88% of FBS Athletic Directors Want an Expanded College Football Playoff

[theboardref]

But, if the first round is played on campus, they will likely have to go play an away game. They would likely not be ranked in the top 4.

I mean I personally don’t see that as that big of a deal if a team is at home healing.

 

[LawDawg]

I would rather it be conditional qualifiers as opposed to AQ:
- Reserve 5 spots for the P5 conference champs, but place a requirement that they must be in the top 15 of the final CFP poll.
- Reserve 1 spot for the highest ranked G5 conference champ, but place a requirement that they must be in the top 12 of the final CFP poll
- Use a BCS type of ranking system that combines computer polls with the Playoff Committee ranking to form the final CFP rankings.
- If teams in the playoff have traditional bowl affiliations, have them play in those venues if possible regardless of "seeding". For example, Big 12 vs SEC in the sugar, Pac-12 vs Big 10 in rose
- Use current big 6 bowls for quarters and semis. Quarters played on new years day, semis a week later at the two locations not used on new years, and bid the champ game to the highest bidder

I like most of this, especially the qualifiers that would keep the crappy CCG upsets out, and crappy G5 teams out.

I disagree on the bowl tie-ins ... don't care. I know the Rose Bowl people love the B1G/PAC tie in, but the UGA v. OU game in 2017 brought in two new fanbases and a ton of excitement. That's good for the Rose Bowl, IMO. And, I think you have to have the first round on campus as that is the only way you will fill stadiums - who can afford to go to CCG, Elite 8, Final 4, and NCG. Especially when hotels and airfares are being booked last minute. Having Elite 8 on campus also let's the 4 best teams have an advantage they earned, meaning the regular season still means something.

The problem with playing the Elite 8 on New Years is the Rose Bowl always has to be on New Years. So, do the Elite 8 on Christmas (I know, I know), then the Final 4 on New Years which let's the Rose Bowl keep its tradition. For those that say fuck the bowls, they are incredibly powerful and profitable. You are going to have to work around them.

It is going to 8 ... that's why all the best teams have been scheduling badass OOC schedules starting in 2022. They know it's coming, and getting those at large spots are going to require you playing some good teams.

 

[LawDawg]

I mean I personally don’t see that as that big of a deal if a team is at home healing.

I get your point, but I assure you that I wouldn't want to go into your stadium for an Elite 8 game, even if I had the extra week off. We will also have had a couple weeks off since the CCG.

This also throws a bone to the douchebag yankees always saying, come up and play a game in the cold. On the rare occasion that they would be one of the top 4 teams, you might just have to go play in the snow in Madison or East Lansing.

 

[theboardref]

I get your point, but I assure you that I wouldn't want to go into your stadium for an Elite 8 game, even if I had the extra week off. We will also have had a couple weeks off since the CCG.

This also throws a bone to the douchebag yankees always saying, come up and play a game in the cold. On the rare occasion that they would be one of the top 4 teams, you might just have to go play in the snow in Madison or East Lansing.

Hell just in my humble opinion, I hate any time a game of true value isn’t played in a dome. I don’t want a playoff or title game to be decided in a slopfest. I don’t care where the game is hosted geographically, but the bare minimum requirement should be either a dome or a retractable roof.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

You really think their intention was to get together and put out a flawed championship system?

I think they put together a system that's intent was to generate more money, and one that would lead the way to a larger playoff. If you're asking do I think the intent was always to expand beyond 4 teams by design, then yes. The first step was something not so different than the BCS, to ease people into the idea and then use that to leapfrog into a larger system that could generate millions more in revenue.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@The_Jer @LawDawg @theboardref

My only concern with keeping the CCG and having it be a qualifier to a 8-16 team playoff is... what if Ohio St is #1 in the country. Loses the CCG to a decent team by 1 point. Ohio St will fall in rankings, but will still be in the top 10, maybe even top 5. Would they not get a seed because they lost the CCG?

Furthermore, I also disagree about bowl tie-ins. Hypothetically if B1G and PAC got seeded together, I am not against them getting the claim to the Rose bowl and like-wise for other teams and their tie-ins, but I ultimately don't care.

I am absolutely for the BCS style ranking, though I would remove the committee and probably replace it with the coaches poll. AP and committee scream bias to me (but thats me, hate me or disagree, whatever). Coaches can be as well, but they are more likely to look out for their teams first.

Also if we are talking about an 8 team playoff, I might be more inclined to accept 2 G5s with 1 at large assuming they meet certain criteria as well. There have been many times where 2 G5s would have met the criteria in my opinion and this also limits the number of at larges from conferences getting in. I'm sorry, but I don't want to see Bama win the SEC, then 2 at large spots going to LSU and Florida or UGA or something. Taking 2 G5s would create more parity, limit the number of same conference members getting in, and still allows a spot for when Notre Dame would qualify not that THAT is important to me at all (honestly, don't care for ND), but it wouldn't screw anything up.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Hell just in my humble opinion, I hate any time a game of true value isn’t played in a dome. I don’t want a playoff or title game to be decided in a slopfest. I don’t care where the game is hosted geographically, but the bare minimum requirement should be either a dome or a retractable roof.

I get ya, but both teams play in the same conditions. If it is wet and rainy or cold and snowy, there isn't an inherent advantage to any team.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

There is a reason I stand firm on conference champions and earning your way in.

Sure lol but not having the CCG saves this as well. And if this model were in play back then, Bama would not have gotten in. I know some people would say that the best team wouldn't have won, but this is nonsense. How many times have we seen a team get beat in the regular season and end up playing the team they lost to in the CCG or bowl and completely turn it around. No different than what Bama did in 2011... they lost so they knew where they had to fix things in a rematch.

 

[Deep Creek]

lol maybe. They do have a conference championship game... could take the top two as they do now. They do play the same number of non-con as most others and a full 12 game slate.

well again, as I said in my last post, there should be some requirements - something like @Deep Creek was saying maybe.

I might...emphasis on MIGHT...take care of itself if conferences would do away with divisions. Still be some unequal schedule but it would probably mitigate it a little bit at least.

 

[Deep Creek]

But those teams have not earned the right to play for a title. If I lose on the field to a team in my division, I am not better than that team. Therefore, why should I get a second chance to play them? The results have been settled on the field already. People can say, what about the NFL, well the NFL also plays all divisional opponents twice so it’s not really relevant.

True. But, you very well could be better than five teams from other conferences that went undefeated in their divison/conference. Why should they get in ahead of you just because they played in a lesser division/conference?

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

I might...emphasis on MIGHT...take care of itself if conferences would do away with divisions. Still be some unequal schedule but it would probably mitigate it a little bit at least.

There better never be a time where divisions are done away with and Nebraska and Oklahoma are NOT reunited.

 

[theboardref]

@The_Jer @LawDawg @theboardref

I am absolutely for the BCS style ranking, though I would remove the committee and probably replace it with the coaches poll. AP and committee scream bias to me (but thats me, hate me or disagree, whatever). Coaches can be as well, but they are more likely to look out for their teams first.

Agree with this. This committee is all fun and games until a school with committee ties gets in over another school.

 

[theboardref]

True. But, you very well could be better than five teams from other conferences that went undefeated in their divison/conference. Why should they get in ahead of you just because they played in a lesser division/conference?

Because if you aren’t the best team in your conference you aren’t the best team in the country. So on the field results have eliminated you.

 

[theboardref]

Sure lol but not having the CCG saves this as well. And if this model were in play back then, Bama would not have gotten in. I know some people would say that the best team wouldn't have won, but this is nonsense. How many times have we seen a team get beat in the regular season and end up playing the team they lost to in the CCG or bowl and completely turn it around. No different than what Bama did in 2011... they lost so they knew where they had to fix things in a rematch.

While they sat at home with an extra tape on LSU to scout.

The more the playoffs are expanded the more useless conference titles become. I personally find that to be lame.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

While they sat at home with an extra tape on LSU to scout.

The more the playoffs are expanded the more useless conference titles become. I personally find that to be lame.

Yeah that I don't get. They don't truly mean much of anything. I would rather keep them, but I agree with you that other teams shouldn't get extra time to prepare.

 

[Hang_On_Sloopy08]

I think they put together a system that's intent was to generate more money, and one that would lead the way to a larger playoff. If you're asking do I think the intent was always to expand beyond 4 teams by design, then yes. The first step was something not so different than the BCS, to ease people into the idea and then use that to leapfrog into a larger system that could generate millions more in revenue.

Ok that makes more sense.

 

[RobToxin]

I'm perfectly fine with a four-game playoff staying like it is.

However, I can give you a good reason from a fan's perspective to expand the playoffs that no one has thought about.

Seeing the best college players playing in the post season.

"But that's what the other bowls are for," you say.

But are they?

Year after year, we see more and more top players sit out there Bowl game because they don't want to get hurt and then not get big NFL money in the draft.

Would some of these players be willing to play if there team is in the playoffs and not some meaningless bowl.

 

[Deep Creek]

Because if you aren’t the best team in your conference you aren’t the best team in the country. So on the field results have eliminated you.

I'm guessing you are "old school" and believe you should win your conference in order to advance. So am I. I can agree with that totally.

I hated it when Texas high school sports started taking more than just district champs into the playoffs. But, like CFB, money won out. I hated it even more so when they started including more than just 1st and 2nd place finishers. Hell, now it is as high as four teams from a district getting into the playoffs. There are some very lopsided games in the first rounds because of it. Upside is there have been more playoff games for me to watch. Often 3-4 on any given weekend.

But, old slchool isn't the case nowadays...nor was it ever in big boy CFB. Until the BCS, it was 100% a beaurty contest regardless of conference championships. Had teams in the old had to win a playoff game or two, I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have the list of national champions we do now. Several of those "Beauty Contest" winners would have had their make up taken off by other playoff opponents IMO. Winning your conference, in and of itself, doesn't guarantee you a seat at the final table.

 

[theboardref]

I'm perfectly fine with a four-game playoff staying like it is.

However, I can give you a good reason from a fan's perspective to expand the playoffs that no one has thought about.

Seeing the best college players playing in the post season.

"But that's what the other bowls are for," you say.

But are they?

Year after year, we see more and more top players sit out there Bowl game because they don't want to get hurt and then not get big NFL money in the draft.

Would some of these players be willing to play if there team is in the playoffs and not some meaningless bowl.

This would cause more to sit out not less. Once a team isn’t in the playoffs, no top prospect is playing and risking injury.

 

[cwalke3408]

For starters, do you want to wait til December? Yes, those games will have significantly more meaning and nonetheless would still happen. I also think there is little to no evidence to suggest that teams would simply stop scheduling decent opponents throughout their non-con even in this circumstance. Hell, rarely do teams schedule more than 1 quality opponent in their non-con anyway and even if they did give that up, I think giving up ONE would be game to allow for TWO or more good games on the back end is more beneficial.

Secondly, all of those examples you gave were conference and conference games will still matter. Hell, conference games have always mattered more than non-con. Yes, losing one won't necessarily expel you from contention... but it doesn't now anyway. I don't understand how you are making this connection, how would conference (or noncon upsets for that matter) cease to happen with an expanded playoff?

Do you want to wait til December for playoff type game? For you Yes, for me nah. Conf. or Non-conf games we are losing out on must win games in the regular season where you (win -> control your own destiny) or (lose -> you must likely going to need help). Will games like Bama/LSU, PSU/OSU, OU/Baylor be the same after expanding because win or lose you still control your own destiny at the end of the day.

Like I said before, we are just handing out oopsies. How did it workout for Oregon losing to ASU or OSU losing to Purdue/Iowa