you're welcome.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
CFP expanding to 8 teams before 2026 - CBS Sports
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
But they weren’t the best. They lost the most important game of the year. How can a team that loses on the biggest stage be considered the best team?
College football has been unique among the sports in that it has attempted to determine it's national champion based on who has the best overall season, not just who gets hot at the end. The idea has been that every game matters, lose a game early to a team that isn't very good and you are out.
The argument made for a playoff (other than $$$$$) was that the best of the teams could end up not playing each other and thus you would have the voters decide. Select among a 12-0 team from the B10, a 12-0 team from the B8 and an 11-1 team from the SEC who lost early to another conference team that ended up 10-2. Throw in a 11-1 team from the PAC10, eliminate the conference winners from the SWC and the ACC who lost 2 games each. Each of the first 3 or 4 could make an argument that they had the best year and should be crowned. You might also get an argument from the champion of the WAC but they struggled in the one game they played against a school from a major conference and it's hard to argue they are the best.
The current system allows you to put those teams with a legitimate claims into a 4 team battle and work it out, the winner of those top four can claim to not only have won the last two against other teams claiming to be the best but to have also played a complete season worthy of being called the best. Crank that playoff number up to 6 or 8 and you are now including teams that have no business saying they had the best overall year. You end up with 3 loss teams, with 2 loss teams that lost to the best competition on their schedule.
I love seeing every game matter. This idea of "second chances" and a team getting hot/lucky at the end doesn't interest me. I don't want to see the sixth best or eighth best team in it just to fill in the bracket.
Yes in most seasons the final winner is likely to be the same team as would come out of the 4 team bracket but not always.
In the NFL the year the Giants won the SB against the then 18-0 Patriots can you really claim that a team that won 9 in the regular season and only got in with the help on another team in the last week of the regular season was the best team for that year? Yes they were the best in the tourney but no way were they the best that year. There are others as well.
NCAA basketball tourney has examples as well as do most other larger tournaments. If you like playoffs, like the tournament format, great. I don't. How much attention do people pay to NCAA basketball in December? They don't, the games don't matter other than moving a team up or down one or two seeds, they are still going to be there if they are one of the 30 or so of the 66 who has a chance to move past the first couple rounds.
College football doesn't need to be like the NFL with 12 of 32 teams playing post season or the NBA or NHL with similar or higher numbers. Lets celebrate what makes college football great. Lets remember that if Ohio State had beaten Oklahoma early in the year the final 4 teams would have been likely different, the game mattered.
No matter how big the number you include gets there will always be those who argue they were unfairly excluded. They won't compare themselves to the top one or two seeds but to the last one getting in. In a four team format number five will be unhappy claiming they were better than four. In an eight team number nine will claim they should have been number eight.
The real question should be who can truly claim to have been the best team that particular year, and for the whole year. No way will you convince me that that group included six or eight or 12 teams.
The argument made for a playoff (other than $$$$$) was that the best of the teams could end up not playing each other and thus you would have the voters decide. Select among a 12-0 team from the B10, a 12-0 team from the B8 and an 11-1 team from the SEC who lost early to another conference team that ended up 10-2. Throw in a 11-1 team from the PAC10, eliminate the conference winners from the SWC and the ACC who lost 2 games each. Each of the first 3 or 4 could make an argument that they had the best year and should be crowned. You might also get an argument from the champion of the WAC but they struggled in the one game they played against a school from a major conference and it's hard to argue they are the best.
The current system allows you to put those teams with a legitimate claims into a 4 team battle and work it out, the winner of those top four can claim to not only have won the last two against other teams claiming to be the best but to have also played a complete season worthy of being called the best. Crank that playoff number up to 6 or 8 and you are now including teams that have no business saying they had the best overall year. You end up with 3 loss teams, with 2 loss teams that lost to the best competition on their schedule.
I love seeing every game matter. This idea of "second chances" and a team getting hot/lucky at the end doesn't interest me. I don't want to see the sixth best or eighth best team in it just to fill in the bracket.
Yes in most seasons the final winner is likely to be the same team as would come out of the 4 team bracket but not always.
In the NFL the year the Giants won the SB against the then 18-0 Patriots can you really claim that a team that won 9 in the regular season and only got in with the help on another team in the last week of the regular season was the best team for that year? Yes they were the best in the tourney but no way were they the best that year. There are others as well.
NCAA basketball tourney has examples as well as do most other larger tournaments. If you like playoffs, like the tournament format, great. I don't. How much attention do people pay to NCAA basketball in December? They don't, the games don't matter other than moving a team up or down one or two seeds, they are still going to be there if they are one of the 30 or so of the 66 who has a chance to move past the first couple rounds.
College football doesn't need to be like the NFL with 12 of 32 teams playing post season or the NBA or NHL with similar or higher numbers. Lets celebrate what makes college football great. Lets remember that if Ohio State had beaten Oklahoma early in the year the final 4 teams would have been likely different, the game mattered.
No matter how big the number you include gets there will always be those who argue they were unfairly excluded. They won't compare themselves to the top one or two seeds but to the last one getting in. In a four team format number five will be unhappy claiming they were better than four. In an eight team number nine will claim they should have been number eight.
The real question should be who can truly claim to have been the best team that particular year, and for the whole year. No way will you convince me that that group included six or eight or 12 teams.
So why should the NFL even go through the motions of the playoffs?
Fans like playoffs --> they generate money
So in the NFL, you just want them to play a 16 game schedule and whoever has the best record and has the tie breakers is crowned champion?
I wouldn't be oppossed. With the size of the league today though, i'd suggest adding the current playoff duration to the season and have everyone play 20.
Edit: you realize the NFL used to crown a champ at the end of the regular season, right?
Edit 2: in no way do I think that would be realistic from a financial perspective.
I just think playoff type situations are far more entertaining, which is what professional sports is all about, IMO. The idea of a “champion” being crowned in week 16-17 of 20 (in your scenario), because nobody can catch the top team seems extremely boring to me.
IMO, during the BCS era, college football had the best regular season but culminated with the absolute worst postseason. Since the inception of the CFP, ratings have skyrocketed, and it’s become the best regular season and very close to the best postseason.
But how much of that has been because the No Fun League has sucked big giant donkey balls during that time frame?
somebody
Well-Known Member
**** you
Propositioned!!!!!!
Awesome, z -- can't wait. I do have some ground rules, as well as a few ideas I'm interested in trying that the wife won't go for. Check your PM!
Seriously though, sorry if your feelings got hurt.
In other news, scientists proved today that water is in fact wet.
I think it's just going to be a matter of how they structure an 8 team playoff not IF...
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
BorrachoBuff
Well-Known Member
I would prefer to see a 6-team playoff, with the top two seeds getting an opening round bye.
This. Conference champions only. 6 seat goes to the highest ranked G5 conference champion
If it's ranked higher than the top ranked P5 non-champ.
It would still give the G5 a chance, but I doubt we'd see a G5 team make it very often, if ever. UCF was undefeated at the end of the regular season last year and they were ranked 12th in the CFP. There were 6 P5 non-champs ranked ahead of them... If you don't create an auto bid for them, they'll never make it.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
I think that would result in a 2nd $ec team each time - 2 out of the six. 2 out of 8 is mildly more acceptable.
Which I'm totally fine with. The post I responded to would have expanded the playoff by 2 but left out Alabama last year.
This is the list of P5 non-champs and their final CFP ranking, all ahead of undefeated UCF...
#4 - Alabama
#6 - Wisconsin
#7 - Auburn
#9 - Penn State
#10 - Miami
#11 - Washington
A G5 will never get in unless they get an auto-bid
No it wouldn't have. Bama was #4 in the final CFP rankings. The post you responded to would have put Ohio State and USC in to fill the 1-5 spots and Bama would have been 6th.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
Conference champs shouldn't get a look, unless they're ranked high enough. Winning a P5 doesn't automatically make you qualified to compete for the title.
Nope. That post was 6, all conference champs - 5 P5 + highest ranked G5.
somebody
Well-Known Member
As long as people do the ranking, it can happen. I could there being a swell of support for the highest ranking G5.
Oh, I understand what you're saying and we are saying the same thing. Yes, I agree that should be how a 6 team playoff should work, rather than an auto-bid for G5.
This is a good point. With the committee knowing this, they could use discretion to put UCF in the CFP. I don't see it happening last year, but it could be something they keep in mind all year and put a team like that higher throughout the season.
I'm still not opposed to the 8 team playoff that's the 5 auto bids and 3 at large.
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
**** conference champions. 6 top ranked teams.
i give it 3 years until the sec figures out a way to lobby 3 teams in and demands a bye for the sec champion from the outset.
Ranking shmankings. You dont win your conference championship you are NOT eligible!
Regular SEasOn MATTERS!!!!!
