What the initial bracket of a 8 team play off would look like 2010-2017

[oldhog63]

Wait, you just said make the ccg's the 1st round, so which is it, you want 8 teams AFTER the ccg's or for the ccg's to be part of the 8?

I think you are mixing me and oldhawg. But, that is what i propose. 8 teams AFTER the ccg's, so 16 teams if you include the ccg's. Could also be 12 or 14 depending on how many at-large are included. 10 P5 conference teams (5 after their ccg's). 2, 4, or 6 at-large play the same week as the ccg's, which would leave 1,2, or 3 more teams for the next round with 6,7, or 8 teams(round 2).

[ChicoHog]

you need all 5 power 5 conf champs, at least one from lower conferences and 2 at large.  How can you will a power 5 conf and be left out?

If that team was 9-3 or 8-4 they should not be in the playoff.  Va tech in 2016 almost beat Clemson in the ACC title game and they had no business being in the playoff. 

If it ever happened it will either be 5 conf champs and 3 wild cards or 5 conf champs, one Group of five and 2 wild cards.  First round playing at home campus stadiums in December like Dec 15.  Final four as they are now.  Biggest obstacle is more bowls being left out of big name teams. 

I'm not a big conference champion advocate because only the big 12 plays a balanced schedule.  Just pick the 4 best teams like now. 

[IronHog]

If that team was 9-3 or 8-4 they should not be in the playoff.  Va tech in 2016 almost beat Clemson in the ACC title game and they had no business being in the playoff. 

If it ever happened it will either be 5 conf champs and 3 wild cards or 5 conf champs, one Group of five and 2 wild cards.  First round playing at home campus stadiums in December like Dec 15.  Final four as they are now.  Biggest obstacle is more bowls being left out of big name teams. 

I'm not a big conference champion advocate because only the big 12 plays a balanced schedule.  Just pick the 4 best teams like now. 

So it's like NASCAR?


Yippie

[hogsanity]

I think you are mixing me and oldhawg. But, that is what i propose. 8 teams AFTER the ccg's, so 16 teams if you include the ccg's. Could also be 12 or 14 depending on how many at-large are included. 10 P5 conference teams (5 after their ccg's). 2, 4, or 6 at-large play the same week as the ccg's, which would leave 1,2, or 3 more teams for the next round with 6,7, or 8 teams(round 2).

Ok, WHEN do you propose playing those games? anything over 8 takes 4 weeks.

[oldhog63]

Ok, WHEN do you propose playing those games? anything over 8 takes 4 weeks.

If the conference championship is included, there would be 4 weeks of playoffs as you say. Currently, there are 2 weeks of playoffs. So, with between 12-16 teams and including the ccg's as round 1, it would only add one more week of playoffs.

Currently there are 4 weeks between the conference championship game and the start of the playoffs. Pick one of those weeks. If finals and holidays are a problem, then push it out one extra week.

[oldhawg]

Wait, you just said make the ccg's the 1st round, so which is it, you want 8 teams AFTER the ccg's or for the ccg's to be part of the 8?

Sorry for the confusion.  Don't think I said make the CCG part of the playoffs.  Someone else maybe?  With a similar handle?

[RebelliousHog]

I think that this format would have provided more excitement and more good games during bowl seasons that have seemed to be ever more populated with games like Checotah State vs. Hog Waller State in the Odor Eaters Bowl.

Hey, the Checotah Chetos and the Hog Waller Rooters was a barn burner. Don't dis those teams.

[oldhog63]

Hey, the Checotah Chetos and the Hog Waller Rooters was a barn burner. Don't dis those teams.

I got to go to lesser bowls. Maybe not a fan favorite outside of the fans for those particular teams. But for the players, it is a nice treat to go to ANY bowl game. Of course the bigger the better. I am in no way advocating getting rid of any of the bowls.

[hogsanity]

If the conference championship is included, there would be 4 weeks of playoffs as you say. Currently, there are 2 weeks of playoffs. So, with between 12-16 teams and including the ccg's as round 1, it would only add one more week of playoffs.

Currently there are 4 weeks between the conference championship game and the start of the playoffs. Pick one of those weeks. If finals and holidays are a problem, then push it out one extra week.

No, it adds two. 12 teams means 4 buys and the rest play down to 8, then 8 to 4, 4 to 2 and 2 to a champ, 4 weeks total. Anything over 8 takes 4 weeks

[oldhog63]

No, it adds two. 12 teams means 4 buys and the rest play down to 8, then 8 to 4, 4 to 2 and 2 to a champ, 4 weeks total. Anything over 8 takes 4 weeks

It adds two if you don't count the ccg. If you count the ccg as round 1, then it only adds one.

Round 1 - CCG's + Any At-Large play in games - 16 teams
Round 2 - Quarter Finals - 8 teams - this would be the only added week
Round 3 - Semi Finals - 4 teams
Round 4 - Finals - Championship game - 2 teams

[hogsanity]

It adds two if you don't count the ccg. If you count the ccg as round 1, then it only adds one.

Round 1 - CCG's + Any At-Large play in games - 16 teams
Round 2 - Quarter Finals - 8 teams - this would be the only added week
Round 3 - Semi Finals - 4 teams
Round 4 - Finals - Championship game - 2 teams

How can you count the ccg's unless you just flat out say that the winner of those games gets in? And you are only counting the p5 ccg's, so what are the p5 league supposed to do? Should the AAC drop their title game? How do you pick " at large" teams before the ccg's are played?

[oldhog63]

How can you count the ccg's unless you just flat out say that the winner of those games gets in? And you are only counting the p5 ccg's, so what are the p5 league supposed to do? Should the AAC drop their title game? How do you pick " at large" teams before the ccg's are played?

Yes, winners of P5 automatically get in. Automatic bid and automatic seeding 1-5.

Six at-large are just that. Pick the next 2-6 highest ranked teams not in the ccg's for at-large. Alabama would be an obvious at-large this year. Probably the 6th seed. Maybe Penn St. Non P5 conferences would have to adjust their conference ccg's and/or schedule if they want to participate.

I am not saying there wouldn't have to be some rearranging of the current schedule. The current system of picking the 'best' four teams for the playoffs is too subjective. Tying the ccg's into the playoffs makes the conference schedule still meaningful. Having at-large teams allows for teams that should be included, Bama, UCF, that were not in the P5 ccg's.

[hogsanity]

Yes, winners of P5 automatically get in. Automatic bid and automatic seeding 1-5.

Six at-large are just that. Pick the next 2-6 highest ranked teams not in the ccg's for at-large. Alabama would be an obvious at-large this year. Probably the 6th seed. Maybe Penn St. Non P5 conferences would have to adjust their conference ccg's and/or schedule if they want to participate.

I am not saying there wouldn't have to be some rearranging of the current schedule. The current system of picking the 'best' four teams for the playoffs is too subjective. Tying the ccg's into the playoffs makes the conference schedule still meaningful. Having at-large teams allows for teams that should be included, Bama, UCF, that were not in the P5 ccg's.

I agree there should be a set way to play your way in. But expanding it to 10 or 12, with the at large teams being determined by ranking just leads to more subjectivity.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

If we stay with 5 - P5 conferences, and if we're dead set on taking the human element out of determining the teams, then let the 10 division winners into a 10-team PO.  Similar to what Sanity suggested a few days ago.  Give the top 6 seeds a bye, and make the bottom 4 seeds play in round 1.  Leaving 8 teams for a round 2 of quarterfinals.

The human element will enter into determing the seeds, which the first 5 go to the conf. champs, and the remaining 5 go to the conf. losers.   

[oldhog63]

I agree there should be a set way to play your way in. But expanding it to 10 or 12, with the at large teams being determined by ranking just leads to more subjectivity.

I agree, more work could be done to flesh out the at-large part of it. I would just like to see a way for teams that maybe stumbled early (or maybe even late, ala Bama) but are the hottest/best ones around to get in. Also, a way to get the best non P5 teams involved.

No system is going to be perfect, but I would like to have a system that would eliminate the Ohio St vs Alabama situation of this year. I know that there will always be someone saying that #17 or #18 should have gotten in ahead of #16, but I really don't think that is the same argument as #4 vs #5. Plus today, all 4 teams are subjective, not just the last team in.

[hogsanity]

I agree, more work could be done to flesh out the at-large part of it. I would just like to see a way for teams that maybe stumbled early (or maybe even late, ala Bama) but are the hottest/best ones around to get in. Also, a way to get the best non P5 teams involved.

No system is going to be perfect, but I would like to have a system that would eliminate the Ohio St vs Alabama situation of this year. I know that there will always be someone saying that #17 or #18 should have gotten in ahead of #16, but I really don't think that is the same argument as #4 vs #5. Plus today, all 4 teams are subjective, not just the last team in.

I'd rather they just go back to the old bowl system. Let the bowls invite who they want, and then have a poll and let people argue over it for 9 months.

[PorkSoda]

I'd rather they just go back to the old bowl system. Let the bowls invite who they want, and then have a poll and let people argue over it for 9 months.

I'm in the minority, but I always liked that system

[oldhawg]

I'd rather they just go back to the old bowl system. Let the bowls invite who they want, and then have a poll and let people argue over it for 9 months.

There would still be bowl tie-ins that could prevent marquee match-ups.

Rose Bowl would insist on going back to Big Ten vs Pac 12 champions.
Sugar Bowl would make arrangements to have SEC Champion.
Cotton Bowl would make arrangements for Big Twelve champion.
Orange Bowl would want the ACC champion.
Fiesta Bowl ? no tie-in?

Back to square one (which really was not so bad).

[hogsanity]

There would still be bowl tie-ins that could prevent marquee match-ups.

Rose Bowl would insist on going back to Big Ten vs Pac 12 champions.
Sugar Bowl would make arrangements to have SEC Champion.
Cotton Bowl would make arrangements for Big Twelve champion.
Orange Bowl would want the ACC champion.
Fiesta Bowl ? no tie-in?

Back to square one (which really was not so bad).

That was my point, it was not so bad. I know there were tie ins to the big bowls, and all involved conf champs. But if the liberty wanted to invite a 4-8 hogs team to play a 5-7 TN, so what, let them do it.

[EastexHawg]

Didn't read the whole thread, but here's my 2 cents on the issue.

To accurately crown a national championship, you need a playoff format.

How big should the playoff be? It needs to be big enough that anybody who has a legitimate argument to be one of the top 2 teams in the country should be in the playoff. No matter how big the playoff is, there will be arguments from those who just missed the cut about why they should be in and another team not. That does not matter. Whether you have just as good a resume or even better than another team that got in is irrelevant. The only argument that matters is whether or not you have just as good an argument to be playing for the national championship if there was no playoff.

A four team playoff does not accomplish that feat. Most every year, there are at least 5 teams that have a genuine claim. Therefore, it is my opinion that an 8 team playoff is the best approach. It is very rare that there's a year where more than 8 teams could argue they should be ranked in the top 2. A six team playoff is another option as a good majority of the time, that value would capture every team it needs to as well. However, it isn't particularly rare for there to be 7. Maybe about one in ten years, perhaps a bit higher than that even. So, I definitely have an open ear to a 6 team playoff, but I think that format would miss out on teams that have a legitimate claim to be in the top 2 just a bit too often.

I agree with this.  Eight lets in all P5 conference champions, regardless of record, and three wild cards.  At least that way if you win your conference you have a chance to win the national championship.

[Sweet Feet]

It makes too much sense. Unfortunately, traditionalists are stuck in their ways and don't want to see a REAL playoff format. 4 teams is pathetic. Every other level has 12 or more along with conference champions.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

It makes too much sense. Unfortunately, traditionalists are stuck in their ways and don't want to see a REAL playoff format. 4 teams is pathetic. Every other level has 12 or more along with conference champions.

At the P-5 level I don't think that you are going to persuade university administrators to go beyond an 8 team format that can be played a week after finals in the week before Christmas, the week of Christmas and a final in the week after Christmas that enables the academic schedule to remain intact. I think they could be persuaded to that schedule, but not one that includes a 16 team format. I'm not for a 12 team format because I don't think that any team deserves a bye week when it comes to a NC play off. JMO

[PorkSoda]

At the P-5 level I don't think that you are going to persuade university administrators to go beyond an 8 team format that can be played a week after finals in the week before Christmas, the week of Christmas and a final in the week after Christmas that enables the academic schedule to remain intact. I think they could be persuaded to that schedule, but not one that includes a 16 team format. I'm not for a 12 team format because I don't think that any team deserves a bye week when it comes to a NC play off. JMO

shoot, why  not just have a 128 team double elimination playoff and ditch the regular season?

[Sweet Feet]

At the P-5 level I don't think that you are going to persuade university administrators to go beyond an 8 team format that can be played a week after finals in the week before Christmas, the week of Christmas and a final in the week after Christmas that enables the academic schedule to remain intact. I think they could be persuaded to that schedule, but not one that includes a 16 team format. I'm not for a 12 team format because I don't think that any team deserves a bye week when it comes to a NC play off. JMO

My question on the academic issue is how is FCS, D2, and D3 able to have 24-32 teams and play on through december just fine? i mean basketball teams play 2-3 games a week in december. i think it can be done

[870rzrback]

There's NEVER been 8 teams in a college football season that deserved to play for the championship... you can make the case for 3 or 4 teams some years. But never 8

[Dr. Starcs]

There's NEVER been 8 teams in a college football season that deserved to play for the championship... you can make the case for 3 or 4 teams some years. But never 8

So why is it ok for 12 in the nfl?  That's 12/32 (37.5% of teams have a chance to win a title)

Comparatively, that would be 48 teams in college football. 8 doesn't sound too bad then.

[870rzrback]

So why is it ok for 12 in the nfl?  That's 12/32 (37.5% of teams have a chance to win a title)

Comparatively, that would be 48 teams in college football. 8 doesn't sound too bad then.

I don't watch the NFL because of that.  Plus the way a Sh**ty team can win in a bad division and a better team with a better record can get left out of the playoffs while they get in.

Comparatively that is the same as what some are wanting here (conference champions moving on to the playoffs). But what if like last year the gators (who only won like what 8 games?) had beaten Bama. Would they deserve a chance at the national championship?

[870rzrback]

In college football every game is so important. To have a special season. To get a chance to win the national championship. Adding more teams to the playoffs makes it ok to lose 2 or sometimes 3 games a year (such as auburn this year being in the top 8)because you still have a chance to win it all

[Billy Bats]

I don't watch the NFL because of that.

Great reason to not watch the most athletic league on the planet.  Sounds fun.  Lol

[MuskogeeHogFan]

My question on the academic issue is how is FCS, D2, and D3 able to have 24-32 teams and play on through december just fine? i mean basketball teams play 2-3 games a week in december. i think it can be done

I understand and it should be doable. I would suspect that, though they trot out the academic argument all the time, the real reason may be the physical toll that it takes on the top P-5 teams. Football may be football at any level but the bigger, stronger and faster players at the top of P-5 probably take a greater physical toll on each other than those playing at the FCS level on a week-in and week-out basis. I'm sure they don't want some of the teams playing 18-20 games each year. Plus, let's face it, even an 8 team play off system is more than overwhelmingly fair in terms of involving any team that could reasonably compete for the NC. A 12 or 16 team play off might be entertaining for us, but I doubt that it would alter the eventual outcome of one of the top 5 or 6 having the real chance to play in the NCG.

[hogsanity]

So why is it ok for 12 in the nfl?  That's 12/32 (37.5% of teams have a chance to win a title)

Comparatively, that would be 48 teams in college football. 8 doesn't sound too bad then.

Here is why it is okay in the NFL. IN the NFL there is a set way to play your way into the playoff. Teams are not chosen by some committee. Teams know when the season starts they need to either win their division, or be one of the top records of teams not winning their division. Yes, some seasons a division my be lousy, but the criteria remains the same. They are not making their own schedules. They are not able to go out and schedule bad teams to pad their win totals.

If the NCAA or there conferences or whoever wants to make a 16 team or a 32 team or however may team playoff in college it is fine with me as long as there is a set criteria to PLAY YOUR WAY IN. No committees, no beauty contests, you know before the season starts how you can get in.

The problem, with 130 teams is fbs, is there is no way to do that, no way to set a criteria to play your way in.

[PorkSoda]

Here is why it is okay in the NFL. IN the NFL there is a set way to play your way into the playoff. Teams are not chosen by some committee. Teams know when the season starts they need to either win their division, or be one of the top records of teams not winning their division. Yes, some seasons a division my be lousy, but the criteria remains the same. They are not making their own schedules. They are not able to go out and schedule bad teams to pad their win totals.

If the NCAA or there conferences or whoever wants to make a 16 team or a 32 team or however may team playoff in college it is fine with me as long as there is a set criteria to PLAY YOUR WAY IN. No committees, no beauty contests, you know before the season starts how you can get in.

The problem, with 130 teams is fbs, is there is no way to do that, no way to set a criteria to play your way in.

sure, win your conference (P5) or have one of the best records /highest rank to to get one of 3 wildcard slots.

in an 8 team scenario