Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OT: D1 CFP

Collapse

Support The Site!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OT: D1 CFP

    Why can’t the current D1 CFP system replicate the current D2 playoff system? They could still keep the bowl game theme and still have heightened interest throughout the year. If not, more so as more teams and fan bases are in the hunt so to speak. The current 4 team system literally alienates all but ten or so schools and fan bases realistically.

    The iffy teams can still have their bowl games - think NIT tournament in basketball. The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, etc can be played within the 24 team CFP playoff system as it is now.

    Within the proposed structure of expansion all schools can begin conference games right away and not have a schedule that is littered with cupcakes and bye weeks. Thus, keeping heightened fan interest and more importantly if your team drops from perfection they can still get into the playoff. As we all know football is a game of matchups so taking a loss in the season shouldn’t end your year. Also, the expansion could eliminate the idiotic argument of conference difficulty as every year it seems that SEC bias always creeps in to get a few SEC teams in the running.. I think it is just to keep those massive fan bases interested which equals $$.

    Call me crazy, please poke holes. I’m interested in dialogue on this, but quite frankly I’m tired of the same old 4-5 teams always being in the running and being in the CFP. I think since D2 is apart of the NCAA and their current playoff system structured as it is why can’t D1 which is also apart of the NCAA have a similar playoff structure which would not only keep heightened fan interest but also likely yield more $$ in the long run.

  • #2
    I am also tired of the annual and ridiculous arguments over the top four FBS playoff teams that leave out many well deserving teams that would be selected in a D2 style playoff.

    One problem, among many, with making a change involves the necessary reduction in regular season games from 12-13 to 10-11 that would eliminate two revenue producing home games with FCS and non-power 5 schools.

    This would eliminate program enhancing payouts to these lower level schools and the power 5 schools would be giving up two guaranteed home games for one or two possible early round playoff games. I could see both parties objecting to this change on strictly revenue loss grounds.

    I have read an opinion piece from one FBS coach arguing that these games and payouts to lower level teams are good for the overall health of college football by diverting much needed financial assistance downward to these schools. Cutting two games from power 5 schedules would do harm to these schools and there would have to be some accomodation to make up for this loss for the D2 style playoff format to work.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by William Fisher Iv View Post
      I am also tired of the annual and ridiculous arguments over the top four FBS playoff teams that leave out many well deserving teams that would be selected in a D2 style playoff.

      One problem, among many, with making a change involves the necessary reduction in regular season games from 12-13 to 10-11 that would eliminate two revenue producing home games with FCS and non-power 5 schools.

      This would eliminate program enhancing payouts to these lower level schools and the power 5 schools would be giving up two guaranteed home games for one or two possible early round playoff games. I could see both parties objecting to this change on strictly revenue loss grounds.

      I have read an opinion piece from one FBS coach arguing that these games and payouts to lower level teams are good for the overall health of college football by diverting much needed financial assistance downward to these schools. Cutting two games from power 5 schedules would do harm to these schools and there would have to be some accomodation to make up for this loss for the D2 style playoff format to work.
      It’s quite simple really, you just eliminate the month off that some of these schools have between their last regular season game and their bowl game. Go straight to the playoffs immediately following the conference championship instead of sitting around for a month. My two cents.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm open to expansion if the players get payed. Institutions already cover losses from their athletic departments, so it's just a question of covering a little bit more. My concern is that we're asking players (Many of whom will be trying to make it in the NFL after college) to play 15 or 16 games in as many weeks, with all the injury risk associated, for zero short term gain.

        Comment


        • #5
          I personally think that if the FBS went to a playoff system any bigger than 8 teams it would firstly completely water down the regular season and two would potentially lead to the beat/most deserving teams sometimes not playing for the championship. To my second point I point to last night’s games, which I believed showed that there are three teams that are clearly the best 3 in the country (I know that’s not the case every year). To my second point, the way it constructed now the regular season almost functions as a “pre-playoff”. For example look at the teams that played in new year six games (plus maybe a few others). Because teams know that they need a resume to make it in they schedule great non-conf games along with their conference games. Lets say they go to 28 teams like the D2 model. There is no way that an undefeated or one loss (maybe even two loss) Alabama, OSU, LSU, Clemson, ND, Mich, USC, Georgia, Penn St, exc do not get into the field. Thus in my opinion all of the “name brand” programs have no incentive to play anybody in the regular season. I know it’s 68 teams that get in the basketball tournament but I think that is a model to point to because out of all the championships in sports it is undoubtably the sport that is the worst way of determining who the best teams in the country are. Upsets are exciting and bring more people in to watch the games but it nearly eliminates the importance for the regular season (just random made up example but no one can honestly say a 17-8 ACC team should have the same right to play for a championship as a 22-2 ACC team). I use this example also because roughly 20% of the D1 basketball teams make the tournament and if 28 teams made the FBS playoffs that would also be roughly 20%. As I said I would not be opposed to 8 teams making it but more than that would be too many IMHO.

          Comment


          • #6
            Even the D2 playoffs took decades to expand to the current amount of teams in the field.

            From Wikipedia:

            It was first held in 1973, as a single-elimination tournament with eight teams. The tournament field has subsequently been expanded three times; in 1988 it became 16 teams, in 2004 it became 24 teams, and in 2016 it became 28 teams.
            Go GSC and Roar LIONS!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Anyone who advocates for leaving the D1 FBS playoff structure as is because of potential blowouts should also advocate for reducing the basketball playoffs to 32 teams to avoid similar blowouts.

              Comment


              • #8
                Say we had an 8 team playoff this year, LSU vs Wisconsin, Ohio State vs Baylor, Clemson vs Oregon, Oklahoma vs Georgia, I'm guessing the only difference from the final 4 we had this year would be Georgia replacing Oklahoma. LSU vs Georgia, Ohio State vs Clemson, sure there could be an upset and we would get 4 more interesting games, but as has been stated before, can we really expect these young men to play what amounts to an NFL season, while maintaining eligibility, without compensation. I'm guessing we will be stuck with 4 for a while but 6 or 8 seems like the next logical step.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Uwfalum98 View Post
                  Say we had an 8 team playoff this year, LSU vs Wisconsin, Ohio State vs Baylor, Clemson vs Oregon, Oklahoma vs Georgia, I'm guessing the only difference from the final 4 we had this year would be Georgia replacing Oklahoma. LSU vs Georgia, Ohio State vs Clemson, sure there could be an upset and we would get 4 more interesting games, but as has been stated before, can we really expect these young men to play what amounts to an NFL season, while maintaining eligibility, without compensation. I'm guessing we will be stuck with 4 for a while but 6 or 8 seems like the next logical step.
                  Agree completely that the final four would probably look the same (minus the maybe OU, for which whoever the 4 was wasn’t beating LSU) And to further make the point should 5-8 deserve to get in when: Baylor had two shots to beat a team the made it in, OU..Georgia and Wisconsin lost “de-facto” quarter final games to teams that made it and Oregon lost to two teams that didn’t even make it in. This to say I’m good with 4.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by William Fisher Iv View Post
                    I am also tired of the annual and ridiculous arguments over the top four FBS playoff teams that leave out many well deserving teams that would be selected in a D2 style playoff.

                    One problem, among many, with making a change involves the necessary reduction in regular season games from 12-13 to 10-11 that would eliminate two revenue producing home games with FCS and non-power 5 schools.

                    This would eliminate program enhancing payouts to these lower level schools and the power 5 schools would be giving up two guaranteed home games for one or two possible early round playoff games. I could see both parties objecting to this change on strictly revenue loss grounds.

                    I have read an opinion piece from one FBS coach arguing that these games and payouts to lower level teams are good for the overall health of college football by diverting much needed financial assistance downward to these schools. Cutting two games from power 5 schedules would do harm to these schools and there would have to be some accomodation to make up for this loss for the D2 style playoff format to work.
                    Yeah the system sucks. So much for amateurism. It’s literally all big business for the schools and that’s going above the players and the fan bases. Full disclosure I am against players being paid as well

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Twincitiesmav View Post

                      It’s quite simple really, you just eliminate the month off that some of these schools have between their last regular season game and their bowl game. Go straight to the playoffs immediately following the conference championship instead of sitting around for a month. My two cents.
                      Yeah I agree. They need to get rid of the month long wait.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Mk63NuclearBomb View Post
                        I'm open to expansion if the players get payed. Institutions already cover losses from their athletic departments, so it's just a question of covering a little bit more. My concern is that we're asking players (Many of whom will be trying to make it in the NFL after college) to play 15 or 16 games in as many weeks, with all the injury risk associated, for zero short term gain.
                        I mean it’s essentially flag football anyway. So the risk of injury is mightily over blown. Surely you’ve seen the calls the at both the NFL and major D1 level with respect to contact plays. They are making the game less contact therefore all of the injuries are pulls and tears and injuries of that nature which quiet frankly can happen in practice, walking around campus, moving furniture, etc so I don’t think that’s a legitimate reason. But that’s just me.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by PSACfan1 View Post

                          I mean it’s essentially flag football anyway. So the risk of injury is mightily over blown. Surely you’ve seen the calls the at both the NFL and major D1 level with respect to contact plays. They are making the game less contact therefore all of the injuries are pulls and tears and injuries of that nature which quiet frankly can happen in practice, walking around campus, moving furniture, etc so I don’t think that’s a legitimate reason. But that’s just me.
                          Did... did you watch OSU/Clemson last night?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PSACfan1 View Post

                            I mean it’s essentially flag football anyway. So the risk of injury is mightily over blown. Surely you’ve seen the calls the at both the NFL and major D1 level with respect to contact plays. They are making the game less contact therefore all of the injuries are pulls and tears and injuries of that nature which quiet frankly can happen in practice, walking around campus, moving furniture, etc so I don’t think that’s a legitimate reason. But that’s just me.
                            Maybe the LSU vs Oklahoma game was flag football, but Ohio State vs Clemson was a whole different animal. As Coach Day said "they were going to make Clemson feel their violence". Ohio State was bringing the wood in that first half. It was like a heavy weight fight and the Buckeyes came out throwing haymakers while Clemson ducked and moved and did just enough to stay in the game. It was abundantly clear why having the #1 seed was so very important. #1 would possibly get tested for a quarter or so and #2 was going to be in a war with Clemson. Hope that the Natty is as good as the Fiesta Bowl.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Mk63NuclearBomb View Post

                              Did... did you watch OSU/Clemson last night?
                              Yes I did. There was still a suspect targeting call. I mean they aren’t reviewing blatant PI’s but are reviewing for targeting calls that isn’t a penalty or warning but is an ejection. They are looking for ways to deter big hits and separating the offensive player from the ball.

                              Comment

                              Ad3

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X