so when are we going to 8 teams? this is how it would have looked if we had:
#1 Clemson vs #8 Notre Dame
#2 Alabama vs #7 Ohio State
#3 Michigan State vs #6 Stanford
#4 Oklahoma vs #5 Iowa
any one of those teams is capable of going on a run. when do you think they'll make the change?
>>64065405
Never thank God
>>64065405
this year is more of a clusterfuck than normal, but 8 would have actually been cool this time around.
In a lot of years 4 is probably too many, and 8 is definitely too many in even more years. but I think you have a fundamental problem if you have 5 power conferences and 4 playoff spots. That has to get dealt with.
Conference championships are more or less the quarter finals tbqh.
If they change the rule it'll be because the playoff committee snubs Bama or some other meme school in a key year
It needs to go to 8, and soon.
The committee LITERALLY selects the conference champions and that is it.
Kill the BS political committee, use the F+/- BCS hybrid to determine the Top 8 TEAMS and go from there.
First round games played at home stadiums of the top 4 seeds, then the final 4.
Half of the games in an 8-team playoff would be rematches of conference championships unless you
a) snub the losers of conference championships even if they are clearly CFP material (Iowa, inb4 meme team)
b) arbitrarily rearrange the rankings to prevent rematches, creating a poorly seeded bracket
If CFP went to 8 teams they'd end up doing automatic conference berths and all the other shit that BCS was hated for. 4 teams is fine.
>implying a 6 team playoff wouldn't be the best
It would still be really important to go 12-0 most years and every P5 conference would have a spot.
>>64065548
>first-round byes
>>64065548
first round byes will bring up the exact same problems that BCS created, albeit with somewhat lower stakes
>>64065405
It needs to be at 16. 10 conference winners with 6 at large bids. Let the 6 at large bids play teams ranked 5-10 with teams 1-4 getting bye weeks.
>>64065521
Would make the most sense. At least it'd give all worthy teams a shot.
Conference championship rematches don't bother me. You see that in the NFL sometimes. Division rivals who compete during the last game of the season for the division title and then face each other the following week in the first round of the playoffs. No one complains then.
>>64065658
if you have at large bids notre dame is virtually guaranteed to be in the playoff every year if they lose two or fewer games simply for the fact that they don't have a conference and their fans travel
IMO you can't have strict "at large" teams until there are no independents anymore
>>64065548
because in a conference like the pac 12 or the ACC, where it's totally feasible a lot of years that a 3 or 4 loss team wins the conference, it would make sense for both of those conference champions to make the playoff over a one loss b1g or SEC runner up or a 1 loss big 12 team.
you can't just throw in every conference champion. pac 12 got rightfully snubbed this year and it's highly unlikely that a year like last year will repeat itself very often (where every conference champion was good and had a good resume and the exclusion decision was extremely controversial)
>>64065722
>Notre Dame finishing off their year getting BTFO by real teams annually
This would actually be hilarious and worth it for the yearly lols
>>64065759
Would have been a shitstorm if Stanford jumped OSU this year because >muh conf champ
>>64065762
it would be but if you notice this year the committee put them up against aOSU so the two overrated shitlord teams could play each other and save their shitty asses from getting exposed.
they would do the same thing in the playoff to ensure one of them went as deep as possible only to get blown the fuck out in a boring ass semi or championship game
Conference champions of ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 12, American, Mountain West and C-USA plus 4 wildcards.
Just like the NFL.
>>64065830
How is OSU overrated
I'd take them to win it all if they'd made the top 4
I agreed with it last year and I most certainly want it now. Who the fuck doesn't want to watch more football?
>>64065722
please go back through the past 10 years and look at final rankings, then come back and apologize for being retarded.
>>64065722
if we did it this conference winners:
>clemson
>alabama
>msu
>oklahoma
>houston
>western kentucky
>bowling green
>san diego state
>stanford
>arkansas state
at large
>Iowa
>aOSU
>ND
>FSU
>UNC
>TCU
would be fun desu
>>64065881
your post refutes nothing i said whatsoever
>>64065860
michigan state already beat them at home and they're probably the third or fourth best team in the playoff
>>64065889
i mean in a perfect world yeah, but that's four extra weeks. they're basically playing an NFL regular season at that point.
they might get there some day but it would kinda marginalize the regular season.
>>64065900
MSU is arguably the best. They're well rounded and proven. Have you seen Bama and Clemson this year? Lmao
It took an extraordinary set of outliers for MSU to pull off a last second win against OSU, they're still the best in the country, just shitty luck and horribly peculiar play calling
Saban would not have let Derrick Henry only get 11 carries
>>64065759
a 3 loss pac 12 team won the conference 1 time in the past 20 years. When did you start following cfb?
>>64065916
i just like how if they expanded the playoff like this there'd be only one sec team
>>64065938
it doesn't matter if they won it or not, they send 3 loss teams to the conference championship on the regular, that makes a 3 loss team winning it feasible
i'm not saying the conference is shitty, i'm just calling it how it is
please use brain
>>64065900
did ND finish in the top 8 last year?
They wouldn't have in 2013.
In 2012 they beat 2 p5 champs
in 2011 they wouldn't have
in 2010 they wouldn't have
in 2009 they wouldn't have
in 2008 they wouldn't have
in 2007 they wouldn't have
I guess you are still sour about 2006? either way, you're spouting off about a boogeyman.
>>64065974
so the fact that brian kelly turned them back into a perennial contender means nothing for the future that we are discussing
like seriously what the fuck are you talking about the charlie weis era for right now
Contract guarantees four teams until 2025 with no exceptions to alter. CFP Committee can't change it. The bowls can't change it. ESPN can't change it.
>>64065961
they've only had 5 conference championship games, 3 of them have featured 3 loss teams, and all 3 of those teams lost. I don't see how you'd use these facts to limit the number of cfp participants.
>>64065990
well someone was making shit up, and i showed them that they were making shit up. It's pretty straightforward.
>>64066001
>send 3 loss team against undefeated team
>CFP rules demand conference champions above all
>3 loss team upsets undefeated team
>meanwhile in another p5 conference championship an undefeated team beats a one loss team, or vice versa, both of which clearly superior to 3 loss conference champ
>rules now force exclusion of one of those teams
>this is obviously a problem
i'm trying to make it as clear as possible. if you still don't understand it i don't know what to tell you
>>64066015
i was not making shit up. if there are at large bids and notre dame has two losses or less they will get in the playoff every single time. that's all i ever said about notre dame and at large spots.
>>64065539
this logic is completely incoherent.
What is the problem with having autoberths for p5 when top teams rarely play each other OOC? It's all guesswork and speculation at this point, which is the whole problem.
I wouldn't have a problem going back to the old bowl/poll system, but if you are going to do a playoff, 2 and 4 are incomplete and just show unwillingness to change.
>>64066056
but I'm not sure that's ever happened before, why would you prefer conjecture because something historically rare might happen?
>>64066056
those are baseless hypotheticals. This is the only year in recent history that those conditions hel, and their only 2 losses were on the road to top 5 p5 champs by the most narrow of margins. That's not exactly common.
6 team > 8 team
most often will be all p5 champs + best at-large
first round byes are fine, relax
>>64066099
it would have happened this year with stanford/iowa. granted, stanford is a way better football team and has a far superior resume, but iowa would have had an argument in this scenario because they are a one loss conference runner up verses a two loss conference champion. they are also currently ranked one higher than stanford.
it would have been even worse if iowa beat MSU.
it would probably happen just about every year.
>>64066141
first round byes would have been a shitstorm this year.
>>64066149
not really. undefeated klemp sun and committee darling bama.
>>64066145
which one of those teams had 3 losses?
I suppose you are speaking to your larger point about a good team losing its CCG. In a 6 team, whichever one of those teams lost wouldn't have much to complain about, since they lost an essential play-in game. They'd have to have the best at-large resume.
>>64066184
I'm aware that bama would have won it, but it would have caused a shitstorm somewhat more modest than 2011.
>>64066137
if you don't think the committee will use all the memes they can to weasel notre dame into a playoff you're drunk
>>64066197
Guess what: ND isn't in the playoff!
>>64066197
but they moved them out of the top 4 in favor of iowa and MSU a couple weeks ago before ND's 2nd loss.
That's literally the only history we have to go on, and it does not support the conspiracy theory.
>>64066185
that's true enough but i still say that automatic conference champion spots in an 8 team playoff creates more problems than it solves because of scenarios like this.
i like automatic conference champs in a 12 team playoff a lot more than an 8 team.
>>64066212
>>64066217
again we are talking about an 8 team playoff.....not the current system.....
>>64066232
Not that anon, but I agree.
On an unrelated note, I think incorporating bye weeks into the playoffs would be a terrible idea.
>>64066269
Feel free to do that because you're not getting an 8 team playoff for a decade and a quarter.
>>64066269
so which year would they have done that in besides 2006? And the same principles that would have illegitimately gotten 2-loss ND into 8th would have gotten 1-loss ND into 4th given teh current circumstances. Despite all your ellipses, the distinction is irrelevant. You've spouted your memes and they've fallen flat son.
>>64066283
if all the parties consent, they can rip up a contract you know. I'm not sure who wouldn't agree to an expansion if everyone thinks their beaks can get wetter.
>>64066330
One of the parties involved is ESPN. Disney does not like losing money, even if it means they can resign for more. Which is not happening since they're losing cable subs, and the security of sports programming being a source for cable revenue is no longer guaranteed.
>>64066323
again you are talking about the notre dame of yesteryear when coached by such an incompetent shit that they actually lost to navy on the regular
comparing then to now is irrelevant to this discussion
why the fuck are you even bringing up years when they didn't have two losses anyway, the whole basis of what i'm saying is if there were at large bids a two loss notre dame gets in virtually automatically
if they have more than two it doesn't happen, that's the whole point
i don't understand why you're arguing this
>>64066283
well that's kind of the point of this entire thread anon. speculating on an 8 team playoff and the scenarios involved.
>>64065521
>tfw Bama would still be number one every year
Are the rest of you niggers even trying?
inb4: Fplus is shit
>>64066369
obviously it'd be replaced by a new contract. If you think they'd so no to a more lucrative contract that otherwise had the same exact terms, I don't know how you're justifying that.
If they see that a 4 team doesn't cause any dilution of interest and they think they can add 2-4 more playoff games which feature compelling matchups and generate viewer interest, then all they have to do is convince everyone involved that they can get a piece of that pie.
>>64066397
>1 ACC team
you sneaky fuck
this is objectively the best format
>>64066390
I didn't realize that you were only one poster, for one.
Secondly, saying they have a guaranteed spot if they have 2 losses isn't really the same assertion that the committee will use memes to get them. You don't have any history on your side, and this year provides a very relevant piece of evidence.
>ND
they already lost to Clemson
fuck off
>>64066433
this is a good post
>>64066444
THIS YEAR THERE ARE ONLY 4 PLAYOFF SPOTS ANON
IN THIS THREAD WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THERE WERE 8
JESUS CHRIST
I'm torn between 6 and 8
that's the absolute upper limit though, and no shoehorning in champs from shit conferences
the bye would be ridiculous to figure out
>>64066514
i recognize that. but I'm assuming you're upset that they get the benefit of the doubt on the margins, which you think would happen more frequently under their current staff with 8 berths. But they did not get the benefit of the doubt over 1 loss Bama, OU and MSU when ND only had 1 loss. So I think your narrative sort of falls apart when we use actual evidence to evaluate it. People (maybe you) were arguing that expansion to 8 teams would be bad, at least in part, due to a rare occurrence that lacks historical precedence.
btw your caps lock appears stuck on. Be sure to check that in case you have to enter any passwords.
>>64066554
6. 5 P5 champs plus one at large
>>64066554
Just for fun make it fluctuate between 6 and 8 based on the strength of the top teams
>>64066569
>i'm going to ignore the last bit of anon's post, because fuck it.
>>64066580
that just introduces yet another set of largely subjective shit flinging
>>64066589
1 and 2 get a bye. whats so hard about that?
>>64066594
Exactly
>>64066595
fairly determining 1 and 2. Do you recall the BCS era?
6 is inevitable and eventually 8. They won't be able to contain 5he SEC whining after getting btfo every year in the first round.
>>64066565
>this person is literally arguing with me that 3 teams that made the playoff this year, when there is a 4 team playoff, would somehow stop 2 loss notre dame from making the playoff if there were 8 slots instead of 4
>this person is arguing this in full knowledge of the fact that notre dame is currently ranked #8 and would make an 8 team playoff if it existed this year
i have no fucking words for how obstinately retarded you are. it's like you're doing it on purpose at this point.
>>64066595
who's 1 and 2 this year, for starters?
>>64066626
That's not what I was arguing, it's clear that you don't understand whats going on.
>>64066610
>>64066630
yeah cause its not like we havent replaced that system with a committee that could seed them or anything like they fucking do now
Clemson/Bama
>>64066610
The stakes would not be as large since the 4 teams not getting a bye still are in the playoffs.
>>64066638
>we should expand because the committee is limited by subjectivity
>but we should still completely rely on this subjectivity to determine a major element of the playoff
so the 8th team is so much worse than the 6th in most years that its worth relying so heavily on speculation?
>>64066638
Clemson, yes
I do not put Bama ahead of MSU or OU
>>64066667
i never complained about the subjectivity. P5 champs is just easier
>>64065405
A lay off of a month for the semi final games is ridiculous.
It will go to 8 because they'd make even more money.
>>64066641
agreed, but the principle is still exactly the same and the advantage is signifcant
>>64066667
Better than only 4
>>64066667
If youre fighting over spot 6 instead of 1-4 you clearly didnt severe to be in outright, so you cant really complain if youre left out.
>>64066679
why is it easier?
>>64066698
in what universe is auto bids for the P5 champs (win your conference and youre in) harder than figuring out the top 6 are with no auto bid criteria?
jesus this thread is full of retards
>>64066694
the argument is 6 v 8
>>64066696
it's about seeding internally, not the bubble.
>>64066713
It was rhetorical. You implicitly have a problem with subjectivity. I'm glad you think other people are the retards though.
>>64066725
>i was only pretending to be retarded
>>64066729
kek okay, perhaps re-read it.
>>64066737
>ask retarded question
>h-heh i didnt really want an answer!
>>64066743
is this a joke?
>>64066746
not as much as your question
>>64066743
>I don't have a problem with subjectivity, i think autoberths is easier
>why is that easier
>because it's not subjective, you retard!
conference championships should only be used in case of 1:1 tiebreaker
e.g. one loss team v.s one loss team
What's stopping them from just copying the FCS system?
>college football
>literally hundreds of teams in division 1 alone
>4 teams in playoffs
>national football league
>32 teams in league
>12 teams in playoffs
People don't actually take the college football playoffs seriously, do they?
>>64066713
it's harder in the frequent scenario that a particular conference champion is notably weaker than runner ups from several other conferences.
>>64066786
on one hand, it values the regular season more, which is important
a meme 9-7 team getting hot at the end and winning the Owl is fun and all but it's not really fair to the teams who performed well all regular season then caught a bad break in the playoffs
then again as an OSU fan it is really annoying to see your championship hopes completely extinguish in one second after playing fine all year
>>64066807
if you cant win your conference then you cant complain about being left out
>>64066760
>moving the goal posts this hard
>>64066815
>muh fairness
That's dumb, all this is an entertainment industry and more playoff games equals more entertainment
>>64066833
just summing up your exchange m8
>>64066822
conferences are arbitrary, and some are much larger than others
that makes no sense from a logical view point
>>64066846
its called the P5 for a reason dumbass
>>64066843
some would say the increased stakes in the regular season make for more entertainment value, as they are all essentially playoff games for the big teams
>>64066815
It's the fairest thing by definition. If you lose you don't get a championship. Nothing could be fairer.
>>64066822
>hey guys virginia tech just won the ACC over duke at 9-4 on the season
>also 12-0 oregon just beat 11-1 USC in the pac 12 title game
>cool virginia tech is clearly the better team and deserves to be in the playoff over USC lets put them in against oregon
is this what you want?
>>64066849
that did not address my points at all
and yet you had the audacity to imply I'm the dumbass lol
>>64066846
sort of agree. They are arbitrary, but their existence generally limits who you play. We know who the best teams in a conferences are, but comparing across conferences is almost entirely speculation.
Though conferences now are so big that even in-conference schedules are imbalanced and the champion isn't always the "best team"
>>64066864
yes. thats how its always been with non BCS bowls. a t 9-4 Va Tech would have gotten the orange bowl
>>64066868
there are 5 established conferences that would get the 5 auto bids. whats so hard to get fucktard
>>64066858
there is a strong element of chance and circumstance that influences football games
as I pointed out before, the playoffs are not the end all be all and sometimes a 9-7 team can catch a 14-2 team with their pants down in the right moment, rendering the 14-2's superior season moot
you can't objectively say that it is fair for the 9-7 team to get that chance at all
>>64065548
I would only go for it if it meant the G5 have a shot over a 3 loss P5 program
>>64066857
I really don't think the regular season value will diminish, after all most of those games are against local conference opponents and there are always high stakes for that. And after all, you would still need a very good regular season to qualify, a 7-5 team simply won't usually be in contention for its conference title.
>>64066895
a 9-7 team wouldnt make a conference championship, nor does any team play 16 games
do you idiots even watch football
>>64066886
>yes. thats how its always been with non BCS bowls. a t 9-4 Va Tech would have gotten the orange bowl
the BCS bowls had multiple at-large slots.
>>64066927
yeah, after auto conference bids
>>64066886
That's the problem, some conferences are getting much larger and congested than others
the SEC and Big 10 have a serious infighting problem
>>64066910
>>64066886
>>64066849
>>64066679
I don't know if this is 1 person or several, but it's now clear to me that there are either pretty dedicated trolls in here or people who genuinely put no effort into thinking.
>>64066895
>the playoffs are not the end all be all
>playoffs are single elimination and decide the year-end champion
sounds like an objective "end all be all." If a 14-2 team loses to a 9-7 team then they don't deserve to win a championship. If you are better than play better and win.
>>64066951
>6 slots
>P5 champs
>one at large
oh yeah such a terrible idea
lets just give participation awards for 8-12 teams!
>>64066927
Ok so make it 8 teams with 5 auto bids and 3 at large just like the pre-ncg bcs days but now with the added bonus of a bracket
>>64066982
you still havent explained why that system is bad except muh troll!
>>64066954
Ok, but that's your opinion. A team can beat another 99 times out of 100 but there's still that 1/100 chance that the memesters pull off an upset in the heat of the moment.
>>64066951
You honestly are getting BTFO and have no concept of how NCAA football works.
>>64066993
My problem wasn't with your suggestion. Those quotes all refer to posts in which the anon was demonstrating his inability to understanding his peers' arguments.
>>64067014
Oh, so youre bitching about something that doesn't have to do with the topic of this thread. Great.
>>64067011
Most of those posts weren't responses to my own, friend. Just noticed people who are struggling with comprehension and context.
>>64067024
I'm concerned you don't actually know what the topic of the thread is tbhonest
>>64066935
but you are arguing in favor one 5 automatic champs and 1 at large in a 6 team playoff.
you do understand how short that system would fall as opposed to an 8 team.
>>64067054
With 8 teams you start letting in too many non conference champions and like this year, teams that already lost to top teams. Whats the point of having ND play Clemson again?
>>64067014
these posts : >>64066998
>>64066954
indicate that you don't watch college football
>>64066998
If you lose to the "memesters" then I don't want you as the champion. You didn't deserve it
>>64067070
i don't disagree with what you're saying, i'm just saying if you stand pat at 6 spots you're going to have a lot more people pissed off then you do now or than you would at 8
you're giving a single at large bid for the entire rest of the country, that is going to cause extreme amounts of butthurt every single year
>>64067096
neither of those were me
>>64067144
>you're giving a single at large bid for the entire rest of the country,
yeah so what? Youre irrelevant if youre not in a P5 conference anyway. those teams have bitched about not getting into BCS bowls for years and no one cared
>>64067164
motherfucker it's not just g5 schools here. it's conference runners up. that's the bigger issue.
no one gives a fuck about g5 schools being upset.
>>64067070
tbf ND lost by 2 on the road, so that wouldn't be the worst rematch. But yes, that is a potential problem. but if ND didn't have that 15 yard penalty against stanford, then ND would have been top 6, which creates the same problem.
>>64067179
>it's conference runners up
who cares. they didnt win. Do you see Iowa, USC, or UNC in the playoffs this year? Do you see them bitching about being left out? Well other than OSU but they always bitch.
>>64067070
Are you saying you don't want to watch ND get bootyblasted in the 1st round for decades?
I'd be down for 6, then it could be P5 winners vs Notre dame every year. They should make it an all-star team for the P5 winners to face off against Notre Dame to make it closer
Bootyblasting for decades
>>64067200
Oregon and georgia certainly would have bitched in 2012.
>>64067225
"win your conference"
>>64067232
agreed, but we still have that 6th spot to try and reward fairly that doesn't go to a conference champ.
>>64067200
they can't bitch because there are only 4 spots. that's the entire point i'm making.
with 8 you have more room.
at 6 everybody and their mother will be crying foul about arbitrary decisions and causing all kinds of assblasted shit everywhere.
i don't understand what you don't see here.
>>64067232
"we didn't play hard enough"
"they need to score more points in order to win the game"
>>64067259
again, if you have to bitch about being 6 or 7, then you really had no room to bitch in the first place since you clearly werent a top 4 team
>>64066406
>4. Ohio State
>6. Michigan State
how the fuck do they justify this? They beat them in the head-to-head and won the B1G
jesus christ, no thank you I'd rather have the committee over this shit every day of the week
>>64066397
>multiple teams from each conference
this would require an additional 2v3 game to determine the #2 spot or a snub in each conference each season
>byes for SEC and Meme 12
i don't even
>>64067278
or you could just go to 8 teams at literally no extra cost to any of the teams and save a lot of bitching and moaning
>>64066433
>browns
kek
>>64067278
but people won't care about "top 4" after a while. Ultimately you have to come up with something that does the most to eliminate guess work, otherwise there's no point in a playoff besides a moneygrab/media circus.
>>64067286
the fact that MSU lost to Nebraska and meme'd the win against Michigan (and arguably OSU)
BAH GAWD HE'S GONE ROGUE
>>64066406
>MSU played in same division as OSU, beat OSU, played an additional game against a high quality opponent, and has a much better OOC win
>OSU still better because of game control metrics that are still being refined and perfected
all you need to know desu.
>four-team playoff
>conference championships and other late-season games serve as de facto quarter finals (win-and-in scenarios, MSU v tOSU, MSU v Iowa for that matter)
>>64067328
>(and arguably OSU)
but they still beat them.
they are objectively the better team
any ranking that has aOSU over MSU is utter shit
>>64065830
Please explain how the defending national champions are as shit and overrated as ND this year?
Salty EEC fans I swear
>>64066406
>Ole fuckin' Piss ranked above Stanford and Florida State
dear god, are sec shills this delusional?
this is laughably bad
>>64065838
but there are 5 Power 5 conferences and 5 Group of 5 conferences
So it should be those 10 + 2 wildcard, but good luck determining the wildcards
I'd be ok with a 10 team playoff, don't even need rankings, except to determine the seeding and thus the two bye teams, just win your conference and you're in, simple as that.
>>64067423
>last year = this year
also how the fuck are they defending their national championship? i didn't know the concrete block bowl was a playoff game.
The problem with college football altogether is people relying on transitive property and bullshit to judge teams. Why can people not watch teams play and judge for themselves? And when we see an actual metric like F+ we shit all over it because it has, say, Arkansas ahead of Iowa. Guess what? Iowa sucks regardless of their record. Do people honestly believe Iowa was better than Bama? Or Ohio State? Or whoever? How about watching football and judging how good a team is based on their play on the field?
And people keep carrying on about how Bama lost to Ole Miss or Oklahoma lost to Texas and that automatically means they're shit teams. The Eagles best the Pats yesterday. Is everyone gonna carry on the rest of the year about how Philly is better than New England? aOSU lost to VT last year and ended up winning it all.
I love the CFB regular season but the subjectivity lends itself to a lot of retarded groupthink.
>>64065405
I don't mind conference champions getting in automatically. It gives incentive to playing tougher competition in the regular season. A strong conference top to bottom should be an admirable goal, only taking conference champions with 0-1 loss incentivises top heaviness.
>>64067951
> Do people honestly believe Iowa was better than Bama? Or Ohio State? Or whoever?
Bama? No. But Bama's offense isn't that great and I think it would have a been a really low scoring game if they played this year. But Bama's defense would have shut down Iowa pretty well all game.
Ohio State? I'm not gonna say yes, but I'm not gonna say no.
I think if they played in the B1GCG instead of Iowa vs MSU, we would have had a very similar game to the one we got. People can scream meme about Iowa all they want, but the fact is they have a top 5 defense and they would have matched really well with Ohio State's shit (they can be good, but this year Tim Beck really fucked up) offense.
F+ is shit because they have MSU over Ohio State even though they beat them head-to-head and won the B1G.
>b-but they lost to Nebraska
Yeah, well Bama lost to Ole Piss and Oklahoma lost to Texas just like you said.
On top of that, they have 3-loss Ole Piss ranked criminally high, and above 2-loss Pac-12 champion Stanford, who has a win over """#5""" Notre Dame.
That is a fucking immediately disregarded, garbage ranking because of those two things.
>>64065405
when you kill yourself
Make all the FBS conferences 10 teams in size and everyone plays each other in their conference then make everyone schedule 3 P5 teams from out of conference and the best overall record (not just conference record) from each conference go to the playoff which is about 12 teams. have first and maybe second round of playoff at the home fields of top seeds. make it 16 teams if you want that way there is room for at-large bids
>>64065405
Never
If they expanded it ESPN would remain with the same number of games so why the fuck would they let the NCAA do that
UNC is still left out in this case, which is kind of bullshit
Just make 4 power conference and let the conference games count as semifinals. I don't want to hate on the group of 5 teams but they'll never have someone as good as the top 5 in the country.
Notre Dame and UConn need to join the ACC outright, and the Big 12 needs to dissolve, giving teams to the SEC, B1G, and Pac. WVU and Iowa State go to group of 5 conferences.
>>64069956
>notre dame in the ACC
>yearly rivalry game with miami
i'm ok with this
>>64066397
>1 ACC
>1 ACC vs 1 SEC
>imying 1 ACC is and easier matchup than 1 CUSA
>implying FSU and UNC aren't top 10 teams
Here's your reply.
Extending the number of games played, limiting those game to in-conference/power 5 teams and putting more of an incentive on player safety could really help solve the issues with the teams. The biggest problem with college football and the difficulty in ranking teams is probably the fact that only 12 games are played against too few opponents, and sometimes not even good opponents. If you were to extend the number of games and keep it strictly against power 5 teams we would have a much easier time ranking them, and increasing player safety may make the game more boring but at least it would allow for the athletes to not get banged up so quickly.
>>64070382
>safety
this one of the reason why many most players banged up today due too many safety concerns
>>64070382
I think if every team played 9 conference games and 3 P5 out of conference games that fix it
For instance, instead of Clemson playing Wofford and Appalachian State, imagine P5 teams like Florida, USC, Baylor, etc. Same shit for Alabama and probably everyone else except Notre Dame who always has P5 opponents every week. This is way more important than more fucking playoff spots.
Instead of a juggernaut, late November matchup we get Alabama bootyblasting some bullshit FCS cupcake 56-6. We also get to hear Nick Saban's weekly press conference on how it's actually a tough game and that people shouldn't be criticizing their schedule. Then, in the 3rd quarter, all the starters are on the bench.
>>64065405
#1 Clemson vs #8 Notre Dame
#2 Alabama vs #7 Ohio State
#3 Michigan State vs #6 Stanford
#4 Oklahoma vs #5 Iowa
#8 Notre Dame vs #5 Iowa
#3 Michigan State vs #7 Ohio State
#5 Iowa vs #7 Ohio State
#7 Ohio State
damn what could have been.
>>64065405
Fucking this.
Do none of you guys remember that Ohio State was fucking ranked 5th until the committee voted to select them over TCU for the playoff?
That vote LITERALLY decided the national champions.
What if TCU was selected instead? Or Baylor?
It's time to go to an 8 team playoff. An extra 4 bowl games isnt going to destroy the league.
>>64065916
Just start the season a week early, or get rid of the by week.
Easy
Go to 16 team conferences and have the four conference champs play each other.
There. I fixed it.
>>64074224
>>64074276
>>64074485
no. we dont need more playoff spots. we need more P5 vs P5 regular season matchups. if you tell all P5 teams they can only schedule P5 teams, we probably wouldve already had these >>64074224 matchups in the regular season
>>64074485
I would be ok with this, it would do away with any of that independent bullshit that Notre Dame pulls and would force each conference to have a championship game to act as a another de facto playoff round.
The only issue is you would have tons of fcs schools getting raped during the nonconference schedule each year because who cares if you play anyone out of conference as the conference is all that matters.
What would the 4 super conferences be btw? I assume SEC, ACC, PAC 16, and the Big 16?
>>64069568
>ESPN would remain with the same number of games so why the fuck would they let the NCAA do that
lol,let it burn then give most the games to ABC for the playoff coverage
>The 5 P5 Champions
>Highest Ranked G5
>2 At-Larges
It's that fucking easy.
>>64075542
this right here,
there should be no reason why college playoffs are only 2 extra games when high school playoffs have 4
>>64075542
have the mid majors like Sun-Belt,American,Mountain West conference champions win automatic to be involved in the playoff picture.
>>64069956
Teams that deserve to be G5 more than West Virginia:
Vanderbilt
Wake Forest
Duke
Boston College
Northwestern
Indiana
Kansas
Baylor
TCU
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
Iowa State
Rutgers
Syracuse
Virginia
Mississippi State
Kentucky
Louisville
Texas Tech
Stanford
Oregon State
Washington State
