re: Playoff good as is? Or need to be expanded?

quote:

---

ETA: the good news is that once they go to 8 teams, with the Power5 champs getting auto bids, the committee will only decide teams 6-8, which should be more tolerable to most folks.

---

based on this we are no longer deciding on the BEST TEAMS .. we are distributing the trophies ... everyone gets one.

Four is fine.

Three playoff games are too many, four would be much worse.

8 conference champions and at large.

I think 6 is optimal. Gives all P-5 champs a slot and one--or two, if one of those conferences really sucks in a given year--at large spots in the playoff.

Simply give the top two seeds a bye, with the remaining four playing the week before the current semifinal games.

quote:

---

I want conference championships to matter. If you don’t win your conference, you shouldn’t compete for the natty.

---

This all looks good on the surface but you have to look at it deeper. If all conference champs rolled in 12-0 or 11-1 with a top 5 ranking great, but that doesnt happen.

Folks say, well, very rarely would an underdog win, really?
In 96, Did a 3 loss Texas team deserve to play for national title? How about a 3 loss A&M team in 98? Had LSU done enough in 2001 to play for the national title? How about that 9-4 2009 Nebraska team that was within a 50 yd fg of knocking off Texas? How about Pitt, Northwestern and Arizona state this year. Have they EARNED a chance to play for the national title? I hear people say devalue the regular. Letting THESE so-so teams in the playoff is what would devalue the regular season. Conference champs would always be a great team? The fact is it's right the opposite. We have a team every single year that wins it's conference that did not do much in the regular season.

Rece Davis had the best idea. If you want conference champs, do away with divisions and conference championship games. Play round robin and the champ goes but keep wildcards in.
Also, if I'm a playoff contender I NEVER play my starters in non conference games and absolutely would not play a p5 out of conference. What's there to gain? I also would sit my starters after I clinched. Bama would not play any starter pretty much the month of November this year. Same with UGA. How good would the UGA Auburn game be with backups? How about the Iron Bowl? Bama loses 26-6 in an "exhibition" game that means nothing. Conference champs devalues the season way more than folks think. In fact, I think it devalues it more than what we have. All the angst comes from 2011 and I get that but you rarely see 1 vs 2 in any conference for the championship. It's usually like number 3 vs number 13. I think Bama played Florida in 2016 and Florida wasn't even ranked.

If you just have conference champs, seriously, it could look like this this season.
Bama or Georgia
Pitt
Northwestern
Arizona St.

Now honestly, would anybody be happy with that?

What has to happen is there needs to be a playoff or not be a playoff. NCAA football is trying to have a playoff AND keep the polls and it simply doesn't work that way. Either go back to the polls or institute a basketball type playoff with 16 teams. Conference champs AND at large bids so we dont have unranked teams, who did nothing in the regular season, playing for the national title.