Since we're talking playoffs, 12-teams with top four byes

It would surely make the post season a lot more fun then it is now. Other than the few playoff games its a mess. 50 meaningless Crap bowl games with bad match-ups usually to boot. I would love it imagine the ratings and the money that could be made when all games counted instead of a few.

No thanks.

Keep it pure and only 4 teams. Most years only 2/3 teams actually deserve it.

Last year ou was the fourth team and got taken to the shed.

ND doesn’t belong and the same will happen to them.

The faggies weren’t screwed by anyone but themselves because they can’t beat bama and honestly were lucky to beat us.

Why do we have a fixed number of playoff teams anyway?

Why don't we just let the selection committee decide how many teams get in, which teams they are, and the format that they will play.

For example this year you had two teams at the very top and 4 teams that weren't all that. They could have gone with six teams giving the top two buy weeks.

In years where it's more uncertain they could take as many as 16, or as few as 2. As know one knows for certain how many will get in, then all games will matter.

Top 8 teams are seeded and play 3 games (quarterfinals, semifinals, and championship game). I don't think that there are many years (perhaps none) when a team out of the top 8 would have a chance of winning the championship in this format.

Perhaps the quarterfinal games are played at the higher seeded teams home stadium to add a bit of excitement and revenue. Quarterfinals played before Christmas. The semifinals and championship are played at similar sites, dates, and format to the current system. This will keep current stakeholders relatively happy.

quote:

---

No thanks.

Keep it pure and only 4 teams. Most years only 2/3 teams actually deserve it.

Last year ou was the fourth team and got taken to the shed.

ND doesn’t belong and the same will happen to them.

The faggies weren’t screwed by anyone but themselves because they can’t beat bama and honestly were lucky to beat us.

---

So are you for dropping the March Madness down to 16 entries? I mean, a team with 10 losses certainly doesn't belong in that tournament, no? UMBC would NEVER beat Virginia in a 1 vs 16 matchup, right? Oh, wait... And UMBC made history the day that day they beat UVA, but they were not under the illusion that they were going to win it all. That was irrelevant. They beat the #1 seed, and they will celebrate that forever.

Look at the excitement generated. Right now, we might as well not play the regular season. Bama, OSU, Clemson, and some random team will make it. It's not about whether you think Oklahoma can beat LSU, it's about playing the games and giving fans hope. I can guarantee you there will be upsets and their will be close games, and there will be millions of fans glued to their tv sets. I'd be willing to bet that almost ever year, the final four will not be the same as the final four in the rankings. Somebody will get beat before the semi-finals.

This is a format that would help LSU. How many times have we seen a talented LSU team finish in the top ten, but miss out on the playoffs because they couldn't navigate the incredibly tough SEC schedule without a couple of losses? Put them in the playoffs, and they can make some noise, and who knows? Maybe go all the way. That's why we play the game.

We need to stop trying to be purists and make if fun, like March Madness.

BTW - this makes more regular season games MORE meaningfull, not less. The last weekend of the season we will see a dozen games or more with potential playoff implications instead of 2 or 3. It will make the end of the season more meaningful for 15 or 20 teams. Players won't quit on the team or skip the meaningless bowl game.


ETA: Remember when Boise State pulled out all of their trick plays to beat Oklahoma? I do. Would LOVE to see that kind of think happen in a college playoff. I would love to see these 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7 matchups (after the by week play in games). That unpredictability is what makes it interesting.

We have Notre Dame in it this year, Aggie on deck. We all know that neither of those teams can beat Bama, or Clemson, and prob not OSU.

So if we cant get 4 decent teams (OU last year) why are we thinking we need more team. Yes, it would help decide 3-12....but who gives a shite. We already will know who the Champ is and should be, and that is the point.

I'll pass

Dumbest shite for recent playoff changes. Who gets the vote on the top 4 to have the bye - this is a huge advantage and teams will get the bye based on their name/prestige, instead of merit.

NO Thanks.

No thanks

quote:

---

yea I don't want a march madness in football. I want the best team crowned as the champion.

---

Surely you understand that it would result in a more entertaining set of games with better matchups than what we get, now in our bowl games. And yes, can the 8th seed beat Alabama? Probably not, but that's why we play the games.

Right now, if we just took straight top 12 rankings, the matchups would be for a 12 team playoff and top 4 have byes:

Coastal Carolina vs aTm - Intriguing matchup. Who has seen CC play? I would watch this game. Winner plays Notre Dame and has a legit shot.

Indiana vs Oklahoma - two one loss teams. Winner takes on Ohio State. Indiana gave OSU a run for their money during the regular season, with OSU winning by one touchdown at home.

Florida vs Iowa State - SEC vs Big 10. Winner gets Clemson. Would love to see a Florida Clemson matchup.

Georgia vs Cincinnati - Another interesting matchup, with the winner getting Alabama. Georgia has a ton of 4-5 star talent on their roster and can match up with Bama personnel. Bama should beat either of them, but they still have to do it on the field.


Now that would be a fun first round and set up some intriguing 2nd round matchups. The Alabama game is the only one where I don't think the winner of the 1st round game has much of a chance.