Facing same team three times a year

[VFL-82-JP]

Michigan must have had a bad game in the 21 playoff as well. They trailed in that one 27-3 at the half and were only able to keep it to a respectable 34-11 because the opponent went in to clock killer mode. In the 19 playoff LSU lead Okie 49-14 at halftime. Sometimes thing snowball and a lesser team gets crushed. That doesn't make them Samford or Kent State.

Heh, yep, this is the argument that wonders which teams have been over-rated by the CFP committee. Michigan getting to the playoffs twice and losing in the first round both times is that sort of argument.

Notre Dame is in the same boat: two invites, two first-round losses.

But the record in this dubious niche belongs to Oklahoma: four appearances in the CFP, and not once have they ever won a single playoff game.

Go Vols!

 

[lexkyvol]

6 power conference. Division winners or Conference winner and runners-up. 12 team playoff! Higher-ranked team host 1st rd. 2nd rd, 3rd rd, title game....all bowl games!

 

[Visiting Dawg]

Heh, yep, this is the argument that wonders which teams have been over-rated by the CFP committee. Michigan getting to the playoffs twice and losing in the first round both times is that sort of argument.

Notre Dame is in the same boat: two invites, two first-round losses.

But the record in this dubious niche belongs to Oklahoma: four appearances in the CFP, and not once have they ever won a single playoff game.

Go Vols!

And honestly that's why I'd like to see it expanded. I'd much rather see an undeserving 10, 11 or 12 get embarrassed in a play in scenario than see a team like a 5 or 6 Bama or Tenn that could make some noise getting left out. That along with the fact that we'd get more meaningful games as opposed to celebrated afterthoughts that turn into a post season scrimmage makes expansion a no brainer for me.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

And honestly that's why I'd like to see it expanded. I'd much rather see an undeserving 10, 11 or 12 get embarrassed in a play in scenario than see a team like a 5 or 6 Bama or Tenn that could make some noise getting left out. That along with the fact that we'd get more meaningful games as opposed to celebrated afterthoughts that turn into a post season scrimmage makes expansion a no brainer for me.

I get it. I understand what you're saying. It's a valid argument.

And yet, it loses sight of the goal. The original purpose. The reason the playoffs exist: to find and crown a national champion.

If we can be assured that the best team in college football is always among the top 4 ranked at the end of the year, there is no added value (sticking with the original goal) of including more teams.

So this is really what we call "mission creep." We can already find the best team, but let's add another purpose: to make more money. And yet another purpose: to give "more teams exposure and relevance." And yet another purpose: ....

Mission creep.

I'd be happy sticking with four.

Go Vols!

 

[b_gann]

It’s about money but think they realized they were damaging their brand to see same 4 teams anointed the title which means they can recruit to that. Opening up to 12 broadens the scope for recruiting for more teams to rise into the inner circle

This is a good point. I'm an avid UT fan obviously and fan of college football in general. I've been completely checked out of the playoff scene for at least the last 4-5 years. It's just a repeating cycle of the same 6-7 teams.

I think by 2024 you also see the Big 10's newest version coming to light as well. Oregon and Washington want that same piece of pie that USC and UCLA just received. I think by the end of this decade you have the shaping of what is essentially two super conferences. My biggest question will be what comes of the teams in the ACC? They'll want out, at least the ones that care about big football. After that, what do teams like TCU, Arizona St, Houston, UCF, etc. do? It'll be interesting to watch it shake out. I think there is a world where it can keep some normalcy of college football and even bring back some old rivalries. My concern is that greed consumes all and the lesser schools just get left out unless they were fortunate enough to already be in by default. We shall see.

 

[Visiting Dawg]

I get it. I understand what you're saying. It's a valid argument.

And yet, it loses sight of the goal. The original purpose. The reason the playoffs exist: to find and crown a national champion.

If we can be assured that the best team in college football is always among the top 4 ranked at the end of the year, there is no added value (sticking with the original goal) of including more teams.

So this is really what we call "mission creep." We can already find the best team, but let's add another purpose: to make more money. And yet another purpose: to give "more teams exposure and relevance." And yet another purpose: ....

Mission creep.

I'd be happy sticking with four.

Go Vols!

Not really mission creep because we're already playing the games, i.e. NY6. They just don't mean anything and are nothing more than money grabs. I actually think one of the biggest improvement in D1 has been going from the old bowl system where 1 and 2 rarely met to the BCS, to the playoff. Imo, more meaningful football is always better than an opinion driven championship, otherwise we could just go back to the 40s and declare a champion before the bowls.

 

[pimo1]

Michigan must have had a bad game in the 21 playoff as well. They trailed in that one 27-3 at the half and were only able to keep it to a respectable 34-11 because the opponent went in to clock killer mode. In the 19 playoff LSU lead Okie 49-14 at halftime. Sometimes thing snowball and a lesser team gets crushed. That doesn't make them Samford or Kent State.

neither of those examples are a 55-point boatracing.
Also none of those were season highs for the opposing team.
Georgia literally whipped TCU worse than they whipped anyone all season. In the Natty. By every possible metric.
It's not that it happened its that it was obviously gonna happen.
TCU only got held to under 29 points twice the whole season 28 in a loss to KSU and 17 in a win vs Texas. they averaged high 40's against everyone else. Michigan was a 6-point win.. its not like they blew them out.
That being said TCU's SOS was actually better overall sorta than Michigan and OSU but it was still bad. They played a ton of really bad defenses.
In our second worst performance the whole season by a large margin we were able to put 13 on them (UGA).

Just being honest there are about 10 teams outside the SEC I have respect for. Any other team Vandy and Kentucky would win at least 4/10 games from on any given year.
That is my benchmark. Vandy, UK Miss State. I honestly believe in any conference/division except the SEC or Big 10 East those guys would compete for the top of the conference every couple of years and be mis pack at worst most years. the SEC E/W and Big10 east are different animals.

 

[#1fulmerite]

Had Bama been allowed in with two loses, would they have fared better?

Would it have been “right”?

Anyone remember how PO’d everyone was outside of the SEC that they received the rematch against LSU in the NC game?