As long as you limit the possibilities for teams competing for a Title, then the top recruits will go to the ones who actually have the possibility. Yeah sure Alabama would still dominate for a few more seasons but get some more, new faces in there and if they become perennial in their own right then you'll see more recruits go there until you achieve some sort of balance in the sport.
Yeah, when they expanded to 4 teams it really evened out the recruiting, and I’m sure the next expansion will have a similar effect. Those elite players will quit going to places like Alabama and Ohio State and Clemson, places with proven records of winning championships and putting players in the league, and go to some other schools just because they have a path to get into the playoff so they can get their asses handed to them. I’m sure that is going to work out great.
As it appears as if your comment is snarky then I'll indulge you with a critical manner of tone...
It will. Just 4 was always the worst option since the start, by making it just 16 will for sure bring in new faces every year and thus boost recognition from others such as recruits, preventing the constant record breaking recruiting class we see every year. Essentially making CFB better again without reverting to Pre-BCS.
Considering LSU was in 3 to 4 loss hell with Les Miles, played their cards right for just one season, and now sit at #3 in both the 2021 & 2022 recruiting cycle, I would say yes, recruits would stop going to those three. Why go to a school where you're not even guaranteed to be a starter for most your time there when you can go to a school that will for sure get you that starter spot AND a chance at the title every year?
It likely will work more times than not. Don't know why a person would advocate for a system that so far has only been proven to be beneficial to the top 1% including Alabama- oh wait, you're a Tide fan, yeah that would make sense LOL.
Are you suggesting DeVonta wouldn’t have peed his pants over the specter of Liberty? Coastal Carolina? A 3-win P12 champ?
I could go for an expansion to either six teams or 8; but 16 is a no-go. I can understand wanting to expand access to the playoffs, but there are rarely more than 4 to 6 teams that deserve consideration.
No. At the time the playoffs were first worked out, four teams was the best option. The top 2 or 3 teams are usually pretty obvious. The difficulty usually lies in figuring out which team should be #4. One of the reasons that Alabama, Ohio St., & Clemson are among the top recruiters is that they are good at developing the players they bring in. Georgia is a good recruiting school, too, but not so high on player development.
Actually, there were many seasons at LSU under Miles where they only had one or two losses, up until his last few years. And LSU has constantly been a top-level recruiting school. They just happened to hit on the right combination of talent & coaching for one season under Orgeron. And you should expect multiple losses some years when you play Alabama, Auburn, Florida & Texas A&M every season.
Eleven schools have made the playoffs in 7 seasons. That's actually around 8.5% of the FBS. Six schools have made the finals (4.6%). A good bit more than the 1% you mention. But I do see your point. Most seasons, not more than 4-to-6 teams are good enough to be in the playoffs, much less the 16 that you advocate for.
As explained before, the "rarely more than 4 to 6 teams deserve to get in" was caused by limiting the access. Why go to Michigan? Why go to Texas? Why go to Auburn? They're not finishing in the top 4 unlike Bama, Clemson, & OSU, recruits see this and it is showing. Expansion to 8, 12, and 16 is just for the better of the sport, it doesn't matter if only 4 teams have a shot, you're still guaranteed to have multiple games worth watching except the unwatchable mess we have now. I'm perfect at 12, but then again 12 is a minimum for me for this to be worthy of being called a playoff.
4 teams were not the best option for reasons already explained. The Top 2 and 3 teams were never obvious hence the introduction of the playoff system due to messes in 2007 & 2011, and the difficulty of finding #4 makes it all the more worse. Every year there is controversy. Every. Year. There has not been a definitive ranking and we're practically punishing teams for losing just one game, and in some cases the fact they went undefeated on a schedule they set up years before that season. It's a ridiculously unfair system with a clear bias, not to mention player development doesn't equate to guaranteed victory as this is CFB, where upsets can happen on a constant basis. I do not see why this is a debate if I'm being honest.
This isn't a counter to what I said.
That's dumb arguing, firstly you should understand what figurative language is, and being only three percent more is within standard MOE, so once again, not a counter. Of the 28 total appearances, 78.5% comprised of teams who made multiple appearances. It's time for expansion.
