Did Notre Dame get screwed in the bowl selection?

[rmilia1]

I just disagree. I don't think Memphis or App St would make their OOC schedule more difficult, knowing they have to go undefeated to get a playoff spot. It just doesn't make sense that they would. Maybe they need the paycheck, so it wouldn't matter, but coming so close this year, I imagine they would change their mind if they knew they were pretty much assured a playoff spot if they could just go undefeated. I imagine the top teams would do the same thing.

Right now, winning a tough OOC game gives you an advantage if you lose a game during the season. In a 16 team playoff, it wouldn't matter. Just get in the playoff, and don't risk anything getting there. Again, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see how a 16 team playoff does anything but water down the football season.

It would be fun to watch, no doubt. I'd love for Michigan to have a chance every year for a national title in a season ending playoff. I just don't think they have deserved that chance by their regular season play. I think they would have been in the playoffs every year under Harbaugh in a 16 team playoff.

Thats the point though man. If they make their OOC better they wouldnt HAVE to go unbeaten. No one would. Youre a Michigan fan right? In CBB sp far this year your team ( OOC ) has ALREADY played Creighton, Iowa St, UNC, Gonzaga, Louisville and you play Oregon next week.

Same premise here

When scheduling the game helps you MORE than losing game hurts you then you will always schedule better.

Its why elite mid major cbb teams play great ooc games but elite G5 cfb programs struggle to schedule people

 

[desert heat]

I said he made a good argument, and asked for help to "talk me off the ledge" because I don't like ND at all.



Because it would incentivize these teams to never schedule a tough OOC opponent. They would have an easier path to the playoffs than any P5 team. Yes, they would have to go undefeated, but it would be MUCH easier to do so when your conference is filled with teams that wouldn't win a single game in a P5 conference. All the one loss G5 teams in the top 25 would be top 16 teams right now if they hadn't lost a game. So, in a 16 team playoff, they would be foolish to risk a loss by scheduling anyone tough OOC.



There would be this season, unless you think the playoff committee would penalize them more in a 16 team playoff scenario.



Why would that matter? The same thing can be accomplished with just 4 teams.



I'm sorry, you lost me. An undefeated Bama was chosen over a one loss Ohio State? Why is that shocking? Bama was in the national title game, so they even won a playoff game. Ohio State lost by 4 TD's to an unranked Purdue last year that won 6 games.

if teams play easier schedules they lose in the polls. sos is a consideration. exactly why some one loss teams are not ranked in the top 16.

how could a top 4 seed lose in the quarters or round of 16 if there is no quarters or round of 16?

i guess i meant 2017 when alabama didn't even make their conference championship game, losing late in november, to auburn, yet still is selected into the final 4, over ohio state who won their conference championship over #3 wisconsin.

 

[MarkOU]

Iowa State played some tough games this year going 7-5

1 point loss to Iowa
2 point loss to Baylor
7 point loss to Okla St
1 point loss to OU
10 point loss to KSU

Notre Dame fucks around they'll get beat.

 

[belcherboy]

Thats the point though man. If they make their OOC better they wouldnt HAVE to go unbeaten.

So Memphis, App St, and Boise wouldn't have to go undefeated to be in the top 16? Perhaps in future seasons, but not this season. They only had one loss and they were just outside the top 16. No need to schedule tougher, if all you got to do is win that game you lost...which was a very winnable game for all three of them IIRC. I know for sure App St was favored.

No one would. Youre a Michigan fan right? In CBB sp far this year your team ( OOC ) has ALREADY played Creighton, Iowa St, UNC, Gonzaga, Louisville and you play Oregon next week

Are we conflating basketball and football? It's 30 game seasons and a lot more teams to compete for a playoff spots. It make sense to have some tough OOC games, plus tournaments pay BIG money to come play other big teams early in the season. But here is the reality, college basketball ratings are terrible (outside of the top teams) because most those games don't matter. People don't watch them because there is no sense of urgency. I don't want college football to lose some of that.

Now lets get back to football.

When scheduling the game helps you MORE than losing game hurts you then you will always schedule better.

Its why elite mid major cbb teams play great ooc games but elite G5 cfb programs struggle to schedule people

G5 programs schedule tough opponents for one reason....money. If there was a great shot for the elite G5's to make the playoffs, they would have a way better paycheck and a MUCH bigger recruiting edge. I would use Boise St as an example in that. From 2002-2012, they would have been in the playoffs at least 5 times, if they didn't schedule a tough OOC game (there only loss in a few of those seasons). They would have been in the playoffs every year, for sure. They would have even made it with a loss many of those years, but why risk it? There would have been very little reason to do it from my perspective. Although, they may still do it for a fat paycheck.

 

[rmilia1]

Also expanding the playoffs isnt about rewarding "teams who dont deserve it". Its about more excitement for fans ,making your regular season schedules better and your postseason more compelling. Lets be honest. No one gives a shit about who wins any bowl game except for the playoffs. The only people who care about any other bowl are the fans of the teams in them. Sure we watch because its football but we dont actually care

 

[belcherboy]

if teams play easier schedules they lose in the polls. sos is a consideration. exactly why some one loss teams are not ranked in the top 16.

So what big OOC game got Memphis their #17 playoff ranking this year?

how could a top 4 seed lose in the quarters or round of 16 if there is no quarters or round of 16?

A top 4 seed loses every year in the current playoff system (actually two top 4 seeds lose in the first round). So you don't need to have quarters or round of sixteen to have it happen.

i guess i meant 2017 when alabama didn't even make their conference championship game, losing late in november, to auburn, yet still is selected into the final 4, over ohio state who won their conference championship over #3 wisconsin.

You are still not making sense. Alabama beat Georgia that year in the national championship game.

 

[belcherboy]

Also expanding the playoffs isnt about rewarding "teams who dont deserve it". Its about more excitement for fans ,making your regular season schedules better and your postseason more compelling. Lets be honest. No one gives a shit about who wins any bowl game except for the playoffs. The only people who care about any other bowl are the fans of the teams in them. Sure we watch because its football but we dont actually care

Then if it is about excitement and making the postseason more compelling, why stop at 16? Wouldn't 32 be even better?

Heck, 68 works for college basketball, let's make it happen!

I love the system the way it is. I can respect the fact that you would like to see it at 16 teams. I just respectfully disagree. I imagine you will get it though. Too much money for them not to eventually expand it.

 

[rmilia1]

So Memphis, App St, and Boise wouldn't have to go undefeated to be in the top 16? Perhaps in future seasons, but not this season. They only had one loss and they were just outside the top 16. No need to schedule tougher, if all you got to do is win that game you lost...which was a very winnable game for all three of them IIRC. I know for sure App St was favored.



Are we conflating basketball and football? It's 30 game seasons and a lot more teams to compete for a playoff spots. It make sense to have some tough OOC games, plus tournaments pay BIG money to come play other big teams early in the season. But here is the reality, college basketball ratings are terrible (outside of the top teams) because most those games don't matter. People don't watch them because there is no sense of urgency. I don't want college football to lose some of that.

Now lets get back to football.



G5 programs schedule tough opponents for one reason....money. If there was a great shot for the elite G5's to make the playoffs, they would have a way better paycheck and a MUCH bigger recruiting edge. I would use Boise St as an example in that. From 2002-2012, they would have been in the playoffs at least 5 times, if they didn't schedule a tough OOC game (there only loss in a few of those seasons). They would have been in the playoffs every year, for sure. They would have even made it with a loss many of those years, but why risk it? There would have been very little reason to do it from my perspective. Although, they may still do it for a fat paycheck.

Cbb ratings arent terrible. Theres just far more games. And roughly 18% of teams make the tourney. A 16 team cfb playoff would be about the same

But ultimately you make my point for me. Fans of both sports almost unanimously prefer CBB postseason to CFB.

Expansion is about the fans not the teams

 

[rmilia1]

Then if it is about excitement and making the postseason more compelling, why stop at 16? Wouldn't 32 be even better?

Heck, 68 works for college basketball, let's make it happen!

I love the system the way it is. I can respect the fact that you would like to see it at 16 teams. I just respectfully disagree. I imagine you will get it though. Too much money for them not to eventually expand it.

Id prefer 8 actually but 16 is better than 4

 

[belcherboy]

Cbb ratings arent terrible. Theres just far more games. And roughly 18% of teams make the tourney. A 16 team cfb playoff would be about the same

That's exactly correct. Most people don't watch college basketball till the tournament. It's much different than regular season college football games.

But ultimately you make my point for me. Fans of both sports almost unanimously prefer CBB postseason to CFB.

Expansion is about the fans not the teams

They prefer it because the regular season is nearly non-existent in basketball. It also happens in a little over two weeks time. Again, apples and oranges when comparing the two sports.

 

[belcherboy]

Id prefer 8 actually but 16 is better than 4

I'd prefer 4, but wouldn't complain if it went to 6 or 8. I think I could be talked into preferring six teams, but again, I don't want to watch UGA play again in a meaningful game, and they would be the #5 seed. It's just not good football to me. (I live in GA now)

 

[rmilia1]

That's exactly correct. Most people don't watch college basketball till the tournament. It's much different than regular season college football games.



They prefer it because the regular season is nearly non-existent in basketball. It also happens in a little over two weeks time. Again, apples and oranges when comparing the two sports.

But its not about trying to turn CFB into CBB. Its about taking the best part of something and adding it to another sport that already is more popular.

We all watch the bowl games even though they dont matter. Its football so we watch. Youre not going to lose viewers in the regular season by making MORE teams and MORE games relevant. Its insanity to think that would occur

 

[kburjr]

Cbb ratings arent terrible. Theres just far more games. And roughly 18% of teams make the tourney. A 16 team cfb playoff would be about the same

But ultimately you make my point for me. Fans of both sports almost unanimously prefer CBB postseason to CFB.

Expansion is about the fans not the teams

I would have to disagree that it would be better for the fans. In order to have a 16 team playoff, there are 8 bowls that would replace their participants (down at the bottom). The Illinois fans that are celebrating making a bowl this year would not have a bowl to go to. And, if a Wisconsin-Florida game was a playoff game, I would not be as interested in it as I would a meeting in the Sugar Bowl as a one-off bowl game.

 

[belcherboy]

But its not about trying to turn CFB into CBB. Its about taking the best part of something and adding it to another sport that already is more popular.

We all watch the bowl games even though they dont matter. Its football so we watch. Youre not going to lose viewers in the regular season by making MORE teams and MORE games relevant. Its insanity to think that would occur

Perhaps, but those games won't matter. Alabama losing to Auburn wouldn't matter. Michigan losing to Ohio State wouldn't matter. Clemson winning the ACC championship game, wouldn't have mattered. The winner of the LSU vs. Georgia wouldn't have mattered. Tua could have sat out the rest of the season and just got ready for the playoffs instead of playing and getting hurt. The urgency would be gone. 16 teams makes it way too easy to get into the playoffs, and some losses in the regular season wouldn't matter.

 

[rmilia1]

I would have to disagree that it would be better for the fans. In order to have a 16 team playoff, there are 8 bowls that would replace their participants (down at the bottom). The Illinois fans that are celebrating making a bowl this year would not have a bowl to go to. And, if a Wisconsin-Florida game was a playoff game, I would not be as interested in it as I would a meeting in the Sugar Bowl as a one-off bowl game.

None of that would be neccessary . You just integrate existing bowls into the playoff. Theres no need to eliminate all the other bowls. Theres 4 postseason CBB tourneys afterall

 

[rmilia1]

Perhaps, but those games won't matter. Alabama losing to Auburn wouldn't matter. Michigan losing to Ohio State wouldn't matter. Clemson winning the ACC championship game, wouldn't have mattered. The winner of the LSU vs. Georgia wouldn't have mattered. Tua could have sat out the rest of the season and just got ready for the playoffs instead of playing and getting hurt. The urgency would be gone. 16 teams makes it way too easy to get into the playoffs, and some losses in the regular season wouldn't matter.

Sure some games would lose importance but others would gain importance, far more in fact because more teams would matter

 

[belcherboy]

If you were to go to an expanded 16 team playoff system, seriously, why not 24 teams? Here is what I could see happening.

8 conference games
1 OOC game



P5 Conference winners get a bye (they play an extra game in their conference championship), plus the three highest ranked teams (make it something to play for)

Playoffs start the third week of November. The championship game is played in January.

I'm not advocating for this, but if they were to expand it to 16 teams, I'd rather see them go to 24 and do something like this above. It likely wouldn't happen unless the money was just REALLY good. Teams don't like losing home games, and they would lose 1-2 in this model.

 

[belcherboy]

Sure some games would lose importance but others would gain importance, far more in fact because more teams would matter

Some games? Many of the biggest games of the season are above. Who cares if the biggest games of the year are only played for bragging rights and maybe a better seed in a playoff.

 

[kburjr]

None of that would be neccessary . You just integrate existing bowls into the playoff. Theres no need to eliminate all the other bowls. Theres 4 postseason CBB tourneys afterall

Is Illinois playing this year in your scenario?

 

[desert heat]

So what big OOC game got Memphis their #17 playoff ranking this year?



A top 4 seed loses every year in the current playoff system (actually two top 4 seeds lose in the first round). So you don't need to have quarters or round of sixteen to have it happen.



You are still not making sense. Alabama beat Georgia that year in the national championship game.

memphis having a weak schedule, yet not being ranked in the top 16, despite only having one loss, is the point. you keep inferring that only the teams with best records will be chosen, in a 16 team playoff, which is false. and teams are already playing weaker schedules in order to help them qualify for the playoff. it's just mostly occurring among p5 schools.

a top seed doesn't lose earlier than the semi's in a 4 team tournament, ace.

so what if bama beat georgia in close game, with a lot of close calls going bama's way, they didn't have to play ohio state, nor does it prove they were the best team.

 

[Olyduck]

isnt this like the ACC #2 bowl?