How to Fix College Football

[WizardHawk]

Your response was so fucking bad you had to do it twice?

The site has been a bit weird today. Strange lags.

 

[HuskerOC]

The site has been a bit weird today. Strange lags.

Site has been perfect.

You just live in a shithole where modern civilized people don't live.

 

[Moab]

Who would try to fix something that isn't really broken? Let's be real, you want to play in the BCS playoffs, it's really simple if you're a P5 team, go undefeated and win your conference championship game. If you don't do that as a p5 team, then you are allowing others to determine if you belong. If that's the case, you better not have lost to a team outside the top 25 and your out of conference schedule needs to have at least 1 credible team in it.

If you're a G5 team, your schedule needs to include at least 1 top 25 team from a P5 conference and it would be better if it was a couple. You'll need to be undefeated with max style points and there better not be any questions as to your actual resume. You'll need help from the P5 conference winners, at least 3 of them, having at least 2 losses and 1 of them being to a weak team.

Honestly, fuck these dudes that think more is better or their team needs to be included. 4 is enough, if you can't handle your business from the end of August to the first week of December, why should you be rewarded. The national title is a special title that only special teams should win, not whiners that think they should be included because they came up with an exception or and excuse of why their team was close enough to being a special team. Close enough sucks in this sport, earn it and you're invited, make excuses and you can GTFOH.

Now, if you still have what you believe is an argument, reread the bold section.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

Let's be real, you want to play in the BCS playoffs, it's really simple if you're a P5 team, go undefeated and win your conference championship game. If you don't do that as a p5 team, then you are allowing others to determine if you belong. If that's the case, you better not have lost to a team outside the top 25 and your out of conference schedule needs to have at least 1 credible team in it.

That mindset relies on the concept that all power conferences are even. They are not. If going undefeated is the ultimate goal, then there's no little incentive to schedule a tough OOC. Take Oregon. Oregon played Auburn, a really good team this season. If they played a quality Group of Five school, like say Utah State or Air Force, or a played Maryland, a not so good Power conference team, or took the Baylor OOC strategy of playing nobody, we would be talking about them in the playoff conversation. The reason is we don't actually want teams to schedule heavy. It's more viewed as a great gamble.

If you're a G5 team, your schedule needs to include at least 1 top 25 team from a P5 conference and it would be better if it was a couple. You'll need to be undefeated with max style points and there better not be any questions as to your actual resume. You'll need help from the P5 conference winners, at least 3 of them, having at least 2 losses and 1 of them being to a weak team.

And how are G5 teams suppose to know this ahead of time? These teams do not own crystal balls. Many of these school schedule their OOC games years ahead of time, and have agreements on location. It's illogical to assume they know where each team will be ranked before the season starts. More over, why in the top 25? Why not top 30? Top 40? Top 20?

The national title is a special title that only special teams should win, not whiners that think they should be included because they came up with an exception or and excuse of why their team was close enough to being a special team. Close enough sucks in this sport, earn it and you're invited, make excuses and you can GTFOH.

This is what I call an arrogant statement. Other than Mike Leach, nobody is calling for a large tournament. Jim Harbaugh is calling for an 11-team system with no conference championship games. The primary call is for 6-8 teams, with giving preference to power conference champions and throwing a bone to one lucky G5 champion. We're talking about looking at a crop of teams with between 10-13 wins on the season, 0-2 loss. 6/130 = 5%, 8/130 = 6%. The playoff would only be reserved to 5-6% of the college football population. That means that 94% of schools would not make it in. It's about special teams, but it's also about giving everybody a fair shot and comprehending the landscape.

And for the record, I do not agree Dan Wetzel. His views are constantly changing. First he wanted 16 teams with every conference champion in. Next he wanted to give all the power conference champions an autobid. Now he wants to get rid of the conference championship games all together.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

Having a conference championship being a autobid would be stupid.

You're correct here. Autobid system would mean that Wisconsin in 2012 would have made the playoffs at 8-5. If Florida State lost to Georgia Tech in 2012 ACC championship game, they would have been 7-6. Ditto for UCLA vs. Oregon. I think the playoffs should be reserved for teams with between 10-13 wins.

If they are going to do 8 teams or even 6 teams, they either (a) do straight up. Whatever the committee picks as their top 8 teams goes.

(b) Just take the top 5 highest ranked conference champions period. No power conference tag. This would create competition between the 10 conferences.

 

[CJH9972]

So many want teams playing six top 25 opponents but no margin of error and no parity when facing unranked teams because the regular season is so wonderful because you can't afford to lose. Throw in the absurd two class system where G5 teams have to do what P5 teams don't or what mid majors didn't have to do under the BCS to make top four.

 

[Moab]

Since we've had the playoff, how many times have the best and most deserving 4 not make the playoffs? If you think you have a team that was one of the best 4, do you really believe that team had a shot at the crystal ball? I can answer that, they didn't...

 

[Neilcar]

On another thread, I said that they need to make the conference champion an automatic playoff birth in order to make this weekend worth something.

Here is an article that has the same idea.

Here's how to fix college football's broken postseason


The first weekend of December is here, which means college football is ready to dust off the pointless, redundant relic that is “Conference Championship Weekend.”

Don’t let the sport’s television partners tell you this is a good idea. Being some zombie fan getting fed establishment nonsense is no way to go through life.

Remember, the people who run this sport once claimed the BCS would have to be pulled out of their “cold, dead hands,” which means they'd be out here justifying how Clemson, the unbeaten, reigning national champion, doesn’t deserve to play for a national title this year.

A four-team playoff arrived as a concession, but it’s still the same leadership, so there is more to do. That includes reforming the postseason to replace this waste-of-time weekend with the first round of an eight-team playoff.

1st off I think the 4 team Playoff demeans the regular season. It allows the #3 and #4 teams get into the playoff when they clearly didn't get it done in the regular season ...

But having said that I also need to remind you that:

1) More College Football is good
2) Less College Football is Bad.

 

[tnapucco]

didn't know it was broke?

 

[romeo212000]

OP is a fheg

 

[jjc2009]

Conference championship games were never anything more than money grabs.

 

[Shanemansj13]

But you are OK arbitrarily picking a team to have a shot at a title who couldn't even win their own conference?

They have criteria, this playoff system is just fine. Now this year could be the biggest test for the CFP committee if Oklahoma and Utah both win. There is absolutely no good reason to expand to 8.

 

[Shanemansj13]

All fair points (even though I complain if anyone disagrees with me), but I don't completely agree. NFL season to NFL fans is exciting all year. Even teams like the Pats (and their fans) who know they will make the playoffs don't want to lose a game.

As for the preseason matchups, many seem to think an 8 teamer will come with first round at site of top 4 seeds. wont teams still then want to win all games so as to make sure they host round 1 game?

Another benefit could be better OOC scheduling as teams would know they can lose one but still get into the CFP.

Have said many times while I prefer 8, I'm good keeping it at 4. Once thought we must have 8 (before any playoff was created), but after winning the first CFP I could see thinking having to win a 3rd game to win it all might be too much to ask these kids.

In the NFL in weeks 16 and 17, if a team has a big lead and possibly a bye you will see them rest starters...that's what could happen in CFB. Every game should matter. Now, of course you will have teams that are undefeated going into a CCG and them still possibly making the playoffs but those are special situations. You expand and there are more games that are less meaningful. Also, even less incentive to schedule big OOC games bc your resume can be average and you can still get in. Clemson could schedule the 150th ranked OOC, play in their shitty conference and skate through the regular season and still easily make the playoffs without a blink. There are too many negatives to expanding from 4 to 8 when 4 is without a doubt the better format at this point.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Since we've had the playoff, how many times have the best and most deserving 4 not make the playoffs? If you think you have a team that was one of the best 4, do you really believe that team had a shot at the crystal ball? I can answer that, they didn't...

I can honestly say the committee was 5 for 5 so far. People want to expand bc they don't want to see the same teams going to the playoff and same teams winning but in reality this is every single sport other than MLB. You will see a couple teams vying for a championship, then the next 7-8 years you will see another group dominate and on and on. The teams with the best coaches, top recruiting classes and top talent on the field are 99% of the time going to be the best. 8 teams isn't changing anyone...we will see blowouts then what? We are stuck in this lost system where games don't matter in the regular season and the Final 4 are still the same Final 4 but they play one extra game.

 

[dtgold88]

That’s funny considering your entire previous post was a complete fabrication of your imagination while you did cry about how anyone can think Baylor should have been the team selected for the playoffs considering Ohio State lost their quarterback that was having a historic season. But keep on pretending that you didn’t.

Making shit up while crying about making shit up....again.

me - "I could understand if the committee chose Baylor or TCU"

If you need help understanding what that means, just ask. No charge. But it's not crying.

 

[dtgold88]

In the NFL in weeks 16 and 17, if a team has a big lead and possibly a bye you will see them rest starters...that's what could happen in CFB. Every game should matter. Now, of course you will have teams that are undefeated going into a CCG and them still possibly making the playoffs but those are special situations. You expand and there are more games that are less meaningful. Also, even less incentive to schedule big OOC games bc your resume can be average and you can still get in. Clemson could schedule the 150th ranked OOC, play in their shitty conference and skate through the regular season and still easily make the playoffs without a blink. There are too many negatives to expanding from 4 to 8 when 4 is without a doubt the better format at this point.

could it happen? sure. But suppose the idea many suggest happens and round 1 is at site of top 4 seeds?

Never mind you ignore this could happen now but doesn't. Neither OSU nor TAM needed to win last week. Both could have lost, won their CCG and gotten in. Yet both went all out for the W....and that was with no home field on the line.

Why, if they can get in by winning CCG, would teams schedule worse OOC?

 

[dtgold88]

I can honestly say the committee was 5 for 5 so far. People want to expand bc they don't want to see the same teams going to the playoff and same teams winning but in reality this is every single sport other than MLB. You will see a couple teams vying for a championship, then the next 7-8 years you will see another group dominate and on and on. The teams with the best coaches, top recruiting classes and top talent on the field are 99% of the time going to be the best. 8 teams isn't changing anyone...we will see blowouts then what? We are stuck in this lost system where games don't matter in the regular season and the Final 4 are still the same Final 4 but they play one extra game.

Many said the same going to 4. Seems to be OK still.

 

[dtgold88]

Didn't you say you weren't pushing for autobids? So now you want to champion one?

Are you seriously whiteknighting this guys article? Because if you are indeed doing that I'm going to enjoy taking this up a notch.

I said what you read in my comment......"you think Wetzel is a tard or putz because he disagrees with you? Has nothing to do with my opinions.

And, no, I have said my preference is CCG winners are in.....but would like to see a 3-loss max. Before you get your panties in a bunch, I've also said if they stay at 4 that is OK as well and wont have a meltdown if anyone prefers 4.

 

[dtgold88]

If there's an autobid, teams won't be afraid to have better OOC schedules. So the supposed "meaninglessness" of the OOC games could make games like Oregon/Auburn the rule rather than the exception.

I don't like CCG's, but if conferences are going to have more than 10 teams, they're a necessary evil. So I wouldn't agree with getting rid of them.

Don't know why the author would get rid of the CCG anyway, there isn't any reason to.

So, what I would like to see, means more football...

which you are apparently against ya commie bastard.

Yeah...I just don't get that rationale and we hear it a lot. To me, if teams knew they were in if they won their conference that would be incentive to schedule better OOC.

 

[dtgold88]

Since we've had the playoff, how many times have the best and most deserving 4 not make the playoffs? If you think you have a team that was one of the best 4, do you really believe that team had a shot at the crystal ball? I can answer that, they didn't...

I'd say 2015 OSU did. They were one of the best 4.

But, no, they didn't earn it and should not have been there.