re: Expanding CFP Won't Increase Parity

quote:

---

No one with any sense would have said that.

---

If ND was left out and tOSU was goose egged liked they were two years ago (to the day!) then it would have been on the lips of every CFB-watching person in America.

quote:

---

it would have been on the lips of every CFB-watching person in America

---

Nope, because Notre Dame is always who we think they are. Some people never learn, sure, but a lot of us tried telling y'all a month ago...

quote:

---

Every team’s first loss should be a huge freaking deal, that’s what makes the CFB regular season so electric and compelling

---

But it's bullshite that all schedules are not created equal. Do we really think Clemson is unbeatable? They played a shite schedule and were rewarded by playing Notre Dame, probably the worst team to ever make the CFB.

Yes Bama is the best team but Georiga was a top 4 team and didn't get in because they play in the SEC. I think 8 is the best number personally.

quote:

---

Georiga was a top 4 team and didn't get in because they lost to 3-loss LSU.

---

quote:

---

I think what you mean to say is that one loss is devastating for teams like Iowa or Virginia or Arizona, but if your Alabama or Clemson one loss is okay, just don't lose two.

---

Yep.

quote:

---

Losing 2 games doesn’t mean you’re done anymore.

---

How so? No offense, but I think UGA got the shaft...and Im not a Bulldog fan.

quote:

---

The entire point of college football is to crown a champion in a way that makes sense.

---

College football accomplishes this with a format unique and specific to them that emphasizes regular season performance to the greatest degree of any sport in the galaxy and rewards/essentially requires undefeated seasons for consideration. Its really a question of tradeoff and how far one wants this to go without eliminating the utility, intent, and design of the college football model. The more you give 1/2-loss teams mulligans with this tournament format, the less the regular season performance means in terms of basically requiring undefeated seasons, transforming the college football model into a quasi-NFL format. Its these big picture things we have to be mindful of when considering monumental and transformative acts.

quote:

---

Whole concept of "let's not have a real tournament because that's what makes us different!" is asinine.

---

Disagree, it distinguishes college football, its unique to other sports, its what makes Saturdays special, sui generis, and it theoretically does more to discourage losing than a tournament format does, therefore upholding the traditions and greatness of American college football that our forefathers began and TR championed. I agree with its intent and I like every game constituting a one-game playoff, keeps me interested weekend to weekend. Also, people are proposing human solutions to human-created problems, see the issue there? Negative externalities and things of that nature are inevitable to occur, just sayin can't make everybody happy.

Can you tell me what the definition of best team is with no wiggle room or hedging?

Don’t try because nobody can

I meant In an 8 tam playoff.

tournaments are more exciting but not a better way to determine a champion. When have we ever had a legitimate debate as to if #5-8 was worthy of title contention. Usually we don’t even debate that about number 4. We are often including teams that have no business there just to round out 4. Tournaments also reward the hottest teams rather than those who had the better season. Evidence proves this out with the additional baseball wildcards and their success as well as what happens in the NCAA bb tournaments. Carmello Anthony’s Syracuse team had to win their conference tourney to secure a bid and wound up winning the whole thing. That has no place in college football.