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.
- 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
Comments
I agree 100% that's why I had to put the disclaimer "all" of college football. Obviously the SEC has been the biggest benefactor of this and OSU but for college football as a whole this centralizes all the money/power. Hope I don't sound too communist lol
I could go for a CFA number 1 right about now
Generally, I think not.
Now, if UGA is not SEC champs, I might be convinced otherwise...
That is a highly debatable point. And that is my point on the current system. There is too much subjectivity and bias affecting outcomes. Its OK if you are Ohio State or one of the schools who is in the conversation even when they aren't that good. Not so good if your conference champ doesn't have the chance to prove how good they are on the field.
No, they are not all created equal. But that doesn't mean the unexpected team won't challenge. It happens all the time in the NCAA Basketball tournament. I know football is a different animal, but then that's why you play the games. And as we've seen in other leagues--teams with the chance to compete will often get new support for their program. In other words--conferences will have more motivation to get better. When PERCEPTION and SUBJECTIVITY keeps you out of contention--why bother making it a bigger priority?
Just put the best 4 teams in. I thought that's what it's all about. It's week 2. A lot of football to be played. Let's just see where all the teams sit in week 6 or 7. The early polls are a joke. I'm a SEC/UGA homer, but a college football fan first. I just don't think you can count anybody out yet. The ball bounces funny in some games.
good point
I would go one step further. Expand to 16 teams? If you really care about inclusion then give the five power 5 conference champs and the five group of 5 conferences automatic bids. Then 6 at large teams. Have the committee select the at large teams and seed the 16 teams. You get the Cinderella-aspect of March madness to a degree. You are also guaranteed national level buy-in. You would be bathing in revenue. For all those saying that is too many games or teams it has magically worked out for every other level of football for years.
I would say 16 team tourney at the end but they would have to cut a game or two in the regular season which I would be fine with. Otherwise teams that make it to the ship would play 17 total.
Sounds good to me. One less cupcake game for all of the power 5 teams. The one drawback is that it could discourage big season opener OOC games. I think that's a small trade-off for what you'd get, though. Imagine, for example, being able to see Boise not only take down Oklahoma with the statue of liberty but actually make a run towards a title. THAT kind of thing would be good for college football as a whole.
4 is plenty. There hasn't been a year where someone worthy has missed out on the playoff yet. And no matter how many teams this thing expands to, there should never ever be automatic bids. Best 4, 8, or 16 teams get in, period. I don't want to watch these small conferences go in and get killed nearly every single time. And the more you expand it the less the regular season means. Oh we lost a game, oh well, 16 teams get in and we'll easily still make the playoffs. That'll turn the regular season into a snoozefest, and not nearly as appealing (I know all us diehards on here will still watch, but you'll lose the casual viewer who will just wait to watch the playoffs, and games for us won't seem that important unless you've already lost a game or two). Teams with up to 3 losses would be in a 16 team playoff. Do they deserve a chance to play for it all? H3ll no!
The weaker conferences favor a requirement to be a champion for obvious reasons. Winning a lesser conference does not make a team more deserving
Like how Boise got killed by Oklahoma or TCU got killed by Ole Miss (who had beaten Bama earlier that year?)
Just to re-word what you said: you don't think there's been a single instance where a team that didn't get in the top 4 could have won the title?
That was #8 OU vs. #9 BSU, so a 16 team playoff they both would've been in (aka earned it). 8 team playoff Boise gets left out. And they get left off because they didn't play a ranked team all year, and had to fend off that awesome Hawaii team to win their conference (so tough!!). With the hundreds of bowl games of G5 schools against P5 schools, glad we can come up with one or two whole examples. Seems like a legit reason to change the entire system. Also, if G5 schools get automatic bids, I propose UGA goes to the Sun Belt, so we are guaranteed a playoff birth every year. Wouldn't blame P5 schools for jumping to lesser conferences to guarantee playoff births. Would you be for Tech leaving the ACC and going to the Sun Belt and watching them in the playoff nearly every year, and us acting like they deserve it? And last I checked TCU wasn't from a small conference.
Also, I said get killed "nearly every time." Please note that's not an absolute statement, as I get that any given team can win. And again, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said there hasn't been a year of someone worthy being left out. Did I say they #5 or #6 team couldn't win on any given day? No. I'm talking about resumes' leading up to the playoff, as that's what gets you in. There hasn't been a team left out that had a better resume than someone in the playoff. If you don't think that's the case, and someone deserving has been left out of the current format unfairly, please name them.
Or anyone else. I know what Bama has accomplished but at some point the past has got to be just that. The past.
Theres got to be a negative for slipping up in the present at some point. I understand the best 4 team concept, but right now I think bama could not play another game this season and the committee would put them in the playoffs. They get the calls, they get the favoritism. Jmo
I think 6 teams is ideal playoff extension. the top two teams get a bye, the next 4 play t.o make the semis, and after those 2 games finals. 6 teams pleases everyone without the over kill of 8 teams.
Too long of a layoff for teams to get a bye. The #3-#6 teams would get a warmup, aka straighten out the kinks/knock off the rust that could come from a long layoff, before they play the top two seeds. Byes don't work if there's a long layoff. If they shorten the time between conference championships and the playoffs, it wouldn't be a big deal. But I don't see that happening.
I'm a little late to the party, but to answer the original question: no, I absolutely do not want Alabama in the CFP if and when Georgia beats them in the SEC title game. The problem is, if the game is remotely close, there's a good chance the committee would give Alabama the benefit of the doubt that it is one of the four best teams in the country. For Georgia to truly eliminate Alabama from the conversation, they'd have to blow them out in that game. That doesn't happen often. Ultimately, this is going to come down to how Notre Dame and the other Power 5 conferences shake out.
As far as non-conference champions making the playoff, I see both sides. Last year, it would've almost certainly benefited Georgia for Alabama to have been left out. But there have been other years (2007,2012) in which Georgia could've made a case for being one of the two best teams in the country despite not winning its conference. As a Georgia homer, I'm split.
I think it makes perfect sense to say that if you can't win your conference, you shouldn't have a chance to win a national title. But in American professional sports, you don't even have to necessarily win your division to play for all the marbles. College football is really an outlier for even having the conversation of whether or not a 12-1, non-conference champion SEC team should be in the playoff. This sport is weird, y'all...but I love it.
I think 8 is over saturation. 6 more realistic cause USF and a big 10 school would've gotten the shot to try. The whole bye for rust isn't a bad point but I like letting my players get healthier.
To me, if you make a rule stating " only conference champions" can make the playoffs. Then no one conference can dominate IMO. It could water down our existing dominate conference ultimately. Last year, we(SEC) kicked another conference out with having an extra team in it.