College playoffs discussion

[Old School]

No they aren't FBS. What a stupid question!

But earlier, you said:

UCF lost their QB to a knee injury last weekend. We will see what kind of depth they have now. I'm all for them getting a shot myself. That's an impressive streak no matter who you have beaten. Like you said they did beat a good Auburn team last year. They might get pummeled but we will never know because the big boys won't schedule them. I think if you had an 8 team playoff they would certainly get a bid.

Now you're saying it does matter who a team plays and beats.

UCF, like Mount Union, played a bunch of nobodies. Many teams would go undefeated against the schedule either of them played. Neither of those two teams has any business anywhere near the playoff.

[Westtncat]

You didn't answer the question you quoted.

You're also making up things that weren't in my post. I said "If the season ended today, Alabama would be the national champion." I didn't say the regular season should end now, or Alabama should be the national champion now. Nothing anywhere in this thread is addressed by "Crowning Alabama when you have three other undefeated teams is about the worst argument for having less teams that you have given so far" or "Why is the fact that Alabama is favored dictating the decision to not have a playoff?'" and I don't know where that came from. What I pointed out was that, once again, four teams is enough, or more than enough. Whoever you pick as your fourth team doesn't have any claim to being the best team in the country right now, or any claim to being as deserving as the #1 team. Going to 8 teams is going to include at least 5 teams that don't have the same sort of claim as the #1 team will.

"There are more than 4 good teams out there." Sure; we could say that 32 college football teams were "good" this year. Should there be a 32 team playoff?

No there should not be a 32 team playoff, there should be 8. I am not quoting you as saying to crown Alabama. I will get back to the point. Are you in the one loss should end your season crowd? IF so I dont understand that. If not how can you say 4 teams is enough? We will take this one step at a time to make sure we address the right issues. So one loss in your mind should make you ineligible for a shot at a championship?

I just noticed you said I didn't answer the question I quoted. You seriously want me to answer that? You really want to know if a team in a different division should cross over and play in the DI championship?

[Old School]

No there should not be a 32 team playoff, there should be 8. I am not quoting you as saying to crown Alabama. I will get back to the point. Are you in the one loss should end your season crowd? IF so I dont understand that. If not how can you say 4 teams is enough? We will take this one step at a time to make sure we address the right issues. So one loss in your mind should make you ineligible for a shot at a championship?

This is sort of an incomplete, loose synopsis of what I think:

College football had an unusual sort of postseason play and national champion determination for a long time. It was far different than a playoff. It allowed for controversy and argument in some years, as there were strong arguments sometimes that more than one team had performed well enough to lay claim to being the best team in the country. In the absence of a playoff, every week counted more than in any other sport. The intense importance of every single week made college football different in a good way: every week counted, every game counted, toward who could or would be champion. The lack of a playoff, conversely, had the negative effect of allowing a lot of justified controversy in some years.

The best thing to do, IMO, would be to have a system that eliminates the controversy by allowing every team that has a real, legitimate claim to having proved themselves #1 at season's end to compete head to head for the national championship. Allowing more teams than that waters down the intense importance of every week and every game, and makes it more like the NFL and NBA where the playoffs take forever. Allowing more teams than that also makes it like the NCAA tournament where, many or even most years, most people walk away not really convinced that the best team in college basketball won the championship. I like the NCAA tournament, but I also like the intensity of the college football season.

So, to your question: Should a single loss disqualify a team? No, not necessarily...but sometimes. Georgia belonged in it last year, if you're going to have four teams. Ohio State, after getting clobbered by a Purdue team that wasn't great, didn't this year. I didn't think 12-1 Wisconsin belonged in it last year, and when Michigan State, Iowa and Ohio State all finished 11-1 or 12-1 in 2015, I didn't think all three of them belonged in the playoff.. But, in 2015, I did think Alabama, even with one loss, belonged in any playoff. Optimally, the playoff would include only those teams that really had a legitimate claim to having proved themselves the best in the country that year. If you go to four teams, you're usually going to have at least one one loss team. And, some years, a one loss team may have as good a claim to being the best in the country: is a one loss SEC champion, or even a one loss SEC team that didn't win its conference, as deserving as, say, an undefeated ACC or Big XII champion (as in 2015)? Some years, probably, depending on schedule and results.

Does all of that make the whole thing depend on fallible human discretion? Yes, sure...but it also makes it depend on what a team did every single week of the season, and every other system does the same thing, in that fallible humans came up with the playoff structure for the NBA or whoever before the season started.

I wouldn't like to see it devolve into an 8 team system in which people are complaining about which 2 or 3 loss team should've gotten in to play the 1 seed in the first round. Leave it to the true big dogs each season.

[Westtncat]

This is sort of an incomplete, loose synopsis of what I think:

College football had an unusual sort of postseason play and national champion determination for a long time. It was far different than a playoff. It allowed for controversy and argument in some years, as there were strong arguments sometimes that more than one team had performed well enough to lay claim to being the best team in the country. In the absence of a playoff, every week counted more than in any other sport. The intense importance of every single week made college football different in a good way: every week counted, every game counted, toward who could or would be champion. The lack of a playoff, conversely, had the negative effect of allowing a lot of justified controversy in some years.

The best thing to do, IMO, would be to have a system that eliminates the controversy by allowing every team that has a real, legitimate claim to having proved themselves #1 at season's end to compete head to head for the national championship. Allowing more teams than that waters down the intense importance of every week and every game, and makes it more like the NFL and NBA where the playoffs take forever. Allowing more teams than that also makes it like the NCAA tournament where, many or even most years, most people walk away not really convinced that the best team in college basketball won the championship. I like the NCAA tournament, but I also like the intensity of the college football season.

So, to your question: Should a single loss disqualify a team? No, not necessarily...but sometimes. Georgia belonged in it last year, if you're going to have four teams. Ohio State, after getting clobbered by a Purdue team that wasn't great, didn't this year. I didn't think 12-1 Wisconsin belonged in it last year, and when Michigan State, Iowa and Ohio State all finished 11-1 or 12-1 in 2015, I didn't think all three of them belonged in the playoff.. But, in 2015, I did think Alabama, even with one loss, belonged in any playoff. Optimally, the playoff would include only those teams that really had a legitimate claim to having proved themselves the best in the country that year. If you go to four teams, you're usually going to have at least one one loss team. And, some years, a one loss team may have as good a claim to being the best in the country: is a one loss SEC champion, or even a one loss SEC team that didn't win its conference, as deserving as, say, an undefeated ACC or Big XII champion (as in 2015)? Some years, probably, depending on schedule and results.

Does all of that make the whole thing depend on fallible human discretion? Yes, sure...but it also makes it depend on what a team did every single week of the season, and every other system does the same thing, in that fallible humans came up with the playoff structure for the NBA or whoever before the season started.

I wouldn't like to see it devolve into an 8 team system in which people are complaining about which 2 or 3 loss team should've gotten in to play the 1 seed in the first round. Leave it to the true big dogs each season.

I understand your concern of a watered down playoff. After 8 I would tend to agree. As I see it too many 1 loss teams each year and that should not put you out period. People will always complain. Football is much different than basketball. Yes the NBA playoffs do take forever but year in and year out there is no doubt or compliant when you have a system as good as theirs. Anything can happen and its impossible to know the true strength of a team unless there is more cross over. What if Alabama loses this year? Then the entire system will have to be questioned. Have you seen the latest top 8 teams this year?
1. Alabama 13-0
2. Clemson 13-0
3. Notre Dame 12-0
4. Oklahoma 12-1
5. Georgia 11-2
6. Ohio St. 12-1
7. Michigan 10-2
8. UCF 12-0

Tell how that would that would leave out a big dog? College football post season is about as dumb as it gets. 4 of these teams have a shot one of them has one loss , one team with one loss is left out and another with NO LOSSES and the longest winning streak in the country is left out again. Whats really silly about division 1 football is that the other teams will play an extra game that means absolutely noting in the scheme of things. Who can tell me the winner of any bowl game last year without looking it up? Probably no one.

Those 8 teams would absolutely not be a watered down playoff. Much better than the accepted wild card playoff in the NFL. JMO, two loss Georgia is better than a lot of those teams with better records.
Funny thing, the AP and the CFP rankings are exactly the same with the top 4. So glad we have this committee to make the hard decisions. What a laugh.

[Old School]

Cutting and pasting here, and hoping to post more tomorrow, but:

What if Alabama loses this year? Then the entire system will have to be questioned.

Not really, I wouldn't think. If to Clemson or Notre Dame, I'm not sure that would change anyone's view of anything. If to Oklahoma, I'm not sure it would call a four team playoff into question. A 16 seed beat 1 seed Virginia in the tournament recently; I don't know that it meant the tournament should go to 128 teams or anything.

Have you seen the latest top 8 teams this year?
1. Alabama 13-0
2. Clemson 13-0
3. Notre Dame 12-0
4. Oklahoma 12-1
5. Georgia 11-2
6. Ohio St. 12-1
7. Michigan 10-2
8. UCF 12-0

Tell how that would that would leave out a big dog?

Alabama (13-0), Clemson (13-0), and Notre Dame (12-0) are the big dogs this year. #4-7 had nice years but aren't in that same group, IMO. #8 IMO is ranked maybe 20 slots or more ahead of where they should be, because their schedule was incredibly weak.

Who can tell me the winner of any bowl game last year without looking it up? Probably no one.

I can, for sure, for last year or a lot of other years...but I follow that stuff and enjoy it a lot. Then again, a lot of people couldn't tell you who the vice president or chief justice is, or tell you how laws are created, or find Illinois or France on a map, without looking it up. I guess it's all relative.

A lot of fans of various sports couldn't tell you who were, say, the playoff wildcards a year or two ago, or any number of other things. The bowl games are big deals; they're fun, they're enjoyable, they match conferences against each other...they're a nice way to end the season. I read people call them "meaningless" and I don't get it; people watch them and enjoy them, they have big audiences (in person and on TV, at least those with P5 teams)...I'm sure the players and coaches don't think they're meaningless. Neither do the big audiences they draw, or the recruits who follow them.

[Westtncat]

Cutting and pasting here, and hoping to post more tomorrow, but:



Not really, I wouldn't think. If to Clemson or Notre Dame, I'm not sure that would change anyone's view of anything. If to Oklahoma, I'm not sure it would call a four team playoff into question. A 16 seed beat 1 seed Virginia in the tournament recently; I don't know that it meant the tournament should go to 128 teams or anything.



Alabama (13-0), Clemson (13-0), and Notre Dame (12-0) are the big dogs this year. #4-7 had nice years but aren't in that same group, IMO. #8 IMO is ranked maybe 20 slots or more ahead of where they should be, because their schedule was incredibly weak.



I can, for sure, for last year or a lot of other years...but I follow that stuff and enjoy it a lot. Then again, a lot of people couldn't tell you who the vice president or chief justice is, or tell you how laws are created, or find Illinois or France on a map, without looking it up. I guess it's all relative.

A lot of fans of various sports couldn't tell you who were, say, the playoff wildcards a year or two ago, or any number of other things. The bowl games are big deals; they're fun, they're enjoyable, they match conferences against each other...they're a nice way to end the season. I read people call them "meaningless" and I don't get it; people watch them and enjoy them, they have big audiences (in person and on TV, at least those with P5 teams)...I'm sure the players and coaches don't think they're meaningless. Neither do the big audiences they draw, or the recruits who follow them.

I cant understand your reasoning with being OK with extra bowl games (which in my opinion are meaningless) but have an issue with 4.....Just 4 more decent teams in a playoff system. Of course the teams in them care and the people involved but most of the rest of the country doesnt tune in to see those. Its like the NIT in basketball, I dont watch it. Some do I know. In the end its simply a difference in opinion. I do feel the playoffs will eventually be extended to 8 teams. Anything over that and I will be taking the stance you have now. Although to a lesser degree in some aspects. Things change, the SEC wont be dominant forever. I think then you will see opinions change real quick. It wasn't long ago no one was beating Nebraska, then it was USC. It will flip again and when it does the SEC will be screaming.

[40bill]

I know I've no dog in this fight, but if you open it up to 8, numbers nine and ten are gonna say how bout us?

UCF is a fine story...they have much to be proud of. However, in my opinion a team in a true power conference like Kentucky, or Northwestern in the Big 10, has accomplished more considering the ongoing competition.
BUT if UCF continues as Boisie has done over many seasons, they WILL get that respect they desire.

[Westtncat]

I know I've no dog in this fight, but if you open it up to 8, numbers nine and ten are gonna say how bout us?

UCF is a fine story...they have much to be proud of. However, in my opinion a team in a true power conference like Kentucky, or Northwestern in the Big 10, has accomplished more considering the ongoing competition.
BUT if UCF continues as Boisie has done over many seasons, they WILL get that respect they desire.

Of course they will. But If you look at the rankings the argument old school has holds much truer. My whole argument is that there are more than 4 with a legit shot. Maybe not 8 but more than 4. My argument is to expand to 8 to include the ones with a decent argument. Some have said 6 which is better too. The top 4 teams are not in the playoff this year in my opinion. In someone elses opinion they are. Outside the top 8 no one really has a gripe.

I actually agree with Old School about a watered down playoff I just feel its fine with 8. People and teams will gripe no matter how many you have. I personally prefer to see a few more great football games. Also, I would like to see it expanded for teams like UCF not so much in support of them but to silence them. Its really the only way they can get their shot.

[Joneslab]

I would watch an 8-team playoff. That would be awesome.

Saw Merrill Hodge one time on ESPN saying that they shouldn't even have a four-team playoff. (This was back when they were first debating four teams.) He argued that football is unique because there's really no need for bowl games. If you go through undefeated, that team has won a championship in their minds. And they've won the conference championship. That's more than enough from his point of view. Everything else is window dressing.

I don't agree with that necessarily but it is interesting. I've always thought the bowl games don't matter to a lot of these programs other than getting to travel and so on but I have no idea if that's true. I've never watched one I don't think. The bowl game we're playing in is obviously massive for our program but I'm not sure Penn State is going to feel the same way.

[KevinHall]

But earlier, you said:



Now you're saying it does matter who a team plays and beats.

UCF, like Mount Union, played a bunch of nobodies. Many teams would go undefeated against the schedule either of them played. Neither of those two teams has any business anywhere near the playoff.

You know what I mean. That's nothing but a sarcastic and jack ass response. You are nothing but condescending when someone disagrees with your opinions. In fact I have seen that too much in this site in recent months and I am out of here. I don't need this at this stage of my life. I originally came to WCF for good information and talk about UK sports. More often than not now you get condescending responses and no respect for others opinions. There a re a few left here who I value their opinion. I will miss those good ones. Good bye and good luck to those few.

[Westtncat]

You know what I mean. That's nothing but a sarcastic and jack ass response. You are nothing but condescending when someone disagrees with your opinions. In fact I have seen that too much in this site in recent months and I am out of here. I don't need this at this stage of my life. I originally came to WCF for good information and talk about UK sports. More often than not now you get condescending responses and no respect for others opinions. There a re a few left here who I value their opinion. I will miss those good ones. Good bye and good luck to those few.

Please reconsider this. Reading a written text is a horrible way to communicate. Sometimes we can assume too much. Maybe it was his only way of making a argument. You cant be sure of the intention. I hope you change your mind.