Quote:No, mine is numerically accurate - 19/20.
You're counting every conference each year if they make it, over the past 5 years. It gives the illusion of "better". It's that 1 out of the past 5 years, Not All made it. And 5 out of the last 10 years, Not All Made it. What I am saying is 100% accurate, too. Yours is, but you're shortening it to just the last 5 years which makes it look better either way, and counting all Teams within conferences each year to jump up the #s to make it not seem that bad.
Again, whether I was more on your side or not, I'm taking the perspective of the P5 Commissioners. Their focus is going to be "How can we maximize that we ALL get in?" With 8 teams, that's what they figure would solve (most of) that. That's what's drawing them to it -- not just mere fans more wanting a Real Playoff (8+ teams). 5 out of 10 years, NOT all P5 Champs would make it in by a straight-8. You're just looking at the last 5 years.
Quote:And as i explained, there is zero evidence from 1890 to 2018 that the major conferences consider autobids for their champs as an ideal end goal.
Of course it has. It got you to the Rose Bowl for the B10 & PAC10/12. Especially when you don't have a playoff (until very very very recently), that was the main goal. Get rid of Conf Champ auto-bids to Big Bowls. See how that works out.
Quote:In fact, we've had a 'playoff' for 20 years - two team and now four team. It's really not complicated.
2 team is not really a playoff anymore than the P12 vs B1G Champs in a Rose Bowl for the who's-better. Or any Conf Championship game. They're not calling Conf Championship games like, "The PAC 12 Playoff" for a reason.
The current 4-team is instead letting the winners of the top 2 bowls play an extra battle for the Nat Champ. This is a playoff, yes. It's not really much of a system, but a snickers bar to feed the hungry, for now. Some P5 heads are getting a bit hungry now (hence the news, discussion, etc).
Quote:In other words, college football is slowly being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 20th century. They have a ways to go.
Pretty much. If you were to say in the 90s that we'd be shifting the bowls around where the Rose Bowl wouldn't have B10 vs P12 Champ every year, and instead would sometimes be designated as Top 2 bowls, where the Top 4 Ranked would be placed and winners would play for a post-bowl Nat Champ -- all while almost ALL teams 6-6 or better would get into Bowls, including low-end General Conference teams -- many would LAUGH and say NO WAY is that happening. Granted, part of their argument would be valid -- why something weird like that? Why not, like an 8-team playoff if you're going to ruin the eliteness of bowls anyway and allow everyone and their cat into them? My response would be: It's a transition, and CFB likes to keep as many fingers in the jars of tradition as much as possible, even if the combination of old & new looks silly at the time.
I say throw out nostalgia (it's for nostrils), don't rely on "tradition" as the end-all-be-all argument. It's already outside of "tradition" anyway. Mine as well make the Playoff system most ideal.
Quote:Why doesn't the NFL throw away their playoff format, and use an NFL Playoff committee to pick the 4 most deserving teams to be in the NFL Playoffs?
Yeah, Only have the two best Ranked in the AFC play, and two best Ranked in the NFC play, and winners go to Super Bowl. Ya already played WAY More games VS # of teams in the league than CFB does! Just cut to the chase, right?? I think that's the argument that those who scoff hard at an 8-team playoff idea Should have! :)
/
The Athletic: college football power brokers pushing for 8 team playoff
