6 team playoff

[belcherboy]

Alabama is the best team in the SEC by far but the rest of the conference isn't all that great. Auburn and LSU are up and down. Georgia is solid.

Ole Miss and Miss St have been ranked highly at some point in the past 5-6 seasons.
LSU and Auburn have both had several seasons of being ranked in the top 10 over the past 5-6 seasons.

I'm a B10 guy (obviously), and really thought that the B10 would be the better conference this year, but I think the SEC is still the best conference. It's close, but I think the SEC is better. I hate admitting it.

Again, Bama has done what they need to do in scheduling, and I don't think they need to prove themselves any more. Most years they have a GREAT OOC game.

 

[7Samurai13]

NFL teams also get to play every team in their division twice.

They have 32 teams and 16 regular game season. College football has 130 teams now and only 12 regular season games. Just isn't comparable.

Even if you go down to only P5 teams you would still be looking at 60+ teams and 12 regular season games.

College football would need to expand to a 32 team playoff to be as inclusive as the NFL using all 130 teams as a baseline.

 

[4down20]

There are things to gain for some teams . Teams like Bama aren't one of then though . A 1 loss Bama is getting in the playoff in most every instance regardless of winning their conference . Same with other teams like Texas, Ohio St, Oklahoma, USC etc. Those teams don't NEED great OOC results . To their credit they still often play those games but they don't need to win them . The majority of CFB isht getting in with a loss and , so far, no one is getting in with 2 so scheduling tough OOC games provides more ridiculous than it does reward

Look at last year . A 2 loss OSU didn't make the playoff and people point to the Iowa loss but you could just as easily blame the OU loss. If OSU plays Ohio instead of Oklahoma and finishes 12-1 with a B10 title they're going to the playoff even with a loss to Iowa.

I'm all for league champs getting in but it'll never be fair because of unbalanced schedules . It would make ooc matchips better in some ways ( easier to schedule good opponents ) but you'd lose meaning in those games too so it'd be less exciting as a fan .

If it's not better for the top team, then it's not better for anyone.

And btw, if Ohio St doesn't play Oklahoma and still loses to Iowa - they still have the same resume.

 

[belcherboy]

Alabama is the best team in the SEC by far but the rest of the conference isn't all that great. Auburn and LSU are up and down. Georgia is solid.

IMO, Auburn and LSU have been WAY more solid than Georgia....at least over the past 5-6 years. Maybe I'm underselling Georgia or overselling Auburn and LSU though. Georgia definitely has the edge in the future, but they also don't play Alabama every year (outside of a possible CCG matchup)

 

[TheDayMan]

NFL teams also get to play every team in their division twice.

They have 32 teams and 16 regular game season. College football has 130 teams now and only 12 regular season games. Just isn't comparable.

Even if you go down to only P5 teams you would still be looking at 60+ teams and 12 regular season games.

Also factor in NFL teams all play every game against NFL level talent. I’ve never seen anyone take this route with the 6 or 8 team playoff argument. There’s not much to say if someone actually thinks the NCAA product would be better if a 7 win team can get in a 6 team playoff, other than maybe “sit the fuck down, you’re out of your element.”

 

[4down20]

College football would need to expand to a 32 team playoff to be as inclusive as the NFL using all 130 teams as a baseline.

So basically, play the regular season and then narrow it down to the same amount of teams the NFL has total.

 

[7Samurai13]

So basically, play the regular season and then narrow it down to the same amount of teams the NFL has total.

That certainly won’t water down the regular season.

 

[TheDayMan]

There are things to gain for some teams . Teams like Bama aren't one of then though . A 1 loss Bama is getting in the playoff in most every instance regardless of winning their conference . Same with other teams like Texas, Ohio St, Oklahoma, USC etc. Those teams don't NEED great OOC results . To their credit they still often play those games but they don't need to win them . The majority of CFB isht getting in with a loss and , so far, no one is getting in with 2 so scheduling tough OOC games provides more ridiculous than it does reward

Look at last year . A 2 loss OSU didn't make the playoff and people point to the Iowa loss but you could just as easily blame the OU loss. If OSU plays Ohio instead of Oklahoma and finishes 12-1 with a B10 title they're going to the playoff even with a loss to Iowa.

I'm all for league champs getting in but it'll never be fair because of unbalanced schedules . It would make ooc matchips better in some ways ( easier to schedule good opponents ) but you'd lose meaning in those games too so it'd be less exciting as a fan .

Disagree. All of those teams would be in trouble if it was between them and a team with a better resume. They would definitely get the nod if things are equal, but they don’t have automatic ins, there’s been nothing to suggest they do.

 

[Fitbud]

UW v Auburn doesn't happen to open this season if the Pac has an auto bid.

Yes, they all schedule some cupcakes as well. But almost all P5's have at least one challenge in OOC. It is for sure a promotional tool to sell to recruits and keep season ticket holders happy, but it is a lot about strength of schedule.

SoS dies with auto bids. Oregon's season this year is exactly the same as whoever had the top SoS. I can't think of a more insane proposal.

I disagree. If you know that winning your conference gives you an auto bid then you have no problem playing tough OOC schedule because it doesn't hurt you at the end of the season.

 

[rmilia1]

Disagree. All of those teams would be in trouble if it was between them and a team with a better resume. They would definitely get the nod if things are equal, but they don’t have automatic ins, there’s been nothing to suggest they do.

So you don't consider conference titles a big part of a resume ?

 

[Fitbud]

IMO, Auburn and LSU have been WAY more solid than Georgia....at least over the past 5-6 years. Maybe I'm underselling Georgia or overselling Auburn and LSU though. Georgia definitely has the edge in the future, but they also don't play Alabama every year (outside of a possible CCG matchup)

What I am saying is that Auburn and LSU are typically considered some of the better school in the SEC and yet they are sometimes falling in and out of the top 25. Same with Florida. Georgia IMHO has been the solid number 2 in SEC for years.

 

[TheDayMan]

So you don't consider conference titles a big part of a resume ?

What did I say that even hints that’s my stance?

 

[TheDayMan]

What I am saying is that Auburn and LSU are typically considered some of the better school in the SEC and yet they are sometimes falling in and out of the top 25. Same with Florida. Georgia IMHO has been the solid number 2 in SEC for years.

We get it, you don’t follow college football, you don’t need to beat us over the head about it.

 

[4down20]

Also factor in NFL teams all play every game against NFL level talent. I’ve never seen anyone take this route with the 6 or 8 team playoff argument. There’s not much to say if someone actually thinks the NCAA product would be better if a 7 win team can get in a 6 team playoff, other than maybe “sit the fuck down, you’re out of your element.”

Yeah, I'm not in favor of expanding at all. But if by chance they do, it best not have AQ in it. I don't care if it's a 32 team playoff, if your conference champion can't make it in the top32, they don't deserve to be there.

And even beyond all the mentioned reasons, when you put such an importance on winning the conference, it completely flips the way conferences generally work right now. As it is, revenue sharing is the way things go because giving money to teams like Vandy is actually beneficial to Alabama and other teams. Because it improves the conference strength, the SoS and makes it more likely to get teams into the playoffs etc.

I think that's one of the big things that made the SEC stronger in the BCS years. Meanwhile I don't think the Big12 shares equally even now. And the Pac12, I don't know what there is to share that contract is so terrible.

But if SoS is gone and you only need to win the conference, then you're better off just keeping it for yourself and competing against the other big dogs of the conference.

It's just bad.

 

[Codaxx]

College fans don’t want to watch a sport with so much diversity try to copy the NFL season. We don’t want shitty 6 win teams, or even mediocre 8 or 9 win teams having a path to the playoff. The season matters, scheduling matters, we don’t want 3 shitty preseason games.

Stick to the NFL if you like that model.

I want more games matching solid teams. I really don’t understand not wanting more good games

THe season matters is nonsense. Remember when LSU beat like 3 conference champs and Bama on the road? Did they give LSU the title? No, they gave them a playoff with Bama. Can you name the last NC that didn’t play in at least 1 playoff games (BCS) or a postseason game? You can preserve the season by simply putting in a bye week for the playoffs

 

[7Samurai13]

I want more games matching solid teams. I really don’t understand not wanting more good games

THe season matters is nonsense. Remember when LSU beat like 3 conference champs and Bama on the road? Did they give LSU the title? No, they gave them a playoff with Bama. Can you name the last NC that didn’t play in at least 1 playoff games (BCS) or a postseason game? You can preserve the season by simply putting in a bye week for the playoffs

2017 UCF

 

[Fitbud]

If you are truly the best team in col

Also factor in NFL teams all play every game against NFL level talent. I’ve never seen anyone take this route with the 6 or 8 team playoff argument. There’s not much to say if someone actually thinks the NCAA product would be better if a 7 win team can get in a 6 team playoff, other than maybe “sit the fuck down, you’re out of your element.”

It's not like I came up with this idea out of thin air. Plenty of experts who know way more about football than you or me have suggested expanding the playoff to include more teams.

If the 4 team playoff was perfect, there wouldn't be speculation every year.

 

[4down20]

So you don't consider conference titles a big part of a resume ?

They are a huge part. But not because they are "conference titles", but because of what it usually means when you accomplish that.

Which is why it's no coincidence that in the 4 years of the playoffs only 2 teams have been teams that didn't win their conference.

So it's a huge deal, it just doesn't trump everything else as some seem to think.

 

[7Samurai13]

If you are truly the best team in col



It's not like I came up with this idea out of thin air. Plenty of experts who know way more about football than you or me have suggested expanding the playoff to include more teams.

If the 4 team playoff was perfect, there wouldn't be speculation every year.

What if I told you that NCAA wants there to be controversy because it keeps people talking about them.

Did you know there is controversy/speculation every year in college basketball with 68 teams making the tourney?

 

[4down20]

I want more games matching solid teams. I really don’t understand not wanting more good games

THe season matters is nonsense. Remember when LSU beat like 3 conference champs and Bama on the road? Did they give LSU the title? No, they gave them a playoff with Bama. Can you name the last NC that didn’t play in at least 1 playoff games (BCS) or a postseason game? You can preserve the season by simply putting in a bye week for the playoffs

huh?