As the thread title says, who would you put in if we had an eight team playoff?
Here's my choices
1) Clemson
2) Bama
3) Mich St
4) Oklahoma
5) Iowa
6) Stanford
7) Notre Dame
8) Ohio State
Just some food for thought. I think these matchups would be great fun.
And a side note-I put Notre dame ahead of Ohio State because I wanted to avoid a rematch with Clemson, and I put Iowa ahead of Stanford for the same reason.
And another question I have for y'all would be do you think that the committee should try to avoid rematches if a situation like this came up, or should the actual power rankings decide the matchups?

(12-06-2015 11:12 AM)miztigers55 Wrote:  As the thread title says, who would you put in if we had an eight team playoff?
Here's my choices
1) Clemson
2) Bama
3) Mich St
4) Oklahoma
5) Iowa
6) Stanford
7) Notre Dame
8) Ohio State
Just some food for thought. I think these matchups would be great fun.
And a side note-I put Notre dame ahead of Ohio State because I wanted to avoid a rematch with Clemson, and I put Iowa ahead of Stanford for the same reason.
And another question I have for y'all would be do you think that the committee should try to avoid rematches if a situation like this came up, or should the actual power rankings decide the matchups
?

hmmm. using your rankings

Orange -Clem vs Ohio St
Sugar - Bama vs ND
Rose - Mich St vs Stan
Cotton - Okie vs Iowa

No real need for a 8 Team Playoff..had that last night with the ACC, SEC & B1G Title Games...

not really with the ACC or SEC. UNC and Florida weren't getting in if they won.

(12-06-2015 02:13 PM)Maize Wrote:  No real need for a 8 Team Playoff..had that last night with the ACC, SEC & B1G Title Games...

I agree, but a 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6 plays out better than CCG's.

An eight team tournament has too many repeat games within it. Possible rematch between Notre Dame and Stanford. Possible rematch between Ohio State and Michigan State as well as between Michigan State and Iowa. Three teams from the same conference? That's terrible.

My proposed scenario for six works so much better in a year like this.

It happens after one of the major conferences goes away. We wont see any expansion of the CFP before the conferences get their's first.

What you see in the six team scenario is the four major conference champions making it in. For the sake of the conversation that would be Clemson, Alabama, Michigan State and Stanford/Oklahoma. I am not going to get into a discussion about which conference to place Oklahoma. The point is that you get four major champions.

You add to that the one G5 team which this year is Houston and then you have five teams. At that point then you have an argument over whom the final position goes to. You have much less redundancy. In fact you don't even really need the Committee except to figure out rankings throughout the year in order to figure out whom the sixth team is.

The big controversy then is about whom gets the first two byes rather than trying to figure out how to set it up so that you get the least amount of redundant rematches while still trying to maintain the cover story that the seedings have to do simply with where the teams rank and not match ups.

when it expands it's going to 8. They aren't doing byes. TV would make the money way too attractive to pass up.

(12-06-2015 02:23 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  An eight team tournament has too many repeat games within it. Possible rematch between Notre Dame and Stanford. Possible rematch between Ohio State and Michigan State as well as between Michigan State and Iowa. Three teams from the same conference? That's terrible.

And CCG's avoid rematches? LOL. Believe me, the networks want ND in an extra game over Iowa or a crappy Fla team.

(12-06-2015 02:35 PM)stever20 Wrote:  when it expands it's going to 8. They aren't doing byes. TV would make the money way too attractive to pass up.

It's not that simple. Oversaturation is for real. The Networks pay a lot for these games. Too many rematch games isn't worth it when they are paying this much.

(12-06-2015 02:37 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 02:23 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  An eight team tournament has too many repeat games within it. Possible rematch between Notre Dame and Stanford. Possible rematch between Ohio State and Michigan State as well as between Michigan State and Iowa. Three teams from the same conference? That's terrible.

And CCG's avoid rematches? LOL. Believe me, the networks want ND in an extra game over Iowa or a crappy Fla team.

That is the conference's problem. You are comparing apples to oranges and not doing very well at it.

I don't even know what your comparison of Notre Dame is all about. Are you saying there will be a slot for independents only? Right so ND has a bad year and the CFP ends up having to take a BYU or an academy? Yeah...terrible idea.

Factor in rules to make a Real Playoff. Right now, there is no Real Playoff. We've always had #1 Bowl and #2 Bowl. Basically, all they did was mix n match the teams, and the winners play an extra bowl to be crowned 'winner'.

8 team playoff would be a Real playoff. But you'd have to consider the factors of an actual playoff, as with all other sports. Winning your conference means Tons. So if the SEC or ACC had an awesome year, even if their 2nd best team didn't get to play in the conf champ game to win their conference, they should take a backseat to a lower ranked P5 Conf Champ.

- So like other sports, there'd be an auto-bid by P5 Conf Champ
- Independents (BYU, ND) would have to be ranked within Top 8 to get in.
- Top G5 Conf Champ ranked within Top 16 would get in (kind of like old BCS rules to allow a G5)
- No more than 2 teams of same conference unless 3rd-best of said conference team is within Top 4 (top half of the 8)
- Adjust seedings where no two teams of same conference can play each other first round

- First Round would probably be at the favorite's home field or a very-close-to-home NFL stadium.

WHAT IT'D BE LIKE NOW:
1. Clemson [ACC Winner]
8. Houston [G5 Winner-T16] (assuming the CFP deciders were influenced by this and made them 16 not 17)

4. Michigan State [B1G Winner]
5. Stanford [P12 Winner]

-------------

2. Alabama [SEC Winner]
7. Notre Dame

3. Oklahoma [B12 Winner]
6. Iowa

Funny enough, my top 8 was in the exact same order as the committee top 8. Also, sure there might be rematches down the line, but I think that it's more important to have the most deserving teams in. Also, I like 4 teams best, but I just wanted to see what would happen in an 8 team scenario.

(12-06-2015 03:11 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  Factor in rules to make a Real Playoff. Right now, there is no Real Playoff. We've always had #1 Bowl and #2 Bowl. Basically, all they did was mix n match the teams, and the winners play an extra bowl to be crowned 'winner'.

8 team playoff would be a Real playoff. But you'd have to consider the factors of an actual playoff, as with all other sports. Winning your conference means Tons. So if the SEC or ACC had an awesome year, even if their 2nd best team didn't get to play in the conf champ game to win their conference, they should take a backseat to a lower ranked P5 Conf Champ.

- So like other sports, there'd be an auto-bid by P5 Conf Champ
- Independents (BYU, ND) would have to be ranked within Top 8 to get in.
- Top G5 Conf Champ ranked within Top 16 would get in (kind of like old BCS rules to allow a G5)
- No more than 2 teams of same conference unless 3rd-best of said conference team is within Top 4 (top half of the 8)
- Adjust seedings where no two teams of same conference can play each other first round

- First Round would probably be at the favorite's home field or a very-close-to-home NFL stadium.

WHAT IT'D BE LIKE NOW:
1. Clemson [ACC Winner]
8. Houston [G5 Winner-T16] (assuming the CFP deciders were influenced by this and made them 16 not 17)

4. Michigan State [B1G Winner]
5. Stanford [P12 Winner]

-------------

2. Alabama [SEC Winner]
7. Notre Dame

3. Oklahoma [B12 Winner]
6. Iowa

On what planet does a 4 team tourney not defined as a playoff? Oh, okay, so the real playoff has automatic bids and the fake playoff doesn't... okay.

He just wants a better chance for a G5 team to get in. That is his criteria.

Quote:On what planet does a 4 team tourney not defined as a playoff? Oh, okay, so the real playoff has automatic bids and the fake playoff doesn't... okay.

Technically it is, yes. I never argued that. It's like a playoff GAME, not a tournament, was my point. Basically all they're doing is sticking to yesteryears' bowls -- of the #1 Bowl and #2 bowl which they've had, and having the winners play each other in a Play off for it all GAME post regular bowls. It's not a tournament. Just an extra game of the winners of the top 2 bowls which we've had.

An 8 team playoff would be a "real" playoff as in it's an actual tourney. G5 or no G5.

(12-06-2015 03:31 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:On what planet does a 4 team tourney not defined as a playoff? Oh, okay, so the real playoff has automatic bids and the fake playoff doesn't... okay.

Technically it is, yes. I never argued that. It's like a playoff GAME, not a tournament, was my point. Basically all they're doing is sticking to yesteryears' bowls -- of the #1 Bowl and #2 bowl which they've had, and having the winners play each other in a Play off for it all GAME post regular bowls. It's not a tournament. Just an extra game of the winners of the top 2 bowls which we've had.

An 8 team playoff would be a "real" playoff as in it's an actual tourney. G5 or no G5.

It's a seeded playoff, not a plus one or a re-ranking. It's a mini tourney. 8 teams is not going to guarantee anything for the 9th team. Undefeated G5 still may get left out. There are always going to be people complaining about being 5 or being 9.

It's a real real stretch calling it a mini-tourney. Again, we already had 2 top bowls for the #1-#4 teams before. All it is is an extra game for the winners of each of those bowls.

Technically that top bowl before, was a play off for the national champion. They just added an extra bowl. It's not really a tourney, although visually they'll lay it out to make it seem like one so much, because we're used to Not seeing anything like a playoff in college football over generations - lol. It's a playoff game of winners of the two top bowls, is all. Much like the B1G championship was a playoff of the winners of the East & West divisional winners. An extra game.

Quote:There are always going to be people complaining about being 5 or being 9.

The reason 8-team playoff would be good is that it'd include all P5 Conf Champs. So no, it wouldn't be the same complaints, as having Stanford left out. Keep doing it of Top 2 Bowls + playoff-bowl-after, leaving out 1 P5 conf champ, you'll have some Real WTF complaining going on. Imagine instead of Mich State & Oklahoma tied for #3/#4 like right now in votes, you have #4/#5 tied -- wtf, right? A P5 CHAMP left out?? Choas!

8 team would be an actual tournament. A mini-tournament but something more than an-extra-bowl "playoff".

Putting all 5 P5 Champs in there (regardless of ranking), and the other 3 being potential G5 Conf Champ ranked at least #x or higher (8th, 10th, 12th, or 16th)... an Indep ranked #8 or higher, and the best leftovers, you'd have a Real playoff -- not a one-bowl-add-on.

Yeah autobids don't work for me. I have no interest seeing 3-4 loss teams in a QF game. Sorry P5 conferences, schedule some tough OOC games and get into the top 4.

(12-06-2015 04:12 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Yeah autobids don't work for me. I have no interest seeing 3-4 loss teams in a QF game. Sorry P5 conferences, schedule some tough OOC games and get into the top 4.

Same. A conference championship alone shouldn't get a team that might have gone 6-3 in conference and 8-4 overall in by default just because they won one game. I love watching those games, but I think you have to take the whole season into account. In a 16 team playoff (which will never/should never happen) sure, but not with 8

Quote:A conference championship alone shouldn't get a team that might have gone 6-3 in conference and 8-4 overall in by default just because they won one game.

It's pretty rare an 8-4 P5 team, then being 9-4 wins it's P5 championship game. Basically when there's the better team in that division's banned from post-season or something and they're 2nd place to go to it and still pulling a bulky upset over the other divisional champ.

But in the end, if you're Conference Champ, it means something -- not "just another game". Taking the whole regular season into account led them to it. If a 9-4 P5 conference winner who, after that was barely ranked, got into it, they'd be the lowest seed anyway facing the #1 team in the country in their house. IMO, you win a P5 conference, it's a Big Deal -- hence Guarantees now to a BCS Bowl. By your rationale, we should maybe nix that?

Say in the East division of the B1G, it was different -- and an 8-4 Iowa got to go on a tie breaker, and team upset 11-1 MSU in it -- should then 9-4 Iowa NOT be able to go to the Rose Bowl? They won the B1G. By your rationale it should be highly questioned if not yanked from the Rose Bowl.

Conference Champs matter a lot. Building up to win your Division is part of the "playoff race" -- and to win your conference post-season game is the prelim round of playoffs. It is a playoff to see who's guaranteed a BCS Bowl -- but instead, for the P5s -- I say a spot in an 8-team playoff.

For G5 Conference Winners? Kind of the same thing before the extra-added national champ bowl was put in last year: If you're the Top G5 Conf Champ of all G5 Conferences and ranked #16 or higher, come on in. One could make an argument that instead of 12 teams in BCS Bowls, there's only 8 in this playoff, so maybe ranked #12 or higher would get them in.

But IMO, I want to see an 8-team playoff to include P5 Conf Champs to play off to see who's better. Independents (ND) having a chance to get in, too if ranked high enough. So that's 5 or possibly 6. So to make the playoff have enough teams to play off each other, you'll need 2-3 more. You can add a #2 of a conference here and there of the best (highest ranked), and still even reward a Top G5 who would serve as a "reward" to the #1 in the first round to face if they're a solidly ranked team for being the best Conf Winner of all G5s.

But yes, my POV puts focus on Conf Winners, as that within itself is a "play off race"... and if you lose your Conf, even if your Conf is better than the another, you don't get any guarantees. Don't like it? Join another conference.