Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Are You Happy With A Four Team Playoff ?

I didn't think there was enough when it started. However, I have been ecstatic with the playoff and don't think any more teams are needed. If they ever do expand it I want it done with absolutely no conference guarantees. Take the top 8, 12 or 16 teams solely based on playoff ranking.
 
4 is okay, but I like the 8 team idea the best, with a couple of conditions.

- P5 conference winners are in

- first round of games are played around Dec 20th, at some lower level bowl locations (neutral site, keep local tourism/businesses happy)

- second round games at the curent bigger bowls on New Years.

- title game around Jan 8th, or so (before next semester)

- Notre dumb gets no special considerations (join a conference, or else). See also, byu.
 
BehindEnemyLines said:
4 is okay, but I like the 8 team idea the best, with a couple of conditions.

- P5 conference winners are in

- first round of games are played around Dec 20th, at some lower level bowl locations (neutral site, keep local tourism/businesses happy)

- second round games at the curent bigger bowls on New Years.

- title game around Jan 8th, or so (before next semester)

- Notre dumb gets no special considerations (join a conference, or else). See also, byu.
Click to expand...

Because of the holidays that reduces the possibility of positive attendance to make it worth it for a neutral site. Games have a much better chance to sell well if they are being played at someones home stadium. Id say the week right after the Conf championship game weekend. Play the final 4 new years weekend and the NC game the weekend after.
 
BehindEnemyLines said:
I based mine on the already established P5.

Who else would you include?
Click to expand...
autobids seem like a mechanism to ensure the rich get richer -- I think they're a horrible idea. what's the logic behind a rule that ensures a bad P5 champ gets in and a deserving G5 champ doesn't?

Autobids are a concept that might sound good at first blush, but after a bit of thought there's no good justificiation, unless of course you just like the idea of the rich getting richer.
 
hokiehead said:
autobids seem like a mechanism to ensure the rich get richer -- I think they're a horrible idea. what's the logic behind a rule that ensures a bad P5 champ gets in and a deserving G5 champ doesn't?

Autobids are a concept that might sound good at first blush, but after a bit of thought there's no good justificiation, unless of course you just like the idea of the rich getting richer.
Click to expand...
You're not seriously arguing that G5 conferences are as tough to navigate through as P5 conferences are you? Or that G5 programs are as deserving as P5 programs?

The P5 conferences play far tougher schedules week in, week out and the teams that win the CCG have been tested throughout the course the season and proven themselves to be deserving far more than a G5 team that played a Sun Belt or AAC conference schedule, even if that G5 team finished a game or two better in the W column than the P5 conference champ. Who you play matters just as much as how many wins you have.
 
Duff Man said:
8 teams is a good number. The main reason? You would see a lot better OOC scheduling.
Click to expand...
In your 8, do the conference champions get automatic bids? I think the p5 champs would almost always be guaranteed to be in anyways, but yea, if the committee continues to value OOC scheduling even if you lose the days of scheduling nobodies will be over.
 
TSchekler said:
You're not seriously arguing that G5 conferences are as tough to navigate through as P5 conferences are you? Or that G5 programs are as deserving as P5 programs?

The P5 conferences play far tougher schedules week in, week out and the teams that win the CCG have been tested throughout the course the season and proven themselves to be deserving far more than a G5 team that played a Sun Belt or AAC conference schedule, even if that G5 team finished a game or two better in the W column than the P5 conference champ. Who you play matters just as much as how many wins you have.
Click to expand...
Not arguing that at all. I'm stating that there is no justificiation that, just because those are the best conferences today, therefore we should make rules guaranteeing those conferences get an advantage in the future.
 
hokiehead said:
Not arguing that at all. I'm arguing that there is no justificiation that, just because those are the best conferences today, that therefore we should make rules guaranteeing those conferences get an advantage in the future.
Click to expand...
Do you ever see a time when the MWC, AAC, C-USA, Sun Belt and the MAC would ever have an argument to being better than any of the P5 conferences? Specifically, the top 3-5 teams in each?
 
TSchekler said:
Do you ever see a time when the MWC, AAC, C-USA, Sun Belt and the MAC would ever have an argument to being better than any of the P5 conferences? Specifically, the top 3-5 teams in each?
Click to expand...
I'm going to laugh if anyone tries to argue this point.

Utah was coming off of three seasons with records of 13-0, 10-3, 10-3 before joining the Pac 12. They were delivering sustained success in the MWC. It wasn't until year 4 of the Pac 12 they were able to be above .500 in conference play.
 
Last edited:
I'd be OK with 8 if they could still incorporate the bowls into the system. Instead of seeding, let the bowls choose the matchups they want for the first two rounds.
 
Guaranteeing 5 spots in an 8-team playoff for conference champions basically solidifies the B12 as a viable conference. I'm not convinced that's a good idea.
 
Highlander said:
I'm going to laugh if anyone tries to argue this point.

Utah was coming off of three seasons with a record of 13-0, 10-3, 10-3 before joining the Pac 12. They were delivering sustained success in the MWC. It wasn't until year 4 of the Pac 12 they were able to be above .500 in conference play.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Some people might point to the Boise State or Utah BCS games where they upset Bama, OU and TCU, but I think it's one thing to have an entire month of prep to pull out all the stops for one game against a top P5 program, and it's something entirely different to have to do it every single week and maintain that level of competitiveness.
 
TSchekler said:
Do you ever see a time when the MWC, AAC, C-USA, Sun Belt and the MAC would ever have an argument to being better than any of the P5 conferences? Specifically, the top 3-5 teams in each?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant queation. We're talking about whether the best team from a given conference is better than the best team from another, and thereby more deaerving of a playoff spot, not the top 3-5 teams in a conference.

You're also ignoring the side where the second place team from one conference is more deserving than the champion of another -- autobids ensure the less deserving conference champ gets in.

To the relevant point, yes, strong argument that Western Michigan more deserving than any XII team this year.

Last year, strong argument that one of the B1G non-Champs would've been more deserving than Stanford.

Here's a good hypothetical: say VT wins the ACC this year or WSU wins the Pac -- what reasoning justifies putting them in the playoffs ahead of the Loser of the tOSU/Michigan game? or Western Michigan?
 
hokiehead said:
Irrelevant queation. We're talking about whether the best team from a given conference is better than the best team from another, and thereby more deaerving of a playoff spot, not the top 3-5 teams in a conference.

You're also ignoring the side where the second place team from one conference is more deserving than the champion of another -- autobids ensure the less deserving conference champ gets in.

To the relevant point, yes, strong argument that Western Michigan more deserving than any XII team this year.

Last year, strong argument that one of the B1G non-Champs would've been more deserving than Stanford.

Here's a good hypothetical: say VT wins the ACC this year or WSU wins the Pac -- what reasoning justifies putting them in the playoffs ahead of the Loser of the tOSU/Michigan game? or Western Michigan?
Click to expand...
Look at professional sports playoffs. Every year an around .500 Division champ makes the playoffs and people get pissed. At some point there will always be those scenarios no matter what the system is.
 
DBT said:
Look at professional sports playoffs. Every year an around .500 Division champ makes the playoffs and people get pissed. At some point there will always be those scenarios no matter what the system is.
Click to expand...
Only when autobids exist. my question is why should we make CFB more like those professional leagues by adding autobids?
 
hokiehead said:
Irrelevant queation. We're talking about whether the best team from a given conference is better than the best team from another, and thereby more deaerving of a playoff spot, not the top 3-5 teams in a conference.

You're also ignoring the side where the second place team from one conference is more deserving than the champion of another -- autobids ensure the less deserving conference champ gets in.

To the relevant point, yes, strong argument that Western Michigan more deserving than any XII team this year.

Last year, strong argument that one of the B1G non-Champs would've been more deserving than Stanford.

Here's a good hypothetical: say VT wins the ACC this year or WSU wins the Pac -- what reasoning justifies putting them in the playoffs ahead of the Loser of the tOSU/Michigan game? or Western Michigan?
Click to expand...
When it comes to the conference champ argument, to me, it all comes down to the fact that major college football has been divided into 5 conferences, and winning those conferences should absolutely mean something. It means something in college basketball, so why shouldn't it mean something in college football? Otherwise, disband all conferences, put all P5 programs under one entity and have everybody play everybody and determine the top 4-6 teams to go to the playoff.
 
hokiehead said:
autobids seem like a mechanism to ensure the rich get richer -- I think they're a horrible idea. what's the logic behind a rule that ensures a bad P5 champ gets in and a deserving G5 champ doesn't?

Autobids are a concept that might sound good at first blush, but after a bit of thought there's no good justificiation, unless of course you just like the idea of the rich getting richer.
Click to expand...

If you win your conference championship, you should be in. This removes subjective selection. The only question mark is the b12 operating without a CCG (they are supposed to have a CCG next year, iirc).

In regards to the "little guys" argument there would still be a chance for 1 or more to earn an invite. This year is a good example of why they wouldn't. Who is the best between Houston, Boise State, and W Michigan? Would they be competitive in a playoff game? Houston, maybe. Big maybe.

And if the 8 team playoff was comprised only of conference champions which other leagues would be included? AAC? MWC? MAC? WAC? Sun Belt? I think this conference championship standard could be applied to the 3 other bids if the top 3 ranked champs were included.
 
TSchekler said:
Do you ever see a time when the MWC, AAC, C-USA, Sun Belt and the MAC would ever have an argument to being better than any of the P5 conferences? Specifically, the top 3-5 teams in each?
Click to expand...

I think that politically, if you claim that everyone is playing in the same NCAA division, you can't do it this way. This is why I think that if we ever get to four 16-team conferences and a playoff of the 4 champs as our playoff... that we'll see the P4 split off into a separate NCAA division.
 
Darth Snow said:
In your 8, do the conference champions get automatic bids? I think the p5 champs would almost always be guaranteed to be in anyways, but yea, if the committee continues to value OOC scheduling even if you lose the days of scheduling nobodies will be over.
Click to expand...

I would not have autobids. I want the best eight teams.
 
Duff Man said:
I would not have autobids. I want the best eight teams.
Click to expand...

If and when it expands to 8 teams it's not the autobids that would bother me so much, it's how the conference champions are determined. These conference championship games are a dumb way to determine a true conference champ and having 2 divisions is even worse. If they're going to insist on having the CCG's then at least do away with divisions and put the 2 best teams in the conference in the championship game.
 
any more than 4 teams in the playoff would make regular season games less important....4 is as good as we're gonna get it without diminishing the importance of the regular season
 
When you consider using neutral sites for quarterfinal games in a 8 team playoff, consider this - attendance at a neutral site game depends on both teams bringing 10s of thousands of fans.

Some fan bases could sustain that kind of travelling support for 3 games in a row, but not everyone could. I don't know if we could. The bowl games would not be happy with thousands of empty seats because a fanbase is either tapped out or waiting to travel to the next round.
 
Alfred91 said:
When you consider using neutral sites for quarterfinal games in a 8 team playoff, consider this - attendance at a neutral site game depends on both teams bringing 10s of thousands of fans.

Some fan bases could sustain that kind of travelling support for 3 games in a row, but not everyone could. I don't know if we could. The bowl games would not be happy with thousands of empty seats because a fanbase is either tapped out or waiting to travel to the next round.
Click to expand...

We couldn't. Only a handful could. You go to 8, you have to host at home field sites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top