If we're going to expand, why not do top 6-8 straight up?

[gob]

I disagree with this completely. If all you have to do is win your conference, you will schedule patsies the rest of the time to rest for your conference schedule. THOSE are the game you have to win. Who wants to get beat up playing top ten teams when you can play cupcakes and save your starters for the IMPORTANT games?
Auto bids will ensure that OOC goes to hell in a hand-basket.

Definitely disagree. Iron sharpens iron

 

[7Samurai13]

Sure . I'm for 16 personally as I think you'd get much better ooc games and you could do autobids AND still guarantee getting every team in who has even a slight argument but I'm just telling you what the narrative would be from those who oppose expansion

How many games will you have to shave off the regular season for that though?

 

[rmilia1]

The key to getting great ooc games is the reward for simply scheduling the game needs to outweigh whether you win it or lose it .

Right now there's no doubt you're penalized more for losing to an Oklahona than you are rewarded for beating Ohio ( for example ). If you want great ooc games you need the reward for scheduling Oklahoma to be more than it is for beating Ohio .

You aren't going to get that with 8 teams

 

[Hang_On_Sloopy08]

I disagree with this completely. If all you have to do is win your conference, you will schedule patsies the rest of the time to rest for your conference schedule. THOSE are the game you have to win. Who wants to get beat up playing top ten teams when you can play cupcakes and save your starters for the IMPORTANT games?
Auto bids will ensure that OOC goes to hell in a hand-basket.

False. You can afford to schedule tougher OOC games because losing one won’t be as detrimental as it now. With an auto-bid by way of conference champion, your school can take on both the payday and risk of playing higher level OOC games because it’s a resume booster should you lose the conference but do well versus your OOC games. What you described above is putting all your eggs in one basket. This way teams in the B1G and PAC for example have a better outside chance of making the playoffs even if they don’t win their conference.

 

[huskers1217]

No one needs humans other than setting up what we already have.

P5 champs we in. Remaining unbeatens are in. At large can be based on the highest remaining rankings in the Massey Composite (which aggregates the 80+
rankings out there).

No committee necessary, and every team has a pathway to the playoff.

DACA for UCF?

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I swear that 8-5 Wisconsin team gets used more than a ten dollar prostitute.

The next time a conference has two major teams on probation we can be sure to use that as an out

 

[tnapucco]

 

[rmilia1]

How many games will you have to shave off the regular season for that though?

I wouldn't take any off but if you wanted to take 1 that'd be ok. If you start a playoff like that mid December you're not impacting any school .

 

[Deep Creek]

No harm at all.

If you have autobids plus a few at large, most everyone will be happy.

Maybe "most", will be....but just maybe. There are a whole bunch of CFB fans that truly believe an increased number of playoff teams will completely ruin college football.

 

[Deep Creek]

DACA for UCF?

Now that's good right there. Well done husker.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Maybe "most", will be....but just maybe. There are a whole bunch of CFB fans that truly believe an increased number of playoff teams will completely ruin college football.

Completely ruin seems a bit strong

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

Maybe "most", will be....but just maybe. There are a whole bunch of CFB fans that truly believe an increased number of playoff teams will completely ruin college football.

They also thought going to 4 would “ruin” it, and before that the BCS would “ruin” it.

 

[Deep Creek]

Completely ruin seems a bit strong

Not for some CFB fans. They are 100% convinced it will completely ruin it. The ruining already started with the BCS and got worse with the CFP. Adding teams will be the last straw according to them. It has already ruined FCS, DII and DIII. Just ask 'em.

 

[Deep Creek]

They also thought going to 4 would “ruin” it, and before that the BCS would “ruin” it.

Yes they did. And it hasn't ruined it has it?

But in their thinking, any change is automatically bad...even before it is tried. Probably the same people that didn't believe cell phones would work.

 

[BamaDude]

Ya'll beat dead horses much?

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Not for some CFB fans. They are 100% convinced it will completely ruin it. The ruining already started with the BCS and got worse with the CFP. Adding teams will be the last straw according to them. It has already ruined FCS, DII and DIII. Just ask 'em.

I simply cannot see how having more meaningful games would ruin college football.

Now getting past eight we start watering it down quite a bit. But even then it's better than what we had in the 90's

Sweet Nebraska and Michigan split a title? Super duper

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

I simply cannot see how having more meaningful games would ruin college football.

Now getting past eight we start watering it down quite a bit. But even then it's better than what we had in the 90's

Sweet Nebraska and Michigan split a title? Super duper

Exactly. Adding 4 teams has a net of 2 additional postseason games (since those 4 teams would’ve constituted 2 bowl games). How that could be “bad” taxes the imagination. It’s like thinking dating a nymphomanical supermodel would be “bad”.

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

Ya'll beat dead horses much?

No, but in Auburn it’s called “foreplay”.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

And most importantly 1984 BYU would have been taken behind the woodshed by whatever worthy opponent was selected.

 

[Fitbud]

I am just curious on the contradictory nature of people's thinking.

If you support 6 or 8 teams, just have the committee pick the teams and their seeding order.

I don't understand why we need to argue that an 8-5 Wisconsin team, 11-2 Florida State team, or 10-3 Washington should get in, if they failed to make the top 6 or 8.

We do have bowls, which reward teams for winning a magical conference. These are a substitute for a college hoops or FCS playoff bracket.

You could argue that the polls are biased and can't be trusted, but then again, you're advocating for using the humans to pick the teams. It seems rather contradictory.

We will expand to a 6 or 8 team playoff eventually. The P5 is just milking it for all it's worth.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Exactly. Adding 4 teams has a net of 2 additional postseason games (since those 4 teams would’ve constituted 2 bowl games). How that could be “bad” taxes the imagination. It’s like thinking dating a nymphomanical supermodel would be “bad”.

Then we get the what about the school types....like somehow the basketball players manage to play 40 games if they make it all the way but that one playoff game meant Dwayne Haskins failed Accounting 1