5 Power 5 Conference champions plus highest group 5 champ and 2 at large.

This is what the group would look like this year.

Alabama
Clemson
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Oregon
Cincinnati
Notre Dame
Texas A&M

Going forward would you be in favor of this?

JW said:

---

No. Highest 8. Period. Your conf champ means nothing.

---

I agree with this and also let's start with 16 and we can go to 24 when we realize that nobody wants to watch football played outside the playoffs.

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

JJxvi said:

---

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

---

And the less importance the regular season has.

JJxvi said:

---

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

---

So taking the best 8 is anti competition but taking multiple teams that are not part of the top 8 but won a game against another crappy team in their conf championship is real competition?

I'd be fine with the six champ, two at large format if the seeds were still based on ranking and not champ status. I wouldn't want the two at large spots to automatically be 7/8.

wbt5845 said:

---

No. Autobids for conference champs incentivizes weak conferences.

And no the present four team format is perfect.

---

ND has been blown out in every CFP and championship game played in the last 10 years, and they will again in 2 days. Yet they're in over us. Get out of here with your perfect system.

UncleNateFitch said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

No. Autobids for conference champs incentivizes weak conferences.

And no the present four team format is perfect.

---

ND has been blown out in every CFP and championship game played in the last 10 years, and they will again in 2 days. Yet they're in over us. Get out of here with your perfect system.

---

This has been explained ad nauseum. Every team that deserves a shot at the national championship will have one. Neither us nor Notre Dame deserve a shot. Expanding the playoffs to allow in even more teams that do not deserve a shot makes no sense.

Toptierag2018 said:

---

5 Power 5 Conference champions plus highest group 5 champ and 2 at large.

This is what the group would look like this year.

Alabama
Clemson
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Oregon
Cincinnati
Notre Dame
Texas A&M

Going forward would you be in favor of this?

---

It's better than the current Invitational beauty contest with politicization.

UncleNateFitch said:

---

How fun would this set be:
Round 1:

1 Alabama 11-0 v 8 Cincinnati 9-0

2 Clemson 10-1 v 7 Florida 8-3

3 Ohio State 6-0 v 6 Oklahoma 8-2

4 Notre Dame 10-1 v 5 Texas A&M 8-1

---

3 blowouts and maybe 1 close game? No thanks.

wbt5845 said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

---

And the less importance the regular season has.

---

This is not true, this website for example regularly melts down over games that have no postseason importance at all. A playoff with more spots and actual qualification also means more regular season games are actually meaningful.

What people like you mean is that the historical method just makes "losing one game in the regular season" take on an inordinate level of importance (esp compared to all other sports) which actually has nothing to do with the enjoyment or importance of the typical regular season game

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

The playoffs should only be expanded when teams that have a legitimate claim to be the best team in the country are left out of the 4 team playoff. It has yet to happen and I don't think it will any time soon.

As much as I would have loved to see us make it this year, we all know that Alabama and Clemson are better teams than us.

---

A legitimate claim!!!! Like when Herbie puts the mini helmet in his case?

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

The playoffs should only be expanded when teams that have a legitimate claim to be the best team in the country are left out of the 4 team playoff. It has yet to happen and I don't think it will any time soon.

As much as I would have loved to see us make it this year, we all know that Alabama and Clemson are better teams than us.

---

Exactly. CFB simply doesn't have the parity the NFL has.

NoahAg said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

The playoffs should only be expanded when teams that have a legitimate claim to be the best team in the country are left out of the 4 team playoff. It has yet to happen and I don't think it will any time soon.

As much as I would have loved to see us make it this year, we all know that Alabama and Clemson are better teams than us.

---

Exactly. CFB simply doesn't have the parity the NFL has.

---

How the hell would we know? Unlike the NFL most teams never play each other.

Conf champs auto bid is ridiculous. You think Oregon deserves to be in playoff ? They lost to Oregon St and weren't even the best in their division and beat over rated USC that barely beat Sumdog.
Coastal deserved to be in over PAC 12 Oregon - and the Big12 champ. 3-0 vs ranked teams beat ByU and Liberty that beat 2 ACC teams, and beat Louisiana. They won Sunbelt what was > BDF

Yes, I would be in favor of an 8-team playoff system with 5 Power 5 conference champions, the highest Group of 5 conference champion, and 2 at large teams. It would include the objective part of winning your conference and the subjective part of ranking the Power 5 conference champions and selecting the at-large teams.

Gramercy Riffs said:

---

NoahAg said:

---

UncleNateFitch said:

---

How fun would this set be:
Round 1:

1 Alabama 11-0 v 8 Cincinnati 9-0

2 Clemson 10-1 v 7 Florida 8-3

3 Ohio State 6-0 v 6 Oklahoma 8-2

4 Notre Dame 10-1 v 5 Texas A&M 8-1

---

3 blowouts and maybe 1 close game? No thanks.

---

Florida at full strength has a puncher's chance against Clemson. Oklahoma is playing decent ball at the end of the year and faces an untested tOSU. Buckeyes probably win that one but OU is better than most of those Big 10 opponents. Ags and Notre Dame would be great.

I see only one blowout and the potential for three entertaining games.

---

Or.... and I'm just spitballing here. We let them play games to decide who is the best.

Toptierag2018 said:

---

5 Power 5 Conference champions plus highest group 5 champ and 2 at large.

This is what the group would look like this year.

Alabama
Clemson
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Oregon
Cincinnati
Notre Dame
Texas A&M

Going forward would you be in favor of this?

---

No. Leave out conference champions. Best eight. The divisions and non-conf games aren't balanced.

rootube said:

---

Gramercy Riffs said:

---

NoahAg said:

---

UncleNateFitch said:

---

How fun would this set be:
Round 1:

1 Alabama 11-0 v 8 Cincinnati 9-0

2 Clemson 10-1 v 7 Florida 8-3

3 Ohio State 6-0 v 6 Oklahoma 8-2

4 Notre Dame 10-1 v 5 Texas A&M 8-1

---

3 blowouts and maybe 1 close game? No thanks.

---

Florida at full strength has a puncher's chance against Clemson. Oklahoma is playing decent ball at the end of the year and faces an untested tOSU. Buckeyes probably win that one but OU is better than most of those Big 10 opponents. Ags and Notre Dame would be great.

I see only one blowout and the potential for three entertaining games.

---

Or.... and I'm just spitballing here. We let them play games to decide who is the best.

---

I don't think there's an "or" there. I too am on the side of letting them play games.

The folks clamoring for "expanded playoff so we can watch more football!" will someday be complaining that "these early games are boring because they're all meaningless!"

Basketball has become all about March Madness. And while it's high drama, it leaves everyone else in the wreckage (only one team ends their season on a win).

JJxvi said:

---

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

---

this is socialism.

are you also in favor of participation trophies?

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

The folks clamoring for "expanded playoff so we can watch more football!" will someday be complaining that "these early games are boring because they're all meaningless!"

Basketball has become all about March Madness. And while it's high drama, it leaves everyone else in the wreckage (only one team ends their season on a win).

---

This x100

If you can lose 2 or 3 games and win a national championship think about how meaningless regular season games become.

This means Florida should have just rested their starters against LSU to get ready for the conference championship game because losing that game didn't hurt their chances of winning a title at all. In fact losing that and Alabama would have still gotten them into an 8 team playoff (a team on a 2 game losing streak playing for a title is insane)

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

The folks clamoring for "expanded playoff so we can watch more football!" will someday be complaining that "these early games are boring because they're all meaningless!"

Basketball has become all about March Madness. And while it's high drama, it leaves everyone else in the wreckage (only one team ends their season on a win).

---

This is also wrong. People would certainly say that, but it would not be the current college football fans. People who would think early games in the NCAA tournament are boring are not people who "used to love the regular season," they are actually people who "would not watch the sport at all at all if the tournamentdid not exist." People willing to watch the **** ass Cheez-It bowl now are not going to be the ones saying the 1 vs 8 or 16 game is boring.

Power 5 only. Group of 5 can have their own playoffs. Ala FCS or Division II

As a firm and solid proponent of the system we have in place, the ONE positive to an expanded playoff system is fewer meaningless bowl games.

I'm watching the Duke's Mayo Bowl and DAMN these teams suck.

I keep seeing the reasoning of "reduced importance on the regular season" as an excuse why playoffs are worse. This seems like a pro rather than a con. It would make football much more entertaining if a single loss didnt cripple every chance for end of year competition.

With a playoff every win is important, but if the team has an off game or maybe two, it wont kill all hope of coming on strong late in a playoff setting. Some teams match up better against others, some have off days, some get on a hot streak at good/bad times of the year.

Current system is basically the BCS, which was also trash. Bowl system has always been dumb. Scrap it, install a playoff.

No. Should be Top 5.
We would have played this season.

wbt5845 said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

---

And the less importance the regular season has.

---

I don't know, seems to work pretty well for basketball. March Madness is kind of a thing.

AZAggie said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

IMO having an invitational tournament with the "best" 8 overall is anti-sport/anti-competition. The more spots that are qualified for automatically by winning competitions (like conferences) the more closely college football resembles a real sport with a real champion, imo.

---

And the less importance the regular season has.

---

I don't know, seems to work pretty well for basketball. March Madness is kind of a thing.

---

There is no sport with a more meaningless regular season than college basketball, except perhaps NBA basketball.