I can live with the number, 4, 8, 16, doesnt matter to me. But the biggest thing, imo, is the criteria being used to determine who gets in. It needs to be consistent from year to year. Using this year's committee's criteria FSU would have been in a 4 team playoff because of record. This year the main criteria was record. Did anyone really expect SMU to be competitive? I admit i thought the vols would be competitive, but their plan didn't work and their staff has yet to make an adjustment since it arrive and OSU was on fire. Clemson put up some fight at least.
Change to playoff system.
- Thread starter Boyd94
- Start date
It was kinda funny to watch Tennessee doing Tennessee things .. arriving early by the 1000s into Columbus , strut around and state they are taking over , they are going to plant a flag after the win , etc and etc .. Nothing but SEC boot licker wanna be's . Then get boat raced with no game plan at all. Typical UT , upper tier SEC , not nearly as close to the top as their fans always think they are . They dream of national relevance but all they have is ole Chummy Lee
Tennessee failed as Nico just never improved as the year wore on. Nico is their main problem…and in that system…you can’t hide a mediocre to poor Qb
Can Heupel coach up a young Qb…we’ll get to see!
Can Heupel coach up a young Qb…we’ll get to see!
The top end B10 teams are always tough.Especially at home.I've been to games at Ohio State, Michigan and one at Notre Dame and have always said if Kentucky was in the B10 our record against the top teams in that league would look depressingly similar to our records against the top teams in the SEC
Okay but how are you even supposed to do this? Big 10 and SEC aren't going to schedule lots of quality OOC games, for example, so it's not like Boise can do a home and home with Ole Miss. There's not a great pool of teams to schedule to boost some of those things.
Tennessee embarrassed the SEC. But now I’m reading they just had a bad day, didn’t make adjustments, etc. There’s always an excuse when it’s the SEC team playing like crap.
I have watched theor games, his route tree is very simple, low level HS. He does 3 things different, huge splits and tempo and to out athlete you. He tries to spread you thin to create running lanes forcing you to bring an extra man in the box and tempo to create confusion.
He has gotten away from tempo for some reason, maybe it confuses his team, but OSU was stonewalling their run game with 6 and had better athletes in coverage. Chumlee has been in Knoxville 3 years and has yet to make an adjustment. Add all that in about with the cold wouldn't affect them, BS, vols looked like they were running in mud. Plus OSU came out on fire, you get the butt kicking we all saw last night.
Folks, the same 4-6ish teams being in the post season picture was ultimately hurting the game as far as interest, ratings, money.
It also fed into a perpetual loop of those same handful of big brands to have a monopoly on talent.
Throw in NIL and portal. Now Arizona St and IU can tell a kid hey we can pay ya a little money, play ya more, and we can be in the picture.
We’re a coaching decision or at least current coach making some staff decisions away from being right there too.
A sufficient offense and even just an okay QB who can run it, whatever style it is, gets ya 10 wins. We saw that happen here.
A bounce of the ball, turnover, against a big boy gets ya an upset and signature win to put on the resume.
We’re not that far away contrary to popular belief. In this era of football it can literally happen overnight. See the aforementioned programs.
That is great for the sport.
It also fed into a perpetual loop of those same handful of big brands to have a monopoly on talent.
Throw in NIL and portal. Now Arizona St and IU can tell a kid hey we can pay ya a little money, play ya more, and we can be in the picture.
We’re a coaching decision or at least current coach making some staff decisions away from being right there too.
A sufficient offense and even just an okay QB who can run it, whatever style it is, gets ya 10 wins. We saw that happen here.
A bounce of the ball, turnover, against a big boy gets ya an upset and signature win to put on the resume.
We’re not that far away contrary to popular belief. In this era of football it can literally happen overnight. See the aforementioned programs.
That is great for the sport.
If you're going to put in 3 loss SEC teams because of some "eye test" even though they dropped 2 games to 6-6 teams, you may as well just split off the SEC and Big 10 into its own division and have a playoff entirely of the two conferences. What does the regular season even mean if we're just going on "we picked the teams we feel like are the best despite their record?" All the 3 loss SEC teams had embarrassing losses. They failed to earn their way in. And for all the smack talk after Friday, IU actually played closer to Notre Dame than any of the other underdogs - including the SEC's 2-loss Tennessee. I think the committee made the perfect selections. If the SEC and Big 10 want to whine about it, it's their own fault for bunching together with a bunch of other strong teams in the pursuit of profit. But even absent that, don't go 2-3 on the road (Bama), don't lose at home to Kentucky (Ole Miss), and don't expect a slate of quality losses (South Carolina) to earn you a date for another loss to a top 10 team.
Right, the SEC and Big 10 teams have no desire to make their schedules even harder by playing them. I do think we can incentivize tougher scheduling by getting rid of the "4 champs get byes" rule and just seeding 1-12. Big 12, ACC, and top G5s like Boise will have an incentive to play each other ooc to try to prove they're worthy of a high seed. If they play those ooc games and lose, they still get to earn a bid (with a worse seed) by winning their conference.
I also think, as pretty much happened this year, you have to not punish conference championship game losers to the benefit of teams who failed to even make their conference championship. The field should pretty much be set after the regular season, with the conference championships just being a chance for teams to improve their seeding (Georgia) or steal someone else's spot with an auto bid (Clemson)
Last edited:
We've talked about what will eventually happen with Chumlee, we got a good look this year. I thought they looked lazy, lethargic at times. Won a few games by getting unreal breaks, those can change around in a hurry. TN, SMU, IU didn't belong in the payoffs, unfortunately for them they proved it. Wonder how long their $10 "performance tax" will last with last night's performance on the horizon?
This is exactly my problem with all the whining about wanting “the best teams, not the best records”. If we’re going to be making decisions based on projected talent levels and little else, that makes the regular season worthless, and we might as well just give the superpower programs like Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, and Oregon preseason autobids and let them play tune up exhibitions all year. They’ll probably make it on merit most years anyway with the 12 or rumored future 16 team format, but I prefer to leave open the possibility they can actually play their way out of a spot if they lose games to mediocre teams like Vanderbilt and Oklahoma. That makes the season more interesting and is ultimately better for the sport as a whole.
It doesn't have to be the top dogs because I agree, the top dogs are getting ready to stop doing that. However, like minded teams that need a boost to bump up their credibility will, SMU, Tulane, UL, Memphis, UC, OK St..... There wil be good teams that need to step up their competition level going forward.
I think the first rounds should be scheduled at some of the minor bowl locations in the lower latitudes, same as the later rounds. That would seem to be fairer and it would also eliminate playing in severe weather. i.e. the Penn St. SMU game was played in temperatures in 20 with 20 MPH winds. It's very difficult to pass the ball under those conditions.
From reading their boards they may be adding to that 10$ tax. There were a few post saying Chumlee was throwing players under the bus by claiming they weren't fully bought in. I am not talking about him being overweight, but he is the face of UT, have a little pride, look professional, wear cloths that fit, shave, you are making millions of dollars a year, don't look like you eat out of garbage cans. That's just a pet peeve of mine may not be a big deal to anyone else.
But last night shut the vols up until fall, realistically our chances of advancing aren't great with a green QB starting his first game, but as a fan I have alot of hope. Ironic Fromm got his first start against ND.
The changes that I would like to see won't happen. First I would like to see it be either 8 or 16 games, preferably 16. A first round home game should be your reward for being ranked in the upper half. I would also like to see conference titles be ignored and just go by the rankings only. The part I know won't happen is conference championship games should be eliminated. The SEC championship game very well could cost UGA a national title.
TN had at least 3 straight, maybe 4 games, where they failed to score in the First Half. Other games they generated less than 350 yds of total offense. Looks to me like Chumlee's gotten lazy.
None of the 9-12 seeds challenged. Net, there just aren't more than 8 teams that have a chance at the titel, probably not that many.
You wnat a lot of first round blowouts? Fine keep 12 or even more.
If you want a chance that games will be decent, go to 8 or fewer. Me, I won't plan around games between #5 to #12 in the future. The FCS games were way more interesting.
You wnat a lot of first round blowouts? Fine keep 12 or even more.
If you want a chance that games will be decent, go to 8 or fewer. Me, I won't plan around games between #5 to #12 in the future. The FCS games were way more interesting.
I agree with this. There is such a huge dropoff in college football after 1-8, probably after 1-6. 7-12 and beyond simply can't compete. Those games this weekend were embarrassing for the sport, and people that want more of that, well I feel sorry for you that you don't have anything better to do than watch that shit product. That was God awful, and expected.
As far as people saying Bama or another SEC needs in, LOL. So a 3 loss Bama team that lost to 6-6 Vandy and got their BRAINS beat in by a horrible Oklahoma team deserves to be in the playoffs?? They didn't even score a touchdown in a college football game. Complete joke. And Ole Miss lost to 4-8 Kentucky AT HOME. Yeah, that screams playoffs.
8 is your number. That way a team that obviously deserves to be in that is left out like Georgia last year gets in. This new experiment has been an embarrassing failure. I didn't watch more than 30 minutes of any of these games because they were so awful.
My belief is that Alabama or Ole Miss would beat Clemson, SMU, Indiana, Arizona St. or Boise St. handily in a playoff game
in fairness, the 4 games so far have not been meaningful. They've been crappy, boring games.
They have been crap. Meaningful as in not an exhibition and players not sitting out of transferring.
I like your numbers, but I think the playoff games should all be in domes. The weather shouldn't be a factor, imo, of determining the NC. I like the conferece championship game, even with what it cost us, at least it kept that arrogant bunch of longhorns from claiming they took over the SEC their first year.
The playoffs should be eight teams . The best in the country ranked by strength of schedule . If that means four SEC teams and four Big ten teams so be it . The playoffs should be the best teams in the country . No TCU , SMU BS . The eight best teams in the country ranked by strength of schedule results.
The whole committee that thought up this abject failure of 12 teamsshould be replaced as it is evident they don’t have a clue .
The whole committee that thought up this abject failure of 12 teamsshould be replaced as it is evident they don’t have a clue .
Yeah like I said Grump 8 was always the right and the perfect number. The problem with the old BCS was 4 just wasnt enough because it may have left out one or two others that legitimatley had a gripe to be included. But there are never more than 5 or 6 that really have a case to be title contenders any given year so 8 would cover those and stil leave a cushion for two other winers that their fans thought they were in the discussion. On top of that 8 is perfect for 3 clean rounds of games. 12 didnt make sense to me other than letting more in for fan appeasement. But if your looking just from the competition side for a good playoff 8 is the number and alwasy has been.
I think the results of the first round are less the fault of committee and expansion, more the fault of ACC being weaker. As well as B12 not having more competitive teams in the picture.
There’s not a whole lot the committee can do about that.
Realignment made the B10 and SEC stronger and the others weaker. How that is rectified I have no idea.
Of course the SEC was lowly in basketball for a while and is now supreme so it’s not out of the realm of possibility to turn a conference around.
In theory NIL and portal should help level playing field.
There’s not a whole lot the committee can do about that.
Realignment made the B10 and SEC stronger and the others weaker. How that is rectified I have no idea.
Of course the SEC was lowly in basketball for a while and is now supreme so it’s not out of the realm of possibility to turn a conference around.
In theory NIL and portal should help level playing field.
Seeding is a reward for great regular seasons. All of the Pro and College sports are set up the same way. Teams play a long regular season for this advantage
Yeah, six teams is probably the best with the top two getting a bye. I'd be okay with eight, but anything beyond 8, you get what we got this weekend.
Great discussion in this thread!
My thought is that conference champions should be rewarded, but also the top four seeds should be rewarded as well.
IMHO, a better format would be that the top four seeds (regardless of whether they are conference champions or not) get the byes.
For these first round playoff games, I’d like to see the teams seeded by their rankings, but if you are one of the highest five conference champions playing a non-champion, you get the home field advantage. If the committee had done that, we would have had Oregon, Georgia, Texas and Penn State 1-4 getting the byes, and #5 Notre Dame at #12 Clemson. #6 Ohio State at #11 Arizona State, #7 Tennessee hosting against #10 SMU (higher seed between two at large teams gets to host) and #8 Indiana at #9 Boise State.
I believe that would have made for a much more compelling bracket overall, as well aa some very intriguing and competitive first round matchups.
My thought is that conference champions should be rewarded, but also the top four seeds should be rewarded as well.
IMHO, a better format would be that the top four seeds (regardless of whether they are conference champions or not) get the byes.
For these first round playoff games, I’d like to see the teams seeded by their rankings, but if you are one of the highest five conference champions playing a non-champion, you get the home field advantage. If the committee had done that, we would have had Oregon, Georgia, Texas and Penn State 1-4 getting the byes, and #5 Notre Dame at #12 Clemson. #6 Ohio State at #11 Arizona State, #7 Tennessee hosting against #10 SMU (higher seed between two at large teams gets to host) and #8 Indiana at #9 Boise State.
I believe that would have made for a much more compelling bracket overall, as well aa some very intriguing and competitive first round matchups.
