First Craig Thompson the MWC Commish, the DeLoss Dodds of Texas and now this. Here is the link.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...erm-answer

(06-02-2013 03:44 PM)Maize Wrote:  First Craig Thompson the MWC Commish, the DeLoss Dodds of Texas and now this. Here is the link.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...erm-answer

Is anyone but the gullible surprised?

Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

(06-02-2013 04:27 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 03:44 PM)Maize Wrote:  First Craig Thompson the MWC Commish, the DeLoss Dodds of Texas and now this. Here is the link.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...erm-answer

Is anyone but the gullible surprised?

Not surprised...but "this soon"...the Old BCS hasn't even finished yet...

12 years before expansion of CPO

(06-02-2013 04:46 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

I'm hoping they stop at 8. That's adding 3 weeks to the schedule for the champ and runner-up already. I just don't see a compelling argument for teams 9 - 16 like there is for 5 - 8.

(06-02-2013 05:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 04:46 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

I'm hoping they stop at 8. That's adding 3 weeks to the schedule for the champ and runner-up already. I just don't see a compelling argument for teams 9 - 16 like there is for 5 - 8.

Whenever they expand...whether it 6 years in or @ the end of the current deal...8 should be the max..

(06-02-2013 06:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 05:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 04:46 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

I'm hoping they stop at 8. That's adding 3 weeks to the schedule for the champ and runner-up already. I just don't see a compelling argument for teams 9 - 16 like there is for 5 - 8.

Whenever they expand...whether it 6 years in or @ the end of the current deal...8 should be the max..

Eight teams makes sense if you are in a power conference and simply need to finish 11-2 and be conference champion in order to be one of the eight teams in most years.

If, on the other hand, you are a G5 team that can finish undefeated at 13-0 and ranked around 5, 6, or 7 in most polls, the idea of stopping at eight is going to keep you up at night.

A compromise would be stopping at twelve. In most seasons, that won't result in an extra game for anyone. I am not sure I understand the rationale, though. For me, the "season is long enough" argument died when the twelfth game and conference championship games were added.

(06-02-2013 07:14 PM)Freshy Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 06:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 05:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 04:46 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

I'm hoping they stop at 8. That's adding 3 weeks to the schedule for the champ and runner-up already. I just don't see a compelling argument for teams 9 - 16 like there is for 5 - 8.

Whenever they expand...whether it 6 years in or @ the end of the current deal...8 should be the max..

Eight teams makes sense if you are in a power conference and simply need to finish 11-2 and be conference champion in order to be one of the eight teams in most years.

If, on the other hand, you are a G5 team that can finish undefeated at 13-0 and ranked around 5, 6, or 7 in most polls, the idea of stopping at eight is going to keep you up at night.

A compromise would be stopping at twelve. In most seasons, that won't result in an extra game for anyone. I am not sure I understand the rationale, though. For me, the "season is long enough" argument died when the twelfth game and conference championship games were added.

The only reason why I say 8 is the number of games that the players would be subject to...you have the injury, concussion, no compensation issue IMO with an expanded playoff.

A way you can get around that is in the 7-10 range out an emphasis on Conference Champion.

(06-02-2013 05:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 04:46 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

I'm hoping they stop at 8. That's adding 3 weeks to the schedule for the champ and runner-up already. I just don't see a compelling argument for teams 9 - 16 like there is for 5 - 8.

The other unknown, even with 8 teams, is ticket sales. ESPN would happily pay for an 8-team playoff, or even 12 or 16, but is the attendance going to be there? How many 80,000-seat stadiums can you ask a team's fans to fill on three consecutive weeks in three different cities, at ticket prices that will probably start at $75 per seat and escalate from there. For a championship game, you can count on the people seeking out the big event, and the corporate sponsors, in addition to the fans of the participating teams.

For the first round in an 8-team playoff, though, they might have to let the higher seed host, or risk a stadium with a lot of empty seats.

That would be even more acute if there are 12-16 teams, and once you get past 8 teams people will also start complaining about diluting the regular season, but we don't need to worry about those things until after they have expanded to 8 teams.

Every conference champion deserves a spot in the playoff, just like in basketball and baseball. Anything less than that is highly suspect, in my opinion.

THe larger the playoff gets the less sense larger conferences make, i.e. 14 team big 10/sec + a large playoff devalues the conference champ games. Those games should be considered the 1st round of the playoffs. Now i could see an 8 team playoff with 4 spots guaranteed spots for conference champs. Yet, the last thing you want is teams to play 3 times, regular season, conference champ game, than the playoffs. What i think happens is it jumps to 8 with the first round on campus. Round 2 could be a double header in a rotated site with the final round in a bowl.

(06-02-2013 08:50 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Every conference champion deserves a spot in the playoff, just like in basketball and baseball. Anything less than that is highly suspect, in my opinion.

I disagree. Football is a different animal than basketball, and some conferences are more equal than others. With the way the games would be seeded, the lowest rated conference champions would be playing the highest rated conference champions in an annual blowout that nobody would be interested in seeing, except for the fans of those 2 schools. The first round in a 16 team playoff with all conference champions making it in would be lucky to have half the games being worth watching. The other half would be tremendous mismatches that would be a waste of TV time IMO...

And to continue to tell the truth, I wouldn't mind seeing the basketball tourney cut down in size, so that only conference champions make the cut. That way we could let the teams in the tourney play best a of 3 series to determine who moves on to the next round and wins it all. Cinderella stands a good chance of winning when it's only one game. But add a couple more games to the mix in each round, and Cinderella's chances go way down. It wouldn't diminish the tourney one bit, and would add to the excitement, since one loss wouldn't automatically put a team out, and Cinderella would live on in the comeback kids...

8 teams, no AQs

If you aren't a top 8 team already, you don't have a case for being the #1 team no matter what conference you won.

(06-02-2013 09:23 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  8 teams, no AQs

If you aren't a top 8 team already, you don't have a case for being the #1 team no matter what conference you won.

8 teams, the P5 conference champions, and the top 3 at large teams (2 team max per conference,eliminating poll bias). If a Go5 conference team can make it under those conditions, they're welcome. If not, 3 P5 conferences should get an extra payout...

(06-02-2013 09:47 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 09:23 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  8 teams, no AQs

If you aren't a top 8 team already, you don't have a case for being the #1 team no matter what conference you won.

8 teams, the P5 conference champions, and the top 3 at large teams (2 team max per conference,eliminating poll bias). If a Go5 conference team can make it under those conditions, they're welcome. If not, 3 P5 conferences should get an extra payout...

I would be stunned if an 13-0 Boise State or 13-0 Cincinnati is not in under that scenario...even a 1 loss would have an outside shot if they had a strong SoS.

I have said all along that a Plus One or a Final Four is actually worse than the BCS and is definitely a recipe for controversy/disaster. By going to eight teams, they'd mitigate that quite a bit. By going to 16 teams, they'd eliminate it altogether.

Some people call that bracket creep but I'd call it common sense.

(06-02-2013 08:58 PM)bluesox Wrote:  THe larger the playoff gets the less sense larger conferences make, i.e. 14 team big 10/sec + a large playoff devalues the conference champ games. Those games should be considered the 1st round of the playoffs. Now i could see an 8 team playoff with 4 spots guaranteed spots for conference champs. Yet, the last thing you want is teams to play 3 times, regular season, conference champ game, than the playoffs. What i think happens is it jumps to 8 with the first round on campus. Round 2 could be a double header in a rotated site with the final round in a bowl.

You could decide several games on New Year's Day... like the Pac 12/Big Champion. Winner goes to the playoffs, round 2.

Said it wouldn't take long to see the rhetoric brought to the Media about expanding the Tournament. The mock committee already told us as much last season.

After realignment, the two leftover issues were NCAA rules and the Tournament. We are seeing a quick transition to both of them with CBS and ESPN whoring themselves out quite efficiently for these guys to guide the discussion forward on both of these fronts.


Once again though, we have fans thinking with too much of a fan mentality. The tournament wont be going past 8 anytime soon.

(06-02-2013 05:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2013 04:46 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would hope they would eventually go to 16 and keep it there.

I'm hoping they stop at 8. That's adding 3 weeks to the schedule for the champ and runner-up already. I just don't see a compelling argument for teams 9 - 16 like there is for 5 - 8.

2008 was really the only time as many as 8 teams was needed. We had undefeated Texas Tech as the 3-way tie for Big 12 champ...PSU as Big Ten champ (1 last-second loss...very similar to mighty Florida's loss...the eventual champion since they were bequeath a shot in the BCS title game)...USC as Pac-12 champ...and undefeated Utah....all left out of a 4-team playoff.

8 is perfect. Home game for round 1 the week after conference championship games...then use the new 5-bowl rotation for the semifinals still.