|
Post by bluehen on Mar 29, 2021 14:11:23 GMT
Good points , fellers
An legitimate, inclusive FBS playoff would make the regular season more meaningful than it is now.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Mar 29, 2021 15:44:44 GMT
Here is the way I see it. When getting recruited from High School what do these players want: 1) They want to go to a place where they will get to play 2) They want to go to a place to get them to a Championship 3) They want to go to a place that will get them to the NFL There are also places they may want to go to because they have affinity for the school
Currently you really only have 3 choices that meet these requirements with Clemson Ohio State and Bama. Maybe OU UGA and LSU but they are behind the pace of the top 3. I do think that only have 4 playoff spots has led to a huge imbalance between the top programs and the next tier. Just look at how lopsided recruiting has become.
I do think that opening the playoffs to 8 or 16 teams would give more teams a shot to prove themselves and with some success those programs would close the recruiting gaps. When discussing on this board there seems to be 2 commonly agreed on Formats 8 teams 5 Power 5 Champs 1 Group of 5 Champ 2 At Large
16 10 Conference Champs 6 At Large
The 8 team scenario would have almost no impact on the importance of the regular season. The 16 team playoffs would open the door for teams that have more than 1 loss but in most years the rivalry games at the end of the year would in most cases still be an elimination game.
College basketball is a completely different beast. In many season you can have teams that are mid majors that can develop some talent to compete with the Big Boys. Just look at last season where Dayton and San Diego St were on track for number 1 seeds. I also think the difference in talent level is not nearly as big compared to football. Look at this years tournament. 33% of teams seeded between 13 and 15 won their first round games. We are now at the elite 8 and have 2 teams at bubble level still in play. I get the argument that the regular seasons means nothing which is largely true if you are in the upper half of P5 conference but then again you still want to get as high of a seed as possible so the games do mean something. If you are in the other conferences then the regular season means a whole lot more as it may get you on the bubble or better seeding in conference tourney play.
College football playoff expansion would certainly open up the door to a whole lot more teams and I think it would only add more drama to the regular season. Just look at last season. When we got to Championship week it was pretty much concluded that Alabama was in. If ND beat Clemson and Ohio State lost then 2 teams could have snuck in. In both cases heavily favored Clemson and Ohio State both won in less than exciting games which lead to almost no drama on what should be one of the biggest weeks of the season. With only 2 At Large teams I see very few years that would get 3 SEC teams in. With 6 at large I could see that number go up. In my perfect world I would use a predefined computer system to pick the 6 at large. Way too much bias goes into the committees and they always seem to benefit the SEC.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Mar 30, 2021 0:10:17 GMT
Just write the rules so the SEC can never have more than one team and be done with it.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Mar 30, 2021 0:25:27 GMT
I always love the "regular season is meaningless" excuse for not having an all inclusive playoffs. As an alum and supporter of a team that has been both FCS and FBS I can say it is bunk. Every game App St played in FCS was important. The only way to guarantee making the playoffs was winning the SoCon. And if we couldn't win the conference title, we had to win enough games to be considered for an at-large bid. And if App St had the SoCon sewed up with 1 or 2 games left, we couldn't tank the game as a loss would impact our seeding and cost us from hosting playoff games. We may have sat our starters quicker in a blow out win, but still they played. And as for the ESPN 4 team playoff, you don't even have to win your conference division to make the field. Stumpy... I'm sure you're right. Every BBall game mattered for Appy because, as you say... the only way you've get in would be to win the conference. But, teams like Kentucky, and Kansas, and Duke, and a BUNCH of other top level teams easily make the 64 team tourney with 10 losses. They can even get it with 15-16 losses. Individual games during the regular season are practically as meaningless as exhibition games. Hell, there have been times I was HOPING Kentucky would lose, just because I didn't want them to be undefeated heading into the tourney. There is just no question that a 16-team football tourney with 6 at-large teams would significantly change the urgency of the regular season for most of the P5, top level schools. Bama would get in with 3 losses. We can argue about whether changing the "feel" matters... but, I don't think it can seriously be argued that it would NOT CHANGE the regular season. That said, I don't think the "regular season would be meaningless" is the reason for not having an "all-inclusive playoff". The real reason is, the P5 team don't think it's fair for G5 teams to even get a ticket to a crap-shoot playoff after playing substantially weaker schedules during the year. The overall competition level between the two groups is simply too large. They SHOULD be split into two levels for the post-season. The top name schools are just not going to give up the monopoly position they have on the spotlight. Not saying I 100% agree with the presumption... but, I think THAT is the real reason you will NEVER see a 16 team tourney with all 10 Conference Champs earning a spot.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Mar 30, 2021 0:30:53 GMT
Here is the way I see it. When getting recruited from High School what do these players want: 1) They want to go to a place where they will get to play 2) They want to go to a place to get them to a Championship 3) They want to go to a place that will get them to the NFL There are also places they may want to go to because they have affinity for the school Currently you really only have 3 choices that meet these requirements with Clemson Ohio State and Bama. Maybe OU UGA and LSU but they are behind the pace of the top 3. I do think that only have 4 playoff spots has led to a huge imbalance between the top programs and the next tier. Just look at how lopsided recruiting has become. I do think that opening the playoffs to 8 or 16 teams would give more teams a shot to prove themselves and with some success those programs would close the recruiting gaps. When discussing on this board there seems to be 2 commonly agreed on Formats 8 teams 5 Power 5 Champs 1 Group of 5 Champ 2 At Large 16 10 Conference Champs 6 At Large The 8 team scenario would have almost no impact on the importance of the regular season. The 16 team playoffs would open the door for teams that have more than 1 loss but in most years the rivalry games at the end of the year would in most cases still be an elimination game. College basketball is a completely different beast. In many season you can have teams that are mid majors that can develop some talent to compete with the Big Boys. Just look at last season where Dayton and San Diego St were on track for number 1 seeds. I also think the difference in talent level is not nearly as big compared to football. Look at this years tournament. 33% of teams seeded between 13 and 15 won their first round games. We are now at the elite 8 and have 2 teams at bubble level still in play. I get the argument that the regular seasons means nothing which is largely true if you are in the upper half of P5 conference but then again you still want to get as high of a seed as possible so the games do mean something. If you are in the other conferences then the regular season means a whole lot more as it may get you on the bubble or better seeding in conference tourney play. College football playoff expansion would certainly open up the door to a whole lot more teams and I think it would only add more drama to the regular season. Just look at last season. When we got to Championship week it was pretty much concluded that Alabama was in. If ND beat Clemson and Ohio State lost then 2 teams could have snuck in. In both cases heavily favored Clemson and Ohio State both won in less than exciting games which lead to almost no drama on what should be one of the biggest weeks of the season. With only 2 At Large teams I see very few years that would get 3 SEC teams in. With 6 at large I could see that number go up. In my perfect world I would use a predefined computer system to pick the 6 at large. Way too much bias goes into the committees and they always seem to benefit the SEC. You make a lot of good points here. I agree that an 8 team playoff would be MUCH better, and would not change the feel of the season, as it is. I LOVE that 8 team format, but... sadly... it can NEVER happen. It would be an open admission that G5 schools are treated differently, and the NCAA would be an easy target for anti-trust lawsuits. The G5 and P5 have to come to some kind of agreement, and FINALLY stop the charade that they are "all the same" and have an "Equal Chance". Really.. THAT is the "official" position of the NCAA. It's obviously ridiculous. But, it is the legal stance of the NCAA.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Mar 30, 2021 0:32:04 GMT
Just write the rules so the SEC can never have more than one team and be done with it. How about zero? The SEC should just exempt themselves from all post-season play and declare the conference winner to be "World Champions".
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Mar 30, 2021 1:52:57 GMT
Just write the rules so the SEC can never have more than one team and be done with it. How about zero? The SEC should just exempt themselves from all post-season play and declare the conference winner to be "World Champions". Laughing
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Mar 30, 2021 13:49:05 GMT
Just write the rules so the SEC can never have more than one team and be done with it. I would have no problem if SEC gets every at large bid as long as it was done on a predetermined ranking system and not by a bunch of former coaches and AD's doing the eye test. In Ohio for High School football, they have a computer system that ranks the teams. Why can't college football come up with a system as well?
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Mar 30, 2021 14:03:53 GMT
Just write the rules so the SEC can never have more than one team and be done with it. I would have no problem if SEC gets every at large bid as long as it was done on a predetermined ranking system and not by a bunch of former coaches and AD's doing the eye test. In Ohio for High School football, they have a computer system that ranks the teams. Why can't college football come up with a system as well? I thought the BCS Plan was much better and said from day one the committee is a small poll in which bias is magnified. Did you think the BCS had a better plan. My memory is everybody but me hated the BCS rating. I support your computer rating idea 100%.
|
|
|
Post by stumpystew on Mar 30, 2021 14:19:07 GMT
Bevo
I have to disagree with you on your good post. In this years 2021 NCAA tourney, neither Duke nor Kentucky made the tournament, with all those losses. And as for P5 teams not carrying about the B-Ball regular season, a lot of my Carolina friends were bemoaning the loss to Marquette as costing the Heels an at large bid.
As for the 16 team football, would a 3 loss Bama get in ahead of 2 or 1 loss division winners from the ACC, SEC, Pac12 and Big10, 2 loss runnerup from the Big 12 and an undefeated Notre Dame? I don't think so.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Mar 30, 2021 15:01:44 GMT
Bevo I have to disagree with you on your good post. In this years 2021 NCAA tourney, neither Duke nor Kentucky made the tournament, with all those losses. And as for P5 teams not carrying about the B-Ball regular season, a lot of my Carolina friends were bemoaning the loss to Marquette as costing the Heels an at large bid. As for the 16 team football, would a 3 loss Bama get in ahead of 2 or 1 loss division winners from the ACC, SEC, Pac12 and Big10, 2 loss runnerup from the Big 12 and an undefeated Notre Dame? I don't think so. LOL Well, Kentucky was 9-16 this year. So, yea.. there IS a limit where even they can't get in. The schedule was reduced due to COVID. Add another 5-6 'rent-a-wins", to make it 15-16, and they MIGHT have snuck in. But, in a 16 team football tourney, with all Conference Champions auto-bid? I could absolutely see a 3 loss Bama team getting in... OVER a bunch of 2 loss teams. That's SIX "at-large" teams. If you have Bama with a loss in the SEC title game, and a non-conference loss early to a high ranked team, and 1 additional loss to a highly ranking SEC East team? Bama would get selected OVER UNDEFEATED G5 teams, and a bunch of 1-2 loss P5 teams. And, probably deservedly so. They might even get in with 3 losses and then run the table. The bigger concern with 16 teams, IMO, though is.... the 4 weeks required to play it. Add a week for CCG games, and that's FIVE weeks of limited play... a THIRD of the season. I think that's too much. I know it doesn't matter to the lower Division schools, because they probably generate more revenue from tourney play that from regular season games. But, for most top P5 programs, they want more home games... for the dollars. And, of course... there is the problem with giving G5 teams a "free ticket" to the Big Dance. That would be a tough pill for most of the P5 to swallow.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Mar 30, 2021 16:41:30 GMT
I would have no problem if SEC gets every at large bid as long as it was done on a predetermined ranking system and not by a bunch of former coaches and AD's doing the eye test. In Ohio for High School football, they have a computer system that ranks the teams. Why can't college football come up with a system as well? I thought the BCS Plan was much better and said from day one the committee is a small poll in which bias is magnified. Did you think the BCS had a better plan. My memory is everybody but me hated the BCS rating. I support your computer rating idea 100%. The BCS was 2/3 opinion and 1/3 computers so the computer polls never carried enough weight to make a difference.
Look at 2006 Ohio State and ttun clearly had the best resumes. ttun lost in a 3 point shootout on the road. They also handed Wiscy there only loss that season. Florida won a lot a close games in the SEC and also lost to Auburn by 10.
Then we have 2011 which both LSU and Bama got in with their rematch where the first game had absolutely no offense whatsoever. That year you had a 1 loss Andew Luck team that won the Pac 12 and also a 1 loss otherOSU team.
Then in 2007 a 2 loss SEC team gets the nod over a 1 loss team from a P5.
From my perspective the SEC has always gotten the benefit of the doubt. Only potential season that would be in question is Auburn 2004 but then again they chose to schedule Patsy U for their non conference games.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Mar 30, 2021 18:22:43 GMT
I thought the BCS Plan was much better and said from day one the committee is a small poll in which bias is magnified. Did you think the BCS had a better plan. My memory is everybody but me hated the BCS rating. I support your computer rating idea 100%. The BCS was 2/3 opinion and 1/3 computers so the computer polls never carried enough weight to make a difference.
Look at 2006 Ohio State and ttun clearly had the best resumes. ttun lost in a 3 point shootout on the road. They also handed Wiscy there only loss that season. Florida won a lot a close games in the SEC and also lost to Auburn by 10.
Then we have 2011 which both LSU and Bama got in with their rematch where the first game had absolutely no offense whatsoever. That year you had a 1 loss Andew Luck team that won the Pac 12 and also a 1 loss otherOSU team.
Then in 2007 a 2 loss SEC team gets the nod over a 1 loss team from a P5.
From my perspective the SEC has always gotten the benefit of the doubt. Only potential season that would be in question is Auburn 2004 but then again they chose to schedule Patsy U for their non conference games.
It wasn’t perfect but instead of optimizing we threw out the baby with the bath water. I think eight is the right number for a playoff. I just watched part of the OSU Pro day. Fields looks amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Mar 30, 2021 18:59:13 GMT
I wonder if Fields is who San Fran is eyeing with the #3 pick?
They made a big trade to move up... I doubt it's for a fat lineman.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Mar 30, 2021 19:03:35 GMT
It wasn’t perfect but instead of optimizing we threw out the baby with the bath water. I think eight is the right number for a playoff. The biggest problem with the BCS was, it was just TWO teams. If they used a full computer system, like SAGARIN even, and picked 8? You'd be SURE to have the most deserving teams included. They could actually do that, and avoid anti-trust issues. Maybe, that's the way out here?
|
|