Do we need to expand the Playoff?

#1
T

temptn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
1,725
Likes
3,395
#1
Would increasing the number of teams in the CFP solve a lot of the recent problems?

Or do they actually want a lot of anxiety.

.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuntlandVolinColo
#3
#3
temptn said:
Would increasing the number of teams in the CFP solve a lot of the recent problems?

Or do they actually want a lot of anxiety.

.
Click to expand...
They're going to 12, how many do you need, 32?

Honestly there's maybe 6 or 8 teams tops that can win if everything goes right for them, the rest are just filler for TV money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf, jonnon111, SoddyAllVol and 8 others
#6
#6
By December we always have 3 and sometimes 4 teams that everybody knows are the best teams. The problems usually come from haters of the teams who made the cfp and fans of the teams that didn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonnon111, MemphisVol77 and Vol8188
#11
#11
8 teams should do it most years and rankings will change each week. That being said, bama sitting at 9 could win against any team ranked above them.

They are a missed field goal and a ballsy 2 point conversion away from being 9-0. That said, glad they lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volcop1, VOLNPA, posivol and 3 others
#12
#12
Expanding the playoff is foolish. It give the Alabamas and Ohio States multiple chances to make the playoffs and take care of business. To say nothing of making the regular season even more of a total joke. I mean, really, the first time some 9-3 team rides a hot streak to finish 12-3 and be named "champion" over a 14-1 team that played a much harder schedule, that'll be the end of any of it mattering. That's idiotic. But that's where we're headed.

Football should have never become about who gets hot at the end of the year, but that's what all this CFP business does. That's why Oregon can get demolished by UGA two months ago, have a much weaker overall schedule than Tennessee, and yet ESPN's talking heads are saying if they get on a hot streak against a weak PAC-10 and win out, they could get in over Tennessee - because of recency bias. If you looked at the whole year, you'd say "wow, Tennessee did a lot more." But in this March Madness playoff mindset, you don't care about body of work, you care about who's hot at the end. September? Who cares. The playoff mindset leads to caring more about about who looks good going into the playoff than it does a total season of work. Which is why Oregon, UCLA, USC, and even LSU could be jumped ahead of Tennessee under the right conditions.

Football should be about who assembled the best season from start to finish. It should be about the best team from bell to bell, not the best team the last week. The more the playoffs grow, the less anything before the playoffs will matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PapaGeorgio, CornbreadVol, Orange12 and 14 others
#13
#13
08Vol said:
The number of teams that can win it all changes every year. Also injuries play a huge part in who can win it all.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There is way too much opinion in college football and not enough on-field results. Move it to 16…give ALL P5 Champs an invite…also the highest ranking non-P5 team…and then at large the rest.


If anyone doesn’t think Alabama could win it as a 6-8 seed this year, they are in denial.
I’d also be in favor of cutting the regular season back to 11 games…and let the first 2-3 rounds of the playoffs be at the home of the highest seed…and play those early rounds at the end of November-early December.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol and Gandalf
#14
#14
Voltopia said:
Expanding the playoff is foolish. It give the Alabamas and Ohio States multiple chances to make the playoffs and take care of business. To say nothing of making the regular season even more of a total joke. I mean, really, the first time some 9-3 team rides a hot streak to finish 12-3 and be named "champion" over a 14-1 team that played a much harder schedule, that'll be the end of any of it mattering. That's idiotic. But that's where we're headed.

Football should have never become about who gets hot at the end of the year, but that's what all this CFP business does. That's why Oregon can get demolished by UGA two months ago, have a much weaker overall schedule than Tennessee, and yet ESPN's talking heads are saying if they get on a hot streak against a weak PAC-10 and win out, they could get in over Tennessee - because of recency bias. If you looked at the whole year, you'd say "wow, Tennessee did a lot more." But in this March Madness playoff mindset, you don't care about body of work, you care about who's hot at the end. September? Who cares. The playoff mindset leads to caring more about about who looks good going into the playoff than it does a total season of work. Which is why Oregon, UCLA, USC, and even LSU could be jumped ahead of Tennessee under the right conditions.

Football should be about who assembled the best season from start to finish. It should be about the best team from bell to bell, not the best team the last week. The more the playoffs grow, the less anything before the playoffs will matter.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. And only because I don’t like the politics of deciding who gets into the tournament and who doesn’t. Especially given the disparity in strength of schedules.

8 teams (with every P5 Champ getting in) would be a good start, but I like 16 teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol and Kas232323
#15
#15
EZE said:
I respectfully disagree. And only because I don’t like the politics of deciding who gets into the tournament and who doesn’t. Especially given the disparity in strength of schedules.

8 teams (with every P5 Champ getting in) would be a good start, but I like 16 teams.
Click to expand...

16 is good or even 8, but I hate the 12 team format with ANY 4 getting a week off. Chunk in the next four and let's go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EZE and IndianaVol
#16
#16
WesternNCVol said:
8 teams should do it most years and rankings will change each week. That being said, bama sitting at 9 could win against any team ranked above them.

They are a missed field goal and a ballsy 2 point conversion away from being 9-0. That said, glad they lost.
Click to expand...
Bama is also one play (see A&M) away from having three losses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WesternNCVol
#18
#18
Voltopia said:
Expanding the playoff is foolish. It give the Alabamas and Ohio States multiple chances to make the playoffs and take care of business. To say nothing of making the regular season even more of a total joke. I mean, really, the first time some 9-3 team rides a hot streak to finish 12-3 and be named "champion" over a 14-1 team that played a much harder schedule, that'll be the end of any of it mattering. That's idiotic. But that's where we're headed.

Football should have never become about who gets hot at the end of the year, but that's what all this CFP business does. That's why Oregon can get demolished by UGA two months ago, have a much weaker overall schedule than Tennessee, and yet ESPN's talking heads are saying if they get on a hot streak against a weak PAC-10 and win out, they could get in over Tennessee - because of recency bias. If you looked at the whole year, you'd say "wow, Tennessee did a lot more." But in this March Madness playoff mindset, you don't care about body of work, you care about who's hot at the end. September? Who cares. The playoff mindset leads to caring more about about who looks good going into the playoff than it does a total season of work. Which is why Oregon, UCLA, USC, and even LSU could be jumped ahead of Tennessee under the right conditions.

Football should be about who assembled the best season from start to finish. It should be about the best team from bell to bell, not the best team the last week. The more the playoffs grow, the less anything before the playoffs will matter.
Click to expand...
.
Using your logic, there should be no playoff all.
 
#19
#19
temptn said:
Would increasing the number of teams in the CFP solve a lot of the recent problems?

Or do they actually want a lot of anxiety.

.
Click to expand...

Yes, similar to what the NFL does. Let's be honest, these kids aren't students anymore, they are paid professionals. Extending the season by maybe 2 weeks would be all that's required.

The bowl consortiums would never let that happen willingly though.
 
#20
#20
12 teams will be great. 16 teams would be best.
It makes the second half of the season far more exciting for multiple teams. Look at what we have now - a third of the season left and only about 7 teams with anything to play for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
#21
#21
Dudleys87 said:
i can see 8. Most seasons I think you can make an argument for those teams. Outside of that they’re just hoping for Cinderella and tv ratings.
Click to expand...

No you can't. You think you can make an argument for 8 different teams being the best in the nation?
 
#24
#24
Vol8188 said:
No you can't. You think you can make an argument for 8 different teams being the best in the nation?
Click to expand...

There’s a lot better chance of having 8 teams with a legitimate shot at making a run than 12. There’s zero chance of making a case for 12.

So yes I could make a case for 8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saxvol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top