Home› General
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Options

Playoff expansion

245

Comments

  • Options
    pgjacksonpgjackson Posts: 17,716 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    It’s not perfect but its close enough. Certainly better than the old days where teams were obligated to certain bowl games and you’d have something like the B12 Champ ranked #1 in the polls playing the P-10 champion ranked at #7 for the national championship. Remember 1984? BYU was undefeated and won the NC by beating an unranked 6-5 Michigan in the Holiday Bowl. Seriously? They were in the WAC and their big win was against Pitt. I am perfectly fine with the current playoff system.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    Dawg1419Dawg1419 Posts: 1,027 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Pigeons said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    UCF beat Auburn, who beat both teams that played for the NCG. I don't know if that's a legitimate shot but had there been 8 teams they would have been one of those teams.

    I realize transitive property of football doesn't always work or else we could say Troy > LSWho? > Auburn > Bama.

    Troy University 2018 National Champions! Print the shirts!

    Good point on ucf. Why rank them if they have no chance of making the NC

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    pgjacksonpgjackson Posts: 17,716 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Dawg1419 said:

    @Pigeons said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    UCF beat Auburn, who beat both teams that played for the NCG. I don't know if that's a legitimate shot but had there been 8 teams they would have been one of those teams.

    I realize transitive property of football doesn't always work or else we could say Troy > LSWho? > Auburn > Bama.

    Troy University 2018 National Champions! Print the shirts!

    Good point on ucf. Why rank them if they have no chance of making the NC

    Because they get publicity and a good reputation, which increases recruit interest. They start recruiting better players and coaches and slowly build a consistent winning team. Next thing you know you get an invite to a P5 conference. Now you are a contender.

    I dont’ think anyone seriously believes UCF would have had a chance in hell against any of the playoff teams.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    GrayDawgGrayDawg Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @pgjackson said:

    @Dawg1419 said:

    @Pigeons said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    UCF beat Auburn, who beat both teams that played for the NCG. I don't know if that's a legitimate shot but had there been 8 teams they would have been one of those teams.

    I realize transitive property of football doesn't always work or else we could say Troy > LSWho? > Auburn > Bama.

    Troy University 2018 National Champions! Print the shirts!

    Good point on ucf. Why rank them if they have no chance of making the NC

    Because they get publicity and a good reputation, which increases recruit interest. They start recruiting better players and coaches and slowly build a consistent winning team. Next thing you know you get an invite to a P5 conference. Now you are a contender.

    I dont’ think anyone seriously believes UCF would have had a chance in hell against any of the playoff teams.

    Yeah, Auburn crapped the bed against UCF. They win that game 9 times out of 10.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,558 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    You'd never know for sure unless you played the games.

    That's why you need a good resume game to get in, and why the regular season of college football is the best out of every sport in the world. It keeps pretty much the entire regular season like playoff game atmospheres. You lose, your chances of getting in dwindle mightily, and requires other teams to start losing... And according to your theory, we will never know if Ga Southern could knock off Bama in the championship game last year do we? Will never know, since they didn't play that game.

    I wasn't advocating a random matchup for the national title. I was talking about creating opportunity for access to a playoff across the entire sport rather than just the power 5. Your GA Southern vs Bama example is a red herring and not relevant to the discussion.

    My point with the example is the “we’ll never knows” don’t work well in this debate. Again, your resume’ is what matters. No deserving team has been left out yet.

    No deserving team has been left out--that is a subjective statement. Tell it to the fans and media who have been in vocal disagreement. The selection process itself is subjective. The "eye test" is one of the criteria the committee uses to determine who is "worthy". Strength of schedule also has an element of subjectivity. Alabama had a very weak SOS last year. A lot of opinion goes into all of it.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    GrayDawgGrayDawg Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    8 teams would be an advantage for UGA for two reasons:

    Less chance of being left out if we don't win the SEC championship (the season wouldn't hinge on one game).

    Our depth is superior to most teams which would pay off in the latter rounds.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TeddyTeddy Posts: 7,109 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    You'd never know for sure unless you played the games.

    That's why you need a good resume game to get in, and why the regular season of college football is the best out of every sport in the world. It keeps pretty much the entire regular season like playoff game atmospheres. You lose, your chances of getting in dwindle mightily, and requires other teams to start losing... And according to your theory, we will never know if Ga Southern could knock off Bama in the championship game last year do we? Will never know, since they didn't play that game.

    I wasn't advocating a random matchup for the national title. I was talking about creating opportunity for access to a playoff across the entire sport rather than just the power 5. Your GA Southern vs Bama example is a red herring and not relevant to the discussion.

    My point with the example is the “we’ll never knows” don’t work well in this debate. Again, your resume’ is what matters. No deserving team has been left out yet.

    No deserving team has been left out--that is a subjective statement. Tell it to the fans and media who have been in vocal disagreement. The selection process itself is subjective. The "eye test" is one of the criteria the committee uses to determine who is "worthy". Strength of schedule also has an element of subjectivity. Alabama had a very weak SOS last year. A lot of opinion goes into all of it.

    Name a team that should've been in, and we can then start this debate.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,558 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Teddy said:

    @JayDog said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    You'd never know for sure unless you played the games.

    That's why you need a good resume game to get in, and why the regular season of college football is the best out of every sport in the world. It keeps pretty much the entire regular season like playoff game atmospheres. You lose, your chances of getting in dwindle mightily, and requires other teams to start losing... And according to your theory, we will never know if Ga Southern could knock off Bama in the championship game last year do we? Will never know, since they didn't play that game.

    I wasn't advocating a random matchup for the national title. I was talking about creating opportunity for access to a playoff across the entire sport rather than just the power 5. Your GA Southern vs Bama example is a red herring and not relevant to the discussion.

    My point with the example is the “we’ll never knows” don’t work well in this debate. Again, your resume’ is what matters. No deserving team has been left out yet.

    No deserving team has been left out--that is a subjective statement. Tell it to the fans and media who have been in vocal disagreement. The selection process itself is subjective. The "eye test" is one of the criteria the committee uses to determine who is "worthy". Strength of schedule also has an element of subjectivity. Alabama had a very weak SOS last year. A lot of opinion goes into all of it.

    Name a team that should've been in, and we can then start this debate.

    It doesn't matter--it's majority opinion. SOS can be debated. Comparison of Head to head matchups can be debated. The quality of wins/losses can be debated. If you use a computer program as has been done in the past for the BCS--the criteria for assessment can be debated. Set down firm criteria that can be quantified by objective, indisputable data--there will be no reason for debate.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TeddyTeddy Posts: 7,109 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @Teddy said:

    @JayDog said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    You'd never know for sure unless you played the games.

    That's why you need a good resume game to get in, and why the regular season of college football is the best out of every sport in the world. It keeps pretty much the entire regular season like playoff game atmospheres. You lose, your chances of getting in dwindle mightily, and requires other teams to start losing... And according to your theory, we will never know if Ga Southern could knock off Bama in the championship game last year do we? Will never know, since they didn't play that game.

    I wasn't advocating a random matchup for the national title. I was talking about creating opportunity for access to a playoff across the entire sport rather than just the power 5. Your GA Southern vs Bama example is a red herring and not relevant to the discussion.

    My point with the example is the “we’ll never knows” don’t work well in this debate. Again, your resume’ is what matters. No deserving team has been left out yet.

    No deserving team has been left out--that is a subjective statement. Tell it to the fans and media who have been in vocal disagreement. The selection process itself is subjective. The "eye test" is one of the criteria the committee uses to determine who is "worthy". Strength of schedule also has an element of subjectivity. Alabama had a very weak SOS last year. A lot of opinion goes into all of it.

    Name a team that should've been in, and we can then start this debate.

    It doesn't matter--it's majority opinion. SOS can be debated. Comparison of Head to head matchups can be debated. The quality of wins/losses can be debated. If you use a computer program as has been done in the past for the BCS--the criteria for assessment can be debated. Set down firm criteria that can be quantified by objective, indisputable data--there will be no reason for debate.

    If the system is flawed then you need to be able to point to specific examples to where it’s been wrong.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    NYCVolunteerNYCVolunteer Posts: 193 ✭ Freshman

    There needs to be an 8 team playoff imo

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RPMdawgRPMdawg Posts: 2,928 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @Teddy said:

    @JayDog said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Teddy said:

    @PTDawg said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    You'd never know for sure unless you played the games.

    That's why you need a good resume game to get in, and why the regular season of college football is the best out of every sport in the world. It keeps pretty much the entire regular season like playoff game atmospheres. You lose, your chances of getting in dwindle mightily, and requires other teams to start losing... And according to your theory, we will never know if Ga Southern could knock off Bama in the championship game last year do we? Will never know, since they didn't play that game.

    I wasn't advocating a random matchup for the national title. I was talking about creating opportunity for access to a playoff across the entire sport rather than just the power 5. Your GA Southern vs Bama example is a red herring and not relevant to the discussion.

    My point with the example is the “we’ll never knows” don’t work well in this debate. Again, your resume’ is what matters. No deserving team has been left out yet.

    No deserving team has been left out--that is a subjective statement. Tell it to the fans and media who have been in vocal disagreement. The selection process itself is subjective. The "eye test" is one of the criteria the committee uses to determine who is "worthy". Strength of schedule also has an element of subjectivity. Alabama had a very weak SOS last year. A lot of opinion goes into all of it.

    Name a team that should've been in, and we can then start this debate.

    It doesn't matter--it's majority opinion. SOS can be debated. Comparison of Head to head matchups can be debated. The quality of wins/losses can be debated. If you use a computer program as has been done in the past for the BCS--the criteria for assessment can be debated. Set down firm criteria that can be quantified by objective, indisputable data--there will be no reason for debate.

    Human nature. Everyone thinks THEY know best or what's right.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    Steve_ZissouSteve_Zissou Posts: 307 ✭✭✭ Junior

    Would need to expand scholarship #s drastically.
    I actually liked BCS program model to determine rankings. I wonder who the top 4 in would have been last year if bcs still around?

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,558 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited September 2018

    @Teddy I just did. Argue that a team is "worthy" until you are blue in the face. If the argument is subjective--you simply can't prove it.

    For academic exercise see this article--https://usat.ly/2zJ6jP8

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    ESPN is driving all this expanded playoff nonsense because they make so much money off the play offs. And too many people believe it because they saw it on TV.

    If you expand it to ‘6 teams, team 7 and 8 are going to **** they didn’t get in. If you expense it to 8 teams, teams 9 and 10 are going to **** they didn’t get in. There is no magic number of teams to let in.

    The game’s already too centralized with fewer teams winning the national championship . The game was more fun when more often some random team would have a really good year and swoop in and win it all.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,558 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited September 2018

    @levander said:
    ESPN is driving all this expanded playoff nonsense because they make so much money off the play offs. And too many people believe it because they saw it on TV.

    If you expand it to ‘6 teams, team 7 and 8 are going to **** they didn’t get in. If you expense it to 8 teams, teams 9 and 10 are going to **** they didn’t get in. There is no magic number of teams to let in.

    The game’s already too centralized with fewer teams winning the national championship . The game was more fun when more often some random team would have a really good year and swoop in and win it all.

    ESPN will make money no matter what format is used. They built that network on polls and bowls.

    I've been a fan of a true playoff since Georgia won the conference (don't remember the year) and got leapfrogged in the polls. Auburn had a year where something similar happened. The only way to end all debate about who's in is an FBS conference champion playoff system. Win and you're in.

    There are problems with any system. It will always be a matter of taste on which poison you choose. If you want to argue that "fan-atics" shouldn't be so rabid for their team to be national champs and accept the will of the majority of biased voters, that's OK. I don't think, in the end, any system will stop all debate.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited September 2018

    @JayDog said:

    @levander said:
    ESPN is driving all this expanded playoff nonsense because they make so much money off the play offs. And too many people believe it because they saw it on TV.

    If you expand it to ‘6 teams, team 7 and 8 are going to **** they didn’t get in. If you expense it to 8 teams, teams 9 and 10 are going to **** they didn’t get in. There is no magic number of teams to let in.

    The game’s already too centralized with fewer teams winning the national championship . The game was more fun when more often some random team would have a really good year and swoop in and win it all.

    ESPN will make money no matter what format is used. They built that network on polls and bowls.

    ESPN makes more money with more playoff games. If you’ve ever been involved with companies who have public ownership, driving EPS up an extra nickel is what those executives live for. There is no being happy with what we already got.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,558 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @levander said:

    @JayDog said:

    @levander said:
    ESPN is driving all this expanded playoff nonsense because they make so much money off the play offs. And too many people believe it because they saw it on TV.

    If you expand it to ‘6 teams, team 7 and 8 are going to **** they didn’t get in. If you expense it to 8 teams, teams 9 and 10 are going to **** they didn’t get in. There is no magic number of teams to let in.

    The game’s already too centralized with fewer teams winning the national championship . The game was more fun when more often some random team would have a really good year and swoop in and win it all.

    ESPN will make money no matter what format is used. They built that network on polls and bowls.

    ESPN makes more money with more playoff games. If you’ve ever been involved with companies who have public ownership, driving EPS up an extra nickel is what those executives live for. There is no being happy with what we already got.

    I guess today that is true. At this point, they will never go back to the old system. The genie is out of the bottle. Frankly, from a broader societal benefit point of view, it wouldn't be bad if college presidents said, "no more national championships will be recognized" opting for education supporting football, rather than the other way around.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Here’s a video I watched awhile back that should help you guys who want playoff expansion understand what you are pushing for.

    One thing Saban doesn’t say is it not only affects players sitting out bowl games. But it also affects which schools recruits are willing to consider.

    https://youtu.be/nTubMhVKDvI

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    Dawg1419Dawg1419 Posts: 1,027 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @pgjackson said:

    @Dawg1419 said:

    @Pigeons said:

    @Bankwalker said:
    Name the 6,7,8 seeds since 2012 who would have had a LEGITIMATE chance to win the 3 games necessary. Expanded playoffs at this level is pointless.

    UCF beat Auburn, who beat both teams that played for the NCG. I don't know if that's a legitimate shot but had there been 8 teams they would have been one of those teams.

    I realize transitive property of football doesn't always work or else we could say Troy > LSWho? > Auburn > Bama.

    Troy University 2018 National Champions! Print the shirts!

    Good point on ucf. Why rank them if they have no chance of making the NC

    Because they get publicity and a good reputation, which increases recruit interest. They start recruiting better players and coaches and slowly build a consistent winning team. Next thing you know you get an invite to a P5 conference. Now you are a contender.

    I dont’ think anyone seriously believes UCF would have had a chance in hell against any of the playoff teams.

    And we will never know

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RxDawgRxDawg Posts: 2,922 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Easy. 8 teams, 5 conference champions plus 3 wildcards. Have a crew pick the 3 wildcards similar to what it is now.

    That said, it probably wont change the final result much.

    I've always said it should be 8 teams. Buy I've also always said it should NEVER go over 8.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.