Basically a poll...

Would you be in favor of dropping some non conference games to allow expansion of the CFP to 8 teams?

The most logical arrangement i can think of is that all 5 P5 conference champions get in with 3 at large committee picks. The committee would also still determine seeding of 1-8.

I guess the drawback would be that if a team isn't in the top 8 they would have less games scheduled because of the limited non conference games. Maybe get around this by allowing teams who did not qualify a chance to play an additional game before bowls start.

No.

No. The CFP we have now is perfect.

Every team that deserves a shot at the national championship has one.

There are tons of arguments about who should be #4 v. #5. That will just shift to who should be #8 v. #9 if you expand the playoffs - nothing is fixed, just changed. And those arguments are irrelevant since the purpose of the CFP is to give a chance to every team that deserves a chance.

You also diminish the importance of the regular season by expanding the playoffs.

And NEVER reward conference champions with an automatic berth. You then incentivize teams forming weak conferences (cough, cough - SIPS).

Bad bad bad idea.

Nope. I cannot think of a year when a team that had a legitimate shot at winning the title was excluded. Expanding would just spark less interest in the regular season and some more meaningless games. You can look and see how FCS/DII runs playoffs-- it's not inherently more interesting or "fair."

Full disclosure, though: If I were College Football czar, I would seriously consider simply reverting to the pre-BCS bowl tie in system (with a seriously trimmed list of bowls).

Not in favor at all.

There's just not enough parity between conferences, much less divisions in some of those conferences, right now.

I hate that rankings play such a role in deciding playoff teams but for now it seems like the only workable system.

I'm in favor or moving it to 6 teams and giving the top two a bye week the first week

fc2112 said:

---

No. The CFP we have now is perfect.

Every team that deserves a shot at the national championship has one.

There are tons of arguments about who should be #4 v. #5. That will just shift to who should be #8 v. #9 if you expand the playoffs - nothing is fixed, just changed. And those arguments are irrelevant since the purpose of the CFP is to give a chance to every team that deserves a chance.

You also diminish the importance of the regular season by expanding the playoffs.

And NEVER reward conference champions with an automatic berth. You then incentivize teams forming weak conferences (cough, cough - SIPS).

Bad bad bad idea.

---

End of thread.

no.

The only thing I don't like about the current system is the love given for an undefeated champion of a weak conference. When a 13-0 Oregon or Oklahoma team gets in ahead of a clearly better, more deserving 12-1 second place SEC, B1G, or ACC team, then I think you have to entertain the idea of expansion.

But outside of that, I'm good with how things are right now.

For this season I'd be more than okay with it. It's almost impossible to get the top 4 right this year with some teams playing 6 games, some at 10, etc.

Normal years, no 4 is perfect. But this year yes expand

Not in favor of dropping regular season games, but I am in favor of eventually expanding the playoffs

No need to drop games, just start the playoffs earlier: two weeks after the ccg's

In a no covid year the ccg's are the first Saturday in December; playoffs would then start around the 15-21 of December, with the final four being played the same time it is in the current 4 team system

Yes expand the playoff. Good grief. The strength of schedule factor/component is a joke in college football. OU and Texas only play one tough game per year. Ditto Ohio State and in some seasons ND plays zero tough opponents. Clemson is legit, but with their schedule they are almost an automatic qualifier.

The current platform whereby the top four teams sit around for 5 weeks without playing a game during the pointless bowl season, is an unmitigated disaster on every level. I'm truly at a loss as to why fans would not desire more quality matchup games in December.

Eliminate CCG and expand to eight
Or better yet expand to 12 top 4 teams get a first round bye next 4 get to host 1st round games

So we want to deprive over a 100 teams the money form the 12th game to make 4 teams happy? Georgia/Florida was a playoff game. The Dawgs lost and were eliminated. The Gators will have another playoff game in a few weeks in Atlanta against the Tide.

2112 has it. The bcs was created to ensure 1 played 2. The current system was created for years when there was a very strong 3 or 4 that deserved a shot.

2001 Oregon. 2003, LSU and usc split the title bc there was no title game. 2004 Auburn.

Being fair to 5 is not the playoffs problem.

Sq 17 said:

---

Eliminate CCG and expand to eight
Or better yet expand to 12 top 4 teams get a first round bye next 4 get to host 1st round games

---

Hell no

fc2112 said:

---

No. The CFP we have now is perfect.

Every team that deserves a shot at the national championship has one.

There are tons of arguments about who should be #4 v. #5. That will just shift to who should be #8 v. #9 if you expand the playoffs - nothing is fixed, just changed. And those arguments are irrelevant since the purpose of the CFP is to give a chance to every team that deserves a chance.

You also diminish the importance of the regular season by expanding the playoffs.

And NEVER reward conference champions with an automatic berth. You then incentivize teams forming weak conferences (cough, cough - SIPS).

Bad bad bad idea.

---

How can you say " teams that deserve a shot have one"

Thats what makes the basketball playoffs the most popular post season tournament... the underdog.

The CFP is already stale with the basically the same teams year in and year out... and the same matchups

And the " it will devalue the regular season is the weakest argument out there.
How will adding more valuable games somehow devalue the regular season???
It won't... it will add more meaningful games

People will never be happy. Leave it as is.


Heck, the ncaa basketball tournament couldn't stay at 64 because people complained.

I do not like the idea of any conference champion getting automatic entry into CFP. Take the top teams whether it is 4 or 8. Big 12 and pac 12 are mediocre.

I don't think you need to cancel a non conference game but yes I think it should be expanded to 6 or 8. SEC is way tougher than the other conferences and should have 2 teams in the top 4 every year but rarely happens.

I've never understood the love for our current ridiculous system. I completely disagree with those who say every team who deserves to be in is in. Seriously? Our current system is a good start, but there are so many ways that a team with a legitimate shot might not make it in. Heck, what if you had a solid year where all P5 conferences were strong (or at least their conference champions were strong) and all had an undefeated champion? How do you decide which one to leave out? It might also leave out a team that lost a season opener and then was the best team by the end of the season. Adding more games would do nothing to diminish the regular season. These arguments are tired, old, and baseless! I agree we shouldn't reduce games for everyone to add a single round for the playoffs, but one more round of playoff games would be just fine.

If you are in favor of 8 what teams this year would you select?

Doesn't matter what the fans think, if it's fair or a team gets in that doesn't deserve it. It's going to at least a 6 team playoff soon. Too much revenue being left on the table.

I would like to see 8 teams, but no more than that. Really, there are most years where there are 5-6 teams that pass the eyeball test and after that there is a drop off in talent. McElroy on espn suggested 6 teams which would work if you had a bye for the 1 versus 6 and 2 versus 5 game winners. It would be nice to see one G5 team get in. I would not want more than 8 because you could always make an argument for a team on the bubble and where does it stop. It would be a travesty if a weaker two loss team got in and knocked off an undefeated team because the regular season should count for something and I wouldn't want CFB to be like the NFL.

The regular season is what gets you to the post season. Is it really that bad if a two-loss team wins three tough games in a row to win a championship? The truth is that with eight teams there wouldn't be many two-loss teams getting in, but I wouldn't mind if A&M lost to Clemson and Alabama in the regular season and then ran the table in the playoffs. If you're the best team at the end of the season, great!

automatic berths would mean that a pac-12/bdf would have the same weight as a SEC championship, which would just be malarkey.

Generally speaking it's highly unlikely that the best team in the country would finish the season ranked 5-8. which is what a generally expanded playoff would do.

NO. Do not expand the CFP.

I am against CFP expanding to an 8-team format.

Will it happen? Yes.

Yes. 16 team playoff with conference only regular season. This year gave us half the perfect season (minus the COVID).

A&M's two-loss 2012 team was arguably the best team at the end of the season but was held back by a loss in the season opener with a true freshman quarterback still figuring things out. I disagree with the notion that the best team at the end of the season has to be practically undefeated or even a conference champion. There are many factors that play into that. I could get on board with a system that sends conference champions to the playoffs, but I'd prefer to see a little latitude to get the best teams in the playoffs, not just conference champions. It's funny how no other sport requires you to win your conference or be ranked in the top four at the end of the season, and yet we don't question their process. FBS football's current process is questioned every year because it's a terrible process that nearly requires you to be a P5 school to even have a shot.

No. If you want to make the playoffs, win the games on your schedule. If you're not a P5 team, and want to compete for a championship, leave D1. You really don't belong there.

Hoss Bronco said:

---

A&M's two-loss 2012 team was arguably the best team at the end of the season but was held back by a loss in the season opener with a true freshman quarterback still figuring things out. I disagree with the notion that the best team at the end of the season has to be practically undefeated or even a conference champion. There are many factors that play into that. I could get on board with a system that sends conference champions to the playoffs, but I'd prefer to see a little latitude to get the best teams in the playoffs, not just conference champions. It's funny how no other sport requires you to win your conference or be ranked in the top four at the end of the season, and yet we don't question their process. FBS football's current process is questioned every year because it's a terrible process that nearly requires you to be a P5 school to even have a shot.

---

Agreed... but Johnny wasn't a true freshman in 2012

Why have automatic bids? If it goes to 8 teams, just pick the top 8 teams.

Yeah, can't believe I said that. Thanks for pointing that out.

I agree, but I think the selection committee is usually better than the polls, so keep that.