In advance of Monday's meeting of the CFP Executive Board, where playoff expansion could be discussed, he says personally, he thinks 4 is the right number:

"Despite multiple conference commissioners including Big 12’s Bob Bowlsby publicly say it’s time to start thinking about playoff expansion, Hancock said he doesn’t envision it happening during the playoff’s current contract which runs through 2026.

“I don’t see it,” Hancock said. “The four-team playoff format is extremely popular.”


https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2019/...nsion.html

It's hard to not question that "extremely popular" remark. It needs some context.

(01-06-2019 08:29 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  It's hard to not question that "extremely popular" remark. It needs some context.

The networks are paying a lot more money for the CFP than they were for the BCS. Are they complaining?

(01-06-2019 08:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-06-2019 08:29 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  It's hard to not question that "extremely popular" remark. It needs some context.

The networks are paying a lot more money for the CFP than they were for the BCS. Are they complaining?

That’s my point. Because the ratings and stadiums are indicating something a little different.

A couple of observations.

First, I do like the four team format, in particular because it preserves the importance of the regular season. I fear that if the playoffs are expanded to 8 that there is a real risk that the importance of many regular season games would be watered down.

Second, I think the biggest problem with the playoff format is that the semis are only on New Years Day once every three years. I would favor moving them to New Years Day permanently. It could be done if during years that the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal, the first semifinal were played in the 1 pm time slot, leaving the Rose on New Years in the 5 pm slot.

The other notable problem has been the dominance of a handful of teams. I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I don't think going to 8 would make a difference.

Isn't this the same guy who said we'd never have a playoff? He just says no to all changes and then gets on board when changes are made

(01-06-2019 11:07 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  Isn't this the same guy who said we'd never have a playoff? He just says no to all changes and then gets on board when changes are made

Yes. You can believe the politician who comes in after a debate to talk about how their candidate did more than Hancock. What he says is less than meaningless.

(01-06-2019 10:40 AM)orangefan Wrote:  A couple of observations.

First, I do like the four team format, in particular because it preserves the importance of the regular season. I fear that if the playoffs are expanded to 8 that there is a real risk that the importance of many regular season games would be watered down.

Second, I think the biggest problem with the playoff format is that the semis are only on New Years Day once every three years. I would favor moving them to New Years Day permanently. It could be done if during years that the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal, the first semifinal were played in the 1 pm time slot, leaving the Rose on New Years in the 5 pm slot.

The other notable problem has been the dominance of a handful of teams. I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I don't think going to 8 would make a difference.

I think the Saturday slot is problematic, but New Year’s Day 8:45pm ET is a killer for East Coast fans. Especially with these inflated halftimes. I don’t think it will do much for the ratings. I also don’t think you can play semis on different days.

The games were non competitive. Let’s not overthink it. ND should have done a rating but the casual fans turned it off early.

We need more data points. More often than not we will see competitive games over 15 plus years.

(01-06-2019 11:29 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(01-06-2019 10:40 AM)orangefan Wrote:  A couple of observations.

First, I do like the four team format, in particular because it preserves the importance of the regular season. I fear that if the playoffs are expanded to 8 that there is a real risk that the importance of many regular season games would be watered down.

Second, I think the biggest problem with the playoff format is that the semis are only on New Years Day once every three years. I would favor moving them to New Years Day permanently. It could be done if during years that the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal, the first semifinal were played in the 1 pm time slot, leaving the Rose on New Years in the 5 pm slot.

The other notable problem has been the dominance of a handful of teams. I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I don't think going to 8 would make a difference.

I think the Saturday slot is problematic, but New Year’s Day 8:45pm ET is a killer for East Coast fans. Especially with these inflated halftimes. I don’t think it will do much for the ratings. I also don’t think you can play semis on different days.

The games were non competitive. Let’s not overthink it. ND should have done a rating but the casual fans turned it off early.

We need more data points. More often than not we will see competitive games over 15 plus years.

will it though? The Oklahoma game vs Alabama was the 3rd best semifinal in the 5 years. Only 2 games that were closer were Oklahoma/Georgia last year and Alabama/Ohio St in 2014. The other 7 semifinals- average MOV is 27 points, with the losing team scoring fewer than 10 points in 5 of the 7 games.

'Member when Bill Hancock said a plus-1 model was "logistically impossible "?

(01-06-2019 11:07 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  Isn't this the same guy who said we'd never have a playoff? He just says no to all changes and then gets on board when changes are made

Delany has made comments he wants to consider expansion so now its an open consideration because Hancock knows if the B1G is on board that is enough support to at least discuss it.

Larry Scott isn't as important to the same degree as Delany as he's commanding the 5th wheel power conference at the moment.

Of course the G5 will latch on to any expansion to 8 as they have no shot now with the committee measuring strongest schedule.

Hancock's view counts for something, he's not a nobody like you or I posting to this forum. He will be in the room meeting with the conference commissioners and university Presidents.

And, he really doesn't have skin in the game. Even if the decision is made to expand to 8, he will keep his job, just like he kept it when he was BCS director and they expanded to 4 with the CFP.

So while yes, ultimately it will be the SEC and B1G and university Presidents that make the call, Hancock obviously has had their confidence for many years and so if he says no expansion now is what he's hearing, that has to be taken seriously.

(01-06-2019 10:40 AM)orangefan Wrote:  The other notable problem has been the dominance of a handful of teams. I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I don't think going to 8 would make a difference.

Yes, if FCS is any guide, we'll end up with someone winning 5 years in a row.

(01-06-2019 12:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Hancock's view counts for something, he's not a nobody like you or I posting to this forum. He will be in the room meeting with the conference commissioners and university Presidents.

And, he really doesn't have skin in the game. Even if the decision is made to expand to 8, he will keep his job, just like he kept it when he was BCS director and they expanded to 4 with the CFP.

So while yes, ultimately it will be the SEC and B1G and university Presidents that make the call, Hancock obviously has had their confidence for many years and so if he says no expansion now is what he's hearing, that has to be taken seriously.

Hancock is a mouthpiece. He's not a decision maker. He's just repeating the party line until it changes. What he says may be true, but his saying it doesn't give you any more information than before he said it.

(01-06-2019 10:40 AM)orangefan Wrote:  A couple of observations.

First, I do like the four team format, in particular because it preserves the importance of the regular season. I fear that if the playoffs are expanded to 8 that there is a real risk that the importance of many regular season games would be watered down.

Second, I think the biggest problem with the playoff format is that the semis are only on New Years Day once every three years. I would favor moving them to New Years Day permanently. It could be done if during years that the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal, the first semifinal were played in the 1 pm time slot, leaving the Rose on New Years in the 5 pm slot.

The other notable problem has been the dominance of a handful of teams. I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I don't think going to 8 would make a difference.

Ive never really understood this argument---especially with respect to making the P5 champs AQ. We spend 66-75% of every season determining conference champions. It seems hard for me to fathom that making conference championships irrelevant does much for the sanctity of the regular season.

Football will never ruin its regular season like basketball has. Basketball's regular season has become devalued and worthless because its become a mere seeding exercise for the conference tournaments. The conference tournaments are the only guaranteed way to make the post season. The regular season in football is completely different because the regular season ONLY determinant to making the post season in football. Thats true if the post season is 2, 4 , 8, or 16. It makes no difference.

(01-06-2019 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-06-2019 10:40 AM)orangefan Wrote:  A couple of observations.

First, I do like the four team format, in particular because it preserves the importance of the regular season. I fear that if the playoffs are expanded to 8 that there is a real risk that the importance of many regular season games would be watered down.

Second, I think the biggest problem with the playoff format is that the semis are only on New Years Day once every three years. I would favor moving them to New Years Day permanently. It could be done if during years that the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal, the first semifinal were played in the 1 pm time slot, leaving the Rose on New Years in the 5 pm slot.

The other notable problem has been the dominance of a handful of teams. I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I don't think going to 8 would make a difference.

Ive never really understood this argument---especially with respect to making the P5 champs AQ. We spend 66-75% of every season determining conference champions. It seems hard for me to fathom that making conference championships irrelevant does much for the sanctity of the regular season.

Football will never ruin its regular season like basketball has. Basketball's regular season has become devalued and worthless because its become a mere seeding exercise for the conference tournaments. The conference tournaments are the only guaranteed way to make the post season. The regular season in football is completely different because the regular season ONLY determinant to making the post season in football. Thats true if the post season is 2, 4 , 8, or 16. It makes no difference.

Agree.

You can't win the regular season. You can't win the conference tournament. Why does any team who doesn't finish in the top 3 of their conference belong in the NCAA championship? They've already had plenty of chances. The NCAA tourney would be better back at 48 or 52. And it would be better if 10 or so conferences were moved down to Division II.

Right basketball is a 350 team tournament essentially because the conference tournaments are a play-in.

MAC fans are bitter because of not getting 2 in the NCAAs while MVC and A10 are getting multiple teams in. MVC and A10 fans have major conference egos over the multiple bids.

But largely whether its 3, 5 or 7 bids in a season for a power basketball conference they don't really care. Most ACC fans don't even know how many teams they get in a year. The FCS conferences don't care they know where they belong on the food chain.

Football of course will never be an inclusive 128 tournament playoff like basketball where you can play 4 games in 4 days. At best it may get to the point where all 10 conference championship games are play-ins to the CFP but that is still highly dependent on the regular season because a school has to win its division.

(01-06-2019 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Basketball's regular season has become devalued and worthless because its become a mere seeding exercise for the conference tournaments.

Not true. College basketball's regular season was not more popular when there were fewer teams in the NCAA tournament, not even back when the NCAA stupidly limited each conference to only one tournament bid. It might be devalued in your opinion, but now there are more games watched by more TV viewers than ever, and cutting down the number of tournament teams would not make the regular season more popular. The availability of at-large tournament bids drives the February TV ratings, because it adds interest to games between 4th and 5th place teams that would be far less meaningful if there were few or no at-large places in the tournament.

(01-06-2019 02:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-06-2019 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Basketball's regular season has become devalued and worthless because its become a mere seeding exercise for the conference tournaments.

Not true. College basketball's regular season was not more popular when there were fewer teams in the NCAA tournament, not even back when the NCAA stupidly limited each conference to only one tournament bid. It might be devalued in your opinion, but now there are more games watched by more TV viewers than ever, and cutting down the number of tournament teams would not make the regular season more popular. The availability of at-large tournament bids drives the February TV ratings, because it adds interest to games between 4th and 5th place teams that would be far less meaningful if there were few or no at-large places in the tournament.

There's still less interest in individual games. "It just doesn't mean more." Each game means less.

to me, it's a question of which one would you rather have being really important. I'll take basketball every day and that postseason....