CFP to 8 discussion

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
slcagg
Posts: 3326
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
Has liked: 105 times
Been liked: 204 times

CFP to 8 discussion

Post by slcagg » July 17th, 2019, 6:16 am

Looks like this is a possibility in the next 5 years. It would be a big deal to at least get a foot in the door for g5 conferences. I think it would also add a lot of money and intrigue.
These users liked this post from slcagg:
aggies22



aggies22
2018 Kick-off Pick'em Champion
Posts: 7729
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has liked: 2209 times
Been liked: 1241 times
Contact:

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by aggies22 » July 17th, 2019, 6:43 am

I think this is absolutely something that MUST happen. College basketball has a much more diverse top-end talent pool and because of that it has more open doors to the championship but there are more than just four top tier teams in college football and adding at LEAST four more deserving teams to the equation needs to happen. I wouldn't mind seeing 12 to 16 possibly?

On another note, I HATE the selection committee process. In my opinion, the BCS did what it was supposed to do for the most part. It took the biased human element out of the process and paired the top teams. I'm sure there could be a few tweaks to fine-tune the system and create something similar to what college basketball used this season to weigh the gravity of teams wins and losses. Bring something like that back!



YoungBloodAggie
Posts: 2507
Joined: October 1st, 2013, 9:11 am
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 330 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by YoungBloodAggie » July 17th, 2019, 7:09 am

This is your reminder that college football does not have a playoff, it has an invitational. When there is no clear criteria for making it into the four-team tournament, how can you call it anything other than an invitational?

This of course serves the purposes of the NCAA, who don't want to establish criteria that instantly rule out about half of its FBS membership, leaving the door open for anti-trust litigation.
These users liked this post from YoungBloodAggie. Total Likes: 2
aggies22Aglicious


Jordan Nathan’s ACTUAL #1 Fan

aggies22
2018 Kick-off Pick'em Champion
Posts: 7729
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has liked: 2209 times
Been liked: 1241 times
Contact:

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by aggies22 » July 17th, 2019, 7:55 am

YoungBloodAggie wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 7:09 am
This is your reminder that college football does not have a playoff, it has an invitational. When there is no clear criteria for making it into the four-team tournament, how can you call it anything other than an invitational?

This of course serves the purposes of the NCAA, who don't want to establish criteria that instantly rule out about half of its FBS membership, leaving the door open for anti-trust litigation.
I like that. I've never thought of it that way. I don't think it's the way it should be done but what you are saying is true. Well done!



oleblu111
Posts: 1249
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:34 pm
Has liked: 370 times
Been liked: 136 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by oleblu111 » July 17th, 2019, 9:07 am

I agree that the invitational would be much better with 8. it would be a good thing for the G-5 members.

I do wonder how USU fans would support the school if we had gone to a playoff when G.A. had the season where if we had scored 7 or 8 more points and gone unbeaten. Could we bring 30-40,000 fans and a large T.V. audience to a game like the Fiesta Bowl ? How would a sunbelt or Mac team do in this new playoff system ?



slcagg
Posts: 3326
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
Has liked: 105 times
Been liked: 204 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by slcagg » July 17th, 2019, 10:04 am

oleblu111 wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 9:07 am
I agree that the invitational would be much better with 8. it would be a good thing for the G-5 members.

I do wonder how USU fans would support the school if we had gone to a playoff when G.A. had the season where if we had scored 7 or 8 more points and gone unbeaten. Could we bring 30-40,000 fans and a large T.V. audience to a game like the Fiesta Bowl ? How would a sunbelt or Mac team do in this new playoff system ?
Good question. I think we might get closer to 20k? But have no idea.

If it were 8, would it be beneficial to do the first round at the higher ranked school? There was discussion this year for the national championship that because you have to travel the week before it makes it hard to make the championship etc.



oleblu111
Posts: 1249
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:34 pm
Has liked: 370 times
Been liked: 136 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by oleblu111 » July 17th, 2019, 10:07 am

I hope the games would all be at neutral sites.



User avatar
Naked Bull Rider
Posts: 404
Joined: July 10th, 2015, 11:15 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 34 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by Naked Bull Rider » July 17th, 2019, 10:43 am

aggies22 wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 6:43 am
On another note, I HATE the selection committee process. In my opinion, the BCS did what it was supposed to do for the most part. It took the biased human element out of the process and paired the top teams. I'm sure there could be a few tweaks to fine-tune the system and create something similar to what college basketball used this season to weigh the gravity of teams wins and losses. Bring something like that back!
I agree, but hated the BCS bowls having the AQ tie-ins. Pitt went 8-3 to win the Big East and face Utah in the 2005 Fiesta Bowl. There were more deserving teams that should've been squaring off with the Utes that day.



AggieUprising50
Posts: 605
Joined: January 31st, 2015, 4:31 pm
Has liked: 61 times
Been liked: 77 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by AggieUprising50 » July 17th, 2019, 11:58 am

YoungBloodAggie wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 7:09 am
This is your reminder that college football does not have a playoff, it has an invitational. When there is no clear criteria for making it into the four-team tournament, how can you call it anything other than an invitational?
Beautifully said.



AggieUprising50
Posts: 605
Joined: January 31st, 2015, 4:31 pm
Has liked: 61 times
Been liked: 77 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by AggieUprising50 » July 17th, 2019, 12:02 pm

aggies22 wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 6:43 am

On another note, I HATE the selection committee process. In my opinion, the BCS did what it was supposed to do for the most part. It took the biased human element out of the process and paired the top teams. I'm sure there could be a few tweaks to fine-tune the system and create something similar to what college basketball used this season to weigh the gravity of teams wins and losses. Bring something like that back!
I agree. The whole point of the playoffs is to have teams settle it on the field to see who is the best team in the country. The selection committee process completely mitigates that.

The fact the UCF went undefeated for 2 season with and impressive bowl win against Auburn last year, and they weren't even CONSIDERED for a playoff spot shows how flawed the system is. Granted I know they lost to LSU, but the fact still remains that they at least earned a chance to play for the title, but weren't even given a shot.

It's time to expand the playoffs.



User avatar
flying_scotsman2.0
Posts: 858
Joined: January 23rd, 2018, 12:29 pm
Has liked: 317 times
Been liked: 131 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by flying_scotsman2.0 » July 17th, 2019, 3:19 pm

Anything less than 32 is a travesty.



User avatar
BigBlueDart
2017 FB Predict The Score Champion
Posts: 7987
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
Location: Syracuse, UT
Has liked: 57 times
Been liked: 223 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by BigBlueDart » July 17th, 2019, 4:05 pm

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 3:19 pm
Anything less than 32 is a travesty.
Anything more than 16 is a logistical nightmare. I'd really like an 8 team playoff, but I think 12 might be the sweet spot for me.



YoungBloodAggie
Posts: 2507
Joined: October 1st, 2013, 9:11 am
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 330 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by YoungBloodAggie » July 17th, 2019, 4:14 pm

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 3:19 pm
Anything less than 32 is a travesty.
We've got the numbers to put on a 128-team playoff and I'm not sure why we aren't taking advantage.
These users liked this post from YoungBloodAggie:
flying_scotsman2.0


Jordan Nathan’s ACTUAL #1 Fan

User avatar
Jjoey53
Posts: 1643
Joined: January 9th, 2018, 4:28 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 144 times

CFP to 8 discussion

Post by Jjoey53 » July 17th, 2019, 5:04 pm

Nothing is going to change for at least 5 more years, I personally like 4, as it does not water down regular season. Regardless if it is 4 or 8, the G5 are staying home.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



YoungBloodAggie
Posts: 2507
Joined: October 1st, 2013, 9:11 am
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 330 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by YoungBloodAggie » July 17th, 2019, 5:32 pm

Jjoey53 wrote:
July 17th, 2019, 5:04 pm
Nothing is going to change for at least 5 more years, I personally like 4, as it does not water down regular season. Regardless if it is 4 or 8, the G5 are staying home.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Water down the regular season? Alabama played The Citadel last year.


Jordan Nathan’s ACTUAL #1 Fan

User avatar
JSHarvey
Posts: 1744
Joined: April 2nd, 2013, 12:45 pm
Location: Sandy, UT
Has liked: 450 times
Been liked: 65 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by JSHarvey » July 18th, 2019, 8:06 am

Guarantee the following: one spot to the highest rated G5 conference champion, spots for the P5 conference champions, and spots for the two remaining highest ranked teams (preferably ranked by computers) that are still left out. Use a standard ranked seeding tournament format.

I don't think the above will happen though - the P5 conferences will still cook the books regardless of the number of teams allowed.


"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance but to overcome it." Lawrence Krauss

"Thinking is the hardest work there is, that's why so few people do it!" Henry Ford

User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7103
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has liked: 9 times
Been liked: 86 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by GeoAg » July 19th, 2019, 8:46 am

8 with 5 AQ P5 champs, highest ranked G5 champ, and 2 at-large. Book it.


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

AggieFBObsession
Posts: 770
Joined: January 25th, 2011, 12:15 pm
Has liked: 340 times
Been liked: 68 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by AggieFBObsession » July 19th, 2019, 9:58 am

GeoAg wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 8:46 am
8 with 5 AQ P5 champs, highest ranked G5 champ, and 2 at-large. Book it.
I could be interested in that. It'd be an upgrade from anything seen before. However I still like the 16 team with all champs being rewarded with a real chance and at-larges. Just make sure that the big bowls get the best games.



User avatar
thegreendalegelf
Posts: 578
Joined: August 18th, 2017, 3:26 pm
Has liked: 338 times
Been liked: 112 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by thegreendalegelf » July 19th, 2019, 11:05 am

AggieFBObsession wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 9:58 am
GeoAg wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 8:46 am
8 with 5 AQ P5 champs, highest ranked G5 champ, and 2 at-large. Book it.
I could be interested in that. It'd be an upgrade from anything seen before. However I still like the 16 team with all champs being rewarded with a real chance and at-larges. Just make sure that the big bowls get the best games.
My issue with 16 is similar to my issue with 8 but much much worse. Every year, at least one of the two semifinals is a blowout and not entertaining. Expanding to 8 or 16 would mean that there are likely to be more blowouts. I do think 8 is the way to go. But including the CUSA champ that last year would have been UAB who lost 41-20 to A&M and whose best win was...beating North Texas by 8? Is not going to make for an entertaining series of games. Most of the early round will be blowouts and not worth it. With 8, most of the match ups will be pretty even and the teams will have to "earn" it.

I am cool with the idea that the top 2 G5 teams play a play-in game. So last year UCF vs Fresno State. It is tough logistically, but boy would that be a fun game.

But last years 9 team playoff (7 + 2 in playin) would have been

Fresno State at UCF for the 8 seed <- Really Good
8 UCF at 1 Bama <- Probably Ugly but great story
7 Michigan at 2 Clemson <- Ugly
6 Ohio State at 3 Notre Dame <- Good
5 Georgia at 4 Oklahoma <- Great

which would be a pretty good setup. But for 16 it would have looked like

16. App State 10-2(Sun Belt) at 1. Bama (SEC) <- Ugly
15. N. Illinois 8-5 (MAC) at 2. Clemson (ACC) <- Ugly
14. UAB 10-3 (CUSA) at 3. Notre Dame 12-0 <- Ugly
13. Fresno State 11-2(MW) at 4. Oklahoma (Big 12) <- could be good
12. Penn State 9-3 at 5. Georgia 11-2 <- Good
11. LSU 9-3 at 6. Ohio State (Big 10) <- Good
10. Florida 9-3 at 7. Michigan 10-2 <- They played it was 41-15 Florida
9. Washington (PAC12) at 8. UCF (AAC) <- Really Good

then its

8. UCF at 1. Bama
10. Florida at 2. Clemson
6. Ohio State at 3. Notre Dame
5. Georgia at 4. Oklahoma

So instead of having 4 extra bad games for nearly the same results, especially considering who is likely to go to the final, have it be 8 where everyone gets a real shot but it isn't watered down. Also expanding to 16 removes the value of a team winning their conference championship even more. In this years 16 it would have had 4 teams from the SEC in the top 16. If you don't have the g5 qualifiers, it would have been Wazzu, Kentucky, Texas, and West Viriginia sneaking in with Utah just outside the line with 2 more SEC teams. The value of top team matchups loses so much value. Keep it at the 5 P5 champs, top G5/play in, and 2 at larges.



AggieFBObsession
Posts: 770
Joined: January 25th, 2011, 12:15 pm
Has liked: 340 times
Been liked: 68 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by AggieFBObsession » July 19th, 2019, 11:17 am

"My issue with 16 is similar to my issue with 8 but much much worse. Every year, at least one of the two semifinals is a blowout and not entertaining. "

There should be blowouts when seeding teams. That's part of the refiners fire. However until the game is played we don't know that it will be a blowout, especially if the teams have never faced each other that year. There's always upsets in every tournament since the beginning of tournaments. That's why it needs to be decided on the field.

And pick 8 teams and I'm sure we'll be able to make an argument for why more teams should've been invited. You have to draw the line in the sand somewhere and I've always believed in inviting all conference champs because that's the nearest to letting it be decided on the field to any other format.



AggieUprising50
Posts: 605
Joined: January 31st, 2015, 4:31 pm
Has liked: 61 times
Been liked: 77 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by AggieUprising50 » July 19th, 2019, 1:18 pm

AggieFBObsession wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 11:17 am
"My issue with 16 is similar to my issue with 8 but much much worse. Every year, at least one of the two semifinals is a blowout and not entertaining. "

There should be blowouts when seeding teams. That's part of the refiners fire. However until the game is played we don't know that it will be a blowout, especially if the teams have never faced each other that year. There's always upsets in every tournament since the beginning of tournaments. That's why it needs to be decided on the field.

And pick 8 teams and I'm sure we'll be able to make an argument for why more teams should've been invited. You have to draw the line in the sand somewhere and I've always believed in inviting all conference champs because that's the nearest to letting it be decided on the field to any other format.
I agree. You have to let them play it out on the field. Give the opportunity for an upset. That's what makes March Maddness so much fun.



User avatar
BigBlueDart
2017 FB Predict The Score Champion
Posts: 7987
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
Location: Syracuse, UT
Has liked: 57 times
Been liked: 223 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by BigBlueDart » July 19th, 2019, 3:01 pm

12 teams. Auto-berth for all P5 conference champions. Top-ranked G5 team gets in. In addition any G5 conference champion ranked higher than, say, 16? gets in. Remaining slots go to teams based on ranking. Seeding based on ranking. Top 4 seeds get 1st round bye.

In addition, all playoff games will be at bowl game locations. Locations for each game will be bid out to bowls in advance (a year?).



YoungBloodAggie
Posts: 2507
Joined: October 1st, 2013, 9:11 am
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 330 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by YoungBloodAggie » July 19th, 2019, 3:11 pm

BigBlueDart wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 3:01 pm
12 teams. Auto-berth for all P5 conference champions. Top-ranked G5 team gets in. In addition any G5 conference champion ranked higher than, say, 16? gets in. Remaining slots go to teams based on ranking. Seeding based on ranking. Top 4 seeds get 1st round bye.

In addition, all playoff games will be at bowl game locations. Locations for each game will be bid out to bowls in advance (a year?).
If you are going to four rounds of playoffs, you should have higher seeds host for the first two weeks.


Jordan Nathan’s ACTUAL #1 Fan

User avatar
BigBlueDart
2017 FB Predict The Score Champion
Posts: 7987
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
Location: Syracuse, UT
Has liked: 57 times
Been liked: 223 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by BigBlueDart » July 19th, 2019, 3:19 pm

YoungBloodAggie wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 3:11 pm
BigBlueDart wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 3:01 pm
12 teams. Auto-berth for all P5 conference champions. Top-ranked G5 team gets in. In addition any G5 conference champion ranked higher than, say, 16? gets in. Remaining slots go to teams based on ranking. Seeding based on ranking. Top 4 seeds get 1st round bye.

In addition, all playoff games will be at bowl game locations. Locations for each game will be bid out to bowls in advance (a year?).
If you are going to four rounds of playoffs, you should have higher seeds host for the first two weeks.
I definitely thought about that, but then that's not how they do it in the basketball tournament. They use pre-designated venues for all rounds.



YoungBloodAggie
Posts: 2507
Joined: October 1st, 2013, 9:11 am
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 330 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by YoungBloodAggie » July 19th, 2019, 3:24 pm

BigBlueDart wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 3:19 pm
YoungBloodAggie wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 3:11 pm
BigBlueDart wrote:
July 19th, 2019, 3:01 pm
12 teams. Auto-berth for all P5 conference champions. Top-ranked G5 team gets in. In addition any G5 conference champion ranked higher than, say, 16? gets in. Remaining slots go to teams based on ranking. Seeding based on ranking. Top 4 seeds get 1st round bye.

In addition, all playoff games will be at bowl game locations. Locations for each game will be bid out to bowls in advance (a year?).
If you are going to four rounds of playoffs, you should have higher seeds host for the first two weeks.
I definitely thought about that, but then that's not how they do it in the basketball tournament. They use pre-designated venues for all rounds.
They are also able to provide fans two rounds of competition in the same weekend. And early rounds aren’t in 80,000 seat stadiums.


Jordan Nathan’s ACTUAL #1 Fan

Imakeitrain
Posts: 5326
Joined: March 11th, 2011, 9:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Has liked: 50 times
Been liked: 174 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by Imakeitrain » July 24th, 2019, 7:08 pm

I like 8. P-5 auto bids, best G5 champ, 2 at-larges.

The only real benefit I see of 16 teams is to make the post season more interesting. Right now bowls that we’d dream about do not matter. It’s just not that interesting to see 6-6 B1G team play a 7-5 SEC team. But those are big money bowls.

If those bowls had consequences through playoffs then the bowls would be better to watch as opposed to the gimmicky bowls we have now.

The biggest issue I have is the committee.
It wasn’t the BCS computer rankings that were the big issue back in the day- it was that there were only 2 teams that could possibly compete.

The NCAA is probably in my view more so now than ever in violation of anti-trust law.

They have a committee made up of P5 blue blood school ADs, deciding that their institutions should be in, while keeping others out. Computers are at least an objective algorithm.


"Gary Come Home”
-Mr. Spongebob Squarepants

User avatar
brownjeans
Flatulent
Posts: 13345
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am
Has liked: 122 times
Been liked: 332 times

Re: CFP to 8 discussion

Post by brownjeans » July 24th, 2019, 8:52 pm

Bowls with highest purses get to host the playoff games - tradition be damned. Let them compete for the privilege. Don't like that Mr. Big-shot bowl? Then make sure you keep your purse high.

Capitalism, it's what's for dinner.



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic