In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1060
Online now 970 Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
What are you guys thoughts on this? I say six or eight is better, especially from a fan point of view. Your field is just too small with four imo and someone who should have a spot will get left out sooner, rather than later. It will create a controversy like the BCS does.
Anyway, Good article from CBS Sports' Dennis Dodd.
"I'm not sensing any ground swell for a significant change in the format." -- Bill Hancock, regarding the BCS on April 25, 2011 in the Orlando Sentinel
"We have a four-team playoff for 12 years and we're dead serious about it. We know people are going to want eight. Some will want 16. Some of them will want 32 but it's going to be four for 12 years." -- Bill Hancock to reporters last Thursday (April 25, 2013), two years to the day after saying the BCS wouldn't change.
Excuse us if we're skeptical. Not so much about the coming playoff in 2014, but about how long it will stay at four teams. Nothing against Hancock, the BCS/College Football Playoff executive director. The man was doing his job regarding both passages listed above. What's amazing these days is how quickly the stewards of the game -- the commissioners -- can change their minds. And why we should question why a four-team playoff couldn't evolve naturally into an eight-team structure? Soon.
A four-team college football playoff starts in 2014. But Dennis Dodd says change happens fast these days, and upping it to eight or 16 teams is conceivable.
Check me out on twitter: http://www.twitter.com/247Blake
12 years is a long time to be stuck with four teams.
Why not 4 teams for two years then grow from there.
Fan of East Texas football? Follow me on Twitter - @247_MG
Agreed always leaving an opening for an adjustment to be made.
If you want a real playoff, you make the conferences mean something. Take the champions of the major conferences (Big 12, B1G, SEC, PacX, ACC?) and throw in 3 or 4 wildcards like the NFL does and do a 3 game playoff. Right now, I could give a flip whether we win the conference in football because it is meaningless in the big picture (other than it means you won most/all of your games).
4 teams is a start.
When they see the amount of interest and the amount of money involved, I think it will expand rapidly.
There needs to be atleast 14 teams in the playoffs, that way you can have room for all the SEC teams.
Good idea. Two year trial period. Then maybe do six for two years before moving to a total of eight.
I hope that's the case.
I like 4 only because there's no way to decide the four other than evaluating every team on its merits and choosing the top 4. You get into 6 or 8 I guarantee you that it wouldn't be the top 6 or 8, but instead the ACC champion would be guaranteed a slot, etc. In sum, I'm not against 6 or 8, but I am against a change that would give auto-bids to conference champs that don't deserve them.
I have favored an 8 team playoff for years, taking each AQ conference champion, guaranteeing one spot to the best non-AQ team, and choosing the eighth team wholly at-large to fill the bracket. In years past this would have meant a single at-large available to an AQ team, but now there would be two such spots available.
Isn't that the same qualification formula that has created unwatchable BCS games with clearly inferior teams while other teams are relegated to lesser bowl games?
No, with proper seeding the "clearly inferior teams" would wash out in the first round. Or they might pull a Louisville and surprise the experts.
Of course with the Big East destruction, I don't think there'd be 6 AQ conferences but 5. So 3 at-large spots, and only guarantee one non-AQ if they say crack the top 10. Seems almost perfect to me. Makes conference champions mean something but with at large spots available so Alabama can sneak in anyway.
The first year a major conference doesn't get a school in the playoffs then that conference will start pushing to expand the playoffs.
I would like at least 7. Give #1 a bye. That should quiet the ridiculous claims of devaluing the season. You can take the 5 AQs (big 12/10, SEC, PAC, ACC). Get 2 at-large teams, which I think is necessary, due to unbalanced schedules.
It's a similar qualification formula, but BCS games are single who could really give a damn pageants that aren't leading up to a championship game. Are the BCS games unwatchable because they include some not quite so good teams, or are they unwatchable because they are nearly meaningless to people who aren't fans of those particular schools? I tend to think it's the latter. And if a couple of the first round games aren't so great, so what?
Yes, N. Ill. was a bad joke, but Utah clubbing Alabama wasn't. Boise State beating Oklahoma was definitely a treat. So was TCU beating Wisconsin.
And if you are wanting to suggest the ACC has little business getting a champ into the playoffs automatically, well, you might look at team recruiting rankings for 2013, see how the top ACC teams out recruited the top Big 12 teams and wonder who might be in the regular position in the near future of looking in from the outside of a four team playoff.
Personally I think an 8-team playoff would be perfect with the first round games hosted by the top seeds. Then the semi-finals and championship would be in bowl games as it's set up now. I go back and look at the teams who were in the 10-16 range before the bowls and really think that I don't want to see them in a playoff. Last year, you would have had OU, FSU, Clemson, Oregon State, Boise State and Northern Illinois in a 16-team playoff and that really loses some of the luster for me. You could probably twist my arm for a 12-team and the top 4 getting a bye, but I really think that 8 is best case scenario.
My personal favorite is 14 (top 2 get byes). First round at home. Conference champs get preferential seeding. First of all it makes it big enough where you can add a non-AQ and give us a shot to watch history. It would make the last few weeks of CFB unbelievable. 20 different fan bases watching football with something at stake, instead of the having maybe 4-5 teams left playing for something. Fighting over why your team got screwed in the seedings.
8 teams, all on campus until the title game. We are nearly at 8 conferences now, so just take all the champs. That way, every single team in college football has a chance to win the NC. Just win your conference first and youre in. If you cant win your conference, you obviously arent the best team in the nation. No voters, no polls, no bias, no ESPN.
That said, they will screw up the 4 team playoff. What criteria are they going to use for SOS? How do you really know who played the best teams? How do you tell what the best conference was? An injury is going to help the decide if a loss was worse than another? How do you know the injured player would have changed things? Will they favor defense or offense? Will they have agendas agaisnt coaches from past run ins? Will they put a second place team in over a champion?
Still waaaay too much subjectivity (is that a word) for me. The human influence of any and everyone not on the field of play should be taken away. Thats too perfect for them though. They have to bleed us fans dry first.
There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.
I can't believe you won't include the Sunbelt, bruthaman.
This post was edited by bierce 12 months ago
Split them up into the othe conferences.
Fit them all into those 8 and let it fly. All champs are in. Only your conference record matters, so play who you want they way you want in the OOC. Seed them by some sort of special teams stat......FG%, Punts killed inside the 20 %, XP% or something. That makes every phase of the game important.
Also wouldn't mind seeing something like 12 teams with "higher seeds" hosting games for first round.
That won't happen, of course, not for a very long time. The conferences sit on a pile of TV $ and aren't about to share what they ain't got to.
But if a playoff happens, seed them by composite Wonderlic scores of the players who played the most minutes at each position.
I remember during the three way tie situation in 2008, Leach said the higher GPA or graduating percentage should go (or something like that). People didnt even blink at that idea. Made sense, but wasnt going to fly.
And the top seed goes to Alabama which has 11 seniors starting, all of whom graduated early and tied for valedictorian.
Or you could just have the eight conference champs and eight at large teams. The at large teams would be based on the teams whose cheerleaders were the hottest and had the best outfits.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports