This weekend is why a 4 team playoff is perfect.

[xpuctaqpGT]

"Every game matters" is pure unadulterated horseshit.

Here's a list of the games played last weekend. Go ahead and tell me how many of these games actually mattered. Out of 62 games played...*MAYBE* 8 games mattered.

13-1 Kent St. Akron G5-G5
13-2 Bowling Green E. Michigan G5-G5
13-3 Ole Miss Miss. St. P5-P5
13-4 N. Illinois C. Michigan G5-G5
13-5 Virginia Tech Virginia P5-P5
13-6 Miami (Fla.) Pittsburgh P5-P5
13-7 Texas State Troy G5-G5
13-8 Ohio Buffalo G5-G5
13-9 Navy Houston G5-G5
13-10 South Florida UCF G5-G5
13-11 W. Michigan Toledo G5-G5
13-12 Baylor TCU P5-P5
13-13 Missouri Arkansas P5-P5
13-14 New Mexico San Diego St. G5-G5
13-15 Iowa Nebraska P5-P5
13-16 W. Kentucky FIU G5-G5
13-17 Texas Tech Texas P5-P5
13-18 California UCLA P5-P5
13-19 Clemson South Carolina P5-P5
13-20 Wyoming San Jose St. G5-G5
13-21 Notre Dame Stanford P5-P5
13-22 Ga. Southern UL Lafayette G5-G5
13-23 Boston College Syracuse P5-P5
13-24 Temple Tulsa G5-G5
13-25 Vanderbilt Tennessee P5-P5
13-26 Colorado Utah P5-P5
13-27 Washington St. Washington P5-P5
13-28 Duke Wake Forest P5-P5
13-29 App. St. Georgia State G5-G5
13-30 Indiana Purdue P5-P5
13-31 Oregon St. Oregon P5-P5
13-32 Kansas Oklahoma St. P5-P5
13-33 Idaho New Mexico St. G5-G5
13-34 Arkansas St. La.-Monroe G5-G5
13-35 North Carolina NC State P5-P5
13-36 East Carolina Memphis G5-G5
13-37 Penn St. Maryland P5-P5
13-38 Texas A&M LSU P5-P5
13-39 UTSA Louisiana Tech G5-G5
13-40 Louisville Kentucky P5-P5
13-41 Iowa St. Kansas St. P5-P5
13-42 Northwestern Illinois P5-P5
13-43 Georgia Georgia Tech P5-P5
13-44 Florida St. Florida P5-P5
13-45 Arizona Arizona St. P5-P5
13-46 Alabama Auburn P5-P5
13-47 UTEP UAB G5-G5
13-48 Connecticut Cincinnati G5-G5
13-49 West Virginia Oklahoma P5-P5
13-50 Utah St. Air Force G5-G5
13-51 Tulane SMU G5-G5
13-52 Wisconsin Minnesota P5-P5
13-53 Michigan St. Rutgers P5-P5
13-54 Ohio St. Michigan P5-P5
13-55 North Texas Rice G5-G5
13-56 FAU Charlotte G5-G5
13-57 Southern Miss Marshall G5-G5
13-58 Old Dominion M. Tenn. St. G5-G5
13-59 Boise St. Fresno St. G5-G5
13-60 UNLV Nevada G5-G5
13-61 BYU Hawaii G5-G5
13-62 Miami (Ohio) Ball St. G5-G5

 

[TheRobotDevil]

But going to 8 games is just means there will be 3 or 4 teams that believe they deserve to be included because they're a top 8 team. Southern Cal isn't the best team in the country, neither is Stanford. They should be in over Ohio State if both win because of their resumes, but that doesn't mean that Southern Cal has had the best season and should be a National Champion. And, an 8 team playoff with 5 autoberths and likely a G5 team means you'd have 2 at large bids.

In that scenario you'd have this this year:
Alabama
Clemson/Miami winner
Auburn/UGA winner
Wisconsin/Ohio State winner
USC/Stanford winner
Oklahoma/TCU winner
G5

And the final spot goes to a conference championship loser. And then you're opening the door to teams playing 3 times in a season, 3 loss national champions and OOC games that don't mean anything.

Exactly there are going to be teams that believe they belong in like this year. I.e. OSU etc.. Where PAC 5 auto bids clears that up. And gets teams like Bama in at the same time. A combination of teams that earned their way in winning their conference. And 3 at large which keeps SOS up rather than just going with 4 teams the committee likes. Exianded field higher competition level. That scenerio looks much more promising than the current scenerio. And all the CCGs actually hold meaning

 

[Deep Creek]

Yeah? And?
Saying 'every game matters' implies as it relates to the topic of how many playoff seats to have doesn't it?

I mean every game doesn't have playoff implications and games for teams that are 1-10 really don't matter much in the last week of the season. Doesn't that go without saying?

For the purposes of discussing whether or not to expand from 4 to 8 or 16 or any of the other flavors pitched, the simple truth is every slot you add takes something away from some amount of games greater than zero in the regular season and possibly diminishes the importance and relevancy of conference championship games.

If we had 8 there is no doubt we would add teams that didn't make into their conference championship games, more or less add some that lost those championship games. That's a fact. This removes intensity of those games and the importance FOR TEAMS ACTUALLY IN THE PLAYOFF HUNT of games down the stretch. You might even see a few teams rest all of their stars in their rivalry game/last week if it is irrelevant enough because they are undefeated and would be in with a loss anyway. It would start looking more and more like the ho hum NFL playoffs where losses don't mean much and half the league has a chance at winning it all and teams can rest players going into the final weeks.

None of this is made up. We already have that now with 4 over 2. A few short years ago there was zero chance a 2 loss team was in the BCS final and no team had any chance of even thinking about resting players or saying ANY game ever was not important. There were those saying Bama's game against Auburn might not matter even though a loss knocked them out of the CCG. Now it still might cost them a playoff spot, but there's no chance they would have been in the BCS finals in our last system. There are few examples of that now, but there would be many many more if we again double it to 8. These are facts.

Yeah? and? what?

I was talking about the group that spew the shit that EVERY game in the regular season mattered. You just pointed out they don't as well. Not arguing there are a lot that do matter and the impact is significant as you have pointed out. But using the term EVERY game in the regular season matters is just plain old horseshit.

And as far as your statement of "A few short years ago there was zero chance a 2 loss team was in the BCS final....", how about LSU 2007? BCS Champions 12-2!!!!!!!

Guess 10 years doesn't qualify as "a few short years" in your timeline.

 

[DHoey]

But going to 8 games is just means there will be 3 or 4 teams that believe they deserve to be included because they're a top 8 team. Southern Cal isn't the best team in the country, neither is Stanford. They should be in over Ohio State if both win because of their resumes, but that doesn't mean that Southern Cal has had the best season and should be a National Champion. And, an 8 team playoff with 5 autoberths and likely a G5 team means you'd have 2 at large bids.

In that scenario you'd have this this year:
Alabama
Clemson/Miami winner
Auburn/UGA winner
Wisconsin/Ohio State winner
USC/Stanford winner
Oklahoma/TCU winner
G5

And the final spot goes to a conference championship loser. And then you're opening the door to teams playing 3 times in a season, 3 loss national champions and OOC games that don't mean anything.

OOC games will always mean something.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

No it doesn't....and you even made the point with the "Had Stanford not lost...." qualifier. Once you've lost enough games, the rest of them don't matter one damned bit in regards to the CFP. Colorado versus Utah the last game of the year DID NOT MATTER so don't give me that "every game matters shit" because it doesn't.

And, Baylor versus Liberty back in September didn't matter either. This week's make up game between FSU and ULM only matters for FSU's bowl streak...IT DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL FOR CFP PURPOSES...even in regards to trying to help Bama and Clemson's SOS.

Some games definitely matter, but NOT EVERY GAME matters. So get outta here with the every game matters shit!

Had Stanford not lost to San Diego State to doesn't seem like a solid arguement to discount the PAC. SC is heading in to the CCG with the same record. As an OSU team that was blown out by Oklahoma and unranked Iowa. Seems to me like games have selective meaning in this format. Too much meaning influenced by the polls. Or how games can be spun to make a case for a comittee. Expansion with 5 conference champions and three at large. Adds meaning to several games emphasizing conference games. And the urgency to win. Will keeping OOC up for the 3 at large spots.Thats why I like what Wisconsin did in a way. It shows teams can coast into the play off discussion or get in with a watered down schedule in this format. And hopefully leads to the next level for CFP

 

[WizardHawk]

Yeah? and? what?

I was talking about the group that spew the shit that EVERY game in the regular season mattered. You just pointed out they don't as well. Not arguing there are a lot that do matter and the impact is significant as you have pointed out. But using the term EVERY game in the regular season matters is just plain old horseshit.

And as far as your statement of "A few short years ago there was zero chance a 2 loss team was in the BCS final....", how about LSU 2007? BCS Champions 12-2!!!!!!!

Guess 10 years doesn't qualify as "a few short years" in your timeline.

So you want to poach what 'every game matters' means to discredit as it relates to THIS THREAD ABOUT HOW MANY PLAYOFF SPOTS TO HAVE and then want to point out the exception to a hard rule as some sort of gotcha that the rule then must not exist?

There can be no argument at all that adding more spots waters down the process to get there. It is pure fact and no amount of spin can change it. At 4 we now have many more 2 loss teams in play than ever could have been with 2. Can you not agree with that? Then the point made is moot yes? And further it is very much also true there will be almost no year without a two loss team with 8 and likely almost no year without a team that either lost their CCG or wasn't even good enough to make it that gets in.

Winning regular season games matters more in college football than any other major US sport. Period. Stop. It doesn't compare to anything else. And while a great many want it to start looking more and more like the NFL because they love the NFL, not all of us agree with that. Many of us love the adrenaline rush of close games in September having so much on the line. You will not have it to the same extent as you go to 8, and what so many others really want, 16 game playoffs. There are a vocal group wanting what FCS has and going well beyond that.

I simply want no part of that myself.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

I do. Deal with it.

Well, this reminds me of when people tell me they think the MLB wildcards should get a three game series. I debate it with them for a minute (which I'll skip in this case), and then tell them that I'm glad I get my way and you don't.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

OOC games will always mean something.

OOC would hold meaning either way.It most likely carries more meaning in an expanded play offs. The biggest difference is conference games and championships gain meaning. Auto bids eliminates politics. Those spots are concrete and determined by the teams on the field. Teams need to keep OOC up for the three at large bids.Where they can use SOS and other human aspects to determine the slots. It would also reward teams that schedule higher SOS. By giving them a slit they wouldn't have had. Because another team in their conference went undefeated with a weak schedule.

Look at this year I can't say OSU or SC etc are top 4amd both are in CCGs. I can't say teams like Bama aren't top four. But could say they are all top 8. If SC and OSU win their CCG's. Play offs were a great start. Not sure why anyone wouldn't want more clarity. I think they expand makes too much sense

 

[uncfan103]

OOC would hold meaning either way.It most likely carries more meaning in an expanded play offs. The biggest difference is conference games and championships gain meaning. Auto bids eliminates politics. Those spots are concrete and determined by the teams on the field. Teams need to keep OOC up for the three at large bids.Where they can use SOS and other human aspects to determine the slots. It would also reward teams that schedule higher SOS. By giving them a slit they wouldn't have had. Because another team in their conference went undefeated with a weak schedule.

Look at this year I can't say OSU or SC etc are top 4amd both are in CCGs. I can't say teams like Bama aren't top four. But could say they are all top 8. If SC and OSU win their CCG's. Play offs were a great start. Not sure why anyone wouldn't want more clarity. I think they expand makes too much sense

You can’t say OSU and SC are top four, just like you can’t say Penn State isn’t top 8. Look at who gets left out if you go to 8, it’ll be teams that are probably one of the 8 best. But, the playoff isn’t for crowing the four best or eight it’s for crowing the best.

 

[uncfan103]

"Every game matters" is pure unadulterated horseshit.

Here's a list of the games played last weekend. Go ahead and tell me how many of these games actually mattered. Out of 62 games played...*MAYBE* 8 games mattered.

What does this prove? And how does that change things if we go to 8?

1. Playoffs
2. Conference Title
3. Beat your rivals
4. Bowl eligibility

That's what matters, and in that order. Once 1 is out of the picture, at least you still have #2 to play for. That can still get you into the playoff, but it's not a guarantee because you lost to someone. Once you miss out on #2 you still have #3 and #4 to look forward to. For some teams 1 isn't an option, for others #4 isn't an option. But, overall there's teams every week with something to gain. What is gained by going to 8 teams, other than eliminating politics and adding teams that haven't had the best season giving them a chance to win a national championship?

 

[TheRobotDevil]

You can’t say OSU and SC are top four, just like you can’t say Penn State isn’t top 8. Look at who gets left out if you go to 8, it’ll be teams that are probably one of the 8 best. But, the playoff isn’t for crowing the four best or eight it’s for crowing the best.

And this would be the problem with the current systems definition "4 best". Or crowning "the best". In an 8 game play off with P5 conference champion auto bids. The debate based on opinion is eliminated. Penn State wouldn't be in the debate with OSU SC in that scenerio. The meaning Conference championships and conference games is elevated. And teams seeking the at large bids need the OOC. It actually increases the meaning of the games. And crowns the best team. Not the best team in the eyes of the committee and press

 

[uncfan103]

And this would be the problem with the current systems definition "4 best". Or crowning "the best". In an 8 game play off with P5 conference champion auto bids. The debate based on opinion is eliminated. Penn State wouldn't be in the debate with OSU SC in that scenerio. The meaning Conference championships and conference games is elevated. And teams seeking the at large bids need the OOC. It actually increases the meaning of the games. And crowns the best team. Not the best team in the eyes of the committee and press

They'd be in a debate with all the CCG losers, and teams that don't participate for the last spot. Southern Cal played themselves out of the playoff spot, and just because someone gets in the playoffs that doesn't deserve it doesn't mean all teams that are on the same level of the four playoff teams should be in competing.

 

[rmilia1]

I'd rather have 4 more great playoff games as opposed to 2 play in games and 2 games where only 1 team is in for sure if they win. If you had a 8 team playoff all these games would still matter as the loser in most of them would be outside the top 8. I will give you that an 8 team playoff almost makes making yourvleague title game a bad thing in some cases.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

They'd be in a debate with all the CCG losers, and teams that don't participate for the last spot. Southern Cal played themselves out of the playoff spot, and just because someone gets in the playoffs that doesn't deserve it doesn't mean all teams that are on the same level of the four playoff teams should be in competing.

However the debate between the CCG losers and at large. Would hold less of an impact. Than the debate over "top 4" in the playoffs now. Idk I prefer logic and clarity. The play offs to be decided on the field rather than through polls and committees. Much less impact and outside human influence in deciding the final three. As opposed to the top 4. Or In an ideal case top 5. I just don't buy into teams deserving it being based on an off the field discussion. But rather the results on the field

 

[Deep Creek]

Winning regular season games matters more in college football than any other major US sport.

I never said it didn't. Just said not every fucking regular season game matters. Can you read?

 

[WizardHawk]

I never said it didn't. Just said not every fucking regular season game matters. Can you read?

Fun, I can use facepalms too!!!

Relax man. I made a point you clearly aren't going to go against any longer. No need for the drama and anger.

 

[Deep Creek]

What is gained by going to 8 teams, other than eliminating politics and adding teams that haven't had the best season giving them a chance to win a national championship?

How are you going to do this?

 

[Deep Creek]

Fun, I can use facepalms too!!!

Relax man. I made a point you clearly aren't going to go against any longer. No need for the drama and anger.

Clearly?

 

[huskers1217]

We couldn't even make it with 128 spots.

Nebraska is probably #129. But we would bitch about it

 

[WizardHawk]

Clearly?

Well yeah, if you are now clinging to posts about things you didn't say instead of adding to things that were said it's clear you are past that. I mean isn't that obvious?

I have zero problems with the people who want 8 or 16 team playoffs, I simply do not agree with them. Some who want it kept at 4 may not have the same reasons or otherwise explain their thoughts the same way.

Whatever your views are on that topic are fine with me and I'm not looking for a fight. Just added my 2c on the whole 'every game matters' part of the discussion that always comes up with playoff expansion.

Have a good day.