Rick Endorses The 8 Team Playoff Plan

[JimmyJohnsonsHair]

I find it hilarious that there are fans who want the NCAA Division I football champion to be decided in the same manner as American Idol. "Well they don't pass the eye test, so let's vote them out." GTFOH.

 

[DaU83]

Again, 4 doesn't work because it omits conference champions AND adds too much of the human element.

So we're going to make conference championships more meaningful by adding three non-champions to the playoff?

And an 8-team playoff only increases the "human element." It's pretty easy to decide the top 4 teams. It's a lot harder when you're talking about the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th ranked teams.

If you really cared about those things, the only option would be a six-team playoff with five Power 5 champions and the highest ranked Group of 5 champion. That would be better than an 8-team playoff, but still too much.

Does anybody actually think this year's playoffs are worse without Penn State? That's what we're upset about? There's nothing to fix. The system works. The past two years have been exciting as ****, and this one should be no different. Keep it the way it is.

I disagree, an 8 team playoff with 5 conference champions and the "best of the power" 5 leaves the human element to determine 2 teams and seeding.

OSU should have been the 4 seed in this case, penalize them even the slightest for not even being the best team in the Big 10 (on the field).

 

[Lokest]

There are people in this thread that will tell you the better team didn't win the fsu-miami game and then tell you the better team won the psu-osu game.

 

[DMoney]

Dmoney and them are cool with it .....until we are in contention and he realizes condi rice just said no to miami being in while eating miso soup citing that Stanford is a better "matchup" for Bama.

There could be 64 teams, and if the 64th team gets unfairly picked over Miami I'm still going to be fired up.

 

[Moro]

Richt is a coach-- it's in his best interest to have more teams in a playoff. His opinion is meaningless. Eight games is too much and kills the best regular season is sports.

Four is perfect. Go back through history-- four solves every problem. Imagine if we had this system in 2000 or 2004. There will always be someone whining whether it is 4 or 8 or 16.

What makes college football great is that a random upset in October has the significance of a playoff game. Get rid of that, and you just have pro football with worse players and a band.

Exactly! Leave well enough alone. If you keep changing it like the rules in the NFL then the league will be on a downward spiral.

 

[Echtcane]

The fewer teams there are in a playoff, the more power you give to people with agendas and biases to stick their favorites in and exclude others. The idea that these people can truly KNOW who the best 4 teams are is ridiculous. And fans are arguing the same points when it's nothing more than opinion and bias. Conferences are essentially closed systems, making it almost impossible to compare strength of schedule of one conf vs another. Out of conference scheduling varies wildly. Penn State played Pitt, OSU didn't. Washington wasn't as tested out of conference as someone like PSU or OSU. Even so, UW may still be a better team. The point is, WE DON'T KNOW THAT. And the committe certainly doesn't either.

 

[88]

Ask yourself what's more exciting. Regular season college or NFL. Then think about why

Your champions will end up being tournament champions instead of season champs. Playoffs are regular season killers. 11 weeks of pure excitement vs 3. Take your pick

 

[kendallcanes]

3 of our games are against FCS teams and 1 week is a bye. That's 4 of 13 weeks that suck. The whole month of September was boring as ****. If we lose two games, our season is over. How exciting is the season after that happens?

How many fans stop showing up after that happens? More fans will come if more teams are in contention later on in the season.

 

[58straight]

Ask yourself what's more exciting. Regular season college or NFL. Then think about why

Your champions will end up being tournament champions instead of season champs. Playoffs are regular season killers. 11 weeks of pure excitement vs 3. Take your pick

NFL regular season right now for me, college football produces a large amount of noncompetitive blow outs that you can call before the game even happens with 100% accuracy. college gives us good games opening weekend then bowl season, in between its not that compelling besides a few rivalry games. You can predict much of how the season will unfold now based on recruiting rankings. the NFL gives you close games every week because even the crappy teams have elite linemen

 

[coca cola]

Honestly I liked the 2 team system better.

 

[Echtcane]

NFL regular season right now for me, college football produces a large amount of noncompetitive blow outs that you can call before the game even happens with 100% accuracy. college gives us good games opening weekend then bowl season, in between its not that compelling besides a few rivalry games. You can predict much of how the season will unfold now based on recruiting rankings. the NFL gives you close games every week because even the crappy teams have elite linemen

Yep, despite all the talk of parity, college football is very imbalanced. The most talented teams may only face one or 2 real challenges all year. How is that so exciting? And with the catch-22 of recruiting, it's essentially designed to stay that way. I'd much rather force them to win more real matchups at the end of the year than have a committee crown them superior with the false claim that they're simply better because of some kind of eye test. And the argument that going to 8 teams would ruin the regular season is absolute crap. If anything, it will act to EXTEND interest longer and to more teams.

 

[Big Sky Cane]

Richt is a coach-- it's in his best interest to have more teams in a playoff. His opinion is meaningless. Eight games is too much and kills the best regular season is sports.

Four is perfect. Go back through history-- four solves every problem. Imagine if we had this system in 2000 or 2004. There will always be someone whining whether it is 4 or 8 or 16.

What makes college football great is that a random upset in October has the significance of a playoff game. Get rid of that, and you just have pro football with worse players and a band.

That's exactly what the idiots said about a 4 team playoff

 

[Moro]

Of course college football is very imbalanced compared to the NFL. It's recruiting system is based on a recruits choice and not a draft selection system. Which means that teams ultimately cannot guarantee an increase in talent from one year to the next. Which also means that schools have to continually resort to spending millions to attract recruits to become competitive ie Oregon. Therefore, a playoff system of sorts won't fix this problem. You have 40 bowl games this year if you take the winner of each and did a playoff from there you'd have an additional 6 months of college football. This would kill the leagues because of the lack of recovery and development time going into the new season.

 

[KevinCaneFace]

The system currently rewards a good loss. Losing th last game of the season all but kills your playoff chances. So what's better? To sit at home during the conference championship like Ohio State or be forced to play the extra game risking injuries and your season?

If you're okay with a system that rewards the second place team in a conference, then you're wrong.

5 conference winners
2 Wildcards
Then add the best of the Group of Five for the last slot

 

[motorcitycane]

Ill say it again. It shouldnt necessarily be 3 at large POWER 5 teams. If you are undefeated you get in over the "at large teams"

NIU,Boise, WMU, HOUSTONS, should get chances

 

[DMoney]

That's exactly what the idiots said about a 4 team playoff

That's bull. A ton of people supported the 4-team playoff and oppose the 8-team playoff, myself included. It's the right number.

College football suffered by excluding Miami/Washington in 2001, Auburn/Utah in 2004, TCU in 2010, Okie State in 2011, etc. A four-team playoff would have solved all of those problems.

Does college football suffer by excluding teams like '16 Penn State? Who cares? They lost twice and got demolished by Michigan. We can decide a champion without them.

 

[Canemang]

That's exactly what the idiots said about a 4 team playoff

That's bull. A ton of people supported the 4-team playoff and oppose the 8-team playoff, myself included. It's the right number.

College football suffered by excluding Miami/Washington in 2001, Auburn/Utah in 2004, TCU in 2010, Okie State in 2011, etc. A four-team playoff would have solved all of those problems.

Does college football suffer by excluding teams like '16 Penn State? Who cares? They lost twice and got demolished by Michigan. We can decide a champion without them.

Question I have is, what clearly makes * a better team than Penn St?

9 straight wins including head to head vs *
Conference champs of what's considered the "best" conference this year
Dominating a MSU team that was a 2 point conversion away from beating *

 

[Moro]

Penn State was a much improved team by the end of the season but the two losses cost them a spot. So they qualify for the most improved team of the year. However, they should win the death penalty over * team in the CFL.

 

[58straight]

Ill say it again. It shouldnt necessarily be 3 at large POWER 5 teams. If you are undefeated you get in over the "at large teams"

NIU,Boise, WMU, HOUSTONS, should get chances

I dont agree I'd still favor a one or 2 loss power 5 team over teams like that just based on the competition and attrition power 5 teams face over the course of a season. look at the 4 game stretch miami faced in october those teams have multiple NFL prospects. a team like western michigan wont ever face a stretch like that and have that wear and tear on the team.