate Penn St/Michigan.
Thomas Donohue
> Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
12/06/2016 at 12:49 |
|
If you’re going to add an extra week for a play-in game, then they will just say “might as well have two play-in games” and there will be six teams. Which ultimately leads to eight teams.
I kinda like 4. If you’re not good enough to be considered #1 or #2, then you can’t complain that you didn’t make the playoff. I don’t think it was the Pitt loss that kept the Happy Valliants out of the playoff, it was getting pummeled by Michigan.
bwp240
> Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
12/06/2016 at 12:49 |
|
I would be okay with a 8 team playoff so no “Power 5" champs gets left out. It also allows those who have had close loses in tough games to have a shot
I would rather not have this “Power 5" silliness, you don’t see it in basketball or any other NCAA sport. So what if WKU has little to no chance, they won their conference so why should they not have a chance at the title. A 14 or 16 team playoff would be ideal (All conference champions + 4 or 6 at large bids). This will make pretty much the Top 8 in the CFP rankings eligible and add at most 3 games.
Also it is done in FCS, D2, and D3 football; it seems to work well.
|
Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
> bwp240
12/06/2016 at 13:22 |
|
I think the reason football tends to be the most stratisfied in terms of conferences is competition for players and the amount of players. In basketball you need to get 5 good guys, in football you need like 40. Just a theory though.
|
Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
> Thomas Donohue
12/06/2016 at 13:26 |
|
Eight would be interesting(I’m really not tied to the 4/5 play in but I think most years it would quiet most of the controversy) I think if you get much over 4 teams thou, serious consideration about conference and pre season schedules would need to occur.
|
Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
> bwp240
12/06/2016 at 13:38 |
|
Also, lots of d2 team play 10 game seasons, and FCS appears to be 11 prior to the playoff. Lots of BCS teams play 12/13 games. If you want a playoff, you’d probably be talking about Extending the season way into January, or starting the season really early. Or you’d need to have teams get rid of their preseason or conference games, and that means potentially losing revenue.
|
bwp240
> Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle
12/06/2016 at 13:57 |
|
I have been giving it a thought, and experimented with a 12 team playoff which is seeded as such.
- CFP Top 4 -> automatic byes
- Remaining Power 5 Conf. Champs -> seeded by CFP rank
- 2 Group of 5 Conf. Champs -> Selected and Seeded by CFP rank (this case WMU and Temple)
- 5 at large bids (CFP rank)
It is not perfect, there is a chance at some repeat games. It also gives a chance to the non-Power 5 schools.
The optimal non-Power 5 system would be an 10 team bracket (8 team playoff + 2 non-Power 5 teams), but it doesn’t work out in bracket form real well.