Proposed 16 Team College Football Playoff

[Guest T Rocks]

Don't you think that if all conference champs got in the playoffs that local kids would tend to stay closer to home, thus helping out non power 5 teams

[futurecoach]

While the current 4 team playoff is certainly better than previously taking just the top 2, I think there's still room to improve. I know many will say it just needs to go to 8...take the Power 5 conference champs, and add 3 at large berths. But, it doesn't allow for non-Power 5 teams a chance to compete. I want a National Championship to cover the entire nation (at least as far as the FBS teams are concerned.) And let's face it, the big boys aren't going to schedule the little guys...there's nothing in it for them. And without a quality win over them, the little guys are not going to get enough respect to make it high enough to get one of the three at-large berths.

 

Here is the best solution that I have heard to correct that issue, as well as a few others:

* All 10 FBS conference champions get an automatic bid (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, along with MAC, Sun Belt, Mountain West, American Athletic, and Conference USA)

* 6 At-large berths are then awarded (based upon the end of season rankings.)

* The 16 teams are then seeded (and just because a team is conference champ, does not necessarily mean they are a higher seed than an at-large team)

* The first two rounds are played on campus, using the higher seed as the host (eliminating travel for half of the teams)

* The semi-finals and finals would rotate amongst three bowl sites.

 

So, what would it look like this year? I've used the last playoff rankings to get the at-large berths, getting: Alabama, Wisconsin, Auburn, Penn State, Miami and Washington.

 

And, using the same playoff rankings to determine the seedings, here's what the bracket would look like...

 

[ATTACH]64821[/ATTACH]

 

I don't care if you want to put UCF in a 16 team playoff, I would even be ok with it if it was an 8 team playoff. But to put all group of 5 conference champs in is an utter waste of time. Do you really want to see Alabama/ Boise State or Oklahoma/ Toledo? The only intriguing matchup in that scenario is USC / Penn State. 1 non P5 is ok. 5 is a complete waste of time.

 

It's very simple 8 teams. 5 conference champs and 3 at large. If a non power 5 team gets to a certain ranking like top 10, then they automatically get one of the at large spots. However not all non power 5 teams deserve that chance. It takes truly great teams to do that. Such as a Boise State team who was a legit top 10 team. A Utah back when they weren't in power 5 conference.

 

8 teams is where is deserves to be. Makes the regular season meaningful still. Doesn't water down the playoffs either.

[futurecoach]

While the current 4 team playoff is certainly better than previously taking just the top 2, I think there's still room to improve. I know many will say it just needs to go to 8...take the Power 5 conference champs, and add 3 at large berths. But, it doesn't allow for non-Power 5 teams a chance to compete. I want a National Championship to cover the entire nation (at least as far as the FBS teams are concerned.) And let's face it, the big boys aren't going to schedule the little guys...there's nothing in it for them. And without a quality win over them, the little guys are not going to get enough respect to make it high enough to get one of the three at-large berths.

 

Here is the best solution that I have heard to correct that issue, as well as a few others:

* All 10 FBS conference champions get an automatic bid (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, along with MAC, Sun Belt, Mountain West, American Athletic, and Conference USA)

* 6 At-large berths are then awarded (based upon the end of season rankings.)

* The 16 teams are then seeded (and just because a team is conference champ, does not necessarily mean they are a higher seed than an at-large team)

* The first two rounds are played on campus, using the higher seed as the host (eliminating travel for half of the teams)

* The semi-finals and finals would rotate amongst three bowl sites.

 

So, what would it look like this year? I've used the last playoff rankings to get the at-large berths, getting: Alabama, Wisconsin, Auburn, Penn State, Miami and Washington.

 

And, using the same playoff rankings to determine the seedings, here's what the bracket would look like...

 

[ATTACH]64821[/ATTACH]

 

Everyone has their own opinions on the CFB, be it 4, 8, 16 teams and that's what they are...Opinions. So here's mine. First off, my question would be "where does it stop" ? My point being that regardless how many teams are in a playoff, there's always going to be controversy on who got hosed, should've been in and on and on. 4 teams, why not 8 ? 8 teams, why not 16 ?

I personally believe that 4 teams in a playoff are the right number and as far as it should go. One reason being is imo the importance of a regular season is already a little less now. I will use Ohio State as one example ...in 2016, Penn St. beat OSU head to head plus won the Big10 and yet OSU went to the CFP bc they were still believed to be better. 2017 rolls around, OSU Won the Big10 Championship by beating a 4th ranked, unbeaten Wisconsin. That result led to no Big10 team advancing and an Alabama team that didn't win it's division of the SEC, so they weren't in a championship game and yet still were chosen to go over a conference champion who had beaten more top 25 teams than Bama. Reason given was "total body of work" and the mention of an avg. at best Iowa team beating OSU so badly.

Before anyone goes on here telling me that I am just defending OSU ...that's not the case at all. Should any want to check a couple of past threads, I plainly said that I didn't think that OSU would go bc of the way they lost to Iowa (allowing 55 pts.) and that was telling on them.

I don't believe that there is a "perfect" system. I think that 4 teams are the correct number as not to devalue the importance of the regular season any more. That's jmo and we know what opinions are like ......everybody has one.

 

I seriously never understood how people say going to 8 would devalue the regular season. As it is very few teams schedule tough top out of conference games. So the regular season is basically just a conference season. So having all 5 conference champs doesn't devalue it at all. Because you have to do great in conference play just to make your conference title. Look at Bama and Osu the last 2 years. They both lost 1 game in conference and missed out on their conference championship. Meaning they both had to hope they would get selected over a conference champ. Just like it would in an 8 team playoff.

 

All conferences are not equal. No one truly even knows what the toughest conference is. So how about we stop crowning champs based off opinions and do it on the field. All 5 conference champs deserve to be in. Then 3 at large. Then it literally also cuts down on complaining. As it is right now there is no guarntee on being able to make it. We could legit have all 5 power conferences have a team go undefeated and win their conference championship and one team would be left out. Just saying sorry for your bad luck for being left out doesn't cut it for me.

 

So it's very simple if you don't win your conference and don't get one of the 3 at larges. Then people have not much to argue because all that needs to be said back is well you should have won your conference and you wouldn't have to worry about it.

 

There is zero reason a power 5 team should go into a season and not know for a fact that they would get in or not by doing something. As states a power 5 team could literally go undefeated and be left out if 4 other power 5 teams went undefeated. That shouldn't even be a possibility.

[GrantNKY]

I seriously never understood how people say going to 8 would devalue the regular season. As it is very few teams schedule tough top out of conference games. So the regular season is basically just a conference season. So having all 5 conference champs doesn't devalue it at all. Because you have to do great in conference play just to make your conference title. Look at Bama and Osu the last 2 years. They both lost 1 game in conference and missed out on their conference championship. Meaning they both had to hope they would get selected over a conference champ. Just like it would in an 8 team playoff.

 

All conferences are not equal. No one truly even knows what the toughest conference is. So how about we stop crowning champs based off opinions and do it on the field. All 5 conference champs deserve to be in. Then 3 at large. Then it literally also cuts down on complaining. As it is right now there is no guarntee on being able to make it. We could legit have all 5 power conferences have a team go undefeated and win their conference championship and one team would be left out. Just saying sorry for your bad luck for being left out doesn't cut it for me.

 

So it's very simple if you don't win your conference and don't get one of the 3 at larges. Then people have not much to argue because all that needs to be said back is well you should have won your conference and you wouldn't have to worry about it.

 

There is zero reason a power 5 team should go into a season and not know for a fact that they would get in or not by doing something. As states a power 5 team could literally go undefeated and be left out if 4 other power 5 teams went undefeated. That shouldn't even be a possibility.

I'll be honest I used to think that way. I too have thought at times going to 8 would devalue the regular season, but then when you think about it, the West Coast checked out on the season when USC got blitzed by Notre Dame and most of the Midwest checked out when Ohio State got blitzed by Iowa and ND got blitzed by Miami. The Northeast never cares about college football anyways. So you essentially had 3 huge markets check out 2/3 of the way through the year. That devalues the regular season way more than 8 teams would. With 8 teams you would still be able to comfortably say all 8 could have a legit chance to win and it keeps the keeps the entire regular season meaningful.

[futurecoach]

Agreed. I just hate the fact that college football is the only sport where a team legit go into a season and not know for a fact what they have to do to play for a championship. Every other major sport you need for a fact exactly what you have to do to play for a championship. College football it's not that though. If you play in a power 5 conference you should know for a fact what you need to do. At moment even though it's not likely, but we truly could have an undefeated team from each conference. Or even 1 loss teams from each conference with no undefeated teams. So why should only opinions be the determining factor for what teams get to play for a title? Just like it's only opinions on what conferences are toughest. If we want to say it's a National Championship. Then all 5 power 5 conferences should have an automatic bid for winning the conference. Plus that still means the regular season means something. I'm even good with the highest non power 5 conference champ making it, with the stipulation that teams has to be ranked higher say than 15th. If not then it opens up another at large spot for a 3rd team.

 

This only creates one additional game for 2 teams who make the title. Which I'm sure those 2 teams wouldn't care about that at all.

[GrantNKY]

Agreed. I just hate the fact that college football is the only sport where a team legit go into a season and not know for a fact what they have to do to play for a championship. Every other major sport you need for a fact exactly what you have to do to play for a championship. College football it's not that though. If you play in a power 5 conference you should know for a fact what you need to do. At moment even though it's not likely, but we truly could have an undefeated team from each conference. Or even 1 loss teams from each conference with no undefeated teams. So why should only opinions be the determining factor for what teams get to play for a title? Just like it's only opinions on what conferences are toughest. If we want to say it's a National Championship. Then all 5 power 5 conferences should have an automatic bid for winning the conference. Plus that still means the regular season means something. I'm even good with the highest non power 5 conference champ making it, with the stipulation that teams has to be ranked higher say than 15th. If not then it opens up another at large spot for a 3rd team.

 

This only creates one additional game for 2 teams who make the title. Which I'm sure those 2 teams wouldn't care about that at all.

I have zero problem with anything you said here. I like conference championships and think they should matter. I also like the non-power conferences, but like you said in your previous post it takes a special team to be able to compete. I say the non-power 5 schools should play their own playoff. If one school qualifies for the P5 playoff they should have the option to play in whichever playoff they want to.