CFB Playoff will expand to 12 teams by 2026

[AUwent 3,778]

1 hour ago, sevenlee36 said:

It’s going in the wrong direction. It should be reduced to 3 teams. I thought the issue with the BCS was making sure the top two teams got into the big game. How many times in the BCS era was there a team ranked 4th that should have been considered ranked in the top two (outside of maybe a non power 5). I don’t recall many… Maybe there is more money in more teams.

1999, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2011 all come to mind.

[woodford 3,679]

9 hours ago, DAG said:

You answered your question. 

I know that. Sort of a rhetorical question. 

[sevenlee36 1,654]

8 hours ago, AUwent said:

1999, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2011 all come to mind.

So in 2004 you thought Utah should have been considered a top 2 team? Maybe so. Then leave it at 4 teams

[woodford 3,679]

17 hours ago, AUwent said:

Imagine if there had been a four team committee during the BCS era. Whoo boy, there would've been an outcry almost every year.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/10/14/4837090/college-football-playoff-selection-committee

Love this type of stuff. A playoff starting in the early 90's would've been pretty epic. FSU, Florida, Nebraska, Tennessee, etc. all playing more against each other. 

I obviously want Auburn to win championships but seeing those teams great again would be cool. I love college football itself almost as much as I love Auburn and I miss Florida/Tennessee being a massive matchup every year.

[80Tiger 904]

21 hours ago, JerryAU said:

This expanded playoff (12 teams) means the playoff committee's "eye test" will be broadened a bit and that #12/#13 ranked team will be pissed when they don't make the cut.

Oh well, folks hated the BCS model, then hated the 4 team CFP model .... now we'll see if this new model will appease everyone. 

Absolutely. Last year ACC champion Pittsburgh was ranked between 16 and 18 at the end of the season.

[AUwent 3,778]

8 hours ago, sevenlee36 said:

So in 2004 you thought Utah should have been considered a top 2 team? Maybe so. Then leave it at 4 teams

No, those were all years that would've been better off with three teams instead of four. As in, first three teams would have been very easy to figure out in each of those years. But deciding a fourth would have ranged from fascinating debate to migraine inducing. For instance, we obviously would've played Okie, but who do you think would've been given the fourth spot to play USCw--Cal-Berkley, Texas or Utah?

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by AUwent

[AUApostle 7,663]

One of the best parts of college football was the controversy - arguing about who was really the nat'l champion, who didn't deserve a spot, and who got left out.  The infantile arguing is most definitely the engine of college football...it's what makes the SEC and it's rivalries so special.

So now we're going to have a system that's completely fair to everyone.  A meritocracy where the strongest, deepest, most complete team survives and is crowned at the end of long and arduous playoff.  I'd rather a sport where the best team gets tripped up by a bad PI call by refs who are clearly on the take at the end of an away game in September and who can't recover by the time December rolls around because pollsters in Wyoming have written them off.  You realize that we got to complain and oscillate between victimization and egotistical snarkiness for months during each offseason...and now it's going to be "fair and boring".  What the heck...have ya'll lost your minds?

Edited September 7, 2022 by AUDevil

[CoffeeTiger 5,228]

I like this. Just means more compelling, meaningful football at seasons end, and would improve the chances of 2nd tier teams like Auburn making the playoffs and having increased chances on getting to the championship game.