2021 CFB Playoff Discussion

[cincibuck]

All in all, there hasn't been a year yet when they have had three competitive games. Why in the hell do people want to keep expanding this?

Because somewhere on a planet far, far away there's a team from South Keokuk State that's going to show the world. It's like Hoosiers but with a football.

 

[BB73]

Where was LaRusa in 1968? Damn, I hated seeing that cards team lose to Detroit.

Al Kaline, Denny McClain, Mickey Lolich, Norm Cash, Willie Horton, Dick McAuliffe, Don Wert, Ray Oyler, Mickey Stanley, Don Demeter, Bill Freehan (despite where he went to college), Bill Monbouquette, and Gates Brown say hello. ️

That comeback from 3-1 down, and trailing in game 5, was a highlight in my younger days.

 

[Don Muenz]

All in all, there hasn't been a year yet when they have had three competitive games. Why in the hell do people want to keep expanding this?
Because somewhere on a planet far, far away there's a team from South Keokuk State that's going to show the world. It's like Hoosiers but with a football.

Hey, Keokuk was quite competitive in the 3-I League!

 

[Jaxbuck]

OSU won the whole thing as a four seed, so not sure how we completely avoid uncompetitive games without occasionally excluding a contender. The semis were both blowouts this year, but that is not always the case. The pre-playoff BCS Championship had a few blowouts as well.

There are always going to be blowouts sure but I think people feel like expanding the playoffs will balance the competitive landscape a la the NFL and that's simply not true. You will see more close games in the early rounds but the NFL puts limits in place against one team acquiring all the talent. That doesn't exist in CFB so there is always going to be a significant gap between, say, the top 1-3 in any given year and everyone else.

If sacrificing the regular season to watch teams 4-16 (or however many) wail away on each other to earn the right to be dutifully crushed by a team from the 1-3 rank, seems like a good idea then that's an opinion I do not share.

I am of the opinion; let's save the regular season as much as possible, let Bowls be an exhibition/reward again and keep the playoffs at no more than 4. It isn't going to happen but it's how I'd vote if anyone cared.

 

[Trevi]

Al Kaline, Denny McClain, Mickey Lolich, Norm Cash, Willie Horton, Dick McAuliffe, Don Wert, Ray Oyler, Mickey Stanley, Don Demeter, Bill Freehan (despite where he went to college), Bill Monbouquette, and Gates Brown say hello. ️

That comeback from 3-1 down, and trailing in game 5, was a highlight in my younger days.

Who are you kidding? You were watching Ty Cobb in those younger days.

 

[CincyInterloper]

There are always going to be blowouts sure but I think people feel like expanding the playoffs will balance the competitive landscape a la the NFL and that's simply not true. You will see more close games in the early rounds but the NFL puts limits in place against one team acquiring all the talent. That doesn't exist in CFB so there is always going to be a significant gap between, say, the top 1-3 in any given year and everyone else.

If sacrificing the regular season to watch teams 4-16 (or however many) wail away on each other to earn the right to be dutifully crushed by a team from the 1-3 rank, seems like a good idea then that's an opinion I do not share.

I am of the opinion; let's save the regular season as much as possible, let Bowls be an exhibition/reward again and keep the playoffs at no more than 4. It isn't going to happen but it's how I'd vote if anyone cared.

I agree completely. On any given Sunday, any NFL team has enough talent to beat any other NFL team. In college football, there is a big talent gap between the top team (or a couple of top teams) and the rest of the NCAA. This may vary a bit year to year, but it's there.

I also really hate how the playoffs have undermined the bowl games to the point where going to the Rose Bowl is considered a consolation prize. That is kind of the motivating factor in my suggestion for selecting the BCS teams after the bowls. However, that would kind of make the bowls an extension of the regular season, and maybe it would be better to get back to the original idea of having exhibition games to reward the players.

 

[Abenaki]

I mean, they're expanding the playoffs for money. But they're also looking to add non-blowout games. You won't get rid of the blowouts, they might be worse depending on the final structure, but you'll be adding games that could be like the Fiesta and Rose this year. That will help eliminate the blowout talking points and it will drive ratings.

 

[cincibuck]

And again, in the NFL the players have a say - fewer pre-season games for example. But college players have no one speaking for them. If they continue with full seasons and ccgs, an expanded play off could 4 games to a season and go from finals week to the first two weeks of the next semester.

 

[Zurp]

I agree completely. On any given Sunday, any NFL team has enough talent to beat any other NFL team. In college football, there is a big talent gap between the top team (or a couple of top teams) and the rest of the NCAA. This may vary a bit year to year, but it's there.

I'm asking this more as for your opinion than to make a point: If the top 4 teams in college football had to play an entire 16 or 17-game schedule against the top 32 teams, would any of them go undefeated? Or get out with just 1 loss? I think the answer is no. I think the top 32 teams in college football is about the same in competitiveness as the NFL is. If we picked the top 32 teams in college football and played a 17-game schedule that looked like the NFL, the top teams would win 13 or 14 games. But, I may be wrong. You don't typically see 35-10 games in the playoffs in the NFL.

I also really hate how the playoffs have undermined the bowl games to the point where going to the Rose Bowl is considered a consolation prize. That is kind of the motivating factor in my suggestion for selecting the BCS teams after the bowls. However, that would kind of make the bowls an extension of the regular season, and maybe it would be better to get back to the original idea of having exhibition games to reward the players.

Cut down on the number of bowl games. I know the me from 10 years ago would want to punch me in the face for saying that. But we don't need 40 bowl games. A team shouldn't celebrate a 6-win season because, "Now we're bowl eligible!" 10 wins now gets you into a bowl game. Hell.. maybe the winners of however many bowl games that is are eligible for playoffs. Take all the 10-win teams, pair them up into bowls (and if there's an odd number of teams, NCAA should ask me which team gets left out of the bowls and playoffs). The winners get re-ranked and the playoffs are set. Home games for better-ranked teams, and byes for teams when necessary. Last 2 alive play in the stadium of last year's winner. (Ha - I want to see USC play Clemson in Columbus.)

 

[Jaxbuck]

I mean, they're expanding the playoffs for money. But they're also looking to add non-blowout games. You won't get rid of the blowouts, they might be worse depending on the final structure, but you'll be adding games that could be like the Fiesta and Rose this year. That will help eliminate the blowout talking points and it will drive ratings.

Absolutely. The NFL has proven people like the "who the fuck knows?" element of playoff games amongst a bunch of evenly matched teams.

Expanded playoff, early round games like a 5 vs 12 game in basketball could be a lot of fun.

1 vs 16 is going to be about the same as it is in basketball. A total ass beating 99 time out of 100.

 

[Onebuckfan]

Nobody seeded below 6 will win a NC but it’s a$$$ maker for conferences not named SEC.

 

[Don Muenz]

Who are you kidding? You were watching Ty Cobb in those younger days.

Just remember, dirt had younger daze, too.

 

[BB73]

Who are you kidding? You were watching Ty Cobb in those younger days.

Only because Cap Anson had retired, I needed a new hero.

 

[Don Muenz]

I was hittin’ where they was, meself.

 

[Bestbuck36]

Absolutely. The NFL has proven people like the "who the fuck knows?" element of playoff games amongst a bunch of evenly matched teams.

Expanded playoff, early round games like a 5 vs 12 game in basketball could be a lot of fun.

1 vs 16 is going to be about the same as it is in basketball. A total ass beating 99 time out of 100.

Shoot, it would get worse than that. There's no such thing as a hot shooter in football. Football is a true team game where basketball one guy can save your ass or become a hero. I'm for expanding to 8 teams max that way there's a couple more teams that always end up just out of the CFP that would get a shot once in a while. They'll learn tough lessons like UC did this year but at least their fans can get a chance to lose their minds once in a while. I'm for that.