Playoff Expansion

[KnoxvilleVol13]

I keep hearing everybody argue between 4 and 8 teams in the playoffs. Personally I believe 4 is fine and any more than that just continues to devalue the regular season. Which is what makes college football great and unique. Which got me thinking..

Why doesn’t CFB just use the NFL 6 team method? Top 2 have byes. 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5. You could do the power 5 champions and one wild card team or just let the committee pick all 6. Nets 2 extra games and would be a happy middle ground for the debate. Just a random thought, what do you guys think?

 

[DuckinVol]

Bring back the BCS.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I think expanding the college football playoff is a bit like the train to Abilene. Don't know if you've heard that story, it's an old one. Bottom line is, everyone in this family was on the train, going to Abilene for the day, because they each thought everyone else wanted to go. In reality, none of them did.

We keep talking about expanding the playoffs because everyone thinks that everyone else is interested in talking about expanding the playoffs.

Now, I'm not saying NO one wants an expanded playoff...but far fewer do than we're generally aware of. And that is among the media, among the coaches and administrations, even among the fan bases.

You hear the ones calling for change (like Mike Leach at Washington State and the occasional ESPN talking head). It's a squeaky wheel thing...they get attention BECAUSE they're making abnormal amounts of noise about it.

I think most folks understand the cost that comes with an additional round of games ... academically and physically, both.

My intuition says, most folks are happy leaving it at four.

Go Vols!

 

[bpalmer28]

I see nothing wrong with 4. My problem with expansion is it adds to the number of games these kids play and increases their risk to injury.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I'd take 6 but prefer 8, although right now 4 is fine because we can't even get good semifinals.

I don't buy the argument that it devalues the regular season, if it goes to 8. More than that I think it would but 8 you're still talking a small percentage getting a shot. And if you make 5 of the spots reserved for P5 conference champs and maybe 1 spot reserved for the highest non-P5 team, that's still only 2 at large spots that everyone else is fighting over. It also puts more emphasis on winning your conference, which seems to be something people complain about not mattering as much anymore.

But I'd take expanding to 6 if that's all they'll agree on.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Bring back the BCS.

Hell no.

 

[hog88]

I'd be fine with expanding the playoffs to 6 teams, P5 conference champions and 1 wild card. Top 2 seeds get a 1st round bye.

1 caveat - P5 schools can only play P5 schools. That will keep the value of the regular season.

 

[DuckinVol]

Having four has already devalued the regular season and the bowls. I enjoyed the BCS. Unless you actually believe the best team always wins, why is a playoff superior to the BCS?

 

[05_never_again]

Bring back the BCS.

After Alabama lost to LSU, I was reading the comment section of an article on al.com that was criticizing Alabama's drop to #5 in the CFP. A couple of people in the comments, I'm assuming Bammers, said that the CFP should be dispensed with because of potential human bias and be replaced with "an algorithm" that picks the teams.

I thought it was hilarious because 1) that's exactly what the BCS was obviously and 2) it highlights the bandwagon nature of their fanbase - the people making these comments I guess weren't Alabama fans in the pre-CFP era, or they at the very least weren't paying attention.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Having four has already devalued the regular season and the bowls. I enjoyed the BCS. Unless you actually believe the best team always wins, why is a playoff superior to the BCS?

How has it devalued the bowls? I see this over and over and I want to know how the hell adding basically a plus one devalues bowls nobody gave a damn about before. Show me the reality where people have cared about the Little Ceaser's Bowl.

How does adding an extra game devalue the regular season anymore than the BCS did? Alabama won an NC in the BCS era and didn't win the conference, just like in the playoff.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I think expanding the college football playoff is a bit like the train to Abilene. Don't know if you've heard that story, it's an old one. Bottom line is, everyone in this family was on the train, going to Abilene for the day, because they each thought everyone else wanted to go. In reality, none of them did.

We keep talking about expanding the playoffs because everyone thinks that everyone else is interested in talking about expanding the playoffs.

Now, I'm not saying NO one wants an expanded playoff...but far fewer do than we're generally aware of. And that is among the media, among the coaches and administrations, even among the fan bases.

You hear the ones calling for change (like Mike Leach at Washington State and the occasional ESPN talking head). It's a squeaky wheel thing...they get attention BECAUSE they're making abnormal amounts of noise about it.

I think most folks understand the cost that comes with an additional round of games ... academically and physically, both.

My intuition says, most folks are happy leaving it at four.

Go Vols!

So now they care? They didn't seem to care when they added conference championship games and a 12th regular season game.

 

[OriginalCoach]

I see nothing wrong with 4. My problem with expansion is it adds to the number of games these kids play and increases their risk to injury.

Tell that to the DII/III (FCS) playoff teams. They’ll probably pat ya on the head and say “move along, kid”.

 

[VolMarine1371]

Just

I keep hearing everybody argue between 4 and 8 teams in the playoffs. Personally I believe 4 is fine and any more than that just continues to devalue the regular season. Which is what makes college football great and unique. Which got me thinking..

Why doesn’t CFB just use the NFL 6 team method? Top 2 have byes. 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5. You could do the power 5 champions and one wild card team or just let the committee pick all 6. Nets 2 extra games and would be a happy middle ground for the debate. Just a random thought, what do you guys think?

hell let’s just use the FCS middle and have about 10 bowls games outside of that and be done with it.

 

[05_never_again]

Having four has already devalued the regular season and the bowls. I enjoyed the BCS. Unless you actually believe the best team always wins, why is a playoff superior to the BCS?

I don't see how it devalues the bowls. During the BCS era, the teams that made the Liberty Bowl, for example, wouldn't have been in a 4, 8, or even 16 team playoff had one existed. So why has the Liberty Bowl lost value?

What has happened, IMO, is that guys so are going pro right after the season have devalued the non-playoff bowl games. A bunch don't want to risk injury in them, but they could have been doing that in the BCS era too. What was the point of playing in a bowl game other than the national title game? That's a cultural change not caused by the creation of a playoff.

 

[DuckinVol]

How has it devalued the bowls? I see this over and over and I want to know how the hell adding basically a plus one devalues bowls nobody gave a damn about before. Show me the reality where people have cared about the Little Ceaser's Bowl.

How does adding an extra game devalue the regular season anymore than the BCS did? Alabama won an NC in the BCS era and didn't win the conference, just like in the playoff.

There was rarely any talk of players sitting out "meaningless bowls" before the playoffs.

 

[Chilmonty]

The playoff is to insure that at least the 2 best teams in the country are in and it works!

5 an 6 will always scream bloody murder but they are irrelevant 1 and 2 is what matters!

 

[05_never_again]

There was rarely any talk of players sitting out "meaningless bowls" before the playoffs.

I'd argue that's a cultural change not caused by the playoff, and is caused in large part by it becoming a more mainstream opinion that college players should get paid.

I don't see how switching from a 2-team to a 4-team playoff makes the Liberty Bowl or Independence Bowl less meaningful. Liberty and Independence Bowl teams wouldn't have been in a 4-team playoff had one existed during the BCS era.

 

[bpalmer28]

Tell that to the DII/III (FCS) playoff teams. They’ll probably pat ya on the head and say “move along, kid”.

I'm sure you're making a good point and I'm just missing it, but the DII champion played one less game than Clemson did last year. If we expand the playoff to 6 or 8 teams, our champion will have to play 16 games. The DII champion plays 14.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I don't see how it devalues the bowls. During the BCS era, the teams that made the Liberty Bowl, for example, wouldn't have been in a 4, 8, or even 16 team playoff. So why has the Liberty Bowl lose value?

What has happened, IMO, is that guys so are going pro right after the season have devalued the non-playoff bowl games. A bunch don't want to risk injury in them, but they could have been doing that in the BCS era too. What was the point of playing in a bowl game other than the national title game? That's a cultural change not caused by the creation of a playoff.

I'd also argue the number of bowls has way more devalued the regular season than the playoff or even the BCS did. There are so many bowls that 6-6 for almost every team that meets it and especially a P5 team is a guarantee for a bowl bid. And in some years 5-7 gets you a spot.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

There was rarely any talk of players sitting out "meaningless bowls" before the playoffs.

Yet it's still pretty rare. Unless you think a handful of players that do it every year is some kind of epidemic.

And what about coaches that take jobs and leave their teams before their bowl? Nobody ever seemed to have a problem with that, but when the players started thinking about their future suddenly everyone gets their panties in a wad.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I'd argue that's a cultural change not caused by the playoff, and is caused in large part by it becoming a more mainstream opinion that college players should get paid.

I don't see how switching from a 2-team to a 4-team playoff makes the Liberty Bowl or Independence Bowl less meaningful. Liberty and Independence Bowl teams wouldn't have been in a 4-team playoff had one existed during the BCS era.

Don't you know, before the playoff those 2 bowls were cultural events that nobody missed!

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I'm sure you're making a good point and I'm just missing it, but the DII champion played one less game than Clemson did last year. If we expand the playoff to 6 or 8 teams, our champion will have to play 16 games. The DII champion plays 14.

Yeah but they also play less regular season games. Which goes back to my point that nobody seemed to worry about player safety when they added a 12th regular season game and conference championships. In fact if it's such a problem, go back to 11 regular season games. But we both know that's not happening.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

I think expanding the college football playoff is a bit like the train to Abilene. Don't know if you've heard that story, it's an old one. Bottom line is, everyone in this family was on the train, going to Abilene for the day, because they each thought everyone else wanted to go. In reality, none of them did.

We keep talking about expanding the playoffs because everyone thinks that everyone else is interested in talking about expanding the playoffs.

Now, I'm not saying NO one wants an expanded playoff...but far fewer do than we're generally aware of. And that is among the media, among the coaches and administrations, even among the fan bases.

You hear the ones calling for change (like Mike Leach at Washington State and the occasional ESPN talking head). It's a squeaky wheel thing...they get attention BECAUSE they're making abnormal amounts of noise about it.

I think most folks understand the cost that comes with an additional round of games ... academically and physically, both.

My intuition says, most folks are happy leaving it at four.

Go Vols!

NCAA Division 2 teams play at least three playoff games every year. My grandson's team with to the finals of D2 3-4 years ago and his team had no problems with academics or fatigue. No reason why the play offs could not be expanded, except that many of the 47 un-needed bowl games would be eliminated. Only a few fans attend or watch on TV those bowl games anyway. These games only exist because the NCAA makes money from the TV revenues.

 

[OriginalCoach]

I'm sure you're making a good point and I'm just missing it, but the DII champion played one less game than Clemson did last year. If we expand the playoff to 6 or 8 teams, our champion will have to play 16 games. The DII champion plays 14.

Montana State beat Austin Peay last weekend and are now in the DII Semi-finals. Austin Peay was their 14th game with 2 more to go if they get in the finals. That’s 16 for all you geniuses arguing against expansion.

 

[JMSqb11]

I keep hearing everybody argue between 4 and 8 teams in the playoffs. Personally I believe 4 is fine and any more than that just continues to devalue the regular season. Which is what makes college football great and unique. Which got me thinking..

Why doesn’t CFB just use the NFL 6 team method? Top 2 have byes. 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5. You could do the power 5 champions and one wild card team or just let the committee pick all 6. Nets 2 extra games and would be a happy middle ground for the debate. Just a random thought, what do you guys think?

There is zero reason to expand. At the end of the day, the playoff got the top 4 teams right this year. Literally no controversy.

More times than not, the playoff committee has gotten it right.