Oklahoma may not be done for CFB
@HighEliteMajor I agree, why they don’t have at least a 8 team playoff is silly. Pretty much every level of football has it. I’d be fine if they shortened the season to 10 games and made a big bracket like FCS (24 teams in playoffs). The only reason it’s not that way is the money to be made of off bowl games. I read last year that even a lame duck bowl game on a Thursday makes millions.
ESPN has article debating between OU and OSU for whom deserves to go with a Georgia loss. They both have had close calls against inferior teams and they are nearly even in SOS on most sites. One big thing IMO is that OU has a chance to get revenge on their one loss, while playing a top 15 team. While OSU will be playing a lower rated Northwestern team that won a very weak B10 west disvison. OSU also has a bad loss to an unranked Purdue club compared to a top 15 team in Texas that OU lost to. I’m just not sure how they could leap frog OU without a loss at this point. Both had good wins this week against top 15 teams. But we all remember TCU dropping from #3 to #6 for OSU to get in, despite smoking ISU 55-3 to close out the season in 2014. At this point if the same thing happens I’ll start to think that OSU has an inside man and probably won’t ever watch the CFP again.
What would you suggest? Looks like this year, barring any huge upsets, the top 3 teams will get in and likely the fourth best will join them and every win seems to count. Expanding the playoffs to 8 teams would not solve the issue since the teams vying for the last spots still would be controversial and logistically adds one more week with final two teams playing 16 games.
As long as the best two teams get in, I don’t rightly care how many teams play. 2,4,8,16. Just get the best two a shot.
I really wish CFB wasn’t a joke, but it is. No real playoff. Every game doesn’t matter. Very few matter at all. And reputation gets you everything. In CBB, it just gets you an extra seeding line.
I’d love for you to expand on this. What would you change? If anything, with 4 teams making the playoffs it seems to me every game matters exponentially more.
@Kcmatt7 Did any game really matter this past weekend other than a few? You want to make every game matter, go to a 24 team playoff.
Top 8 get byes – Five conference winners, top non-power 5 team, and next two best by committee determination.
The other 16 play, with the better seeded teams getting home field. The winners then play the top 8, on the top 8’s home field.
Huge incentive for every team to play hard and win. Winning the conference is huge. Getting a bye huge. Getting to a 9-16 seed and a home game is huge. Getting in to the tourney 17-24 is huge.
This would be heaven.
And that is how you determine the “champion”. Not the “best” @dylans. There’s a difference. A champion is what we’re looking for, and fighting through a tourney format is how that is accomplished. Not gifting teams the right to play for a title.
@HighEliteMajor I see what you’re saying now. I’m not opposed to your idea.
It wasn’t popular, but the picking of 2 teams to play one game was the purest championship game in all of sports. Sure there was some crying by someone getting passed over, but they usually came close to picking the two best teams.
When you lose is important too. Lose early, and then win out, you look better on Dec. 1 than if you win everything and lose late like Michigan just did. (I’m not saying Michigan should be in by the way). I hate the idea of an 8 team playoff. Too many extra games, too much political choosing of teams.
And HEM is absolutely right about the SEC. They’re assumed to be good because they beat weak out of conference scheds and then when they beat an in conference opponent everyone says wow, that’s a really good win. I beat this drum a lot, but the conflict of interest is palpable here. SEC network owned by ESPN. Who does ESPN then push as the best? Their own conference of course.
Several games mattered this past weekend. The OU-WVU kept one team in the race and the other out, same withe Michigan OSU game. Notre Dame beating USC assured it of a spot in the Final Four. Had Clemson lost of if it loses next weekend then it might be out, same for OU and OSU and Georgia and to a lesser extent Alabama. I don’t know how you can say games in the past or the upcoming weekend don’t matter.
I can see maybe going to 8 teams and extending the season by 3 week but going to 24 teams will never work since the winning team might end up playing 8 games.
@JayHawkFanToo As opposed to all of the other games in CFB? You cited four or five games from last weekend. As I said, “other than a few.” That’s all. How many CFB teams played this last weekend? All 130? 65 games and four or five meant something? And those were the only games that arguably mattered. That’s it.
In a 24 team playoff, the max games is not 8, it’s a max 5 games for the 8 lowest teams, and a max 4 for the rest. D-III has a 32 team playoff, D-II has a 28 team playoff. See the link below.
The entire month of January could be the playoff month. They could play the first four games (8 teams prior to the holiday, seeds 17-24), then the 16 teams remaining have a playoff starting the weekend of New Years (basically when the semi-final is now).
With conference championship games you already have a 10 team playoff for 4 spots. Ohh the drama.
Way to take my words out of context. I mentioned those few teams only because they were/are directly involved in the 4 team playoff race. Many other games also mattered because they determined bowl eligibility or candidacy to a better bowl. In short, lots of games mattered not only last weekend but the entire season, saying otherwise is disingenuous.
@HighEliteMajor You’re going to kill the bowl games with a playoff like that. I suppose those folks are lobbying long and hard to avoid a playoff of more than 4 teams.
I’d also like to see the NCAA to start sharing the wealth with northern sites for playoff games. SEC teams win playoffs because they’re frequently virtual home games.
@JayHawkFanToo You could say the game between the worst teams “mattered” because it might lead to more donations. You know what you were referring to, and you know what I was referring to – determining a champion. You didn’t mention bowls. You mentioned title contenders and those games. There was no out of context, or anything like that.
@wissox Bingo. The real reason why we don’t have a playoff. The bowls. Sounds rational, huh? All other reasons not to have a playoff are bogus. It’s to protect the bowl system.
@HighEliteMajor Like I said earlier on this thread, the bowls make the networks and NCAA too much money to do away with or change a ton.
Yes, I know what we both were writing and every game that included playoffs contenders absolutely mattered. Also, and unlike basketball, every football game matters. A team can make it to the NCAA with a losing record so wins and loses are really not that important other than for seeding but, to make it to the football playoffs, any more than one loss and you are practically eliminated from contention so every game throughout the season matters to those team with a realistic chance to being the champion.
By the same talk, I believe that 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament is a ridiculously high number with the great majority of team having zero chance and the Tournament is just another junket. I would like to see the format you propose for football applied to basketball instead withe 8 byes and 16 teams in a play-in games to determine the final 16 and from there no single elimination but a best of 3 games instead.
Football-wise, the NCAA only makes money from the playoffs basically. Hardly any from the other bowl games if any. Almost the entirety of their income is from TV rights to March Madness. Which is why they haven’t cared about players getting paid under the table in the sport for so long…
@HighEliteMajor To be honest, I’d love to keep the bowl system the way it is and just let them vote on a champ like they used to. I know it led to some weird results, like BYU around 1990, but bowl games are awesome to watch.
@JayHawkFanToo You do realize what you said, right? I don’t think you do. But once you read what I post, you’ll have another shifting explanation.
You said, " … but, to make it to the football playoffs, any more than one loss and you are practically eliminated from contention so every game throughout the season matters to those team with a realistic chance to being the champion."
Did you figure it out?
I’ll help – you just said that any more than one loss “practically eliminated” the teams from championship contention.
So, obviously, the games for such teams that get that second loss are irrelevant. That is, every game doesn’t means something. In fact, after two losses, the games really mean nothing – which you just admitted.
Now, while I’m sure you’ll try to double-talk again – let’s review:
Your first point I responded to was where you correctly referenced the few meaningful games this past season.
Then, after my response noting the same, you cited bowl games saying, “Way to take my words out of context. I mentioned those few teams only because they were/are directly involved in the 4 team playoff race. Many other games also mattered because they determined bowl eligibility or candidacy to a better bowl.”
Then you now shift back and say, “Yes, I know what we both were writing and every game that included playoffs contenders absolutely mattered.”
So, predicted response – “But, but bowls matter. They really do. That’s what I mean.”
If that’s what you now mean, that bowls matter, then shout that loud and proud – because the half empty stadiums your refer to in falsely suggesting that early round playoffs would suffer, are exactly what you see in most bowls (actually, many are in the 50-60ish% range).
Again, every single game matters for those teams worthy of contending for a berth in the playoffs since a loss means they are out of the playoffs. Nothing too terribly complicated about this.
Also, every single game matters for all teams competing for a berth in a bowl since the better record results not only in eligibility but in a better Bowl as well. KSU was playing for Bowl eligibility last weekend so you bet your a$$ the game mattered to them. For teams like KU who had no hopes of a Bowls, the last couple of games did not matter (although it did for his opponents) but it would have been exactly the same whether the payoff included 4 or 24 teams, right? Nothing too terribly complicated about this either.
Remember? This exactly what I said several post ago…
"I mentioned those few teams only because they were/are directly involved in the 4 team playoff race. Many other games also mattered because they determined bowl eligibility or candidacy to a better bowl. In short, lots of games mattered not only last weekend but the entire season, saying otherwise is disingenuous."
What you are saying is the only the games that matter are those which determine who goes to the playoffs which is asinine. Again you can take my posts out of context or spin them anyway you want but the meaning is very clear to anyone without an agenda.
@JayHawkFanToo Zzzzzzzzzzz. You’re too easy to debate with.
So your argument is a team becoming embarrassing eligible for a crap exhibition at 6-6, or bumping up from the Foster Farmers Bowl at 41% capacity in attendance to the Camping World Bowl with 57% attendance? Master debater. Every game matters. Or “many” games mattered. Or maybe some games mattered. Awesome.
All to argue and fuss so boisterously against determining a real champion. Enjoy your Dickies American Airlines 60% full bowl (I made that one up … hard to tell) D-I CFB is a joke.
Now, about that signing bonus for Miles that he was undoubtedly going to get …
Zzzzzzzzzzz. You’re too easy to debate with.
To you, everyone that does not agree with you is too easy to debate because you are unwilling or pathologically unable to see any view that is different than yours. It is not a debate, it is a diatribe.
So, you will have to debate/play by yourself or with yourself…whichever floats your boat.
Oklahoma beats Texas in the rematch for the B12 title and again Alabama comes back to beat Georgia (stupid play call on fake punt that set up the game winning TD for Bama). ESPN and Georgia are lobbying hard that they are one of the best teams and deserve to be in, SMH. If they really choose a 2 loss non conference champ over potentially 2 single loss power 5 champs (if OSU holds on). I’ll never watch the CFP again, they may as well change the name of the CFP to SEC invitational. I think SEC is the best conference but it’s hard to tell because they get away with their top teams playing no one in the non conference. Bama needs to sack up and schedule some besides the Citadel to play. OSU and OU just finished a series last season and even Texas is playing B10 teams on the road.
I agree. My picks would be Alabama, Clemson Notre Dame and Oklahoma. I would not surprise me a bit to see either Georgia or Ohio State replace Oklahoma.