Jump to content
The Gridiron Digest

8 or 12


southend
 Share

Recommended Posts

8…having 4 teams get a bye is still unfair in my opinion.

8 teams…five conference champions, 1 group of 5…two at large.

This year it’d look like this in my opinion.

Alabama - SEC champ

Michigan - Big Ten champ

Georgia - at large

Cincinnati - group of 5

Notre Dame - at large

Baylor - Big 12 champ

Utah - Pac 12 champ

Pittsburgh - ACC champ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 is enough for me; and can fit well within the current length of the season/post season. 12 is too many; even 10 is too many as well. Whoever is the 10th ranked team, while having a great season, is certainly not in a position to compete for a National title. Just a hunch, but I am guessing in my lifetime, there has never been a team that finished the season ranked 10th that had any chance at a title. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, southend said:

The example that they gave was last years scenario, Alabama (1) Florida (7) .If Either one of those not getting in But PAC 10 winner Oregon (27) getting in. This wouldn’t pass the “ fair” test. So that is the sticking point for 8. 

Geographical representation is important.  An 8 team system like the one I proposed ensures that each region of the country is represented.

Though west coast football viewership is nowhere near that of the Midwest or south east, keeping those viewers tuned in would be beneficial.

In a particular year where a conference is unbelievable, it wouldn’t be insane to put three teams in as they could nab the two at large spots.

You could still even use the NY6 bowls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2021 at 2:01 PM, temptation said:

Geographical representation is important.  An 8 team system like the one I proposed ensures that each region of the country is represented.

Though west coast football viewership is nowhere near that of the Midwest or south east, keeping those viewers tuned in would be beneficial.

In a particular year where a conference is unbelievable, it wouldn’t be insane to put three teams in as they could nab the two at large spots.

You could still even use the NY6 bowls.

I expect that once they decide to go beyond 4 teams the idea of neutral sites (especially using bowls) will move to hosted sites. Expecting a team's fans to travel to a conference championship game, and 3 playoff games will be very difficult. Having 3 week of playoff games will take more attention and interest away from the lower tier bowl games. If there are 12-16 playoff teams the interest in the lower bowls will be even less, and I don't see how they remain. Ultimately an expanded playoff will result in a decision to move from a bowl postseason to a playoff postseason.

A 16-team playoff system doesn't assume all 16 teams have a realistic chance to win the championship. We don't have that expectation for the 68 teams in the basketball tournament or the 14 teams in the NFL playoffs. For some teams it will be considered a success to make the playoffs and have a crack against one of the top teams. For some teams it will be a great accomplishment to be the 11th seed and beat the 6 seed on the road. The championship team will likely come from the top 4-6 teams which is fine.

I love the bowl games so I'm perfectly fine with the current set up. The fact that players are opting out of the games to prepare for the NFL (I don't fault them at all) shows the importance to many has become much less. I think it's time to scrap bowls and go to an expanded playoffs like FCS, D2, and D3 do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just getting back to what the committee’s sticking points ,by 2 of the conferences was . They would not agree to 8. 

On 12/23/2021 at 11:52 AM, southend said:

The example that they gave was last years scenario, Alabama (1) Florida (7) .If Either one of those not getting in But PAC 10 winner Oregon (27) getting in. This wouldn’t pass the “ fair” test. So that is the sticking point for 8. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, southend said:

Just getting back to what the committee’s sticking points ,by 2 of the conferences was . They would not agree to 8. 

 

I don't get it.  In an 8 team scenario, you could have at-large bids from 2 different conferences so the second place (and in some cases maybe even the third place team in a really dominant year) can get an opportunity.

5 power 5 champs.

1 group of 5.

2 at-large.

Edited by temptation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, temptation said:

I don't get it.  In an 8 team scenario, you could have at-large bids from 2 different conferences so the second place (and in some cases maybe even the third place team in a really dominant year) can get an opportunity.

5 power 5 champs.

1 group of 5.

2 at-large.

I agree....but I would just go 5 power 5 conference champs

3 at large

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bash Riprock said:

I agree....but I would just go 5 power 5 conference champs

3 at large

Nah, that's what makes college basketball's postseason the best of any sport.  At least give the little guy a chance...even if there is a great chance they will get their teeth kicked in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, temptation said:

Nah, that's what makes college basketball's postseason the best of any sport.  At least give the little guy a chance...even if there is a great chance they will get their teeth kicked in.

Hey. The ☘️ aren’t little guys. 😂 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, southend said:

Called BIG little guys,Funny!What’s that make Pee U, and IU then?

🤷 midgets?

Is that phrase still allowed?  Or should it read little people?  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, temptation said:

Nah, that's what makes college basketball's postseason the best of any sport.  At least give the little guy a chance...even if there is a great chance they will get their teeth kicked in.

Little guy still has a chance with 3 at larges.....Cincy would have been an at large this year.  

Run the table impressively in the Mountain West and earn an at large.  

Major independents better find a conference home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bash Riprock said:

Little guy still has a chance with 3 at larges.....Cincy would have been an at large this year.  

Run the table impressively in the Mountain West and earn an at large.  

Major independents better find a conference home

True but I’d rather a G5 be GUARANTEED a spot.  Showings like Cincinnati had this year will punish future G5’s in favor of 3 SEC teams which would make me vomit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...