Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 121

Thread: The college football playoff expansion Thread

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death View Post
    Expansion is coming.
    For us cheap-asses, can you give a cursory summary?

  2. #32
    I never thought I would say this, but I would keep it at 4. It creates so much regular season drama, so many elimination games. If you get to 8, the MSU/auburn, MSU/Bama, MSU/OSU (different MSU), Baylor/TCU, all the PAC 12 games, etc., don't mean as much.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by wally View Post
    For us cheap-asses, can you give a cursory summary?
    It was just a bunch of coaches and admins bitching about only 4 teams.
    "Be a philosopher. A man can compromise to gain a point. It has become apparent that a man can, within limits, follow his inclinations within the arms of the Church if he does so discreetly." - The Walking Drum

    "And here’s what life comes down to—not how many years you live, but how many of those years are filled with bullshit that doesn’t amount to anything to satisfy the requirements of some dickhead you’ll never get the pleasure of punching in the face." – Adam Carolla

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    I never thought I would say this, but I would keep it at 4. It creates so much regular season drama, so many elimination games. If you get to 8, the MSU/auburn, MSU/Bama, MSU/OSU (different MSU), Baylor/TCU, all the PAC 12 games, etc., don't mean as much.
    I agree with you. This season has been great. In a perverse way, it's really fun that there are only four spots for 5 conferences. Musical chairs.

    But expansion is coming, and nothing can stop it. The good news is an increased likelihood of Utah making the playoff someday.

  5. #35
    Okay, thanks bro!

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    I agree with you. This season has been great. In a perverse way, it's really fun that there are only four spots for 5 conferences. Musical chairs.

    But expansion is coming, and nothing can stop it. The good news is an increased likelihood of Utah making the playoff someday.
    The other good news: it would give the Big XII even less reason to expand, and ensure that BYU remains in limbo for eternity (which may be the case anyway).

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    I never thought I would say this, but I would keep it at 4. It creates so much regular season drama, so many elimination games. If you get to 8, the MSU/auburn, MSU/Bama, MSU/OSU (different MSU), Baylor/TCU, all the PAC 12 games, etc., don't mean as much.
    Please tell me you don't buy into that "playoffs diminish the regular season" nonsense. If the regular season was so important, then there's no way Utah would have finished as the only undefeated team in the country, beating several ranked teams in the process, and still wasn't seriously considered for the championship.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    Please tell me you don't buy into that "playoffs diminish the regular season" nonsense. If the regular season was so important, then there's no way Utah would have finished as the only undefeated team in the country, beating several ranked teams in the process, and still wasn't seriously considered for the championship.
    Playoff at 4 has been very exciting in the regular season. Playoff at 8? maybe exciting to those vying for the 7th and 8th spots, but the games at the top wouldn't matter so much.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    Playoff at 4 has been very exciting in the regular season. Playoff at 8? maybe exciting to those vying for the 7th and 8th spots, but the games at the top wouldn't matter so much.
    Kind of like basketball now, top teams playing for seeding position, but not having to worry as much about being left out of the dance.
    “To me there is no dishonor in being wrong and learning. There is dishonor in willful ignorance and there is dishonor in disrespect.” James Hatch, former Navy Seal and current Yale student.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    Playoff at 4 has been very exciting in the regular season. Playoff at 8? maybe exciting to those vying for the 7th and 8th spots, but the games at the top wouldn't matter so much.
    Not so sure. There isn't a singe team right now whose playoff chances wouldn't be significantly hurt (by which I mean they would probably not control their own destiny) if they were to lose a game.

  11. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Scratch View Post
    Not so sure. There isn't a singe team right now whose playoff chances wouldn't be significantly hurt (by which I mean they would probably not control their own destiny) if they were to lose a game.

    If they did auto berths to the P5 champs with just 3 at-larges, things would stay pretty interesting. I do think the Big12 would expand, though.

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    Playoff at 4 has been very exciting in the regular season. Playoff at 8? maybe exciting to those vying for the 7th and 8th spots, but the games at the top wouldn't matter so much.
    I'm not sure I buy into this. What I've always hated about college football is the subjectivity that creeps into its "national championship." A conference championship is inarguable. It's fact. Winning a power conference means something, even if you won the fifth-best power conference. You still should be given the chance on the field to see how you stack up against the best teams from other parts of the country.

    Again, winning a power conference championship needs to mean something. Even if you win it ugly. Whoever survives the PAC-12 gauntlet has earned a shot to play for the national championship. Right now, Oregon is our only shot at that. If they lose one more game, they're out. That's bull. I just can't wrap my brain around a college football playoff that doesn't have a PAC-12 representative every single year. It shouldn't happen.

  13. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    If they did auto berths to the P5 champs with just 3 at-larges, things would stay pretty interesting. I do think the Big12 would expand, though.
    I don't want any auto bids. That is what caused Utah to play a crappy Pitt team in the Fiesta bowl when we should have played a better team.

  14. #44
    What I like about this year is that every conference and non-conference game counts. The non-conference games of teams in your conference count because if you win they pump up the strength of the conference. If you go to an 8 game playoff and you guarantee the conference champion of the P5 conferences an automatic berth, what is to say that a team might say. I have the best chance of getting to the playoff by winning my conference. What gives me the best chance of winning the conference, loading up with some difficult non-conference games or playing patsy non-conference games and giving my guys some rest? The SEC already does this by playing 8 conference games and usually scheduling a patsy non-confernence game in early November.

    Unless you are going to place a requirement on P5 conferences that 1) require them to have at least 12 teams and a conference championship game, 2) play 9 conference games, and 3) play at least 1 school from another P5 conference, there will be some conference championships that are not equal to another. It will never be absolutely equal because sometimes teams you think will be good are not and sometimes teams you think will be bad will not, but you should at least have a n equal framework.

    I know the argument will be that there will be 3 at-large. The reality is that there will be 2 at-large because the non-P5 will need to get a seat at the table for the highest ranked conference champion in order to avoid antitrust issues. The chances are still better to win your conference against 12+ other schools instead of competing against 50 schools for the other 2 playoff spots.

  15. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by UTEopia View Post
    Unless you are going to place a requirement on P5 conferences that 1) require them to have at least 12 teams and a conference championship game, 2) play 9 conference games, and 3) play at least 1 school from another P5 conference, there will be some conference championships that are not equal to another. It will never be absolutely equal because sometimes teams you think will be good are not and sometimes teams you think will be bad will not, but you should at least have a n equal framework.
    That's a good point against auto-bids. I think you are right - it only works if there is some standardization.

  16. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Sullyute View Post
    I don't want any auto bids. That is what caused Utah to play a crappy Pitt team in the Fiesta bowl when we should have played a better team.
    I don't know if I agree. I think nonBCS bias is what caused Utah to play Pitt instead of Auburn. If they wanted that match up, they could have made it happen. Auburn definitely didn't want that matchup.

  17. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by UTEopia View Post
    What I like about this year is that every conference and non-conference game counts. The non-conference games of teams in your conference count because if you win they pump up the strength of the conference. If you go to an 8 game playoff and you guarantee the conference champion of the P5 conferences an automatic berth, what is to say that a team might say. I have the best chance of getting to the playoff by winning my conference. What gives me the best chance of winning the conference, loading up with some difficult non-conference games or playing patsy non-conference games and giving my guys some rest? The SEC already does this by playing 8 conference games and usually scheduling a patsy non-confernence game in early November.

    Unless you are going to place a requirement on P5 conferences that 1) require them to have at least 12 teams and a conference championship game, 2) play 9 conference games, and 3) play at least 1 school from another P5 conference, there will be some conference championships that are not equal to another. It will never be absolutely equal because sometimes teams you think will be good are not and sometimes teams you think will be bad will not, but you should at least have a n equal framework.

    I know the argument will be that there will be 3 at-large. The reality is that there will be 2 at-large because the non-P5 will need to get a seat at the table for the highest ranked conference champion in order to avoid antitrust issues. The chances are still better to win your conference against 12+ other schools instead of competing against 50 schools for the other 2 playoff spots.
    I can see where you're coming from. But it seems like the current set up already discourages teams from scheduling difficult games. We were told "difficulty of schedule" would be one of the metrics, but I haven't seen much evidence of that yet among the committee's initial rankings. Do you think we'll see SEC teams drop like crazy as they play their mid-season FCS teams this week? I doubt it.

    I'll wait until we actually see which four teams are chosen, but if we end up with two SEC teams, I'll know that any criteria we were told would be used was lip service. If two, or even one loss knocks you out of contention for the playoff, then you need to schedule as many easy games as you can - i.e. the SEC model. Seems like it's working.

    As for your suggestions for future scheduling requirements, I'm all for those - I'd love to see them. Additionally, to encourage some more "cross pollination" I'd like to see a rule among the P5 conferences that they need to play a home-and-home with at least one team from every other P5 conference w/in a certain timeline, like every eight years, or so. (Suddenly, Indiana's phone would start ringing off the hook from southern state area codes). Make all of these teams travel across the country now and again.

  18. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Sullyute View Post
    I don't want any auto bids. That is what caused Utah to play a crappy Pitt team in the Fiesta bowl when we should have played a better team.
    Thank you! I don't get the logic behind wanting to hand out auto bids. If Florida State or Alabama lose to whatever crappy team wins the other division in each conference, should that team be in the playoff, even with 3-4 losses? No, no, no, a million times no. I think a four team playoff is acceptable, a six or eight teamer would also be exciting. But never, never, never go to auto bids. Haven't we learned that lesson already?

  19. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by UBlender View Post
    Thank you! I don't get the logic behind wanting to hand out auto bids. If Florida State or Alabama lose to whatever crappy team wins the other division in each conference, should that team be in the playoff, even with 3-4 losses? No, no, no, a million times no. I think a four team playoff is acceptable, a six or eight teamer would also be exciting. But never, never, never go to auto bids. Haven't we learned that lesson already?
    Autobids would have worked better in that sense back in the 10 team round robin days.

  20. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    I don't know if I agree. I think nonBCS bias is what caused Utah to play Pitt instead of Auburn. If they wanted that match up, they could have made it happen. Auburn definitely didn't want that matchup.
    The point is that under that system, Pitt would have been in the playoff regardless of what the original matchup is. There is absolutely no reason to require automatic access to the playoff for a crappy team like Pitt or that UConn team that made the Fiesta Bowl just because they won a P5 conference that is in a down cycle.

  21. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by FountainOfUte View Post
    I'll wait until we actually see which four teams are chosen, but if we end up with two SEC teams, I'll know that any criteria we were told would be used was lip service. If two, or even one loss knocks you out of contention for the playoff, then you need to schedule as many easy games as you can - i.e. the SEC model. Seems like it's working.
    The SEC has many teams with top 20 schedules in SOS. I don't think anyone can argue that they have an easy path. Now, FSU on the other hand, could easily work the system, schedule nobody, coast through the ACC, and get in on brand recognition.

  22. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by UBlender View Post
    The point is that under that system, Pitt would have been in the playoff regardless of what the original matchup is. There is absolutely no reason to require automatic access to the playoff for a crappy team like Pitt or that UConn team that made the Fiesta Bowl just because they won a P5 conference that is in a down cycle.
    The idea is to encourage long term parity among the P5 conferences. With no auto-bid, and if teams are ranked fairly, it's possible an 8 team playoff could consist of 4-5 SEC teams (Sagarin has 5 in the top 8 right now - maybe that drops with their SOS this week and maybe it drops as they beat each other up in the last week).

  23. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by UTEopia View Post
    What I like about this year is that every conference and non-conference game counts. The non-conference games of teams in your conference count because if you win they pump up the strength of the conference. If you go to an 8 game playoff and you guarantee the conference champion of the P5 conferences an automatic berth, what is to say that a team might say. I have the best chance of getting to the playoff by winning my conference. What gives me the best chance of winning the conference, loading up with some difficult non-conference games or playing patsy non-conference games and giving my guys some rest? The SEC already does this by playing 8 conference games and usually scheduling a patsy non-confernence game in early November.

    Unless you are going to place a requirement on P5 conferences that 1) require them to have at least 12 teams and a conference championship game, 2) play 9 conference games, and 3) play at least 1 school from another P5 conference, there will be some conference championships that are not equal to another. It will never be absolutely equal because sometimes teams you think will be good are not and sometimes teams you think will be bad will not, but you should at least have a n equal framework.

    I know the argument will be that there will be 3 at-large. The reality is that there will be 2 at-large because the non-P5 will need to get a seat at the table for the highest ranked conference champion in order to avoid antitrust issues. The chances are still better to win your conference against 12+ other schools instead of competing against 50 schools for the other 2 playoff spots.
    I have to disagree with this. The SEC is not going to be penalized for playing a soft schedule. In fact, there is talk about 2 SEC teams going to the playoffs.

    An auto bid eliminates all that nonsense and guarantees the true champ will be settled on the field.

    There will probably be a lot more discussion about this after the season.

    Picture this, the 4 playoff teams are Alabama, Oregon, TCU, and Florida State.

    First game, Florida State beats Alabama by 21 points. Second game, Oregon beats Florida State by 28 points.

    Ohio State/Wisconsin/Michigan State fans are going to be pretty vocal about Alabama getting selected over the Big 10 teams.

    We just need an auto bid for all 5 conferences, plus 3 at large. Then it can be settled on the field with no bias.
    Last edited by utefan; 11-20-2014 at 06:04 PM.

  24. #54
    Five P5 autobids protects those conferences. Let's say we somehow win the PAC South and then find a way to beat Oregon at Levi's Stadium. Why should we *NOT* be in the playoff in that scenario? (Same for UCLA, or ASU or USC or UA).


    The example of our Fiesta Bowl game vs Pitt isn't really valid, because the Big East is history, and we're down to 5 power conferences.

    Then two at-large P5 teams, and a non-P5 team that gets to travel to the #1 seed's home stadium for the first round.


    This prevents ridiculous NCs like 1984, and doesn't punish really strong conferences.


    As far as I'm concerned, if the Big-12 doesn't feel the need to expand, why force it? They play 9 league games, and then a CCG for them is a rematch. Let them. Otherwise, the pressure will be on to have 5x16, which dilutes the pool, or eliminate the Big-12 and go 4x16, which isn't going to happen. 10 teams is enough for a CCG.


    The ACC & SEC addressed the 8 game schedule by requiring teams to play another P5 team.

  25. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    I have to disagree with this. The SEC is not going to be penalized for playing a soft schedule. In fact, there is talk about 2 SEC teams going to the playoffs.
    This is because the SEC has not played a soft schedule. The SEC might get rewarded for playing some of the tougher schedules in the country.

    Ohio State/Wisconsin/Michigan State fans are going to be pretty vocal about Alabama getting selected over the Big 10 teams.
    They have no leg to stand on. Alabama is a pretty clear #1 right now, and if they beat Auburn and then Georgia, they put distance on the field.

  26. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    This is because the SEC has not played a soft schedule. The SEC might get rewarded for playing some of the tougher schedules in the country.



    They have no leg to stand on. Alabama is a pretty clear #1 right now, and if they beat Auburn and then Georgia, they put distance on the field.
    What are you basing the SEC strong schedule and Alabama being a clear cut #1 on? We won't have the real answer to those questions until after the playoffs.

    SEC teams we're ranked so high in the preseason so they are considered to have a tough schedule for playing each other, basically.

    I'm with the camp that wants to get rid of the speculation and opinion. Let them settle it on the field. Every conference champ should get to the playoffs, and have a few at large bids for the really good teams that don't win their conference.

  27. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    What are you basing the SEC strong schedule and Alabama being a clear cut #1 on? We won't have the real answer to those questions until after the playoffs.

    SEC teams we're ranked so high in the preseason so they are considered to have a tough schedule for playing each other, basically.
    I was mostly basing on computer SOS rankings, which don't take any preseason rankings into account. Both computers and media seem to agree that the SEC teams have played pretty tough schedules.

  28. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    I was mostly basing on computer SOS rankings, which don't take any preseason rankings into account. Both computers and media seem to agree that the SEC teams have played pretty tough schedules.
    Well the SEC hasn't really played a lot of tough out of conference games, so they are likely basing that strength of schedule on the "fact" that all the SEC teams are great and they all play each other.

    We'll see if that proves to be true when they play some tough out of conference games in the playoffs.

    It's a perfect example of why every P5 conference should have an auto bid. We don't really know which conferences are the best until after the best teams from each conference play it out on the field.
    Last edited by utefan; 11-20-2014 at 09:57 PM.

  29. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    Well the SEC hasn't really played a lot of tough out of conference games, so they are likely basing that strength of schedule on the "fact" that all the SEC teams are great and they all play each other.

    We'll see if that proves to be true when they play some tough out of conference games in the playoffs.

    It's a perfect example of why every P5 conference should have an auto bid. We don't really know which conferences are the best until after the best teams from each conference play it out on the field.
    The SEC has a lot more quality OOC wins than any other conference this year.

  30. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Scratch View Post
    The SEC has a lot more quality OOC wins than any other conference this year.
    That's just an opinion. Nothing more.

    My opinion is the SEC will be exposed when they're forced to play tough out of conference games in the playoffs.

    The statements of "fact" that the SEC has played a tough out of conference schedule are a perfect example of why every P5 conference should have an auto bid to the playoffs.

    Of all the college football fans out there, I'd think Ute fans should know this better than anyone. Opinions should play no part in determining the champion. Let them settle it on the field.

    My opinion is the SEC is over rated, has not played a really tough out of conference schedule, and will be exposed in the playoffs.

    It's a good thing we'll get to see it all play out on the field, finally. It's too bad at least one of the P5 conferences will be left out. Hopefully there will be enough outcry from the fans to get the playoff expansion going.

    If all the P5 schools send their best and the SEC wins, they proved they were the best. If we're just going on opinions and crowning them as the clear cut #1 when they haven't played anyone, that's basically meaningless.

    I personally think Oregon is the clear cut #1. I can't see them losing to anyone, depending on how healthy they are.
    Last edited by utefan; 11-21-2014 at 01:54 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •