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!

CFP expanding to 8 teams before 2026 - CBS Sports

Duff Man said:
That is different than saying they have always gotten it right. But whatever, this is a pointless argument.
Click to expand...
Agree. Apologies for loop.

Here’s a legit question, I think.

In CFP era, has a lower seed or a Vegas dog ever won a game?
 
hawg1 said:
Agree. Apologies for loop.

Here’s a legit question, I think.

In CFP era, has a lower seed or a Vegas dog ever won a game?
Click to expand...
Alabama was the 4 seed and won the natty last year. Georgia was the 3 seed, so yes.

The year before, Clemson (2) upset Alabama (1). In 2016, Alabama (2) upset Clemson (1). in 2015, Ohio State (4) upset Alabama (1), and then beat Oregon (2).
 
TSchekler said:
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.
Click to expand...
And even though I don't really care, per se, about the FCS playoffs -- there is a chance that I will watch an FCS, DII or DIII game every year. That game at each of those levels is the playoff title game. For FCS, I've even watched the semi-final round a couple times. That suggests strongly to me that a playoff determining a champion increases my interest in tuning into games. I'd be very surprised to learn that I'm a snowflake or even in the minority on this.
 
I'm firmly in the camp that a 4-team playoff is perfect because I love the importance of the regular season. Right now with 4 we have quite a few late-season games that are essential elimination games. Sure you can find a few exceptions to this in the CFB history but for the most part a late season game pitting 2 highly-ranked teams end up being elimination games.

Having said that I have no doubt that the CFB will be going to 8 teams although I think it'll be later rather than sooner. And of course the most common take on this is to have the P5 champions and 3 at-large teams but they really need to eliminate the conference championship games in order to get the true conference champions. This situation where you can have have a situation such as a 4-loss winner of one division pull a big upset and be proclaimed a conference champion is a joke. If they insist on keeping the CCG's intact then at least eliminate the divisions and have the 2 best teams play for the conference title.

And no auto-bids for the top-ranked G5 team unless there's a hard stipulation in place about where they are ranked. (Yes this would need alot of definition) For example, if the highest-ranked G5 team was a Boise team (not to pick on Boise) whose 1 loss was to a middle-tier P5 team, then no G5 team gets in that year.
 
Buffnik said:
And even though I don't really care, per se, about the FCS playoffs -- there is a chance that I will watch an FCS, DII or DIII game every year. That game at each of those levels is the playoff title game. For FCS, I've even watched the semi-final round a couple times. That suggests strongly to me that a playoff determining a champion increases my interest in tuning into games. I'd be very surprised to learn that I'm a snowflake or even in the minority on this.
Click to expand...
I'd argue for snowflake. If I turn one of those games on it is because I'm dying for football, any football. That or one of the teams has some sort of crazy connection to me. And since those games aren't normally on tv, it would be hard to argue that watching it BECAUSE it's a playoff game is a factor when in fact it's only ON because it's a playoff game. But this is just my opinion. I've actually stopped watching the CFP games as intently because there is still ANOTHER game to go, so in essence, the "Rose Bowl Champion" or the "Orange Bowl Champion" doesn't even really mean anything.
 
CUAviator said:
I'd argue for snowflake. If I turn one of those games on it is because I'm dying for football, any football. That or one of the teams has some sort of crazy connection to me. And since those games aren't normally on tv, it would be hard to argue that watching it BECAUSE it's a playoff game is a factor when in fact it's only ON because it's a playoff game. But this is just my opinion. I've actually stopped watching the CFP games as intently because there is still ANOTHER game to go, so in essence, the "Rose Bowl Champion" or the "Orange Bowl Champion" doesn't even really mean anything.
Click to expand...
I think you're making the argument for playoffs being a driver for interest.

fwiw, the DII National Championship drew more viewers (626k homes) than the MWC Championship (623k). The FCS Championship drew more homes than 5 bowl games.

As a bit of an aside, 1 of those 5 bowl games was the Marshall-CSU matchup in the New Mexico Bowl - it drew almost twice the viewers of the MWC Championship of Fresno State-Boise State. Explains why we keep seeing bowl games getting added. Folks tune it and they make money for the network.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

People watch when it's a game that determines a champion of a sport.
 
Great column by Dan Wetzel on Yahoo Sports this week: https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-one-...ege-football-playoff-expansion-202745969.html

Talks about how stupid the bowl system is and how a 4-team playoff that shares the money with the bowls by having them host the semi-finals is a completely idiotic business model.

College sports’ old-boy network is a strange one though. The idea of the NFL cutting in some independent contractors on their playoffs or Super Bowl is beyond laughable. Nah, I think we’ll just continue to rent the stadium, run the game and keep all the money to ourselves. Appreciate the offer, though.

In college football, it’s backward. They thank the guy they inexplicably cut in on the action. It’s a bizarre and nearly impossible bond to break. And it’s a big reason why college football has a four-team playoff, not a preferable and more profitable eight-team playoff.

One round bigger would require the first round to be played on campus and the old bowl cronies sure aren’t in favor of that. Next thing you know they might lose the semifinals too.
 
InTheBuff said:
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...om&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

got another quick article - this will happen
Click to expand...

UCF is not playing for National Championships for the kids on the current roster and will never ever be in the CFP, but what they are playing for is an invitation to the ACC or the BIG12 conference, because they have to move up to get in. Political lobbying for a P5 invite is the ultimate goal, and I pray to god that there is never a plan for a G5 team to ever be in the CFP playoffs!!! Why is there not a push to create and fund a G5 Playoff? Some of the lesser bowls would be smart to do it and find a way to make it more financially feasible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top