zephyr88 said:

---

Would've rather seen the Georgia-Bama matchup this weekend.

I think Cincy walked in the the coliseum afraid of the Gumps.

I don't know why Michigan **** the bed so bad.

---

It's because teams from the other conferences just can't stand up to SEC-level football.

NCAA football vs basketball is not a great comparison. Yet we only remember the tight games in the NCAA March Madness and forget that half of them are blowouts. The challenge to field a playoff worthy team should cut off at about 16-20 teams for the reason that most teams can't field a healthy squad throughout the year in FB. Maybe give the top 4-6 teams a bye and let the scrappy 5-16 or 5-20 teams fight out the early rounds until a roughly 8 team playoff. Less blowouts, and if a Cincy type team has what it takes, they will have earned it. Another bonus possibility: occupying that many teams with relevance into a playoff means fewer 6 and 6 crap teams get to go to a bowl they didn't deserve.

Also, this approach may reduce the opt-outs and transfer portal activity until after Dec 31.

As long as it is 4 teams selected theough a closed door popularity contest....no. It will never be competitive or aything approaching an actual playoff.

Those thinking 4 is the magic number have a short memory. Remember last year when Crying Kirk & ESPN ran a campaign to keep us out of the playoff. Even worse pimping ND & B1G?!

Salute The Marines said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

The crappy bowl season has shown 4 teams is not enough. 12 v 5, 11 v 6, etc. would have had a bunch of good games and there would have been zero opt-outs. It would have been 100X better.

---

But there's no need. 4 finds us the legit champion every year.

---

Then just crown the SEC champ the NC.

Oh, but wait. That's not the point. The point is the athletes love playing football that matters and we love watching football that matters. Playoff games matter. Extra BS bowl games don't. I want more good football to watch, they want to play more, the conferences and networks want more money. If you don't want to watch until the semis, then just don't watch those games. You have 2 footballess weekends before the season ends rather than after. Let the rest of us who do want to watch (and play) do so.

It's a win-win for everybody (except those who want to college football to suck).

I still think the format is still there to have an effective playoff. Have a normally seeded NY6/BCS bowl system and pick the 4 best teams after that. NY6 bowls would definitively reveal who the best are and you would cut the opt outs for those 12 or so teams if they think they have a shot. Bowl season still matters and the top ranked team can still be crowned.

A_Gang_Ag_06 said:

---

I'd say it just shows four teams are enough.

---

This X a gazillion

Dr. Horrible said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

bgrimm05 said:

---

If I'm reading it right, since 2015 only 6 out of the 23 playoff games have been decided by 1 score. 16 have been decided by 2 touchdowns or more (assuming nothing crazy happens with Georgia/Michigan). Is this just bad luck, or is the committee really getting it wrong every year?

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/2019/5/22/history.aspx

---

The committee isn't getting it wrong, most years there aren't more than 2 teams that deserve to play for a national championship....some years there are 3 which is why they needed to go away from the BCS and expand it to 4, but very rarely are there 4 elite teams.

Who should the committee have put in this year? ND? They would get smoked by Alabama and Georgia just like Cincy and Michigan.

---

Except that the committee would have put bama against Michigan this year if there were only 2…

---

True, and that would have been fine. Bama already beat Georgia.

Cow Pie & Fries said:

---

Those thinking 4 is the magic number have a short memory. Remember last year when Crying Kirk & ESPN ran a campaign to keep us out of the playoff. Even worse pimping ND & B1G?!

---

We didn't deserve a shot. Neither did Notre Dame. Expanding to allow more undeserving teams in is not the solution.

In hindsight, there weren't very many competitive games in BCS National Championships with 1 vs 2. Everyone complained about giving #3 and 4 a shot and all it did was water down the post season and make the semifinal games a snooze fest. Wait until they expand it. Rich will get even richer

fc2112 said:

---

A_Gang_Ag_06 said:

---

I'd say it just shows four teams are enough.

---

This X a gazillion

---

Then wait 2 weeks and start watching the semis.

It's not that hard to figure out.

Cow Pie & Fries said:

---

Those thinking 4 is the magic number have a short memory. Remember last year when Crying Kirk & ESPN ran a campaign to keep us out of the playoff. Even worse pimping ND & B1G?!

---

Memory is fine, perspective is different. There were only 2 legit contenders that year. ND and A&M both got beat badly by one of them. The Big10 and Ohio State didn't rate. Your issue is about how they filled out the bracket, not whether they left the #1 team out of it.

Salute The Marines said:

---

OilManAg91 said:

---

Currently the system is an invitational "ice skating beauty contest" not a true playoff. Expanding beyond 4 teams would provide an opportunity for more teams to actually earn there way into a playoff instead of this backwards beauty contest. Once every team has a legitimate path to earn their way into a true playoff, then top recruits will not need to concentrate on only Bama, Georgia, Ohio St, Clemson to make the playoffs and over the next few years the talent will spread out and CFB will be better.

---

An 8 win team that didn't even play a bowl got the number one class in the country. Your scenario isn't necessary for elite recruiting.

---

That's an aberration. Using single data points to draw conclusions should never be done.

Agree and also put the awards ceremonies after the bowl games so that it also puts more value in playing bowl games instead of opting out if they want a bigger payout during the draft. Bowls should have to insure award nominees for risk of injury as well.

It's all about what will make the NCAA and their media partners the most money. It's why ND got in over A&M, and it's why the playoffs will expand. It will not make the playoffs better because of it.

A is A said:

---

TyperWoods said:

---

A_Gang_Ag_06 said:

---

I'd say it just shows four teams are enough.

---

Actually, the opposite.

Four teams are a beauty contest.

---

Which teams outside the top four would you put with Georgia and Alabama?

---

Texas A&M.
The team that beat Bama.

racerfink said:

---

It's all about what will make the NCAA and their media partners the most money. It's why ND got in over A&M, and it's why the playoffs will expand. It will not make the playoffs better because of it.

---

You know the NCAA gets $0 from the CFP, don't you?

Salute The Marines said:

---

TyperWoods said:

---

Salute The Marines said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

The crappy bowl season has shown 4 teams is not enough. 12 v 5, 11 v 6, etc. would have had a bunch of good games and there would have been zero opt-outs. It would have been 100X better.

---

But there's no need. 4 finds us the legit champion every year.

---

Nope. 4 finds us an accepted beauty contest winner. Legit? Ehhhh. Didn't Bama win one year without even winning it's conference?

---

Do you think expanding the playoffs would prevent teams from winning if they didn't win their conference?

---

No and that's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing the champion isn't necessarily legit every year.

If by legit one means the best team in the country. What do you mean by "legit"?

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

TyperWoods said:

---

A_Gang_Ag_06 said:

---

I'd say it just shows four teams are enough.

---

Actually, the opposite.

Four teams are a beauty contest.

---

You serious, Clark? Which other teams were necessary this year to find team #1?

---

How many teams are necessary before the season even starts to find the #1 team?

One can find the #1 team with zero games. It's just a beauty contest.

OilManAg91 said:

---

Currently the system is an invitational "ice skating beauty contest" not a true playoff. Expanding beyond 4 teams would provide an opportunity for more teams to actually earn there way into a playoff instead of this backwards beauty contest. Once every team has a legitimate path to earn their way into a true playoff, then top recruits will not need to concentrate on only Bama, Georgia, Ohio St, Clemson to make the playoffs and over the next few years the talent will spread out and CFB will be better.

---

Well said OilMan. I don't understand why others don't agree with this comment, but to each his own.

Because it has a false chicken-egg assumption.

This is Georgia's second time in playoff. OU has been twice as many times.

If kids concentrate on schools always in playoff, OU would have been whipping UGA in recruiting the last 8 years. They have not.

Do you really think the kid that wants to go to UGA will change to Penn State because Penn State can finish 16th, but still make playoff? The kid knows finishing 3rd gets you a significantly better chance to win.

I'm not against expansion by the way. Just not buying the "now bad team will have level recruiting field" argument. The field has never been level. And never will be

fc2112 said:

---

racerfink said:

---

It's all about what will make the NCAA and their media partners the most money. It's why ND got in over A&M, and it's why the playoffs will expand. It will not make the playoffs better because of it.

---

You know the NCAA gets $0 from the CFP, don't you?

---

After reading this, my point still stands… just switch out NCAA for "Playoff" owners.

[url] https://www.forbes.com/sites/bdavidridpath/2017/01/17/college-football-playoff-and-other-ncaa-revenues-is-an-expose-of-selfish-interest/?sh=6c8690a4e1af[/url]

When ND has been in playoff, it's semi final game has been the lower rated of the two games.

A is A said:

---

TyperWoods said:

---

A_Gang_Ag_06 said:

---

I'd say it just shows four teams are enough.

---

Actually, the opposite.

Four teams are a beauty contest.

---

Which teams outside the top four would you put with Georgia and Alabama?

---

I'd do something radical and have a 16 or 24 team playoff and have every single game be great.

mjfrog said:

---

NCAA football vs basketball is not a great comparison. Yet we only remember the tight games in the NCAA March Madness and forget that half of them are blowouts. The challenge to field a playoff worthy team should cut off at about 16-20 teams for the reason that most teams can't field a healthy squad throughout the year in FB. Maybe give the top 4-6 teams a bye and let the scrappy 5-16 or 5-20 teams fight out the early rounds until a roughly 8 team playoff. Less blowouts, and if a Cincy type team has what it takes, they will have earned it. Another bonus possibility: occupying that many teams with relevance into a playoff means fewer 6 and 6 crap teams get to go to a bowl they didn't deserve.

---

If you don't like the NCAA basketball as an example then feel free to choose every single other sport and other division in football as an example.

Quote:

---

I'd do something radical and have a 16 or 24 team playoff and have every single game be great.

---

Will there also be unicorns?

If 1 v 4 or 2v 3 gets us very few great games, how will 1 v 16? Or in 24 teams (at best) 1 v 9 produce great games?

BMX Bandit said:

---

When ND has been in playoff, it's semi final game has been the lower rated of the two games.

---

Here's a fun fact:

Brian Kelly's record on BCS/New Years Day

2008: Virginia Tech 20, Cincinnati 7
2009: Florida 51, Cincinnati 24
2012: Alabama 42, Notre Dame 14
2016: Ohio State 44, Notre Dame 28
2018: Clemson 30, Notre Dame 3
2020: Alabama 31, Notre Dame 14

0-6.

I really think LSU will regret Kelly replacing Ogeron

DC hire very underwhelming.

Kelly's OC at ND turned down being highest paid OC in SEC and stayed at ND. So he had to go get Cincy OC that just put up 6 on Bama.

Stop fetishizing close games. The NFL is built to even the playing field and it absolutely sucks. What makes college football magic is that a team like Baylor can smack down teams like OU and OleMiss who are at a massive competitive advantage.

So great games aren't close games? You think that because there's a tiny chance a 16 could win, that makes it a great game? That makes zero sense. Try again

BMX Bandit said:

---

I really think LSU will regret Kelly replacing Ogeron

DC hire very underwhelming.

Kelly's OC at ND turned down being highest paid OC in SEC and stayed at ND. So he had to go get Cincy OC that just put up 6 on Bama.

---

For as much grief Bob Stoops always got for being "Big Game Bob" I think Brian Kelly deserves that title now.

I am still perplexed exactly why Kelly left ND for LSU, though. He just doesn't seem to be a good fit there to me. Nor for the SEC for that matter.

aggiehawg said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

I really think LSU will regret Kelly replacing Ogeron

DC hire very underwhelming.

Kelly's OC at ND turned down being highest paid OC in SEC and stayed at ND. So he had to go get Cincy OC that just put up 6 on Bama.

---

For as much grief Bob Stoops always got for being "Big Game Bob" I think Brian Kelly deserves that title now.

I am still perplexed exactly why Kelly left ND for LSU, though. He just doesn't seem to be a good fit there to me. Nor for the SEC for that matter.

---

I think it was mostly the $9.5M/year.

If you're gonna keep the current format then stop calling it a playoff.

4 teams picked by a committee is not a playoff.

8-12 teams would be a playoff.

TXAG 05 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

I really think LSU will regret Kelly replacing Ogeron

DC hire very underwhelming.

Kelly's OC at ND turned down being highest paid OC in SEC and stayed at ND. So he had to go get Cincy OC that just put up 6 on Bama.

---

For as much grief Bob Stoops always got for being "Big Game Bob" I think Brian Kelly deserves that title now.

I am still perplexed exactly why Kelly left ND for LSU, though. He just doesn't seem to be a good fit there to me. Nor for the SEC for that matter.

---

I think it was mostly the $9.5M/year.

---

For the retirement money?

Maybe ND was getting tired of Kelly and vice versa, instead?