I remember as a kid in the 1980s, regular season college basketball chase-for-No. 1 matchups were a huge deal. Yes, this was in the Northeast and St. Johns and the Big East were riding high. Yes, this was basically in a three network TV universe. But it was a reality--when No. 1 lost, or if No. 1 was playing a top team, it was a big deal.

Over time, that faded. I wonder if some of that was that being No. 1 didn't have much connection to being the national champs at the end of the year. Duke and Carolina could trade #1 and 2 back and forth in January and February, but what people remember is the Final Four.

Yesterday's Ohio State win essentially wiped out the Virginia Tech game. If there were an 8 team playoff, and OSU's win coupled with TCU's win made that a little more likely, that wipes out most of the value of the TCU-Baylor game.

Part of the reason there hasn't been a playoff until now is that the CFB powers-that-be have been afraid of the FBS season going the way of the MBB season.

NOTE: On the other hand, without a playoff, there would have been much less national interest in the Oregon-Arizona and OSU-Wisconsin title games.

(01-02-2015 08:24 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I remember as a kid in the 1980s, regular season college basketball chase-for-No. 1 matchups were a huge deal. Yes, this was in the Northeast and St. Johns and the Big East were riding high. Yes, this was basically in a three network TV universe. But it was a reality--when No. 1 lost, or if No. 1 was playing a top team, it was a big deal.

Over time, that faded. I wonder if some of that was that being No. 1 didn't have much connection to being the national champs at the end of the year. Duke and Carolina could trade #1 and 2 back and forth in January and February, but what people remember is the Final Four.

Yesterday's Ohio State win essentially wiped out the Virginia Tech game. If there were an 8 team playoff, and OSU's win coupled with TCU's win made that a little more likely, that wipes out most of the value of the TCU-Baylor game.

Part of the reason there hasn't been a playoff until now is that the CFB powers-that-be have been afraid of the FBS season going the way of the MBB season.

NOTE: On the other hand, without a playoff, there would have been much less national interest in the Oregon-Arizona and OSU-Wisconsin title games.

That didn't wipe out the Virginia Tech loss. If Alabama won would that have wiped out the loss against what we now know was an extremely overhyped Ole Miss team?

How about if TCU had made it in, would that have wiped out the loss to Baylor?

Stop trying to oversimplify things. That is what the committee is getting away from and look what we got for it. A great game. You are trying to take away from that, for what? Saying that Ohio State doesn't deserve the win over Alabama because they lost to Virginia Tech early in the year right after they lost their first quarterback?

That is terrible logic. Just stop. The regular season was actually worth more this year thanks to the Playoff. The talk about the playoff made every week more exciting. You traditionals need to give it up, making up terrible arguments in these last ditch attempts to make a point that doesn't matter anymore.

There's still a huge difference between the NCAA Tournament and CFP simply because of the size of the field. The regular season certainly still matters in a huge way for college football with only a 4-team field (and I'd argue that it would still be the same way with an 8-team field). You still need to be a *great* team (or least have a great resume on paper) to make it to the CFP. In contrast, the 68-team NCAA Tournament field means that you "only" have to be a "pretty good" team (at least if you're a power conference member) to get to the postseason, which means that each individual regular season game doesn't mean much to national audiences. (Granted, regular season basketball games mean quite a bit for the last 15 or so at-large bids that are on the bubble.) Note that the OP's memories of 1980s basketball reflected a time when the NCAA Tournament field was smaller than today, but still much larger than the CFP system. There's too small of a field coupled with too few games in football to worry about the supposed impact to the regular season. The NFL still draws massive ratings every week with a larger playoff field and fewer overall teams - the weekly drama of football is a very different beast than other sports that play multiple times per week.

They need to keep it at 4 as long as possible...part of what makes College Football different is the Regular Season and the Debate during the Off Season...going to 8 and especially 16 would IMO really damage the Regular Season much as the NCAA Basketball Tournament has killed the Regular Season.

It means that Buffalo won't get any more big paychecks from playing contenders.

(01-02-2015 10:37 AM)Maize Wrote:  They need to keep it at 4 as long as possible...part of what makes College Football different is the Regular Season and the Debate during the Off Season...going to 8 and especially 16 would IMO really damage the Regular Season much as the NCAA Basketball Tournament has killed the Regular Season.

The fun thing about six teams would be the race to earn the top two spots as they get a bye into the second round. What we saw this year was the race for #4 but the downside of that is that whomever loses that race loses their entire shot at the championship.

If they had a six team bracket then the propaganda machine can focus everyone on the race for #2. When that happens then the #3-#6 teams that were in the chase for #2 still have a chance at the championship. People don't pay so much attention as to whom is getting in at #6 and who didn't with #7.

(01-02-2015 10:32 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There's still a huge difference between the NCAA Tournament and CFP simply because of the size of the field. The regular season certainly still matters in a huge way for college football with only a 4-team field (and I'd argue that it would still be the same way with an 8-team field). You still need to be a *great* team (or least have a great resume on paper) to make it to the CFP. In contrast, the 68-team NCAA Tournament field means that you "only" have to be a "pretty good" team (at least if you're a power conference member) to get to the postseason, which means that each individual regular season game doesn't mean much to national audiences. (Granted, regular season basketball games mean quite a bit for the last 15 or so at-large bids that are on the bubble.) Note that the OP's memories of 1980s basketball reflected a time when the NCAA Tournament field was smaller than today, but still much larger than the CFP system. There's too small of a field coupled with too few games in football to worry about the supposed impact to the regular season. The NFL still draws massive ratings every week with a larger playoff field and fewer overall teams - the weekly drama of football is a very different beast than other sports that play multiple times per week.

Also that was before so many games were on TV. It was only in the late 70s that the NCAA field expanded from the 25 champs and independents.

Now you really don't have to be pretty good. You just have to be in the top half of a major conference. Even then, you have a shot with the conference tournament. For the top programs the NCAA is all but a given every year. The season is just a seeding exercise.

I dont see the NCAA's as making the regular season meaningless. Now the Conference tourneys are what IMO make the regular season worthless. If the Auto bid was determined by the regular season rather then the conference tournament more people would pay attention.

(01-02-2015 08:24 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I remember as a kid in the 1980s, regular season college basketball chase-for-No. 1 matchups were a huge deal. Yes, this was in the Northeast and St. Johns and the Big East were riding high. Yes, this was basically in a three network TV universe. But it was a reality--when No. 1 lost, or if No. 1 was playing a top team, it was a big deal.

Over time, that faded. I wonder if some of that was that being No. 1 didn't have much connection to being the national champs at the end of the year. Duke and Carolina could trade #1 and 2 back and forth in January and February, but what people remember is the Final Four.

Yesterday's Ohio State win essentially wiped out the Virginia Tech game. If there were an 8 team playoff, and OSU's win coupled with TCU's win made that a little more likely, that wipes out most of the value of the TCU-Baylor game.

Part of the reason there hasn't been a playoff until now is that the CFB powers-that-be have been afraid of the FBS season going the way of the MBB season.

NOTE: On the other hand, without a playoff, there would have been much less national interest in the Oregon-Arizona and OSU-Wisconsin title games.

Football is nothing like basketball. Basketball ruined their regular season when they created the conference tournament. Now the regular season means nothing. They are just glorified exhibitions played to determine seeding in a conference tournament. That's why the college regular season was ruined.

If you got rid of the conference tournaments, you would put some value back into the college basketball regular season.


Football will never be that way because the playoff is designed in a way that the regular season conference races mean something. You almost have to win your conference to even get into the playoff.

To me, the biggest difference is between 4 and 8 teams. I know a lot of others think of a difference between 8 and 16 as the huge deal, but I really think 8 is where the regular season is hit to the point you are loosing part of it's meaning. At 8, you will have automatic births for the 5 major conferences and the impact of that cannot be overstated enough. It means that those huge non-conference games in the first half of the year lose a lot of meaning. It means you if you are a casual Big Ten fan, you have much less reason to watch the big match-ups in the SEC, PAC-12, etc. The last few weeks of the year MIGHT get a little extra meaning, but that will come at the expense of games in September, October, and the first half of November.

It means that the Baylors of the world will stop scheduling Sisters of the Incarnate Word University and start scheduling more P5 OOC (most do). Conversely it will be tougher for the ECUs and UCFs to schedule P5s or at least have more than one or two per year on their OOC. I think it means more separation between the P5 and G5. What was a very subtle difference in the BCS era, will become more defined as the years pass.

(01-04-2015 09:38 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  To me, the biggest difference is between 4 and 8 teams. I know a lot of others think of a difference between 8 and 16 as the huge deal, but I really think 8 is where the regular season is hit to the point you are loosing part of it's meaning. At 8, you will have automatic births for the 5 major conferences and the impact of that cannot be overstated enough. It means that those huge non-conference games in the first half of the year lose a lot of meaning. It means you if you are a casual Big Ten fan, you have much less reason to watch the big match-ups in the SEC, PAC-12, etc. The last few weeks of the year MIGHT get a little extra meaning, but that will come at the expense of games in September, October, and the first half of November.

This is exactly right. The current format of five conferences playing for four spots and the weekly drama of conference X or Y playing its way out of the CFP because the 10th best team lost to the 11th best team of another conference was what made this the most fun season in ages. Is it fair? No. But the current structure maintains a do or die kind of urgency from the opening kickoff to rivalry week which would be drastically reduced by playoff expansion.

I like six. Top six conference champs. Top two get byes.

Those byes are important, adding meaning to the non-con schedule.

Conference games are even bigger. Specifying conference titles for admission leaves little-to-no room for error. I reject the notion that you can compete to be crowned the best in the nation if you're not the best in your conference.

I hate byes. Give me 8 or leave it at 4, please.

If the playoff is expanded with each conference champion getting a automatic invitation, we could see better OOC games.

For instance, we could see Alabama play O$U in September with the loser still being able to win their conference and get into the playoffs.

I can see this coming in the next 3-5 years.

As long as the field stays at 4, the regular season will continue to have great significance, as it did this season.

The minute the "poobahs" bow to public pressure and move it to 16, the regular season is meaningless.

Teams are strengthening their schedules. So far its making it a better regular season.

More teams in the playoffs means more meaningful games later in the season, more fanbases engaged and more people watching. With only two in the playoffs, most teams would be eliminated from contention after their first loss. The rest of the season would be nothing but a series of meaningless exhibitions and fans would tune out. With an expanded playoffs, there are a lot more teams playing games in November that matter. One early season loss or even two losses in some years wouldn't end a team's season and fans of the team, as well as fans of other teams in contention, have reason to keep paying attention and keep watching.

I would like to have a tournament with the top 8 teams. No automatic berths, and the Top 4 teams would host the first round of the playoffs. This would provide a huge incentive for even the top teams to continue winning in the final week.

Even though a team like #1 Alabama might have already effectively clinched a berth before playing their CCG, they would still need a win in the CCG to ensure a home game in the quarterfinals. Additionally, a bad loss to a bad team in the CCG could still knock them out of the playoff picture entirely, depending on the year and conference performance.

(01-07-2015 06:23 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I hate byes. Give me 8 or leave it at 4, please.

I agree. Level the playing field for everyone, and let 'em duke it out from there.