Getting bored of CFP

[Muskyhunter16]

Anyone else kind of getting bored of the playoffs every year? Always the same 5 or 6 teams for the most part, every year with a tiny chance you get a new team like an LSU or Washington once every 5 years. I think it’s really hurting the sport overall and they’ll need to strongly consider expanding it to 8 teams real soon or going back to the old bowl system. I honestly like the old system more and allows for much more discussion and interest from everyone on who is the real champion. Yes you don’t get a real champion but who cares, all the “BCS” bowls meant so much more and teams outside of the SEC aren’t eliminated with 1 loss. Not really feeing another Bama, Clemson, Ohio State invitational again with another ND semi-final blowout.

 

[John_J_Rambo]

Their typically aren’t 4 deserving teams, much less 8.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

So your solution is to add more mediocrity? That doesn't sound right to me.

 

[ThereIsNoPlace]

This year is a really tough measure for a fan of college football. Typically there'll be a few more dramatic conference and rivalry games leading up to the CFP. Let's check back next year, and if it's Clemson, Bama & OSU again, we should indeed talk about expansion. Also, a couple outdoor cold weather quarterfinal sites should be considered. I know, I know, crazy old man talk. While you're removing yourself from my lawn, scoop off that last bit of snow around my mail box wood ya?

 

[bingo65]

Anyone else kind of getting bored of the playoffs every year? Always the same 5 or 6 teams for the most part, every year with a tiny chance you get a new team like an LSU or Washington once every 5 years. I think it’s really hurting the sport overall and they’ll need to strongly consider expanding it to 8 teams real soon or going back to the old bowl system. I honestly like the old system more and allows for much more discussion and interest from everyone on who is the real champion. Yes you don’t get a real champion but who cares, all the “BCS” bowls meant so much more and teams outside of the SEC aren’t eliminated with 1 loss. Not really feeing another Bama, Clemson, Ohio State invitational again with another ND semi-final blowout.

i lose interest as soon as the regular season is over. their are only about 6-8 teams that have a shot at the playoff each year and they are the same programs every year. They are the best teams but its boring. there is no parity at the top of college fb. the parity is in the middle thats why the regular season is so interesting. personally i wouldn't mind if they reduced scholarship limits by another 5 in an effort to balance the scales a little more

 

[SkerInCo]

If Nebraska isn't part of the post season, I have zero interest in any of that.

 

[TruHusker]

If there are always the same 5 or 6 teams at the top, what will make a difference if the playoffs are expanded to 8? I guess you would have the occasional "upset" potential.

Yes, the same could be said of Nebraska back in the 90's if they would have had this system in place, always at the top and in the conversation. I think the best bet would be to start fielding a winning team and go from there.

 

[Herbert Husker]

Their typically aren’t 4 deserving teams, much less 8.

I think sports are at their best when we don't worry as much about picking the "most deserving" team as the champion. I actually think it's un-American to do so. The European soccer format of just playing a regular season and crowning a champion without a playoff is boring. It might be the optimal method for determining the best team, but sports aren't just about crowning the best team as the champion.

Were the Giants more deserving of the Super Bowl than the undefeated Patriots? Of course not. They barely made the playoffs. If we cared about who deserved it more, it was the Patriots. But that's a game we'll never forget, which is what matters most in entertainment. Same goes for George Mason. Did they "deserve" to be a Final Four team? No. They were at best a top 40 team in college basketball that year. But we Americans love seeing athletes step up their game on the biggest of stages to pull off upsets. It's a major part of what sports are all about.

With that said, I couldn't care less if a team like Iowa State is "deserving" of being in the playoff after losing to Louisiana. If they go and upset Alabama, they will have delivered all we ask for as sports fans: a moment where they stepped up on the biggest stage and pulled off a heroic upset. And there still is importance to the regular season. It's not like a team can go 8-4 and still get in the playoff. I'm just asking for a little more leeway to make the playoff more entertaining.

 

[BeautifulDayintheNeighborhood]

Everyone deserves a trophy

 

[drubendall]

I liked the old system better. Let college be college. Regardless, we know Alabama or Clemson is the best team at the end of the year. The endless arguing was fun.

 

[Mr.Scary13]

Take the top 2 teams from power 5 conferences with 2 at large and have at it. Top 2 being division winners from in conference and that being based solely on division record, not overall conference record.

 

[scarletred]

Covid year not much to judge on but the SEC and ACC..

 

[jteten]

Adding teams would be good for revenue, excitement and conversation. The NCAA is f’n stupid to keep it at 4. Absolutely idiotic. The arguments will still remain, but the engagement will increase when more teams have a shot at the playoffs.

 

[mkbrkloster]

So your solution is to add more mediocrity? That doesn't sound right to me.

Elite players want to win a championship. They know they have to go to one of 5 schools to get that done, so that's where they all go.
It used to be that a number 15 team could compete against number 2. Now that game is a blowout.
Would increasing the field size change that over time, Maybe.

 

[TripleOption67]

I'm from the old school days of college football where bowl games meant something and you could have 3 or 4 teams playing in different bowl games on New Year's day with a shot at winning the national championship. You were locked on to the TV all day from the Cotton Bowl to the Rose Bowl and then the Orange and Sugar Bowls to see who got upset giving another team a chance.

Like 1981. #3 Alabama loses in the Cotton Bowl, #2 Georgia loses in the Sugar Bowl which gave #4 Nebraska a chance to beat #1 Clemson for the title. There are many examples like this that made college football great. And who gives a crap if you had an occasional split title. It made for interesting talk and made the entire season fun as well as an exciting bowl season.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

Elite players want to win a championship. They know they have to go to one of 5 schools to get that done, so that's where they all go.
It used to be that a number 15 team could compete against number 2. Now that game is a blowout.
Would increasing the field size change that over time, Maybe.

Cream always rises to the top....and people said the same thing about reducing scholly numbers years ago, and creating the playoff to begin with. No matter what rules or format you put in place, for the most part the same teams will be in it year in and year out...but what will happen if we expand the playoff is 2 and 3 loss SEC teams will now have hope where they didn't before. IE-backfire

 

[mgbreis]

Honestly, I'm kinda bored with college football as a whole more than just the CFP specifically. Partly due to Nebraska's suckage, but also because of transfers, targeting, spread offenses, etc. I find myself gravitating more toward the NFL than I ever thought possible, just because it looks more like the "football" that I grew up with.

 

[jmliehr]

i lose interest as soon as the regular season is over. their are only about 6-8 teams that have a shot at the playoff each year and they are the same programs every year. They are the best teams but its boring. there is no parity at the top of college fb. the parity is in the middle thats why the regular season is so interesting. personally i wouldn't mind if they reduced scholarship limits by another 5 in an effort to balance the scales a little more

Scholarship limits hurt IMO, the great programs are going to get better players no matter what. The other programs would have less margin of error with less scholarships. Nebraska has only trended downward with scholarship limits. Instead of taking a few kids with potential we have to go for results more quickly. Late bloomers will be left out more often.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

Here's a thought...

Mark Richt

@MarkRicht
·
Dec 10

Here is a thought! 32 Team FBS Playoff. Every game is a bowl. 31 games in all. Makes all bowls meaningful. Makes all post season games meaningful. Allows Group of 5 schools to have a shot! Less opting out. Share revenue with all schools and the student athletes.

 

[GBR_Atlanta]

I stated losing interest When Ohio State and Alabama got in after not winning their conference titles. It feels more like an invitational vs a true playoff. To me it feels the same as past bowl games in the way that instead of the AP and Coaches that pick the national title, it’s a committee of people. The year PSU won the B1G they had just as good a shot as the top 4 at winning it all, but never got a chance.

 

[9and4]

I think that if you extended automatic invitations to every Power 5 conference champ (with a sixth berth in a six-team playoff to the highest-ranked Group of 5 champ), it could even out recruiting a bit, especially in the South.

If you're Nebraska, Iowa State or Colorado, for example, you might have a better shot at a top-tier Southern player by saying, "Listen, other than Alabama and Clemson, you have no shot at being in the playoffs. Come here, and give us a shot at the Big Ten (Pac-12, Big XII) title, and we'll get you into the playoffs."

Of course, all those Florida players might get one hint of a Midwestern winter and head back home to play for FAU or FIU, but that would be a boon for Group of 5 programs that already play at a high level (Boise, Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, etc.) who would have a shot at a playoff berth as well.

As it stands, you can pretty much pencil in only the SEC champ and ACC champ, with a second SEC team or Notre Dame filling the third spot, leaving the Big Ten, the Big XII and the Pac-12 out of the running unless they run the table and go 13-0 (or 6-0 in OSU's case this year). That's a tough hill to climb, one that an SEC team or Clemson generally doesn't have to scale.

And to say that one team is obviously better than a team from another conference is often based only on win-loss records, often in the same conference, or from games played between conferences in September. And as we know, in a normal season, most teams change over time.

As for Iowa, they'd have to up their game and start shooting for championships instead of printing t-shirts for second- and third-place finishes, their current apex and measuring stick for excellence.

 

[Muskyhunter16]

So your solution is to add more mediocrity? That doesn't sound right to me.

Honestly yes, mainly for entertainment and interest if college fans. I mean, I look at college football as the best, most pure sport out there. The passion and dedication of college fans is beyond that of any pro sport in my opinion. I get that you want to crown a champion but that’s not all what college football is about in my opinion. Add more teams to this thing and that will generate a ton more hope and meaning to the seasons. It will also potentially stop every 5 star recruit from going to 1 of 4 schools. I also think the open transfer market/free agency is going to help as well going forward

 

[Husker Hambone]

College football has sucked this year. I think a big reason in my opinion is that fans aren’t allowed to be at games or at least limited. This is a throw away year, complete trash. Also I cannot stand the ESPN playoff “who’s in” show either. Talking about all the possible scenarios and wasting their breathe. We know who’s in at the start of the season: Ohio St, Bama, Clemson... and some other SEC or Big 12 team, but only if the Big 12 team is undefeated or the SEC team has maybe one loss since all their games are top 15 matchups each week. College football is just not the same.

 

[cidsports]

It is a +1 system and called a College Football Playoff. 20/20 has been a rough year.

 

[9and4]

My other thought is that if FCS can do a 24-team playoff (after an 11-game regular season, no conference championship games), why can't FBS? If you start a playoff right after the regular season, the first set of 8 games would take the place of conference championship games and probably get better ratings on television.

We know that North Dakota State is probably going to be in the title game every year, but that doesn't diminish the excitement of the other 23 schools who are competing against them, with the outside chance of getting the upset of the decade or even the century in NDSU's case.

First Saturday of December (top 8 seeds get byes, reserved for Power 5 conference champions and 3 at-large):

• 9 seed vs. 24 seed
• 10 vs. 23
• 11 vs. 22
• 12 vs. 21
• 13 vs. 20
• 14 vs. 19
• 15 vs. 18
• 16 vs. 17

The second Saturday in December matches the winners of those games against the top 8 seeds, so eight more games with huge ratings and money, played at home stadiums.

That leaves quarterfinals for New Year's Day in the four traditional major bowls: Cotton, Sugar, Rose and Orange, with semifinals 7 to 13 days after that and a title game in late January. Those games can be played in Atlanta, Phoenix or another neutral site.

That doesn't eliminate a 12th game in a bowl for the teams that don't qualify. In fact, I'd say that the other 104 squads could all be invited to play a 12th game — an exhibition — somewhere warm or domed between Dec. 15-31 and between the second round of the playoffs and the New Year's Day quarterfinals.

 

[BleedRed78]

Scholarship limits hurt IMO, the great programs are going to get better players no matter what. The other programs would have less margin of error with less scholarships. Nebraska has only trended downward with scholarship limits. Instead of taking a few kids with potential we have to go for results more quickly. Late bloomers will be left out more often.

Imagine that, regulations introduced to help the little guy ends up mostly only helping the big guys.

 

[Trojanhorse13]

My other thought is that if FCS can do a 24-team playoff (after an 11-game regular season, no conference championship games), why can't FBS? If you start a playoff right after the regular season, the first set of 8 games would take the place of conference championship games and probably get better ratings on television.

We know that North Dakota State is probably going to be in the title game every year, but that doesn't diminish the excitement of the other 23 schools who are competing against them, with the outside chance of getting the upset of the decade or even the century in NDSU's case.

First Saturday of December (top 8 seeds get byes, reserved for Power 5 conference champions and 3 at-large):

• 9 seed vs. 24 seed
• 10 vs. 23
• 11 vs. 22
• 12 vs. 21
• 13 vs. 20
• 14 vs. 19
• 15 vs. 18
• 16 vs. 17

The second Saturday in December matches the winners of those games against the top 8 seeds, so eight more games with huge ratings and money, played at home stadiums.

That leaves quarterfinals for New Year's Day in the four traditional major bowls: Cotton, Sugar, Rose and Orange, with semifinals 7 to 13 days after that and a title game in late January. Those games can be played in Atlanta, Phoenix or another neutral site.

That doesn't eliminate a 12th game in a bowl for the teams that don't qualify. In fact, I'd say that the other 104 squads could all be invited to play a 12th game — an exhibition — somewhere warm or domed between Dec. 15-31 and between the second round of the playoffs and the New Year's Day quarterfinals.

I have been saying the same thing for years. Probably be more lucrative financially as well.

 

[GBR_Atlanta]

Honestly yes, mainly for entertainment and interest if college fans. I mean, I look at college football as the best, most pure sport out there. The passion and dedication of college fans is beyond that of any pro sport in my opinion. I get that you want to crown a champion but that’s not all what college football is about in my opinion. Add more teams to this thing and that will generate a ton more hope and meaning to the seasons. It will also potentially stop every 5 star recruit from going to 1 of 4 schools. I also think the open transfer market/free agency is going to help as well going forward

I agree. The bowl games (even the NY6), have been trending toward Mediocrity since the playoff started IMO, and the way to save them is to make them playoff games. Do bowls still mean the same thing to players? Maybe. We’ve seen players start to opt out of NY6 games. To fans? I’m seeing a lot of empty seats at these games, even the higher tier bowls.

 

[Trojanhorse13]

I think the bowls were trending to mediocrity before the playoff system.

 

[bigboxes]

Their typically aren’t 4 deserving teams, much less 8.

Although I agree that the best team is usually among the top four, I am for eight teams for a college football playoff. That way we get a representative from each p5 conference and three at large bids.

 

[hexumhawk]

16 teams
Home field for higher seed
Final 4 neutral site

HUGE TV ratings
More teams involved and more discussion
No 13-0 UFC teams left out without a chance to play for a title.

You can still have bowls with the teams that are left and they would be just as meaningful as they are now.

 

[rcnut223]

If Nebraska isn't part of the post season, I have zero interest in any of that.

Well then you have been bored for a long time, recall the last bowl ? against UCLA in the Foster Farms Bowl . Seems like forever ago, oh wait it was 😎

 

[bigboxes]

Anyone else kind of getting bored of the playoffs every year? Always the same 5 or 6 teams for the most part, every year with a tiny chance you get a new team like an LSU or Washington once every 5 years. I think it’s really hurting the sport overall and they’ll need to strongly consider expanding it to 8 teams real soon or going back to the old bowl system. I honestly like the old system more and allows for much more discussion and interest from everyone on who is the real champion. Yes you don’t get a real champion but who cares, all the “BCS” bowls meant so much more and teams outside of the SEC aren’t eliminated with 1 loss. Not really feeing another Bama, Clemson, Ohio State invitational again with another ND semi-final blowout.

I'm sure they were saying the same thing when Nebraska and Florida State were winning all the championships in the 90s.

 

[TruHusker]

Scholarship limits hurt IMO, the great programs are going to get better players no matter what. The other programs would have less margin of error with less scholarships. Nebraska has only trended downward with scholarship limits. Instead of taking a few kids with potential we have to go for results more quickly. Late bloomers will be left out more often.

This could easily be debated the other way. Here is the history of scholarships I found.

Unlimited until 1973
1973 - 105
1978 - 95
1992 - 85

I do agree the great programs (we were formerly one of those) are going to get better players. It only goes to reason, kids want to play for the best, win championships and go to the NFL. I have said for years, when we start putting kids in the pros consistently we will see our stock go up. When was the last time Bama, Clemson, and tOSU weren't in the picture? They built those advantages by beating the crap out of everyone year in and year out so to the victor goes the spoils.

That said, the argument I would make is reducing scholarships across the board keeps the "great programs" from loading up on the talent. Just take the top 4 teams - with the difference between 95-85 you now have 40 total kids who have to go somewhere else. That opens the door for many other schools but they have to have something to get the kids there of course, i.e championships, NFL.

There is a downside which I think you are alluding to. The great schools have their pick of the liter so to speak and rest of us have to take what is available and hope we can catch lightening in the bottle, get that occasional stud or two that make a huge difference. So, in that sense, yes, there is "less margin" but it also is a product of their success while there theoretically should be enough talent available if you can get them here and develop them.

 

[iclone]

Are Husker fans fired up about the NCAA men's basketball tournament now?

 

[9and4]

This could easily be debated the other way. Here is the history of scholarships I found.

Unlimited until 1973
1973 - 105
1978 - 95
1992 - 85

I do agree the great programs (we were formerly one of those) are going to get better players. It only goes to reason, kids want to play for the best, win championships and go to the NFL. I have said for years, when we start putting kids in the pros consistently we will see our stock go up. When was the last time Bama, Clemson, and tOSU weren't in the picture? They built those advantages by beating the crap out of everyone year in and year out so to the victor goes the spoils.

That said, the argument I would make is reducing scholarships across the board keeps the "great programs" from loading up on the talent. Just take the top 4 teams - with the difference between 95-85 you now have 40 total kids who have to go somewhere else. That opens the door for many other schools but they have to have something to get the kids there of course, i.e championships, NFL.

There is a downside which I think you are alluding to. The great schools have their pick of the liter so to speak and rest of us have to take what is available and hope we can catch lightening in the bottle, get that occasional stud or two that make a huge difference. So, in that sense, yes, there is "less margin" but it also is a product of their success while there theoretically should be enough talent available if you can get them here and develop them.

In addition, fewer football scholarships (say 70 instead of 85) might mean the introduction of another popular men's sport, such as soccer or ice hockey, and the chance at increased revenue through both television and ticket sales.

 

[GBR_Atlanta]

16 teams
Home field for higher seed
Final 4 neutral site

HUGE TV ratings
More teams involved and more discussion
No 13-0 UFC teams left out without a chance to play for a title.

You can still have bowls with the teams that are left and they would be just as meaningful as they are now.

On paper it seems so easy. We’ll see if it ever gets to 16. I sure hope so.

 

[saluno22]

Their typically aren’t 4 deserving teams, much less 8.

So your solution is to add more mediocrity? That doesn't sound right to me.

I think adding more teams adds more ability to recruit at a higher level for other schools. Right now, it's a momentum/self-fulfilling prophecy issue where the great teams make the playoffs, makes it more appealing to play for the great teams, and those same teams continue to make the playoffs. If you're elite and your goal is to make the playoffs, you're going to Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State right now... and there's not much to slow it down.

Adding more teams will level the recruiting field a little bit.

Say what you will about the wild west of college football pre-playoff (and especially pre-BCS and post-85 scholarship limit), that is where we saw the "best" "parity" in FBS as a whole.

 

[bingo65]

Scholarship limits hurt IMO, the great programs are going to get better players no matter what. The other programs would have less margin of error with less scholarships. Nebraska has only trended downward with scholarship limits. Instead of taking a few kids with potential we have to go for results more quickly. Late bloomers will be left out more often.

thats not how it has traditionally worked. what has traditionally happened is that 5 of the potential Alabama recruits now have to go somewhere else other than Bama. limiting scholarships raises the level of player on the bottom teams. the top teams stay the same. kansas now gets 5 players they would have never had a chance at getting. Bama gets the same players they always get.

 

[saluno22]

I stated losing interest When Ohio State and Alabama got in after not winning their conference titles. It feels more like an invitational vs a true playoff. To me it feels the same as past bowl games in the way that instead of the AP and Coaches that pick the national title, it’s a committee of people. The year PSU won the B1G they had just as good a shot as the top 4 at winning it all, but never got a chance.

Yep, TV revenue/eyeballs matter.