How would a 16 team playoff look?

[NaturalStateReb]

I'm a fan of the 8 team system. As it stands right now, there are 5 major conferences. Only having 4 spots immediately relegates an entire conference to second tier,  plus it loses money relative to the BCS system (only 3 big games vs the 5 big games previously). TCU deserved to be in just like Bama, FSU, Oregon, and tOSU.

If you are going to have a playoff, the point of that is to crown a champion. Therefore, you need to have a system that allows all teams deserving to be in to get in. If you have a system whose purpose is to make sure teams that don't deserve it don't get in, then you will leave teams that do deserve it, out. That is where 8 comes in. In general, that would equate to the major conference champions as well as a few extras. However, I think conf. champion should carry a large weight, but not a guarantee. If you win the ACC ranked 14th and finish 9-3, that isn't really a playoff team. If you went 12-0 but lost to that 9-3 team in the champ game, then it depends on the rest of the field and quality wins by yourself to if you get in.

I agree.  16 teams are probably too many--what are the chances that #11 is actually the best team?  Eight, however, makes sense, especially in light of last year's finish. 

I think it's headed to 8 just for the reason you cite:  if we've got 5 power conferences, one of them is guaranteed to be left out, and 2 of them could be if one league gets in 2 teams.  There's no way they're going to put up with that long term. 

4 teams were just to show profitable it could be.  8 is the real number.

[hogsanity]

I suspect most who want more playoff teams also enjoy the uptempo no defense 56-53 type games too. They just want more more more of what excites them.

That said, 16 teams is not terrible IF it is the top 16 teams, not the weak sister winners of the poor old deaf nuns of sissy conferences like the sunbelt, mac, mt west, conf usa, etc.

[bennyl08]

I suspect most who want more playoff teams also enjoy the uptempo no defense 56-53 type games too. They just want more more more of what excites them.

That said, 16 teams is not terrible IF it is the top 16 teams, not the weak sister winners of the poor old deaf nuns of sissy conferences like the sunbelt, mac, mt west, conf usa, etc.

I suspect what you suspect is suspect. Wanting playoffs has nothing to do with wanting more games, it has to do with crowning a true champion. Having more games is actually an argument against higher seeded playoffs, rarely is it an argument for. Sunbelt and C-USA actually have some of the best bowl records of any conference, bowls usually played against low to mid-tier power conferences as opposed to sisters of the even poorer. Not saying they should get a spot in the playoffs just because of winning their conference, but yeah, I'd put in a 12-0 southern miss over a 9-3 Arizona State, at least if they scheduled some good OOC games.

[hogsanity]

I suspect what you suspect is suspect. Wanting playoffs has nothing to do with wanting more games, it has to do with crowning a true champion. Having more games is actually an argument against higher seeded playoffs, rarely is it an argument for. Sunbelt and C-USA actually have some of the best bowl records of any conference, bowls usually played against low to mid-tier power conferences as opposed to sisters of the even poorer. Not saying they should get a spot in the playoffs just because of winning their conference, but yeah, I'd put in a 12-0 southern miss over a 9-3 Arizona State, at least if they scheduled some good OOC games.

So because the winner of the sunbelt does not get in the playoff, it is not crowing a true champion?

Of course I was against having a playoff at all because I knew it would eventually lead to arguments from the little guys to get a guaranteed seat at the table.

D1 needs to be cut to 64 teams, then we can talk real playoff.

[bphi11ips]

Eight is Enough

[Hogfaniam]

Eight is Enough

Is that coming back too?  First Full House...

[Hogfaniam]

So because the winner of the sunbelt does not get in the playoff, it is not crowing a true champion?

Of course I was against having a playoff at all because I knew it would eventually lead to arguments from the little guys to get a guaranteed seat at the table.

D1 needs to be cut to 64 teams, then we can talk real playoff.

How would the cut be done? 

[LZH]

Cotton Bowl!  Woo Pig Sooie!

Wait, um, wps?

Damn....Tangerine Bowl?

[bennyl08]

So because the winner of the sunbelt does not get in the playoff, it is not crowing a true champion?

Of course I was against having a playoff at all because I knew it would eventually lead to arguments from the little guys to get a guaranteed seat at the table.

D1 needs to be cut to 64 teams, then we can talk real playoff.

Did I come close to saying or even implying that? I say that TCU had every right to be in the playoff this year as did every other participant. If you have an undefeated Boise St. team that is ranked in the top 5 because they also beat some ranked teams in OOC play, then yes, they do have an argument to be in the playoff over a 9-3 ACC champ. Very few people it seems are a fan of somebody being guaranteed a spot at the table and I explicitly mentioned that I was against it as well. The only reason I brought up the sun-belt is to counter the idea that they can't compete. Big East was guaranteed a spot during the BCS series and everybody lampooned that they had a guaranteed spot. However, they had a much better record in their BCS bowl than the Big 10, Big 12, and ACC (Big east had nearly double the winning percentage of the ACC).

[Svrdhd]

My kid was involved in a series of FCS playoff games, the weekly travel can and will be thousands of miles. It's not at all like basketball where there are regionals, you may be Louisiana, Oregon, and Chicago in consecutive weeks. As a result attendance is poor, especially in the early rounds.
  Besides, the 4 team playoff is simply a safety mechanism to make sure #3 has a shot, just in case we didn't get #1 and #2 right. As a side benefit we've added a 4th. I personally have no interest in anything beyond that.

[hoghiker]

My kid was involved in a series of FCS playoff games, the weekly travel can and will be thousands of miles. It's not at all like basketball where there are regionals, you may be Louisiana, Oregon, and Chicago in consecutive weeks. As a result attendance is poor, especially in the early rounds.
  Besides, the 4 team playoff is simply a safety mechanism to make sure #3 has a shot, just in case we didn't get #1 and #2 right. As a side benefit we've added a 4th. I personally have no interest in anything beyond that.

The student athlete is lost in all of this. Going to a 16 round playoff solidifies college football's full acceptance of professional  status. Look no further than Kentucky basketball if you want an example. I know, I know, I'm deluding myself that there is a shred of amateurism  left in college sports. I'd like to keep my delusion and keep it the way it is. Arkansas, in my opinion, has a better shot now than under an expanded system. We win the SEC then advance to the quarter finals. Neat, tidy and it retains some resemblance to college sports. I like it.

[Senility]

I could be wrong (it wouldn't be the first time), but it seems to me that the underlying premise of the major bowl matchups and the recent playoff goals are vying to pit highly successful major college teams of considerable interest from differing conferences against one another.

Politically correct sporting equanimity do gooders and arbiters are adamant about ceding a few spots to the little guys and the independents; but not many nationwide fans get all lathered up about a proposed matchup between Sari State and Yoo Hoo U - even if both DID go 11 and 0.

[hogsanity]

Did I come close to saying or even implying that? I say that TCU had every right to be in the playoff this year as did every other participant. If you have an undefeated Boise St. team that is ranked in the top 5 because they also beat some ranked teams in OOC play, then yes, they do have an argument to be in the playoff over a 9-3 ACC champ. Very few people it seems are a fan of somebody being guaranteed a spot at the table and I explicitly mentioned that I was against it as well. The only reason I brought up the sun-belt is to counter the idea that they can't compete. Big East was guaranteed a spot during the BCS series and everybody lampooned that they had a guaranteed spot. However, they had a much better record in their BCS bowl than the Big 10, Big 12, and ACC (Big east had nearly double the winning percentage of the ACC).

And that was my argument against a playoff all along, there was no set way to win your way in. At the end of the day it was going to be picked by humans, which was the old gripe about awarding a NC by poll rankings. Now, people are just placated by the fact that the "top 4" play games against each other to crown a "nc".

That is why I have always been a proponent of 4 16 team leagues, the conf winners are automatically the 4 playoff teams. Whether the conference do 2 divisions each, and those div winners play conf title games, or they go to 4 divisions in each league, and play some sort of internal conf playoff, either way I am fine with it because the teams would have won their way in, not been picked by some committee.

[The_Iceman]

Here is what I want:

Top 8 teams, no automatic bids. Just straight up 8 best. Put them in a 8 team playoff that starts Christmas week. Final 4 on New Years Day. Championship a Week later.

[hogsanity]

Here is what I want:

Top 8 teams, no automatic bids. Just straight up 8 best. Put them in a 8 team playoff that starts Christmas week. Final 4 on New Years Day. Championship a Week later.

back to a question I have asked for years, HOW do you determine the " top 8" teams?

[SantaHog]

It seems like I remember a proposal for the 8 or 16 team system from a couple of years ago that had the first round of games being played at the higher ranked teams home field.  Then, the remaining rounds would be played in bowl games.  That way the fans wouldn't be having to pay for bowl trips as much. 

[Hogs-n-Roses]

We would love it as hog fans I believe. The paying to be playing power 8-10 would hate it. Alabama, Florida, Texas, tOSU,USCw, , Albarn,Oklahomer,Oregon,Fl.State...... You know the teams paying recruits during the recruiting process, usually unofficial visits where it starts. The NCAA believes that if one of these schools wins it all then its good for the game. The NCAA has had enuff dirt on major players for each of these teams in the last 10 years to penalize each into the next century yet awards them wit national titles then a slap on the wrist. Google NCAA football national championships WIKI... scroll down to about 1970- present.

[Pork Twain]

Once we put basketball in a 64-team tournament, the whole thing crumbled.  Clearly a cautionary tale.

Because basketball and football are the same

[NaturalStateReb]

Because basketball and football are the same

They're not the same, but every other sport has a playoff, and every other division has a playoff.  We even have high school football playoffs, but somehow, education isn't destroyed, the sport soldiers on, and the world keeps turning.

All this discussion is missing is someone yelling for the kids to get off the lawn.

[hogsanity]

They're not the same, but every other sport has a playoff, and every other division has a playoff.  We even have high school football playoffs, but somehow, education isn't destroyed, the sport soldiers on, and the world keeps turning.

All this discussion is missing is someone yelling for the kids to get off the lawn.

And in the other football divisions they only play 10 regular season games to allow for the playoffs. Do you honestly think that FBS level is going to cut 2 games, knowing that 2/3rds of its teams have no shot to make the playoff, even if they expand to 16. Do they cut 2 ooc games, thus ending the very mechanism many small programs have for renting themselves out to get stomped to fund their program?

And lets assume they do, now we are back to HOW do you qualify for the playoff?

[Rzbakfromwaybak]

Believe that an 8 team playoff is more realistic, don't believe it will ever get to a 16 team.

The 4 team playoff that we have now, is just not enough in most seasons, to get a true National Champion.

A 4 team playoff in football as we have now, is similar as going to a 16 team playoff/championship in basketball.  Too many good teams that actually have a chance to advance, would be left out.

[NaturalStateReb]

And in the other football divisions they only play 10 regular season games to allow for the playoffs. Do you honestly think that FBS level is going to cut 2 games, knowing that 2/3rds of its teams have no shot to make the playoff, even if they expand to 16. Do they cut 2 ooc games, thus ending the very mechanism many small programs have for renting themselves out to get stomped to fund their program?

And lets assume they do, now we are back to HOW do you qualify for the playoff?

I don't advocate having a 16-team playoff.  I'm in favor of the 8-team, first game at home model. 

I don't think we have to cut any games.  We're already playing football until January.  There's plenty of time to do it. 

[hogsanity]

I don't advocate having a 16-team playoff.  I'm in favor of the 8-team, first game at home model. 

I don't think we have to cut any games.  We're already playing football until January.  There's plenty of time to do it. 

Ok, but how will we pick those teams?

[Hogfaniam]

And in the other football divisions they only play 10 regular season games to allow for the playoffs. Do you honestly think that FBS level is going to cut 2 games, knowing that 2/3rds of its teams have no shot to make the playoff, even if they expand to 16. Do they cut 2 ooc games, thus ending the very mechanism many small programs have for renting themselves out to get stomped to fund their program?

And lets assume they do, now we are back to HOW do you qualify for the playoff?

Don't they play 11 with a 12th game every 4 or 5 yrs?

[thirrdegreetusker]

.....and every other division has a playoff.  We even have high school football playoffs, but somehow, education isn't destroyed, the sport soldiers on, and the world keeps turning.

All this discussion is missing is someone yelling for the kids to get off the lawn.

Get off the lawn!!

So, if all the other kids jump off  a bridge, are you...........

[thirrdegreetusker]

Re: How would a 16 team playoff look?

About 12 teams too many, that's how it would look.

[WizardofhOgZ]

Cluttered and awful with to many bad teams in your model. Seriously at any given year there are only 5 or fewer deserving teams so that would mean at most a 8 team play off.

I've been arguing about this for years.  Four is THE right number.  The format we have now (1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3, winners play 2 weeks later) is THE format.  We are where we have always needed to be.  Rejoice, sit back and enjoy.

As for the Snort's post (quoted above), I'd so much rather see the 5th "deserving" team omitted (in the rare year when there really are 5 "deserving" teams) than pollute the Championship series with 3 (or more, when there aren't 5 deserving teams) NON-deserving teams.  ONLY teams that have absolutely earned their way in to Championship consideration should be included.  I don't want any "1983 NC State (17-10)" teams winning the National Championship because they got "hot" at the right time.

I define "teams that have absolutely earned their way", in this context, to be teams that - at the end of the regular season (including Conference Championship games, if any) - would be a team you would give serious consideration to voting number one at that point in time, if there were no Bowls of playoffs.  If they aren't good enough to be considered at that point, they shouldn't be in the Championship Playoffs.

[arkansasrazorback]

But let's be honest here, the bowl system (as it currently exists today) has become a colossal bore.

no it is not.  don't watch if you don't like it.  I for one love all the added football I get to watch.  Do not change it from what it is now.

[Ben]

And in the other football divisions they only play 10 regular season games to allow for the playoffs.

False. The FCS and Div 2 plays 11 games while having a 20+ team playoff format. Div 3 plays 10 because they have a 32 team playoff format

[Ben]

8 is the most ideal and perfect. 4 is too small. I have every reason to believe tcu and baylor woulda played well in the playoffs. Mich st too

[BR]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/bowls14/story/_/id/12132615/bowl-ratings-attendance-first-year-college-football-playoff-era

While TV ratings are slightly up across the board for bowl games, attendance has dipped.

The 38 bowl games this season have drawn an average announced attendance of 43,285, down 9.2 percent from the average of 47,659 for the 34 bowls last season that led up to the BCS National Championship.

Those figures are skewed by the fact that all four new bowls that had their inaugural games this season drew fewer than 30,000 fans. But even if you throw those four games out of the mix, the average attendance for the remaining 34 bowls is 45,904, down 3.7 percent from last season.

[hogsanity]

False. The FCS and Div 2 plays 11 games while having a 20+ team playoff format. Div 3 plays 10 because they have a 32 team playoff format

Ok, I stand corrected. Do you see fbs cutting even 1 game or conf championship games?

[BR]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24962176/attendance-down-4-percent-for-returning-bowls-in-2014-15

2014-15 Bowl Attendance
Bowl   Matchup   Attendance   Change from
2013-14


Rose   Florida State-Oregon   91,322   -3,851
Championship   Ohio State-Oregon   85,689   -8,519
Sugar   Alabama-Ohio State   74,682   +4,209
Cotton   Baylor-Michigan State   71,464   -1,226
Texas   Arkansas-Texas   71,115   +38,788
Fiesta   Boise State-Arizona   66,896   +1,724
Peach   TCU-Ole Miss   65,706   -2,240
Alamo   Kansas State-UCLA   60,517   -5,401
Music City   LSU-Notre Dame   60,149   +8,024
Orange   Mississippi St-Georgia Tech   58,211   -13,869
TaxSlayer   Iowa-Tennessee   56,310   -4,402
Holiday   USC-Nebraska   55,789   +2,859
Liberty   Texas A&M-West Virginia   51,282   -6,564
Pinstripe   Penn State-Boston College   49,012   +1,890
Citrus   Missouri-Minnesota   48,624   -8,005
Sun   Arizona State-Duke   47,809   -103
Belk   Georgia-Louisville   45,671   +460
Outback   Wisconsin-Auburn   44,023   -7,273
Russell Athletic   Clemson-Oklahoma   40,071   -11,027
Independence   South Carolina-Miami   38,242   +1,325
Armed Forces   Houston-Pittsburgh   37,888   -1,358
GoDaddy   Arkansas State-Toledo   36,811   +692
Cactus   Oklahoma State-Washington   35,409   -17,875
Foster Farms   Stanford-Maryland   34,780   +644
Military   Virginia Tech-Cincinnati   34,277   +4,114
New Orleans   Nevada-UL Lafayette   34,014   -20,714
Poinsettia   Navy-San Diego State   33,077   +9,669
Las Vegas   Utah-Colorado State   33,067   -150
Heart of Dallas   Louisiana Tech-Illinois   31,297   -7,083
Birmingham   Florida-East Carolina   30,083   -12,634
Boca Raton   Marshall-Northern Illinois   29,419   No game
New Mexico   Utah State-UTEP   28,725   +1,621
Bitcoin   UCF-N.C. State   26,675   +6,622
Hawaii   Fresno State-Rice   25,365   -3,741
Quick Lane*   Rutgers-North Carolina   23,876   -2,383
Miami Beach   Memphis-BYU   20,761   No game
Camellia   S. Alabama-Bowling Green   20,256   No game
Famous Idaho Potato   Air Force-Western Michigan   18,223   -3,718
Bahamas   W. Kentucky-C. Michigan   13,667   No game
* - Quick Lane Bowl has a different owner than the previous game, Little Caesars Bowl, at this same location. For the purposes of this analysis and by use of the Football Bowl Association, the Quick Lane Bowl is considered a returning bowl.

Bowl attendance decreased for the fifth straight season and the average is down 16 percent it averaged 52,961 in 2009-10, the last season with 33 bowls. This season, home attendance in FBS regular-season games was down 4 percent and reached its lowest average in 14 years.

[Ben]

I've been arguing about this for years.  Four is THE right number.  The format we have now (1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3, winners play 2 weeks later) is THE format.  We are where we have always needed to be.  Rejoice, sit back and enjoy.

As for the Snort's post (quoted above), I'd so much rather see the 5th "deserving" team omitted (in the rare year when there really are 5 "deserving" teams) than pollute the Championship series with 3 (or more, when there aren't 5 deserving teams) NON-deserving teams.  ONLY teams that have absolutely earned their way in to Championship consideration should be included.  I don't want any "1983 NC State (17-10)" teams winning the National Championship because they got "hot" at the right time.

I define "teams that have absolutely earned their way", in this context, to be teams that - at the end of the regular season (including Conference Championship games, if any) - would be a team you would give serious consideration to voting number one at that point in time, if there were no Bowls of playoffs.  If they aren't good enough to be considered at that point, they shouldn't be in the Championship Playoffs.

but see thats an issue too. Who we consider isnt always the best. Im sure everyone had ohio losing to bama, yet if it wasnt for the playoffs extending contenders, we woulda never known. Bama/oregon would be the champs. Then i feel tcu would have beaten some of those playoff teams and baylor could have made a statement. Point being is its all speculation. Its not true until its proven on the field. Which goes back to the saying, "thats why we play the game"


That being said, i say 4 is too few. 8 would be better

[Ben]

Ok, I stand corrected. Do you see fbs cutting even 1 game or conf championship games?

one is more doable than two. I doubt they stop conf titles. Those are important. Even then i dont think they have to cut down a game for an 8 team playoff. The national champs for fcs plays a total of 15 games. 16 if you are the one without a bye. The fbs regular season is 12 games for most. A team who makes it to the title in an 8 team playoff plays 15 total.

With 16 teams, itd be 16. But the tricky part is who to drop. Id drop the fcs team personally to build SOS. Either them or one of the 2 midmajors played. But the problem with that is like you said, schools wont get paid.



EDIT: my bad, didn factor the conference championship for the eight team format lol. You right. So 16 with 8teams, 17 with 16. So yeah they may have to do two

[hoghiker]

They're not the same, but every other sport has a playoff, and every other division has a playoff.  We even have high school football playoffs, but somehow, education isn't destroyed, the sport soldiers on, and the world keeps turning.

All this discussion is missing is someone yelling for the kids to get off the lawn.

Because I like college football the way is doesn't mean I'm irrational. It means I like the way it is with out the NFL mimic playoff. You can argue it anyway you want to but it will change the game. It will change the way many, not you I know, view it. I assume you think it will enhance the college game experience. I don't. I'll say it again, Arkansas' best shot at a national title was under the BCS setup. Win SEC and then go to the title game.Not sure Arkansas will ever have the depth needed for a big round robin.

[Ben]

Because I like college football the way is doesn't mean I'm irrational. It means I like the way it is with out the NFL mimic playoff. You can argue it anyway you want to but it will change the game. It will change the way many, not you I know, view it. I assume you think it will enhance the college game experience. I don't. I'll say it again, Arkansas' best shot at a national title was under the BCS setup. Win SEC and then go to the title game.Not sure Arkansas will ever have the depth needed for a big round robin.

I think arkansas has a much better shot at winning with the playoffs than the BCS setup. Because first and foremost, they have to win the SEC which they have yet to do. If it was an 8 team playoff in those times, arkansas would have qualified in 2010 and 2011 and have a better shot than trying to squeeze in the top 2. Ohio proved to us that its way easier to win a title with a playoff than with the BCS

[Hogfaniam]

6 would've gotten it to TCU.  Five conference champions and 1 at large.  Next was Mississippi St, which by then was out of it.

[Inhogswetrust]

It doesn't matter if there are 100 teams in the playoff or only 4 teams in the playoffs someone is going to be mad because their team got left out. Leave it at four.

[Hogs-n-Roses]

You know now we're talkin. You take 10-12 teams with games played at neutral sites like  the cotton bowl, gator bowl, cap 1 bowl, sugar bowl....... And maybe one of these top pay fer play schools don't win it every year. Heck make it the top 16 teams. First 4 games played 2nd week in Dec.. Second 4 played couple of days later still on Christmas break . Next weekend Friday nite,2 games, Sat. 2 games . Next weekend is New years so The eve gets a game n the new years day gets a game . Next weekend is the championship. All games played at Bowl sites. All other bowls play as usual.

[bennyl08]

It doesn't matter if there are 100 teams in the playoff or only 4 teams in the playoffs someone is going to be mad because their team got left out. Leave it at four.

Very, very true. There will always be some team on the bubble complaining that they didn't get in. The question is, do they have a legitimate claim?

2014: 1 undefeated team, 5 1 loss teams. All but Baylor deserved to be in and Baylor beat TCU.
2013: 1 undefeated, 9 1-loss teams (2, arguably 3 of them smaller schools), and a 2-loss stanford ranked 5
2012: 1 undefeated, 5 1-loss teams (1 small school outside of top ten ranking), as well as UGA whose second loss came to bama in the championship which was easily the closest matchup Bama faced all season.
2011: 1 undefeated, 5 1-loss schools (2 small schools, but Boise was #7)
2010: 3 undefeated, 6 1 loss schools (2 small schools),
2009: 5 undefeated and 1 1-loss.

Rarely can the field truly be narrowed down to four. Usually may put in one or two schools that don't truly have a right to claim a national title, but 4 almost always eliminates a team that does have just as much a right as any other.

[LJHOG]

How would a 16 team playoff look?
Like the NFL.  The system in place now will do for NCAA football what the NCAAT has done for basketball.  That is put a larger premium on winning because of the money.

[hoghiker]

I think arkansas has a much better shot at winning with the playoffs than the BCS setup. Because first and foremost, they have to win the SEC which they have yet to do. If it was an 8 team playoff in those times, arkansas would have qualified in 2010 and 2011 and have a better shot than trying to squeeze in the top 2. Ohio proved to us that its way easier to win a title with a playoff than with the BCS

We we're never going to win a national title in 2010 or 2011. We weren't good enough. That could be argued otherwise but it would be a weak position to defend. Near indefensible. The BCS era was kind to the SEC. Win the SEC and then win the title game. That's an easy case to make. I don't see how a path gets simpler than that. It's never going to be an easy road. Just a more direct path. I don't think it will benefit the Hogs or college football, as we know it, in general. Money will make the playoffs expand and that money will forever change college football. It's probably inevitable. So are death and taxes and I don't like them either.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

We we're never going to win a national title in 2010 or 2011. We weren't good enough. That could be argued otherwise but it would be a weak position to defend. Near indefensible. The BCS era was kind to the SEC. Win the SEC and then win the title game. That's an easy case to make. I don't see how a path gets simpler than that. It's never going to be an easy road. Just a more direct path. I don't think it will benefit the Hogs or college football, as we know it, in general. Money will make the playoffs expand and that money will forever change college football. It's probably inevitable. So are death and taxes and I don't like them either.

Well, the play offs are here and I doubt that will ever change. That being the case, if they just expand it to 8 teams I think they have done about as much as they can do to make it as perfect as they possibly can. 16 teams is just too many and would incur too much expense and time (per school administrations) to be feasible.

8 teams includes anyone who most likely could compete at a high enough level to contend for a NC. At the end of the regular season last year that would have produced first week brackets that would have looked something like this.

Alabama vs. Mich State
Oregon vs. Miss State
Florida St. vs. TCU
Ohio St. vs. Baylor

2 SEC teams, 2 Big Ten teams, 2 Big 12 teams, 1 ACC team and 1 Pac 12 team. All of the Power 5 conferences would have been represented in the first round and what is more, there might have been some surprises that came out of some of those match-ups.

[hoghiker]

Well, the play offs are here and I doubt that will ever change. That being the case, if they just expand it to 8 teams I think they have done about as much as they can do to make it as perfect as they possibly can. 16 teams is just too many and would incur too much expense and time (per school administrations) to be feasible.

8 teams includes anyone who most likely could compete at a high enough level to contend for a NC. At the end of the regular season last year that would have produced first week brackets that would have looked something like this.

Alabama vs. Mich State
Oregon vs. Miss State
Florida St. vs. TCU
Ohio St. vs. Baylor

2 SEC teams, 2 Big Ten teams, 2 Big 12 teams, 1 ACC team and 1 Pac 12 team. All of the Power 5 conferences would have been represented in the first round and what is more, there might have been some surprises that came out of some of those match-ups.

You are right but I don't have to like it. Sure, some team can win that's not the best team. A Cinderella could take it all and that's the magic of a tournament. That's one reason we all love the NCCA BB round robin. It's also why half the country doesn't watch NCAA basketball till tournament time. It's here, I'll watch it, I might even learn to like it but I'd wager a solid amount that it forever change college football and turns it into a more cynical, less amateur college student quagmire of guns for hire game. The complete  Newtonization of the game some of us love like it is.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

You are right but I don't have to like it. Sure, some team can win that's not the best team. A Cinderella could take it all and that's the magic of a tournament. That's one reason we all love the NCCA BB round robin. It's also why half the country doesn't watch NCAA basketball till tournament time. It's here, I'll watch it, I might even learn to like it but I'd wager a solid amount that it forever change college football and turns it into a more cynical, less amateur college student quagmire of guns for hire game. The complete  Newtonization of the game some of us love like it is.

I think that 8 team format is far more interesting than if they went to 16 teams. Can you imagine these match-ups? Again, there might be some upsets but do you really want to have to (in some cases) play a team from your own conference one more time? 8 teams is the way to go in my opinion, but even then, that might not preclude the possibility of facing a team from within your own conference at some point, though the odds of doing so might be less.

1 Alabama 12-1 vs.  16 Missouri 10-3

2 Oregon 12-1 vs. 15 Arizona State 9-3

3 Florida State 13-0 vs. 14 UCLA 9-3

4 Ohio State 12-1 vs. 13 Georgia 9-3

5 Baylor 11-1 vs. 12 Georgia Tech 10-3

6 TCU 11-1 vs. 11 Kansas State 9-3

7 Mississippi State 10-2 vs. 10 Arizona 10-3

8 Michigan State 10-2 vs. 9 Ole Miss 9-3

[longtimeHogfan]

I think it'd look something like this:

[Inhogswetrust]

Very, very true. There will always be some team on the bubble complaining that they didn't get in. The question is, do they have a legitimate claim?

2014: 1 undefeated team, 5 1 loss teams. All but Baylor deserved to be in and Baylor beat TCU.
2013: 1 undefeated, 9 1-loss teams (2, arguably 3 of them smaller schools), and a 2-loss stanford ranked 5
2012: 1 undefeated, 5 1-loss teams (1 small school outside of top ten ranking), as well as UGA whose second loss came to bama in the championship which was easily the closest matchup Bama faced all season.
2011: 1 undefeated, 5 1-loss schools (2 small schools, but Boise was #7)
2010: 3 undefeated, 6 1 loss schools (2 small schools),
2009: 5 undefeated and 1 1-loss.

Rarely can the field truly be narrowed down to four. Usually may put in one or two schools that don't truly have a right to claim a national title, but 4 almost always eliminates a team that does have just as much a right as any other.

They would have just as much a legitimate claim as the current 5,6,7.....etc, etc teams do. It is just as legitimate to narrow to four as to eight or sixteen.......................

[bennyl08]

They would have just as much a legitimate claim as the current 5,6,7.....etc, etc teams do. It is just as legitimate to narrow to four as to eight or sixteen.......................

Except that they wouldn't, not even close. Let me explain it differently. When I say a legitimate claim, I am not referring to inclusion in the tournament. If that were the case, then yes. A 4 team tourney will have the 5,6,7 teams saying they deserved that fourth spot just as much as a 16 team playoff would have 17,18,19, and 20 all clamoring that they deserved to be in the game.

Nay, I am saying how many teams have a real argument that at the end of the season, they should be playing for the national championship game if there was no tournament. That number should be what goes into the playoff size. I.e. Last year, it would have been Bama and FSU in the title game, both teams that lost in the first round. FSU was undefeated but they never looked all that good throughout the season and OSU and Oregon and TCU had just as much a case to play FSU as Bama. TCU and Baylor actually had better cases than OSU who won it all and probably wouldn't have been in the playoffs if the Big 12 wasn't stupid and had a championship game.

[Inhogswetrust]

Except that they wouldn't, not even close. Let me explain it differently. When I say a legitimate claim, I am not referring to inclusion in the tournament. If that were the case, then yes. A 4 team tourney will have the 5,6,7 teams saying they deserved that fourth spot just as much as a 16 team playoff would have 17,18,19, and 20 all clamoring that they deserved to be in the game.

Nay, I am saying how many teams have a real argument that at the end of the season, they should be playing for the national championship game if there was no tournament. That number should be what goes into the playoff size. I.e. Last year, it would have been Bama and FSU in the title game, both teams that lost in the first round. FSU was undefeated but they never looked all that good throughout the season and OSU and Oregon and TCU had just as much a case to play FSU as Bama. TCU and Baylor actually had better cases than OSU who won it all and probably wouldn't have been in the playoffs if the Big 12 wasn't stupid and had a championship game.

I could BARELY go for 8 in a football playoff but not 16.  I honestly don't see that many years if any, where any team ranked perhaps higher than 8 had a "legitimate" claim to be considered good enough to be in a playoff, much less win it.