Yeah, because winning the AAC is so much more impressive than winning 10 games or more as a non-champ P5 team.Ranking shmankings. You dont win your conference championship you are NOT eligible!
Regular SEasOn MATTERS!!!!!
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!
CFP expanding to 8 teams before 2026 - CBS Sports
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
You are for the status quo. Im tired of watching an east coast biased ranking system that rewards more SEC teams at expense of everyone else. As well as watching a 2nd Big12 team or something get in just to get steam rolled. Because thats what we'll get; reward the rich, stomp the poor. Im for teams having a chance. Im for it being decided on the field.
In contrast, this last World Cup saw the titans of soccer, namely Germany, eliminated at the Group Stage, 70th ranked Russia reach the final 8, and Iceland, Japan, and South Korea among others have impressive games against countries they shouldn't.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Just take the best teams, as the charter says.
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
Only the best teams should get to compete for the title.
If someone else won the conference they are from are they the best team? Do we take the best team based on rankings? Or on record? Maybe 8 teams is not enough....
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
No AP or Coaches poll, average of the top 10 computer polls with a heavy influence on strength of schedule.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
You take the four best teams according to the metrics provided to the Committee using the guidelines established.
They got it right each year so far.
Q. Why change now?
A. They aren’t. No plans to do so this contract period.
How would you know if the committee got it wrong?
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
TCU should have been in over Ohio State. The fact they won the title is irrelevant. They didn't deserve to be there.
I have nothing constructive to say because I’ve said it (probably in this thread) a million times - HATE PLAYOFFS.
There are too many teams without enough common denominators (in terms of common opponents) with too much disparity. And football is too demanding to KEEP playing games, especially at neutral sites and in bowls. Unlike NCAA basketball or baseball where there is a lot more parity, a lot more regular season games, you can play double elimination or back to back to back games, etc. But also, no one cares about the regular season. For pro football, it’s even worse. But at least the higher seeded team gets to keep playing at home. And when they are done going 8-8 in the regular season, then have 3 playoff games, then the Super Bowl, they don’t have to take a final.
And if you’re going to argue FCS playoffs - don’t. It’s aleays the same teams anyway, and they DO play at home for the playoffs, and NO ONE cares about any of it.
There are too many teams without enough common denominators (in terms of common opponents) with too much disparity. And football is too demanding to KEEP playing games, especially at neutral sites and in bowls. Unlike NCAA basketball or baseball where there is a lot more parity, a lot more regular season games, you can play double elimination or back to back to back games, etc. But also, no one cares about the regular season. For pro football, it’s even worse. But at least the higher seeded team gets to keep playing at home. And when they are done going 8-8 in the regular season, then have 3 playoff games, then the Super Bowl, they don’t have to take a final.
And if you’re going to argue FCS playoffs - don’t. It’s aleays the same teams anyway, and they DO play at home for the playoffs, and NO ONE cares about any of it.
Nobody cares about the FCS playoffs because it's FCS and there is a higher level of football being played with it's own Playoff. That's not a good argument. Football is not too demanding for the top 6-8 teams in the country to play 15-16 games. The top NFL teams play 17-20 games and these guys are essentially semi-pro (spare me the student athlete bit) football players.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Football knowledge. Metrics. Film. Data. Power rankings. Eyeballs of experts.
Enjoy the four.
Get used to the idea of expansion. It's going to happen.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Charter says nothing about being deserving. It says four best teams. Want to change the playoff, change the charter.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Not in this contract. Enjoy the four.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
It’s not an answer you like. But it is the answer. Otherwise, 130 team playoff.
Enjoy the four.
Things change quickly. More money with more playoff games. Contracts can be renegotiated. Will be six. Could be eight.
No, it is a non-answer. By your logic, the committee can never be wrong, which is silly. Of course a committee composed of human beings can get it wrong.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Kill conference championship games. Kill divisions.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Bowl games too powerful to let this happen at this point. It’s not even being discussed at this point.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Yes, a Committee can get it wrong. But how would you know?
Bowl games that will be affected will make more money as they will be part of the expanded playoffs. You're naive if you believe there have been no discussions on what an expansion would look like and how to implement it.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
But you don’t know they got it wrong either.
Based on the best data available - and in the absence of a 130 team playoff, they got it right.
That is some interesting circular logic to insulate the committee from any and all criticism.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Are you calling Hancock, Long, Hocutt, etc liars?
They are thrilled with the playoff.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Does not insulate the Committee from criticism. They get lots of criticism.
It’s just the way they choose. Some don’t like it, or the fact it is four teams.
I do.
That is different than saying they have always gotten it right. But whatever, this is a pointless argument.