We've had a pure computer based selection in the past and everyone hated it. It was just the top two teams but it was hated. If we went to a new algorithm to select 16 teams, guess what, people would hate it too. So no matter what system was used, their will be people upset with it. 

I personally would rather see a 11-1 Tulane than a 4th or 5th place team from P4. Think back to the undefeated UCF team. We can all say they wouldn't have won a playoff, but we don't "know" they wouldn't have. 

Notre Dame would join a P4 or they would face an uphill battle to get in.

What ever is done I'm all for a 16 team playoff, but no more. I'm fine with 5 highest ranked conference champions getting in, but I DO NOT want any conference to have an amount of guaranteed bids. That's the Big 10's hold up on approving expansion to 16, they want 4 guaranteed spots each year.

16 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

We've had a pure computer based selection in the past and everyone hated it. It was just the top two teams but it was hated. If we went to a new algorithm to select 16 teams, guess what, people would hate it too. So no matter what system was used, their will be people upset with it. 

I personally would rather see a 11-1 Tulane than a 4th or 5th place team from P4. Think back to the undefeated UCF team. We can all say they wouldn't have won a playoff, but we don't "know" they wouldn't have. 

Notre Dame would join a P4 or they would face an uphill battle to get in.

What ever is done I'm all for a 16 team playoff, but no more. I'm fine with 5 highest ranked conference champions getting in, but I DO NOT want any conference to have an amount of guaranteed bids. That's the Big 10's hold up on approving expansion to 16, they want 4 guaranteed spots each year.

Will say that people hated it because they wanted the subjective human opinion, but they certainly also don’t agree on what human opinions to work with in the current system. 
 

The issue I continue to see is that their criteria moves so severely. It often seems they contradict what they just said to justify a rank the week before in justifying the rankings of the current week. And the more teams they add to this, the more opportunity to have issues with the shifting criteria. 

27 minutes ago, DragonFire said:

Will say that people hated it because they wanted the subjective human opinion, but they certainly also don’t agree on what human opinions to work with in the current system. 
 

The issue I continue to see is that their criteria moves so severely. It often seems they contradict what they just said to justify a rank the week before in justifying the rankings of the current week. And the more teams they add to this, the more opportunity to have issues with the shifting criteria. 

They dig themselves into a hole each week trying to justify where each team is ranked. Shouldn't be afraid to say, "You know, we just think Team A is Better than Team B right now."

Everyone raises heck each week over that week's rankings, but in the end the CFP Committee by in large have gotten it correct in the end.

On 12/5/2025 at 11:18 PM, theguru said:

The "computer/algorithm" decides.

And I would like to see 16 teams with no special cases, just the best 16 teams.  

I love the idea of 16 teams.

What are the perameters of the algorithm?  Does it include "good losses?"  Because I absolutely HATE the idea of rewarding losing games, like Alabama.  No way a 3 loss team should be in the playoff.  

If it were up to me, conference winner of every FBS conference (Except the Pac 12 since it only has 2 schools).  That would be 9 automatic bids.  Then, use the algorithm to find the next best 7 schools and put them in.  

15 minutes ago, New Colonel said:

I love the idea of 16 teams.

What are the parameters of the algorithm?  Does it include "good losses?"  Because I absolutely HATE the idea of rewarding losing games, like Alabama.  No way a 3 loss team should be in the playoff.  

If it were up to me, conference winner of every FBS conference (Except the Pac 12 since it only has 2 schools).  That would be 9 automatic bids.  Then, use the algorithm to find the next best 7 schools and put them in.  

I would rather use a straight power rating system like the TP94 Power Ratings here on BGP and take the top 16 teams. 

8 minutes ago, theguru said:

I would rather use a straight power rating system like the TP94 Power Ratings here on BGP and take the top 16 teams. 

If we do that, then we need to get rid of all conferences altogether.

1 minute ago, New Colonel said:

If we do that, then we need to get rid of all conferences altogether.

Sounds good to me, right along with conference championship games.