CFP considering expanding playoffs to 12 teams

[mmboys07]

So, will this scenario, how ever it plays out, result in ND dumbing down its schedule? Will conference teams dumb down their non-conference schedules even more? Will top teams
hold players out at the end of the season to get ready for the playoffs? Will this increase pressure for paying the players even more? Will players ever go to class again; outside of ND,
Northwestern, and schools like that? Just wondering.

 

[Golson5]

So, will this scenario, how ever it plays out, result in ND dumbing down its schedule? Will conference teams dumb down their non-conference schedules even more? Will top teams
hold players out at the end of the season to get ready for the playoffs? Will this increase pressure for paying the players even more? Will players ever go to class again; outside of ND,
Northwestern, and schools like that? Just wondering.

Its a dumpster fire

 

[savvyandsassier]

It's not trash to the fans of those schools - or more importantly - to the fans of other programs in that conference that may now be impacted by the result of that game. Once again, you must focus on the fact that access to the CCG is only dependent on conference games. Each of the five conferences may have November games like that. It's going to get crazy. Fans (short for fanatics) like to go crazy in November.

If college football purists are offended by a two or three loss team being in the playoffs, then so be it. But they will be drowned out by the increased interest by other fans in November and December. Like I said this proposal is not about the playoffs; it's about the regular season.

It's not trash at all to anyone. ND fans are particularly backwards and reactionary, which should come as no surprise. They probably belong to several cults, we know they belong to two. The cult of the undefeated season, as I'm calling it. And you can see them all hissing at this new playoff like vampires at dawn. Not all, but at a minimum it's a loud and disgruntled minority, and they pretty much define ND on the whole. And then there's the cult of independence that they jealously safeguard and nurture against any real or perceived threats. Those two cults overlap of course, so it really puts them behind the eightball at ever embracing or enjoying or appreciating anything new.

In any case, it's done. It's pretty close to perfect, or at least pretty damn good overall, and I'm ecstatic. I wasn't sure this day would ever come, and it seems like they really went for it and delivered the goods, and no shitty half measures. This whole setup is not bad at all! And as ND fan who would rather see us stay independent but who certainly isn't married to it, if they change the whole first-round bye nonsense, we just might be able to avoid joining a conference. But probably not. Which is fine, whatever....

Overall, this is fantastic news. Our ship has finally come in! And as some dude said on some random podcast I listened to said, if you're against this new playoff, you're not even a CFB fan. I don't know what you are exactly, but you ain't a fan.....

 

[Golson5]

It's not trash at all to anyone. ND fans are particularly backwards and reactionary, which should come as no surprise. They probably belong to several cults, we know they belong to two. The cult of the undefeated season, as I'm calling it. And you can see them all hissing at this new playoff like vampires at dawn. Not all, but at a minimum it's a loud and disgruntled minority, and they pretty much define ND on the whole. And then there's the cult of independence that they jealously safeguard and nurture against any real or perceived threats. Those two cults overlap of course, so it really puts them behind the eightball at ever embracing or enjoying or appreciating anything new.

In any case, it's done. It's pretty close to perfect, or at least pretty damn good overall, and I'm ecstatic. I wasn't sure this day would ever come, and it seems like they really went for it and delivered the goods, and no shitty half measures. This whole setup is not bad at all! And as ND fan who would rather see us stay independent but who certainly isn't married to it, if they change the whole first-round bye nonsense, we just might be able to avoid joining a conference. But probably not. Which is fine, whatever....

Overall, this is fantastic news. Our ship has finally come in! And as some dude said on some random podcast I listened to said, if you're against this new playoff, you're not even a CFB fan. I don't know what you are exactly, but you ain't a fan.....

Biggest tool here

 

[NDSMC78]

If college football purists are offended by a two or three loss team being in the playoffs, then so be it. But they will be drowned out by the increased interest by other fans in November and December. Like I said this proposal is not about the playoffs; it's about the regular season.

College football attendance is down across the country. TV viewership is also down. That problem is not going to be solved by making regular season games less important.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

There are losing teams in any organization. CFB has had them for 130 years. Teams that are out of the national title race play for their bowl or failing that to beat their end of year rival. This new dumb idea further erodes both of those things.

Sorry, but that's ridiculous. Rivalry games will always be rivalry games no matter each team's record or post-season prospects. This new proposed system does nothing to diminish that. If anything, it could enhance more end-of-year rivalry games as more teams will have more on the line during those matchups.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

College football attendance is down across the country. TV viewership is also down. That problem is not going to be solved by making regular season games less important.

78, you and I have been pretty much simpatico when it comes to the BS myths surrounding the supposed virtues of being in a conference and the even bigger myth that ND would be better off by joining one, but you seem to be off base here. No one in this thread has shown any sufficient evidence of how this new system makes regular-season games less important. The only case that has been made is that 9-3 teams will now have an opportunity to make the playoffs, with the argument being that those 3 losses really didn't matter and therefore those games were less important.

That is not true.

A 9-3 team diminishes the notion that making the playoffs is a reward in and of itself, but it doesn't detract from the regular season. The regular season games - even early-season games - will matter just as much as, if not more than, they ever have. Why? Because rankings will be no less important than they are now. That means all of these things will still matter:

• Strength of schedule
• Who you beat
• Who you lost to
• Style points (i.e. - game control, point differential, etc)

A 9-3 team will only be able to make the playoffs if their ranking justifies it, and their ranking will have to be justified the same it has been. That part won't change, therefore, the regular-season games they played in and lost will still matter just as they would have in the current system, with the only difference being that instead of being ranked in the top 12 and likely being eligible for a premier bowl game, they will now be eligible for the playoffs.

If we were talking about a 32 or 64-team playoff there is no doubt the regular season would be diminished. But 12 teams don't do that.

 

[mirer03]

It's an awfully high price to pay imo

The play in gain essentially becomes their conference title game.... Same as what the top teams had to go through

 

[NDSMC78]

78, you and I have been pretty much simpatico when it comes to the BS myths surrounding the supposed virtues of being in a conference and the even bigger myth that ND would be better off by joining one, but you seem to be off base here. No one in this thread has shown any sufficient evidence of how this new system makes regular-season games less important. The only case that has been made is that 9-3 teams will now have an opportunity to make the playoffs, with the argument being that those 3 losses really didn't matter and therefore those games were less important.

That is not true.

Just because we agree on most things doesn't mean we can't disagree every now and then. The fact is that any increase of teams in a playoff, no matter what the sport, diminishes the regular season. I go back to the days when the baseball playoffs consisted of the National League champ playing the American League champ in the World Series. There were no division champs, wild card teams, etc. Same for the NFL. When you have two teams that qualify for the playoffs, as opposed to 10 or 12, that puts a premium on excelling throughout the season. Division champs and wild card teams allow for lesser teams to win championships.
I fully understand that, for economic reasons and fan interest, the more teams in the playoffs, the more people keep watching and going out to the ballparks. But that doesn't change the fact that increasing the number of teams in the playoffs makes the regular season less important.

 

[savvyandsassier]

If you belong to the cult of the undefeated season, then there's no amount of patient reasoning that's going to talk you down. By their perverse logic, you wouldn't have any postseason at all. There wouldn't even be a title game, even that would most certainly diminish the value of regular season. If you could figure out a way to not play any games at all, that might help. At least it couldn't be diminished that way. We'll just have one big preseason poll and that will be the end of it.

And quite frankly, they're correct. If that's all that you matters to you, and that's where you find yourself, then quite naturally you would want no postseason at all. And there's nothing to convince them of. They're quite right. It's bonkers and demented, but nevertheless philosophically sound.

Like I said, these people are not sports fans. They're sort of quasi-religious votaries. Like vestal virgins or something. But their reign of terror is coming to an end. So that's the good news.

 

[NDSMC78]

Like I said, these people are not sports fans. They're sort of quasi-religious votaries. Like vestal virgins or something. But their reign of terror is coming to an end. So that's the good news.

What a dope. Like only you are able to tell us all what the real truth is.
Yeah, we are sports fans. We just think that the regular season should be paramount.

 

[Golson5]

If you belong to the cult of the undefeated season, then there's no amount of patient reasoning that's going to talk you down. By their perverse logic, you wouldn't have any postseason at all. There wouldn't even be a title game, even that would most certainly diminish the value of regular season. If you could figure out a way to not play any games at all, that might help. At least it couldn't be diminished that way. We'll just have one big preseason poll and that will be the end of it.

And quite frankly, they're correct. If that's all that you matters to you, and that's where you find yourself, then quite naturally you would want no postseason at all. And there's nothing to convince them of. They're quite right. It's bonkers and demented, but nevertheless philosophically sound.

Like I said, these people are not sports fans. They're sort of quasi-religious votaries. Like vestal virgins or something. But their reign of terror is coming to an end. So that's the good news.

Huge tool

 

[tbonesays]

Agreed. I was asking one of the Booster leaders at FSU a question about how the annual TV schedules are made and also about the issues the ACC had with its odd non geographical divisions. He was very clear. The biggest voice at the table is ESPN. And so it is with this proposal. ESPN has a huge voice and nothing can happen until 2027 unless ESPN gets compensated for giving up the last 4 years of its contract if this new playoff scheme starts with the 2023 season. But ESPN sees an issue with ratings and they know - and we know - that the post season of college football has been significantly damaged by the current playoff system. This current proposal was controlled by ESPN, the B10 and the SEC to address concerns of the other power 5 conferences and the Group of 5.

Ratings are down. Fans are clamoring for a more “interesting” November. Cable cutting is real. I don’t understand why people believe that a “loss” diminishes the season when in fact the new process allows more opportunities for schools to recover from a loss earlier in the year. Hope is the currency that keeps fans engaged. There are too many national programs (and entire conferences) that are out of the conversation by mid October and there is no way in the current system to reel them back in. Opt outs by NFL caliber college players will increase if something is not done.

What was unexpected (at least to me) was the conclusion made by the committee that studied this was to double down on the concept of conference champion. But then again, the vast majority of football games that are played are conference games. You either blow the conferences up and go to a more NFL type regional model or you work with what you have. But if you study how TV conference contracts are negotiated (something ND has not had to worry about), the conference games that are played every year are the major factor in determining the contractual revenue. It’s a known scheduled game when the contract is being negotiated. Ad hoc OOC games (such as Clemson-UGA and Bama-Miami this September) get little added revenue in the contract as it is generally unknown what those future games will be when the contract is negotiated. (That is why in the past ten years, so many early interesting OOC games - like Clemson-UGA- are played in a neutral site. It was the only way that the schools could monetize the value of that game with ticket sales.) The conference TV contract is not given a “boost” for scheduling that one off game.

The B10 and the SEC are clearly all in on the “conference” paradigm and the conference champ game has been resurrected as a material factor in determining how the playoffs will work.

In conclusion, this is all about changing the playoffs for the benefit of the regular season. It is not a better way of finding out who is #1. I have been studying conference realignments and how these TV contracts work for over 15 years. In the past 5 years, the B10 and the SEC have created a material revenue differential between them and the remaining 3 power conferences. It’s unhealthy for the sport. I won’t bore you how those two conferences did it (they actually chose different pathways to do it) but it is what it is. The playoffs had to be changed in order to make the power 5 annual conference games more meaningful to conferences not named B10 or SEC, or else this sport will become hopelessly regionalized.

So ESPN thinks it's ratings are too low and their solution is to inflate the post season creating more irrelevant games.

These must be the people who see a half empty stadium and think it needs a loud jumbotron.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

Just because we agree on most things doesn't mean we can't disagree every now and then. The fact is that any increase of teams in a playoff, no matter what the sport, diminishes the regular season. I go back to the days when the baseball playoffs consisted of the National League champ playing the American League champ in the World Series. There were no division champs, wild card teams, etc. Same for the NFL. When you have two teams that qualify for the playoffs, as opposed to 10 or 12, that puts a premium on excelling throughout the season. Division champs and wild card teams allow for lesser teams to win championships.
I fully understand that, for economic reasons and fan interest, the more teams in the playoffs, the more people keep watching and going out to the ballparks. But that doesn't change the fact that increasing the number of teams in the playoffs makes the regular season less important.

Fair enough, but I was hoping I could also sell you on the idea that this helps ND's chances to remain independent, which I think this definitely does. When people come to realize that, as long as ND takes care of business and finishes good enough to be a 5 seed (or even a 6-8 seed) and gets to play a home game against an opponent we should be heavy favorites against, and then get to play the #4 seed on a neutral field after we win, we could be in a situation where we are playing a 9th or 10th ranked team in the quarterfinals while the #1 seed will be playing the 8th ranked team at best and the 2 and 3 seeds will be playing even tougher opponents as well.

Being a #5 seed is not nearly as bad as people think and ND's regular-season goals and schedule should put us in the discussion to be a 5 seed most seasons. And if this system also makes it less likely we will be forced to join a conference then, on balance, I'll take it.

 

[tbonesays]

So, will this scenario, how ever it plays out, result in ND dumbing down its schedule? Will conference teams dumb down their non-conference schedules even more? Will top teams
hold players out at the end of the season to get ready for the playoffs? Will this increase pressure for paying the players even more? Will players ever go to class again; outside of ND,
Northwestern, and schools like that? Just wondering.

IF ND wants to work the system then we would just schedule our way to 10-2 and always sneak into the playoff. That means no Ohio State/Michigan the same year we play Clemson/@Miami. Bye Purdue, hello Indiana State.

Oh and lol at anyone who thinks an inflated playoff doesn't devalue the regular season. They must think you can print money without inflation.

 

[NDSMC78]

Fair enough, but I was hoping I could also sell you on the idea that this helps ND's chances to remain independent, which I think this definitely does.

I hope you are right, but I have my doubts. I am very much opposed to anything which will cause ND to join a conference.

 

[Golson5]

Fair enough, but I was hoping I could also sell you on the idea that this helps ND's chances to remain independent, which I think this definitely does. When people come to realize that, as long as ND takes care of business and finishes good enough to be a 5 seed (or even a 6-8 seed) and gets to play a home game against an opponent we should be heavy favorites against, and then get to play the #4 seed on a neutral field after we win, we could be in a situation where we are playing a 9th or 10th ranked team in the quarterfinals while the #1 seed will be playing the 8th ranked team at best and the 2 and 3 seeds will be playing even tougher opponents as well.

Being a #5 seed is not nearly as bad as people think and ND's regular-season goals and schedule should put us in the discussion to be a 5 seed most seasons. And if this system also makes it less likely we will be forced to join a conference then, on balance, I'll take it.

Its BAD for CFB. It may be good for certain individual teams in certain years.

But bad for the overall product

 

[savvyandsassier]

What a dope. Like only you are able to tell us all what the real truth is.
Yeah, we are sports fans. We just think that the regular season should be paramount.

Was I talking to you, did I address you? I wouldn't address me personally unless you really want to know what I think. Because if you think you don't like what I've had to say thus far.... I've been waiting my entire adult life for a bona fide CFB playoff, we'll just leave it at that.

Besides, you got your little friend in this thread who's bending over backwards to try and accommodate you. Very gracious of him. Even though there's nothing to explain. It's like trying to explain why a bowl of Cinnamon Toast Crunch tastes so damn good. Is it actually possible to explain that? Not if all you want and all you'll ever eat and all you've ever eaten is plain oatmeal. That's a very imperfect analogy but it kind of captures it.

So I'll leave with you one thought, maybe you can expand your horizons a little bit. The whole point of a playoff, it's central virtue, is indeed to diminish the importance of the regular season. So you're not wrong to fear and loathe it. That's precisely what it does and why we have playoffs, in any sport anywhere. Specifically to diminish the importance of the regular season. And then, to incredibly, miraculously, improbably and against all odds leap into the abyss....... and based on the various results and W/L records and whatnot, produce what we call a champion.

But you can't do that without diminishing the regular season first. Otherwise you just have effin' oatmeal. And If you were an actual sports fan you'd understand that implicitly.....

 

[Okie70]

12 teams is such a complete sell out to the TV networks.

Nothing but a moronic cash grab.

There are only a few years where you have more than 6 teams that could be considered legitimate contenders.

I have never seen a year with more than 8.No.

Yet we now will have supposedly 12.

More participation trophy garbage.

Further diminishes the regular season.

How does it diminish the regular season when a team has to play well DURING THE REGULAR SEASON to get to be 12th? Is it that No. 12 might beat No. 5 and diminish its regular season? Never understood how a playoff systems ranking the top teams for the playoff (whether 2, 4, 8 or 12) hurts the regular chase for one of those spots.

 

[Golson5]

How does it diminish the regular season when a team has to play well DURING THE REGULAR SEASON to get to be 12th? Is it that No. 12 might beat No. 5 and diminish its regular season? Never understood how a playoff systems ranking the top teams for the playoff (whether 2, 4, 8 or 12) hurts the regular chase for one of those spots.

Because a team with 3 losses doesnt deserve a playoff spot. Being ranked 12th isnt that difficult. You can schedule easy and go 10 and 2 and make the playoff. That sucks

The thing that makes cfb the best is every game matters so much. If you lose 1 game, you might be out. Now its okay to lose. Even twice. You can still get in.

Makes those games less enjoyable because the stakes have been significantly diminished.

Its a shame if they do this

 

[savvyandsassier]

How does it diminish the regular season when a team has to play well DURING THE REGULAR SEASON to get to be 12th? Is it that No. 12 might beat No. 5 and diminish its regular season? Never understood how a playoff systems ranking the top teams for the playoff (whether 2, 4, 8 or 12) hurts the regular chase for one of those spots.

Because they're not undefeated. If you're not undefeated, just go home already.

 

[tbonesays]

So I'll leave with you one thought, maybe you can expand your horizons a little bit. The whole point of a playoff, it's central virtue, is indeed to diminish the importance of the regular season. So you're not wrong to fear and loathe it.

Would not have predicted that anyone would admit this, or that the one guy would be you. This is all true except I don't call it a "virtue."

How does it diminish the regular season when a team has to play well DURING THE REGULAR SEASON to get to be 12th? Is it that No. 12 might beat No. 5 and diminish its regular season? Never understood how a playoff systems ranking the top teams for the playoff (whether 2, 4, 8 or 12) hurts the regular chase for one of those spots.

Because every game matters, until they installed a playoff and made many games superfluous.

There have been a few very recent years where as soon as ND went to commercial I immediately changed the channel to watch Bedlam. That was because that game between two teams we never played, still had a direct effect on NDs path to the national title; and visa versa for the teams in OK.

That dynamic will vanish along with many others like it once the playoff is inflated. We have little interest in checking on other games just to yawn about playoff seeding.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

Because a team with 3 losses doesnt deserve a playoff spot. Being ranked 12th isnt that difficult. You can schedule easy and go 10 and 2 and make the playoff. That sucks

The thing that makes cfb the best is every game matters so much. If you lose 1 game, you might be out. Now its okay to lose. Even twice. You can still get in.

Makes those games less enjoyable because the stakes have been significantly diminished.

Its a shame if they do this

Teams have and will continue to be penalized for playing cupcake schedules. Yeah, if a team's only goal is to make the playoff they might schedule all cupcakes for OOC games and then hope like hell they can get one of the spots, but then they will have to worry about seeding. Getting one of the byes or getting to host a home playoff game will be important and jeopardizing those opportunities by scheduling easy will be just as costly as it is now.

The rest of what you have is also not true and I've already explained why. People are still going to care about early-season games. Losses are still going to matter. The only thing that is going to be diminished is the idea that making the playoffs is a reward in and of itself. That will still be true but less so. However, winning playoff games will be huge. Hosting a playoff game will also.

 

[savvyandsassier]

Would not have predicted that anyone would admit this, or that the one guy would be you. This is all true except I don't call it a "virtue."

Because every game matters, until they installed a playoff and made many games superfluous.

There have been a few very recent years where as soon as ND went to commercial I immediately changed the channel to watch Bedlam. That was because that game between two teams we never played, still had a direct effect on NDs path to the national title; and visa versa for the teams in OK.

That dynamic will vanish along with many others like it once the playoff is inflated. We have little interest in checking on other games just to yawn about playoff seeding.

Like I said, it's the whole point. It's the whole point....

Since there's really no way to tell who's the best or not, regardless of their respective W/L records, on account of all the different leagues scattered all over the country.... and so we're gonna have a playoff so we can sort it out as best as possible. And have a great time doing it.

You should get into watching European club soccer. They have no playoff at all. Of course they have no separate divisions or conferences, and all 20 teams in the Premiere League play each other twice, once at home and once away. So there's no need for a playoff. It's just the regular season and that's it. You'd be happy as a pig rolling in his own shit.

 

[Golson5]

Teams have and will continue to be penalized for playing cupcake schedules. Yeah, if a team's only goal is to make the playoff they might schedule all cupcakes for OOC games and then hope like hell they can get one of the spots, but then they will have to worry about seeding. Getting one of the byes or getting to host a home playoff game will be important and jeopardizing those opportunities by scheduling easy will be just as costly as it is now.

The rest of what you have is also not true and I've already explained why. People are still going to care about early-season games. Losses are still going to matter. The only thing that is going to be diminished is the idea that making the playoffs is a reward in and of itself. That will still be true but less so. However, winning playoff games will be huge. Hosting a playoff game will also.

Disagree with everything you said

 

[tbonesays]

Teams have and will continue to be penalized for playing cupcake schedules.

No they aren't.

Like I said, it's the whole point. It's the whole point....

Since there's really no way to tell who's the best or not, regardless of their respective W/L records, on account of all the different leagues scattered all over the country.... and so we're gonna have a playoff so we can sort it out as best as possible. And have a great time doing it.

You should get into watching European club soccer. They have no playoff at all. Of course they have no separate divisions or conferences, and all 20 teams in the Premiere League play each other twice, once at home and once away. So there's no need for a playoff. It's just the regular season and that's it. You'd be happy as a pig rolling in his own shit.

No there are many ways to tell who had the best season. A single elimination tournament is one of the worst.

 

[northvanole]

You have to study how ESPN evaluated the value of regular season games to see what is going on here. Except for ND and NBC, all college football TV contracts are negotiated between the networks and conference leadership. AD's of members of the conference will give input, but they aren't doing the negotiating. And it has become clearer and clearer that the networks favor the value and certitude of conference games. This new system backs off the original playoff premise that conference champ games do not matter more than any other game. It mattered as a game, as a 13th game. But teams have won the CCG and not gone to the playoff, and teams didn't make it to the CCG and went to the playoff. This has ended. And conferences now matter more than ever. You have to begin with this optic to determine the impact of this system on the regular season. This is not a mere expansion. By adding the conf champ game as a material factor to the seeding of the 12 playoff teams, the committee is actually adding something that didn't previously exist. By magnifying the value of the CCG, it has magnified the value of every conference game. Why isn't this easy to see?

As the great radio college football host Bill King said in 2012, they may rue the day that this is called a playoff. They should have called it a "plus one" system. All playoffs have seedings based on the regular season. They are not designed to prove that the #1 team in the regular season is the #1 team after the playoffs are played. When the NFL, at only 32 teams, adds many teams to the playoff, it looks odd. There could be too much access. When the 65 members of the power 5 and the 65 members of the group of five have a 12 team playoff, it enhances the regular season because it adds needed access to engage more fan bases.

This is not a playoff expansion. The is the first real Div 1 playoff in college football history

 

[topdecktiger]

No they aren't.


No there are many ways to tell who had the best season. A single elimination tournament is one of the worst.

Let me ask you this, who do you think was the better team this year, Chelsea or Manchester City?

 

[NDSMC78]

When the NFL, at only 32 teams, adds many teams to the playoff, it looks odd. There could be too much access. When the 65 members of the power 5 and the 65 members of the group of five have a 12 team playoff, it enhances the regular season because it adds needed access to engage more fan bases.

In my estimation, having a 12 team playoff is "too much access." A 12 team playoff is nothing more than a money grab.

 

[Bumpdaddy]

No they aren't.

Yes, they are. Baylor and TCU were penalized throughout the 2014 rankings for having weak schedules. In 2016, the CFP committee specifically said they were ranking undefeated UW out of the top 4 because their schedule wasn't strong enough (they later moved up after #4 A&M lost a 2nd time). In 2015, 1-loss ND was ranked ahead of several undefeated P5 teams through the first 3 weeks of the CFP rankings specifically because of our SoS (we later dropped out after losing to Stanford). UCF got penalized multiple years for their weak schedules even though most of it wasn't their fault. Cinci and Coastal Carolina got penalized last year. There are other examples. The one time the CFP blatantly screwed up was 2019 Utah who they ranked as high as #5 despite playing 2 FCS teams and losing to the only team they played that had more than 7 wins (a mediocre USC).

 

[Golson5]

Yes, they are. Baylor and TCU were penalized throughout the 2014 rankings for having weak schedules. In 2016, the CFP committee specifically said they were ranking undefeated UW out of the top 4 because their schedule wasn't strong enough (they later moved up after #4 A&M lost a 2nd time). In 2015, 1-loss ND was ranked ahead of several undefeated P5 teams through the first 3 weeks of the CFP rankings specifically because of our SoS (we later dropped out after losing to Stanford). UCF got penalized multiple years for their weak schedules even though most of it wasn't their fault. Cinci and Coastal Carolina got penalized last year. There are other examples. The one time the CFP blatantly screwed up was 2019 Utah who they ranked as high as #5 despite playing 2 FCS teams and losing to the only team they played that had more than 7 wins (a mediocre USC).

You wont be penalized when there are 12 teams. Thats the problem

Schedule a weak schedule. Go 11 and 1. Your in the playoff

 

[Bumpdaddy]

OK, let's try another angle.

Before MLB instituted the wild card:

• 14% of all teams made the playoffs (1 out of 7 teams in each of 4 divisions).
• 17% of all teams were in the playoffs before expansion (1 out of 6 teams in each division).
• 10% of teams played in the World Series before divisions and playoffs were ever created. It was at 12.5% in Babe Ruth's day.

Before the NFL instituted wild card games in 1970:

• 25% of all teams made the playoffs (1 out of 4 teams in each of 4 divisions)
• 20% of all teams made championship game before the playoffs were created (1 out of 5 teams in 2 divisions)

These were the "bygone" eras when many people think the post-seasons were at their purest. In both leagues, you can at least say every team's strength of schedule was roughly the same since they played each other, so it was easy to evaluate the teams. Still, look at those percentages.

Contrast that with:

The FBS now has 130 schools; 10 conferences, plus a group of 7 independents. A 12 team playoff is only 9% of all teams. Even if we only counted Power 5 schools (65 schools) that only amounts to 18% of teams but, of course, it would be wrong to only include Power 5 schools.

9% of all schools is low by any reasonable standard. The current 4-team format amounts to a whopping 3% of all teams. And for anyone who thinks, "I don't care about MLB or the NFL", no other college sport is as playoff-restrictive as FBS football has been. All other college sports have relatively bigger playoff systems including FCS football.

There is no good reason for the FBS to be as playoff-restrictive as it has been. In fact, the opposite is true. Why? Because schedules are nowhere near the same strength. There is nowhere close to enough intersectional play to properly evaluate a lot of the schools. Only a handful of schools actually play national schedules like ND.

A playoff consisting of 9% of all teams isn't too much.

 

[Golson5]

OK, let's try another angle.

Before MLB instituted the wild card:

• 14% of all teams made the playoffs (1 out of 7 teams in each of 4 divisions).
• 17% of all teams were in the playoffs before expansion (1 out of 6 teams in each division).
• 10% of teams played in the World Series before divisions and playoffs were ever created. It was at 12.5% in Babe Ruth's day.

Before the NFL instituted wild card games in 1970:

• 25% of all teams made the playoffs (1 out of 4 teams in each of 4 divisions)
• 20% of all teams made championship game before the playoffs were created (1 out of 5 teams in 2 divisions)

These were the "bygone" eras when many people think the post-seasons were at their purest. In both leagues, you can at least say every team's strength of schedule was roughly the same since they played each other, so it was easy to evaluate the teams. Still, look at those percentages.

Contrast that with:

The FBS now has 130 schools; 10 conferences, plus a group of 7 independents. A 12 team playoff is only 9% of all teams. Even if we only counted Power 5 schools (65 schools) that only amounts to 18% of teams but, of course, it would be wrong to only include Power 5 schools.

9% of all schools is low by any reasonable standard. The current 4-team format amounts to a whopping 3% of all teams. And for anyone who thinks, "I don't care about MLB or the NFL", no other college sport is as playoff-restrictive as FBS football has been. All other college sports have relatively bigger playoff systems including FCS football.

There is no good reason for the FBS to be as playoff-restrictive as it has been. In fact, the opposite is true. Why? Because schedules are nowhere near the same strength. There is nowhere close to enough intersectional play to properly evaluate a lot of the schools. Only a handful of schools actually play national schedules like ND.

A playoff consisting of 9% of all teams isn't too much.

80 percent of the teams arent very competitive in cfb.

Poor examples

 

[Bumpdaddy]

80 percent of the teams arent very competitive in cfb.

Poor examples

Dumb post. A lot of teams aren't competitive in a lot of sports and during any era. They still have more representative playoffs anyway.

 

[Golson5]

Dumb post. A lot of teams aren't competitive in a lot of sports and during any era. They still have more representative playoffs anyway.

Not like cfb. Theres like 6 teams who have a chance. Another 30 who are quality teams.

And about 60 who have zero percent chance and arent competitive at all.

You cant compare pro teams with college. That made zero sense

 

[Bumpdaddy]

Not like cfb. Theres like 6 teams who have a chance. Another 30 who are quality teams.

And about 60 who have zero percent chance and arent competitive at all.

You cant compare pro teams with college. That made zero sense

It made sense, you just aren't comprehending. I used the MLB and NFL examples for perspective. Pick any college sport you want. Their playoff systems are more inclusive. There are non-competitive teams in all college sports. Most college sports have just a small percentage of teams "with a chance." They still have more inclusive playoffs.

And even if that weren't true, the solution to a sport that is dominated by just a few elite programs wouldn't be to continue to keep things more exclusive. It would be to make things more inclusive for more teams.

9% of all teams is not opening the flood gates. College football will survive.

 

[deadmanramsey]

I think before anyone evaluates the proposed new format, this fundamental question needs to be answered: conceptually and idealistically, what is the purpose of having a playoff system?

I think it is a way of rewarding the most deserving elite teams while maintaining high competition as a fair means of determining a champion.

With that understanding in mind, I think the new format fails on both fronts. It's a less exclusive and special event and will have even worse competition then there already has been (which has featured way too many blow-outs as it is).

If anything, a reversion to the BCS format of 1 vs. 2 was called for.

I have no idea how those who support a 12-team system would not similarly advocate for a 16, 24, or Hell, 64 team format, unless they can present a coherent understanding of the playoffs that somehow differs than my own, in which 12 teams represents the ideal.

 

[deadmanramsey]

78, you and I have been pretty much simpatico when it comes to the BS myths surrounding the supposed virtues of being in a conference and the even bigger myth that ND would be better off by joining one, but you seem to be off base here. No one in this thread has shown any sufficient evidence of how this new system makes regular-season games less important. The only case that has been made is that 9-3 teams will now have an opportunity to make the playoffs, with the argument being that those 3 losses really didn't matter and therefore those games were less important.

That is not true.

A 9-3 team diminishes the notion that making the playoffs is a reward in and of itself, but it doesn't detract from the regular season. The regular season games - even early-season games - will matter just as much as, if not more than, they ever have. Why? Because rankings will be no less important than they are now. That means all of these things will still matter:

• Strength of schedule
• Who you beat
• Who you lost to
• Style points (i.e. - game control, point differential, etc)

A 9-3 team will only be able to make the playoffs if their ranking justifies it, and their ranking will have to be justified the same it has been. That part won't change, therefore, the regular-season games they played in and lost will still matter just as they would have in the current system, with the only difference being that instead of being ranked in the top 12 and likely being eligible for a premier bowl game, they will now be eligible for the playoffs.

If we were talking about a 32 or 64-team playoff there is no doubt the regular season would be diminished. But 12 teams don't do that.

Why should a 9-3 team even be in the conversation for a national championship? Such a team has clearly proven to not be an elite team worthy of being crowned the champs. They had their chances and blew it. They should have to settle for consolation prizes and look at making a run the following season.

 

[topdecktiger]

I think before anyone evaluates the proposed new format, this fundamental question needs to be answered: conceptually and idealistically, what is the purpose of having a playoff system?

I think it is a way of rewarding the most deserving elite teams while maintaining high competition as a fair means of determining a champion.

With that understanding in mind, I think the new format fails on both fronts. It's a less exclusive and special event and will have even worse competition then there already has been (which has featured way too many blow-outs as it is).

If anything, a reversion to the BCS format of 1 vs. 2 was called for.

I have no idea how those who support a 12-team system would not similarly advocate for a 16, 24, or Hell, 64 team format, unless they can present a coherent understanding of the playoffs that somehow differs than my own, in which 12 teams represents the ideal.

This is why I don't particularly like the 12 team format. I want a format that removes some of the subjectivity from the process. There needs to be some mechanism where qualification for the playoffs is strictly decided within the playing field, without any selection committee, poll rankings, media rankings, etc.

 

[topdecktiger]

Why should a 9-3 team even be in the conversation for a national championship? Such a team has clearly proven to not be an elite team worthy of being crowned the champs. They had their chances and blew it. They should have to settle for consolation prizes and look at making a run the following season.

The reason is because of the selection process. There needs to be a qualification process, as opposed to selection. Basically, it's better to risk having a 9-3 team quality, than have an 11-1 team selected by dubious methods.