An 8-team playoff may come sooner than many expected.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...voices-ready-to-discuss-8-team-playoff-format
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...voices-ready-to-discuss-8-team-playoff-format
College Football's 'Influential Voices' Ready to Discuss 8-Team Playoff Format
- Thread starter phoenix4nu
- Start date
I prefer staying at 4 because it encourages good non conference games to build strength of schedule and every game is important. What if a team has the conference sewed up do they sit starters the last game to avoid injury. Stay with 4.
All for an expansion to an 8 team playoff! Right now the rest of the bowls are pretty meaningless with some players now choosing to skip them because they are so meaningless. Automatically including each P5 conference champ would make winning your conference a very meaningful step.
And an 8 team playoff will make them even less meaningful, so there would immediately be calls to expand the playoff to 16 teams, then 32......
IF the SEC is against it, my initial thoughts are to be for it
I would expect the SEC to be against this. The current format has benefited them greatly.
On the other side of the coin, I'm certain that sports outlets will love this as it will greatly increase the controversy, annually, of who makes the tournament.
On the other side of the coin, I'm certain that sports outlets will love this as it will greatly increase the controversy, annually, of who makes the tournament.
If they take the 5 power conference champions those conference CCG will mean more trying to win your division knowing you will be in playoffs..
Those CCG will be playoff games for the one’s that think their will eventually be a 16 team playoff..
The 3 at large berths looks like 2 or all 3 will be rewarded for better records and who they beaten..
Give a team like UCF a chance to prove their worthy..
Those CCG will be playoff games for the one’s that think their will eventually be a 16 team playoff..
The 3 at large berths looks like 2 or all 3 will be rewarded for better records and who they beaten..
Give a team like UCF a chance to prove their worthy..
Last edited:
1. I called this some years back. We are closer to an NFL Lite league than many would like to believe. Teams will rest their starters once they get their spot at the table.
2. Expanding to 8 makes sense. If you are going to do it, do it right. Four teams is way too small.
3. Do away with many of the meaningless bowl games. They messed up what was special about Div IA so you may as well rip the band aid off and get it over with.
4. Pair back the teams in FBS (Div 1A). Way too many teams for quality football. Ban FBS teams from playing FCS teams.
2. Expanding to 8 makes sense. If you are going to do it, do it right. Four teams is way too small.
3. Do away with many of the meaningless bowl games. They messed up what was special about Div IA so you may as well rip the band aid off and get it over with.
4. Pair back the teams in FBS (Div 1A). Way too many teams for quality football. Ban FBS teams from playing FCS teams.
The SEC isn't against the expansion to 8, they are against the elimination of the conference championship games.
I disagree, the SEC plays cupcake non-conference schedules now and only 8 conference games, to give them the easiest path to the playoffs. A playoff with automatic bids might encourage teams to play tougher non-conference games because they won't potentially knock you out of playoff contention if you can still win your conference. In fact, they could boost your resume for a potential wild card spot if you don't win your conference.
Also, with an 8-team playoff, you would be playing for home-field advantage/seeding, so I don't think teams would sit starters to avoid injury. Because if you lose late in the season, you might end up dropping to a lower seed, and have to play a road game in December (potentially in a cold climate).
The northern schools and western schools need to stand up against the sec and acc because they will lobby hard not to have the hire seed have home field advantage, yes now there on top right now, look at last year bama squeaks in, you think they'd have like to go to Madison Wisconsin, with a new formula Wisconsin probably would have been a at large and higher seed than bama
It's just a ploy, a way to bring a chip to the negotiation table. Even with the CCG, you are adding 1 extra game for 6 teams. It can be worked out.
I wouldn't expect him to say "We are not signing up for any system that could potentially send LSU to Ann Arbor in December."
I would expect him to say what he did: "nope we are fine just the way it is".
I dont blame him. It's his job to do the best for his conference, and they are doing well with the current setup.
Agree there are many ways to make D1 college football and the post season better.
Disagree because you can use the bowls for the playoff games.
It's pretty obvious there aren't enough teams with the potential to be No. 1 to fill out a 16 or 32 team playoff scheme in football. You could probably make a case I think for anyone in the Top Ten to have No. 1 potential in the playoffs but that's about it.
If structured properly 8 would be perfect. Gives a good group of 5 a chance with a couple at large bids. Power 5 conf champs get in, however I think there should be stipulations on # of loses. Probably no more than 2 to qualify. This can be done. They'd be idiots if they ever tried going to 16.....but hey, the NCAA is full of them! Lol
You could just stipulate that any conference champ that finishes ranked in the Top 10 gets an automatic bid. That could prevent a 4-loss conference champ from getting in, while also giving a deserving G5 like UCF a bid.
I would say top 12 for both a Conference Champ and a G6. But I like that as a qualifier.
An 8 team playoff is the only way to go. That, and pay the players, but that's a separate issue.
Thing is though, doesn't that mean we would have to eliminate at least 1 non-conference game? You can't have players playing THAT many extra games, because the risk of injury starts getting pretty insane.
Thing is though, doesn't that mean we would have to eliminate at least 1 non-conference game? You can't have players playing THAT many extra games, because the risk of injury starts getting pretty insane.
But IF you eliminate ccg, that would more than likely guarantee two BIG and 2 SEC teams. Good for BIG. The norm for sec
They will need to continue loosening redshirt rules if a play off extended. The reason being is depth, IMO and desire competitive games.
Crucial injuries impact the college game more than the pros. There are very few teams that have across the board talent to withstand the 'wrong' injury, or have the ability to alter a gamelan or scheme quickly after losing a difference maker...Bama, Clemson, OSU (and USC of not long ago)..that's about it. This is even more important if it expands to 16.
If a team recruits well, the freshman in December are much different. If Nebraska could slide in over the next couple of years, the roster won't be where it needs to be to withstand a Martinez injury. More players to tap without losing eligibility would help make round 2, 3 and 4 a fairer fight.
The physical nature of the B1G make this even more important. A playoff structure will eliminate down time after a conf schedule like is experienced with bowl games now.
Crucial injuries impact the college game more than the pros. There are very few teams that have across the board talent to withstand the 'wrong' injury, or have the ability to alter a gamelan or scheme quickly after losing a difference maker...Bama, Clemson, OSU (and USC of not long ago)..that's about it. This is even more important if it expands to 16.
If a team recruits well, the freshman in December are much different. If Nebraska could slide in over the next couple of years, the roster won't be where it needs to be to withstand a Martinez injury. More players to tap without losing eligibility would help make round 2, 3 and 4 a fairer fight.
The physical nature of the B1G make this even more important. A playoff structure will eliminate down time after a conf schedule like is experienced with bowl games now.
They will do fine in any setup. They will all but be guaranteed 2 teams a year in that setup and wouldn't surprise for them to get 3 once in awhile.
FCS has a 24-team playoff, which is 4-5 extra games. Granted, they play an 11-game regular season, which I would be fine with at the FBS level too. For most teams, the 12th game is just a glorified scrimmage against a lower-level team. However, most programs need that game for the revenue.
Last edited:
Other than 6 or 8 bowls, all the rest are pretty much just entertainment for me.
Everybody knows there are probably only 5 or 6 teams each year that are good enough to be a national champ.
Play the rest of them, have fun, and get a little bragging rights
Everybody knows there are probably only 5 or 6 teams each year that are good enough to be a national champ.
Play the rest of them, have fun, and get a little bragging rights
It doesn’t allow much for advancement late season though. If Bama loses late then perception dictates that they still go to the playoff even though #5 was waiting in line and won.
So when does the SEC start scheduling “good” non-con games that don’t include FCS teams?
I like the 4 game playoff if every conference plays the same amount of conference games, say 9 and schedules 2 Power 5 and 1 G5 teams for non-con. If everyone does that, keep 4 team playoff. Otherwise, move it to 8 with how everything is set up now.
If you have to limit games during the regular season for injury concerns, then the playoff is the wrong idea. It's only going to be a couple teams that are going to be playing extra games and they're likely to be the most physically in shape teams to handle playing an extra game. I don't think having an extra game for the top two teams is enough of an injury concern to limit the regular season to 11 games.
They are doing the same as almost everyone else. In 5 years, just one time has any league had 2 of the top 4, last year with Georgia and Alabama.
I don't think this system benefits the SEC only. It helped Ohio St one time as well.
The bowl games have plenty of meaning. It's what you make of it, if your team thinks bowl games are meaningless, then you're probably going to get beat. If your team has a lot to play for in a bowl game, it can give you a lot of momentum heading into the next season. Just look at what happened to UCF and Auburn after their bowl game last year. UCF wins and has another great year this year while Auburn fell off the map. Look at our 2010 season. We were having a great year up until our bowl game. We weren't motivated to play because we had the same team twice and that bowl loss cast a shadow on what would have been looked at as our first great season since 2001.
A lot of you like to complain about bowl games but it is a great opportunity for young guys to get some extra practice. It gives something for the middle of the road teams to play for and be proud of. It also gives an opportunity for northern teams and fans to travel down south during the winter months. Bowl games are a college football tradition and are great for the game. In my opinion, it wouldn't be college football without them.
A lot of you like to complain about bowl games but it is a great opportunity for young guys to get some extra practice. It gives something for the middle of the road teams to play for and be proud of. It also gives an opportunity for northern teams and fans to travel down south during the winter months. Bowl games are a college football tradition and are great for the game. In my opinion, it wouldn't be college football without them.
Sweet, now we'll have 3 SEC teams in 2/3 years most likely, which will benefit their recruiting even more, and help the rich get richer. Brilliant. To think, this is going to come to fruition because a couple of leagues can't up their play enough to get in under the current system, so we have to lower the bar for them...reminds me of a lot of things happening in America right now, nobody gets left behind, everyone's a winner!!!
I still don't understand this thought process.
If the CFP poll was used to select the 8 teams, since 2014, including this year,
The Big 10 would have had 13 selections
The SEC would have had 9
The Big 12 - 6
The ACC - 5
The PAC - 4
Independents - 3
From the looks of things, the Big 10 has the most to gain.
You're assuming everyone is going to vote the exact same, when the variable is changing from 4 to 8. The SEC is the best, it isn't close, and it's very easy to imagine both championship participants are in regardless, so there's 2. You really think at least every other year they won't have one of the best in the next group of 6???
The SEC right now is 2 great programs (Bama and UGA) and 12 average to mediocre programs. SEC went 2-6 in bowl games last year that didn't involve Bama and UGA. The Big Ten went 7-1.
Overall, the SEC isn't that special. Even a mediocre program like Kentucky went 5-3 in the SEC this year.
Overall, the SEC isn't that special. Even a mediocre program like Kentucky went 5-3 in the SEC this year.
You are assuming they are going to vote differently. It isn't like it is a room full of SEC honks on the committee.
I would argue you may get better none conference games knowing it does not kill your chances of getting in if you lose.
I think then it would level the playing field and get everyone playing 9 conference games
What is your point? That the SEC is going to get 2 in every year? The Big Ten will get 2 in every year and that the other 3 league will all get 1 and sometimes 2?
