CFP considering expansion to 12-team format

[YoloinOhio]

 

Top 4 ranked conf champs  would get byes. First round would be played at home fields. 

[YoloinOhio]

 

[DrDawkinstein]

Big mistake, imo. But I've also always contended the playoffs are bad for college football as it is.

 

I could maybe see expanding to 6, and someday stretching it to 8. But even that is all too much. 12 just makes the season worthless.

[Bill from NYC]

3 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Big mistake, imo. But I've also always contended the playoffs are bad for college football as it is.

 

I could maybe see expanding to 6, and someday stretching it to 8. But even that is all too much. 12 just makes the season worthless.

Also too many games for the players. Too much risk.

 

If they expand the playoffs they should do away with conference championship games imo. Those games are unfair to the SEC, but I suppose that this is what expansion is all about.

5 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

Top 4 ranked conf champs  would get byes. First round would be played at home fields. 

How do you feel about this?

[YoloinOhio]

32 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Also too many games for the players. Too much risk.

 

If they expand the playoffs they should do away with conference championship games imo. Those games are unfair to the SEC, but I suppose that this is what expansion is all about.

How do you feel about this?

Unless Ohio state starts losing more than 0-1 games/yr in conference they should make the playoff every year. Will be interesting to see the potential of warm weather teams having to come north for that 1st round in December that has home fields. College Post season has always been played in domes or warm weather stadiums. 

[Doc Brown]

I love it.  Twelve was perfect for the NFL with the top four teams getting a bye.  One bad game won't ruin an entire season for some highly skilled teams and you'll have a lot more meaningful games near the end of the season trying to get into that 12 team playoff.  You'll also get to see some Cinderella stories.

[YoloinOhio]

6 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Big mistake, imo. But I've also always contended the playoffs are bad for college football as it is.

 

I could maybe see expanding to 6, and someday stretching it to 8. But even that is all too much. 12 just makes the season worthless.

The regular season will be more meaningful to more teams for longer. But no one game will hold nearly the stakes they did in the past.

[Bill from NYC]

9 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

Unless Ohio state starts losing more than 0-1 games/yr in conference they should make the playoff every year. Will be interesting to see the potential of warm weather teams having to come north for that 1st round in December that has home fields. College Post season has always been played in domes or warm weather stadiums. 

Good points. 

 

I think that 12 teams would make some playoff games all but meaningless. Many players are currently sitting out bowl games. Will an NFL bound player from a GO5 or even Pac 12 team want to risk injury and face OSU, Clemson, or Bama, while having little to no chance of winning? I predict that many players will simply not play.

 

There is a better way for more schools to make the playoffs. They need to recruit better and improve their coaching. Saban does not win by working 8 hour days and I'm sure that the same applies to Day and Dabo. Why punish greatness?

Edited June 11, 2021 by Bill from NYC

[YoloinOhio]

 

[Milanos Milano]

On 6/11/2021 at 7:05 AM, YoloinOhio said:

 

I really hope this happens. While teams like Bama, Ohio St, Clemson, and Oklahoma deserve to be in the playoffs most year because they have the talent, it would be nice to see some other near worthy teams get a crack at it. I think 12 is a really good amount. Any more and it would water down the experience and 4 I also felt was not enough. It makes sense to have a big tournament for college basketball, but it would be terrible for football. 12 is just right. 

Edited June 13, 2021 by IronMaidenBills

[FireChans]

On 6/10/2021 at 4:39 PM, DrDawkinstein said:

Big mistake, imo. But I've also always contended the playoffs are bad for college football as it is.

 

I could maybe see expanding to 6, and someday stretching it to 8. But even that is all too much. 12 just makes the season worthless.

The regular season is already worthless. Teams like Bama, Clemson, OSU play Jackson State half the time. 
 

Seeing a lower caliber team that surprises and plays well all year get a chance to play against the top teams in the country can be nothing but fun.

On 6/11/2021 at 6:14 AM, Bill from NYC said:

Good points. 

 

I think that 12 teams would make some playoff games all but meaningless. Many players are currently sitting out bowl games. Will an NFL bound player from a GO5 or even Pac 12 team want to risk injury and face OSU, Clemson, or Bama, while having little to no chance of winning? I predict that many players will simply not play.

 

There is a better way for more schools to make the playoffs. They need to recruit better and improve their coaching. Saban does not win by working 8 hour days and I'm sure that the same applies to Day and Dabo. Why punish greatness?

Counterpoint, college players care more about winning a championship than the Capital One Bowl.

 

The NCAA tournament didn’t cause all of the top NBA prospects to drop.

 

Why wouldn’t a decent OT from Iowa want to put some play on tape of him going against some Bama DE’s?

[YoloinOhio]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

The regular season is already worthless. Teams like Bama, Clemson, OSU play Jackson State half the time. 
 

Seeing a lower caliber team that surprises and plays well all year get a chance to play against the top teams in the country can be nothing but fun.

Counterpoint, college players care more about winning a championship than the Capital One Bowl.

 

The NCAA tournament didn’t cause all of the top NBA prospects to drop.

 

Why wouldn’t a decent OT from Iowa want to put some play on tape of him going against some Bama DE’s?

I think with a potential of having to play up to 17 games you will see the nfl guys and certain starters sitting out the part of the schedule that has any cupcake games so they “load manage” for the bigger games and post season. Theoretically that’s better for the big programs who recruit well because it gets the younger guys who are just as talented more experience early 

[FireChans]

41 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

I think with a potential of having to play up to 17 games you will see the nfl guys and certain starters sitting out the part of the schedule that has any cupcake games so they “load manage” for the bigger games and post season. Theoretically that’s better for the big programs who recruit well because it gets the younger guys who are just as talented more experience early 

IMO, this only makes the game better. Devonta Smith didn't need to play every snap vs Arkansas

[Doc Brown]

On 6/11/2021 at 6:14 AM, Bill from NYC said:

Good points. 

 

I think that 12 teams would make some playoff games all but meaningless. Many players are currently sitting out bowl games. Will an NFL bound player from a GO5 or even Pac 12 team want to risk injury and face OSU, Clemson, or Bama, while having little to no chance of winning? I predict that many players will simply not play.

 

There is a better way for more schools to make the playoffs. They need to recruit better and improve their coaching. Saban does not win by working 8 hour days and I'm sure that the same applies to Day and Dabo. Why punish greatness?

With a chance (no matter how minute) at a championship title and to put good film in against better teams they'll play.  Internal pressure from both the team and your college as a whole also plays a factor.

[Bill from NYC]

8 hours ago, FireChans said:

The regular season is already worthless. Teams like Bama, Clemson, OSU play Jackson State half the time. 
 

Oh, OK. I thought that Alabama played a 10 game all SEC schedule in 2020 and went undefeated. Sorry.

 

[Bill from NYC]

8 hours ago, FireChans said:

 

Seeing a lower caliber team that surprises and plays well all year get a chance to play against the top teams in the country can be nothing but fun.

 

Really? I was thinking that sub-par teams would stand a chance of losing by scores of 60-0.  That doesn't sound like fun from where I sit FC.

 

Also, I don't think that the championships should be fun based. Maybe the best teams should play, no? And also, "fun" for who? Not the kid who loses a 20 million or so guaranteed contract for having to play extra, unpaid college games. 

 

Sorry, I don't think that inferior teams should be rewarded. I also don't think that the college kids should be taking more risk. Finally, I think that the reason for this proposal is economic exploitation. It will be great for the NCAA but how good will it be for the injured player.

 

Thanks for the dialogue FC and as always, JMO.

[FireChans]

27 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Oh, OK. I thought that Alabama played a 10 game all SEC schedule in 2020 and went undefeated. Sorry.

 

That was the COVID schedule.  This year the Bama boys play such powerhouse teams such as:

 

Mercer (they beat Duke in the NCAA CBB tourney a few years ago!)

Southern Miss

New Mexico State

 

If a few players miss those games, so what?  Bama backups will beat them by 50.

18 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Really? I was thinking that sub-par teams would stand a chance of losing by scores of 60-0.  That doesn't sound like fun from where I sit FC.

 

Also, I don't think that the championships should be fun based. Maybe the best teams should play, no? And also, "fun" for who? Not the kid who loses a 20 million or so guaranteed contract for having to play extra, unpaid college games. 

 

Sorry, I don't think that inferior teams should be rewarded. I also don't think that the college kids should be taking more risk. Finally, I think that the reason for this proposal is economic exploitation. It will be great for the NCAA but how good will it be for the injured player.

 

Thanks for the dialogue FC and as always, JMO.

Really? I was thinking that sub-par teams would stand a chance of losing by scores of 60-0.  That doesn't sound like fun from where I sit FC.

 

I get that.  I get that ND can barely hang with the powerhouses.  But you know what?  It's still football.  The difference in talent between TAMU and Bama is not the same as Mercer vs Bama.  The teams that make it will be at least solid. 

 

And usually the good CFB teams have good players. I would like to see some star DB from Michigan State play a LSU star WR in the first round of the playoff.  Sounds like fun to me.

 

Not the kid who loses a 20 million or so guaranteed contract for having to play extra, unpaid college games. 

 

If I was a college player, I would rather play an undefeated BIG12 or PAC10 team  than Mercer. Injuries can happen in any game.  But we let those boys ride vs Southern Miss.  Why not the playoff?

 

It will be great for the NCAA but how good will it be for the injured player.

 

Injuries suck.  More games equals more risk but no one argues to eliminate the useless games on the schedule for the players.  Or to eliminate the East/West game. Or to eliminate Bowl Season. 

 

Ultimately, the players don't have to play.  If you are a top 10 talent and you don't want to risk the postseason, go right ahead.  They'll still play. Because they want to.

 

There are thousands of college players and only hundreds of draftees.  Even fewer are the ones who make it to the NFL.  Who are we really protecting?  The projected first rounders?

Edited June 14, 2021 by FireChans

[Bill from NYC]

17 hours ago, FireChans said:

 

There are thousands of college players and only hundreds of draftees.  Even fewer are the ones who make it to the NFL.  Who are we really protecting?  The projected first rounders?

The above is a thought provoking question imo. I think that the answer to it is no, but I do get your point.

 

I have spoken to a particular player who was a second round draft pick. I also spoke to his mother. He hails from Mississippi and his mom is a nursing assistant. If he would have torn his achilles (or another horrible injury), he would be out millions of dollars.

 

Things are changing in Alabama. Many of the players are very bright kids these days. Still, some are not exactly chemistry majors and stand to make much more money playing football than they will after college in other endeavors. NFL players have very short careers and this opens the for for later round draft picks as well as udfas to make the pros.

 

I'm not going to harp on it but I think that a majority of the top college players come from poor families. Most have little to nothing to fall back on and an injury can cost them a sum of money they would probably not see from any other line of work.

 

If they MUST expand the playoffs, my thing is to do away with conference title games and shorten the regular season. They should also place more emphasis on strength of schedule. 

 

Again, jmo.

 

 

[Orlando Buffalo]

18 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Really? I was thinking that sub-par teams would stand a chance of losing by scores of 60-0.  That doesn't sound like fun from where I sit FC.

 

Also, I don't think that the championships should be fun based. Maybe the best teams should play, no? And also, "fun" for who? Not the kid who loses a 20 million or so guaranteed contract for having to play extra, unpaid college games. 

 

Sorry, I don't think that inferior teams should be rewarded. I also don't think that the college kids should be taking more risk. Finally, I think that the reason for this proposal is economic exploitation. It will be great for the NCAA but how good will it be for the injured player.

 

Thanks for the dialogue FC and as always, JMO.

Bill I think you do not realize how good the players are across the country in many schools and how many only go to power 5 schools because they know everywhere else they can't win a title. The expansion of the playoff will every year be 11 power 5 schools but at least one other will be given a chance. The non power team will 2/3 of the time lose the first game but seeing as six times in the past 16 years the only undefeated team after bowl games was not national champs it is hard to argue they never have a chance 

 

[May Day 10]

I like it.  

I think the teams such as UCF a few years ago or those Peterson Boise teams should have a shot, a puncher's chance, and if they un-seated a power team in the tournament, it would be mayhem.  I would also like to see the SEC runner-up who is arguably the 2nd best team in the country get in rather than an overrated Notre Dame tomato can or Ohio State.  Now they all can get in.  This truly gives every team a chance at a National Championship when the season starts, which does not exist now.

 

12 teams will all be pretty high quality.  Furthermore, you are having 5-12 in the first round which normally should breed pretty good and interesting match-ups.  I dont think we are doomed to perpetual blowouts either.  

 

I used to be a huge bowl game fan, but they did lose an enormous amount of luster and importance when the playoff started.  If the Bowl Games are grafted with games that mean something, then it is much better.

 

We will get a lot more flavor in the playoff picture than Alabama, Clemson, O-State, Notre Dame, Georgia, Oklahoma.   We will get more Washington, Texas A&M, Utah, Cincinnati, Wisconsin, etc.  Plus a bracket buster like Coastal Carolina, UCF, Boise, or WMU...  say what you will, but if those teams are undefeated, they should get a shot with 12, and Im sure their players would relish a week of "Great White Hype" going up against a P5 school.