What Realistic Changes Would You Make To The CFB Playoff?

[bamaltc]

The BCS formula got it right almost every year in determining the top 2. If it had been top 4, it would have gotten it right every year.

My opinion:
1. USE THE BCS FORMULA
2. Then have either the top 4, 8, or 16 teams--NO BYES

 

[CrimsonNagus]

Create a 16 team playoff with 8 auto-bids from the SEC and 8 auto bids from the BigTen. Screw everyone else.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Get rid of the weekly rankings show altogether. That is nothing more than made for TV drama that I tuned out of years ago. I wish everyone else would too so they would bury that crap.

If you insist upon a committee, get rid of anyone whatsoever not affiliate with a major college football program. In other words, the committee members must have played, coached, or been an AD at a major college football program. BUT, I would get rid of the committee altogether and go with a modified BCS rankings system.

16 teams. No auto-bids. 4 regions, 1 vs. 4, 2 vs.3 in the 1st round, similar to how the ncaa basketball tournament is done. No re-seeding a la the NFL's playoffs.

 

[bamadwain]

Conference championship games are not going away, to much money involved, I heard this weekend that the SEC was throwing around a idea about having a championship weekend if they can get ESPN on board, like paying 5 million to each team, so take last year's standings 1. George vs 2 Texas,( winner is SEC champion, both in playoffs) 3 Tennessee vs 6 South Carolina ( winner goes) 4 Bama vs 5 LSU ( winner goes) there's your 4 teams in playoffs

 

[Tidewater]

I like the BCS formula. Had both subjective opinion (the polls) and objective computers. So I don't see where subjectivity vs. objectivity is an either/or thing.

I do think there's a core question you have to ask yourself, but I think it's different from the one selma puts forward.

That question is, "Should conference championships matter in either the selection or seeding of the CFB playoff?" Then, if you answer yes, there's a followup: How much?

Some say it should matter. Others say it shouldn't. I think they should, but there are legitimate points on both sides.

Thanks for this.
I think Conference CGs should count, but like any other game.
ACC last year, a 9-3 team beat a 11-1 team and the lower-ranked team won. That game shoudl count, but not determine who is in and who is out. It was just an additional game.

Who had they played and to whom had they lost, however?
To beat twelve teams with losing records is not a great accomplishment, likewise having played six teams in the top twenty and lost to two of them, that ain't too shabby. Which one is the better team? Eye test might be best answer. Or computers taking the analysis another step or two on wins and losses. Vandy is a good example. Probably did not have a really good record, but they played an SEC schedule, so theyr strength of schedule was probably fairly high.

 

[Slowpoke Catracho]

I would rather get the committee out of the picture, but that isn't an option since it's not realistic. It means big $$$ for ESPN to string people along until the last vote on the playoff. As long as ESPN is pulling the strings there will be a committee and subjectivity will reign. We are just going to have to pour out the NIL $$$ and get the talent to win 10 + games every year.

 

[RollTide_HTTR]

I'd get rid of conference championship games. At this point they are pointless IMO

 

[BamaFanatJSU]

...the SEC was throwing around a idea about having a championship weekend if they can get ESPN on board, like paying 5 million to each team, so take last year's standings 1. George vs 2 Texas,( winner is SEC champion, both in playoffs) 3 Tennessee vs 6 South Carolina ( winner goes) 4 Bama vs 5 LSU (winner goes) there's your 4 teams in playoffs

Not gonna lie, that sounds like an amazing weekend of football, and I would sign off on that with 99% certainty (with my only hesitation being the increased chance of injury for all participating teams).

 

[CrimsonTitles]

1) Either abolish conference championship games, or find a way to make them more legitimate. The committee made this whole stink about "preserving the conference championship games", especially with regards to the ACC. The problem is, the ACC in particular did not have a true outright champion. Neither SMU nor Clemson had to face Miami last year. Who's to say Miami wouldn't have beaten both of them? The conference championship game, in its current format, does not work without divisions. It drives me crazy when people try to say you had to leave Bama out to preserve conference championship games when the top 4 teams from that conference didn't even face each other.

2) Go ahead and expand the playoff to 16. It's inevitable, and it's going to happen even if we initially only expand to 14. Let's make it 16, and just never touch the subject of expansion again.

3) No automatic bids. We can keep the committee, be they did okay when they ranked the teams. The problem was the automatic bids, so if you take those away, then the committee will likely be very competent.

4) No byes in the playoff. Byes were necessary in the 12 team playoff, because that's not a number you can do with a traditional bracket, but with 16, there's no need to have any byes. It's just more for people to be upset about. Let's keep it simple and have 1 play 16, 2 play 15, 3 play 14, and so on.

5) No home playoff games. Let's just add a few more bowl games to the playoff rotation, and have this entire tournament as a neutral site event so we can have a true undisputed national champion. Eliminating these could also help prevent some first round blowouts, which could be a problem.

I can't promise it would be perfect, but if the playoff made these changes, we would have a very good product.

 

[Power Eye]

I like 12 teams and the idea of the top 4 teams getting byes, but I'm in agreement with most everyone else that it should not be the highest ranked conference winners that get byes. It ended up making bad matchups in the first round and second rounds. I'm okay with the top 5 conference winners getting in.

I'm also in agreement with going to the BCS formula, or something along those lines, to determine the rankings. I think this will incentivize teams from lesser conferences to beef up their OOC games. I don't want it to go the other way, which is what is being incentivized now.

Lastly, work something out with the NFL so that the CFP isn't competing with the NFL on the Saturday wildcard and divisional rounds, and put the national championship game on prime time Saturday night. That might be easier said than done.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

I would say the P4 conference champions can have no more than two total losses to get the automatic qualifier

I like that.

Keeps an undeserving team who catches lightning in a bottle in the conference championship game from getting a guaranteed spot.

A 3-loss team could still get in (as we almost did last year), but it wouldn't be automatic.

 

[BamaFanatJSU]

...Championship weekend...1. Georgia vs 2 Texas, (winner is SEC champion, both in playoffs) 3 Tennessee vs 6 South Carolina ( winner goes) 4 Bama vs 5 LSU ( winner goes) there's your 4 teams in playoffs

The more I think about this, the more I like it.

> You could play the three games in three domed NFL stadiums to prevent weather issues (AT&T, NRG, Caesars, and Mercedes are all potential spots within the SEC footprint).
> Give the higher ranked team 65% of available tickets and the lower ranked team 35% to provide at least some advantage for being the higher seeded team.
> Play the 4-5 game at 12:00 PM, the 3-6 game at 3:30 PM, and the 1-2 game at 7:00 PM and dominate an entire day of college football viewing. The ad rights the conference and broadcast partner(s) could sell would be enormous.

**An additional benefit of using this setup would be that it eliminates the possibility of any coach, fan, or pundit saying, "It would actually be better for Team X to not play in the conference championship game and risk injuries because they'll still make the playoff." This levels the playing field and requires all conference teams who make the playoff to have played the same number of games.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

For the record, I would be fine with the BCS formula, in part because if you WIN THE CONFERENCE TITLE GAME, you get extra points in the calculation and if you lose it, you LOSE points. The BCS formula was never going to work with four teams - not when the clowns voting in the accepted cumulative polls had riff-raff like Boise State and TCU in the tops of their polls.

Look how close we came to a monumental disaster:

2010 WEEK 12
1) Oregon
2) Auburn
3) TCU
4) Boise State
5) LSU
6) Stanford

That's the week:
- Alabama blows a 24-7 lead in the home Iron Bowl against Cam Newton (who whips USCe)
- Stanford clobbered 5-7 Oregon State, 38-0
- TCU beat New Mexico, 66-17
- Colin Kaepernick put his name on the map along with a missed kick that sunk Boise
- Oregon clobbered Arizona (and the next week Oregon State)

In such a scenario...with a 1-loss Auburn
1) Oregon
2) TCU
3) Boise State (maybe)
4) Auburn MAYBE since it was a CCG....depending on how bad the Iron Bowl loss
4) Stanford MAYBE

The above polling is why we have a committee - period. There was no way in hell they were letting ONE team that skated through the season beating nobody worth a damn in the playoff that doesn't draw eyes to the set much less TWO.

And those same two teams just by chance had been unbeaten at the end of the 2009 reg, too.


But I would add all of those problems are now gone, too. You COULD use the BCS for the TOP TWELVE and the whining then becomes "why am I #5 and have to play an additional game when I played a tougher schedule than #4?"

 

[CrimsonTitles]

1) Either abolish conference championship games, or find a way to make them more legitimate. The committee made this whole stink about "preserving the conference championship games", especially with regards to the ACC. The problem is, the ACC in particular did not have a true outright champion. Neither SMU nor Clemson had to face Miami last year. Who's to say Miami wouldn't have beaten both of them? The conference championship game, in its current format, does not work without divisions. It drives me crazy when people try to say you had to leave Bama out to preserve conference championship games when the top 4 teams from that conference didn't even face each other.

2) Go ahead and expand the playoff to 16. It's inevitable, and it's going to happen even if we initially only expand to 14. Let's make it 16, and just never touch the subject of expansion again.

3) No automatic bids. We can keep the committee, be they did okay when they ranked the teams. The problem was the automatic bids, so if you take those away, then the committee will likely be very competent.

4) No byes in the playoff. Byes were necessary in the 12 team playoff, because that's not a number you can do with a traditional bracket, but with 16, there's no need to have any byes. It's just more for people to be upset about. Let's keep it simple and have 1 play 16, 2 play 15, 3 play 14, and so on.

5) No home playoff games. Let's just add a few more bowl games to the playoff rotation, and have this entire tournament as a neutral site event so we can have a true undisputed national champion. Eliminating these could also help prevent some first round blowouts, which could be a problem.

I can't promise it would be perfect, but if the playoff made these changes, we would have a very good product.

I'd also add one more thing.

6) No teams will be considered for the playoff unless they are in a conference. This would force Notre Dame to finally get with the program, and prevent the constant preferential treatment they get because they were a powerhouse 50+ years ago. Notre Dame plays an ACC caliber (at best) schedule, but they get treated more favorably than an actual ACC team. A 2 loss Notre Dame is almost always ranked higher than. 2 loss ACC team, even though they play a similar caliber schedule. I know Notre Dame would probably hate that, but they would thank me later. They will never win a national championship as long as they refuse to join a conference, so this actually helps them. They got lucky this year with a favorable path, and Carson Beck being out for Georgia, but this year's run wiill be the exception, not the rule.

 

[TRU]

I like this approach and I agree that the conference championships do not mean much any more now that they have done away with divisions. But if one really wants to keep the conference championships, how about integrating them into the playoffs? If the #1 and #2 teams in say the BiG are in the BCS top 16 both get into the 16 game playoff. But they are set up o play one another in the very first round. That way only the conference champ actually advances to the next round. You can re-seed for the round of 8 after the "conference champs" are decided.

But cynic that I am, I doubt they are going to get rid of the committee and return to a BCS based model. This is because no one has yet touched on the real role of the committee. It exists not to set up a playoff that picks the most deserving teams, but to set up a series of games that will get the highest viewership and therefore revenues. It is not about ensuring a legitimate NC. It's like everything else in college ball now. It is all about the $$$.

 

[CrimsonTitles]

I like this approach and I agree that the conference championships do not mean much any more now that they have done away with divisions. But if one really wants to keep the conference championships, how about integrating them into the playoffs? If the #1 and #2 teams in say the BiG are in the BCS top 16 both get into the 16 game playoff. But they are set up o play one another in the very first round. That way only the conference champ actually advances to the next round. You can re-seed for the round of 8 after the "conference champs" are decided.

But cynic that I am, I doubt they are going to get rid of the committee and return to a BCS based model. This is because no one has yet touched on the real role of the committee. It exists not to set up a playoff that picks the most deserving teams, but to set up a series of games that will get the highest viewership and therefore revenues. It is not about ensuring a legitimate NC. It's like everything else in college ball now. It is all about the $$$.

GMac suggested something like this on one of his radio shows, but I'm not sure that works for college football, because all conferences are not created equal
That would severely disadvantage any team coming out of the SEC and even the Big 10, because their path to a championship would be much tougher than the ACC and Big 12. You'd essentially still have the same automatic bid system as you do now, but the difference is, the good games would be at the beginning of the playoffs, and it could potentially increase the chances of having another Georgia v Tcu type of national championship.

 

[PGDocBama]

What do you think? What changes would you make?

All good points but I'd go to #1 vs #2 or at least no more than 4 teams. Otherwise, it's just not college football.

 

[JDCrimson]

I could get on board with this...

Conference championship games are not going away, to much money involved, I heard this weekend that the SEC was throwing around a idea about having a championship weekend if they can get ESPN on board, like paying 5 million to each team, so take last year's standings 1. George vs 2 Texas,( winner is SEC champion, both in playoffs) 3 Tennessee vs 6 South Carolina ( winner goes) 4 Bama vs 5 LSU ( winner goes) there's your 4 teams in playoffs

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Cue Linkin Park

We're building it up to break it back down.
We're building it up to burn down
Can't wait to burn it to the ground.

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

The #1-4 Seeds that receive byes should actually be the Top 4 teams in the country regardless if the are a Conf Champ.

Actually just get rid of the Conf Champ getting anything guaranteed.

I'm not sure how to word it but if a Conf Champ is actually ranked in the Top 12 then sure put them in but otherwise leave them out.

I'm close to saying just let a BCS computer rank the teams 1-12 and be done with it. Let that pick the field and then let the Humans manipulate seeding within reason after that.

The BCS Formula always seemed to work well. Until this past year, the committee's ranking s always seemed to match the old formula anyways...