Good Riddance to the 4 Team Playoff Farce

I agree completely, but four was better than two...which was better than the old bowl system.

 

They just need to go ahead and follow the FCS model. I was at the Furman game yesterday and it was a ton of fun. I'd love home and away for the first three rounds of playoffs.

 

Should be 8 or 16. 12 team gives an unfair advantage to the top 4 as a bye week in a three round playoff is a huge advantage. How many champs will come from the 5-12 spots? I bet you get none for the first ten or so years.

 

I'd say one in the first ten years and it will be talked about in the way the old BCS busters were.

 

I agree, a playoff bye is too big an advantage. 8 is probably enough to include all the teams with a legitimate shot at the championship.

 

Gripe all you want, but even this year's CFP would have been a thousand times better than the BCS, the last time our very Gators made it to a title game.

Let's make the argument right now had this been the BCS - Michigan and Washington would be playing for the title and nothing FSU could have done would have changed that either. At least we get Texas and Bama. Sure, the 4-team CFP isn't great and it showed how flawed it still is when you have so many good teams in the end but not enough spots.

Even a 12-team format will get a few grumbles from the teams that finish 13-16.

 

One scenario that could potentially play out, but highly unlikely, is a team could in theory play 18 games in a season now. Granted, that team would be Hawaii or playing at Hawaii (which would mean 13 regular season games), a conference championship, and making it the national championship as a 5-12 seed (4 games). We will see 17 games for some teams I suspect.

Wild to think about that these kids are basically playing NFL type schedules.

 

4 is enough, but really most years it hasnt been, 12 is way to many, none of the teams left out( minus Oregon and UGA) would even be competitive vs this years top 4, and most years you already knew who would be in the final. They're just diluting the play off with more lopsided games for the money

 

Recall Coach Spurrier in the 1990s wanting a 6-team to 8-team playoff. Thus, assuring that the very best teams would play for the championship.

The very best teams are usually the conference champions with zero or one losses. For instance in 2023 you have the following:
1. Michigan (13-0) Big Ten Champs
2. Washington (13-0) Pac Champs
3. Texas (12-1) Big 12 Champs
4. Alabama (12-1) SEC Champs

In the 2nd tier:
5. FSU (13-0) ACC Champs
6. Georgia (12-1) SEC RU
7. Ohio St (11-1) Big (#3)
8. Oregon (11-2) Pac RU

3rd Tier:
9. Missouri (10-2) SEC-E RU (SEC #3)
10 Penn St (10-2) (Big #4)
11 Ole Miss (10-2) (SEC #3/4)
12 Oklahoma (10-2) (Big-12 #3)
============================

Beyond this, you will get 3+ loss teams (i.e #13 LSU (9-3), etc.) and non-P5 teams like say #18 Liberty (13-0):

13. LSU (9-3) (SEC #5)
14. Arizona (9-3) (PAC #3)
15. Notre Dame (9-3) (Independent)
16. Louisville (10-3) (ACC RU)

 

If it was in place this year the dawgs at 6 would be among the betting favorites

 

btw, I agree with your first part, 8-teams would almost assure the teams with the best records will play against each other. However, 16 teams would be too many. I say that 12 teams is too many - it will later cause an ?outcry to open it up to 16 or more teams, which would be watered down.

#6 Georgia and #7 Ohio St could make some noise. These two teams have some of the best recruited classes around and should have the depth to play multiple, high profile games.

If you listen to the Bulldog fans, they would argue that they have the best team, lol!

Heck, even #8 Oregon gave #2 Washington some very close, competitive games!

 

I always preferred an 8 team playoff, including all 5 power conference champs, plus 3 other worthy teams. It's very likely that an 8 team play-off would include all truly worthy contenders.

 

I think this year is a bit of an anomaly, unprecedented event and all. And sure, OSU/GA could make noise in a 12-team playoff, but a) rankings might look quite differently if a committee is ranking 12 teams and b) those teams' opponents would get two weeks to prep. No guarantee either makes it to the second round.

 

Eh, I'll miss where one loss can destroy your season, now 2-3 loss teams will be in...sorry but I think that's lame.

I'm having a hard time thinking of any year that Florida deserved a shot and was not allowed one due to the systems used, maybe 1984?

 

Not sure why you threw 5-12 in there when you suggested 8 team playoff. I can definitely see a 5 winning it all. Uga? Not 9 though.

 

I'm presuming the top four earn a bye. My argument is that the bye week is not a commensurate reward, it's too much of a benefit rendering the other teams largely irrelevant. It also creates the new griping point: "We got screwed out of the bye!"

 

I pretty much agree with everything he said. Only thing I have to add to that is a four seed has never won a single game if I’m correct. Everybody has quibbled over who have should have gotten the four seed . I know a lot of people felt like they were left out of that slot over the years but I’ve never once thought that team could’ve won the national championship. This is the first year I think a four seed has a legitimate shot.
I would be for a 16 team playoff also. It makes for a lot better postseason than the crap we’ve had but I do not think it will change the eventual champion very often at all. This year is quite remarkable though because Ohio State or Georgia or Oregon could possibly be any team in the playoff This is a first year of that type of parody in my opinion.

 

I actually liked the four. The whole point was just to identify the #1 team, and four seemed a good balance between the two team model, which once left out a 12-0 SEC champ, and a big number, like 12, which will definitely include teams that don’t deserve the title of #1.