‘Why not eight?’

If you had “before the first playoff game is played” in the When Will The First Conference Commissioner Advocate An Eight-Team Playoff? pool, you win.

Four teams may not be enough for a college football playoff, according to ACC commissioner John Swofford.

Speaking at Wednesday’s weekly Durham Sports Club meeting at the Croasdaile Country Club, Swofford said an eight-team playoff, “in terms of the number of teams, would probably be ideal.”

This season marks the debut of a four-team College Football Playoff, replacing the BCS, which chose two teams for a national championship game.

“I don’t think all the controversy’s going to go away,” Swofford said of the new system. “You have four teams that get a chance to play for the national championship, which is twice as many as before, but whoever’s fifth or sixth is not going to be happy. There will be some conferences that won’t have a team in the playoff.”

After they go to eight, Swofford and his peers can recycle that puppy with just a couple of changes in the numbers.  As long as there’s more money in it for them, of course.

43 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

43 responses to “‘Why not eight?’

  1. Castleberry

    Do you suppose they’re even worried about attendance? What’s the max attendance they’ve had for the ACC Championship Game.

    Let’s just say miracles happen this year for the Dawgs. If you go to Atlanta, the semi-final, and the championship… that’s some serious coin. Throw in a quarterfinal and it has to be a home game for the better seed. And when would that be – Christmas week?

    These effin’ bozos.

    Like

  2. Connor

    Death, taxes, and post-season expansion.

    Like

  3. Big Shock

    I know a playoff is not your thing, but looking at this weeks Mumme Poll, 8 seems to be about right.

    Like

    • It ain’t stoppin’ at eight.

      Like

    • AusDawg85

      Unless you’re #9

      Like

    • Bright Idea

      8 might cut down on the season long talk of who will get in the playoffs.Listening to all of the talk from every talking head and game commentator beginning in September just about ruined this season. Nobody talks about the players or the games themselves. Even the Heisman race seems to be an afterthought.

      Like

      • Biggus Rickus

        The number of teams isn’t why ESPN has talked about it incessantly. They talk about it incessantly to get ratings and stir debate and all of the other annoying reasons ESPN does anything.

        Like

      • Hackerdog

        I think you have it backwards. Only 4 teams are making the playoffs and ESPN is talking about it incessantly. If 8 teams, or 12, or 16, or 24, went to the playoffs, it would just increase the talk by that much. Bradley would even be able to pitch GA Tech as a legitimate choice to go dancing.

        Like

  4. Uglydawg

    If this “make room for all conference champions” comes true, GT will be in the mix fairly often. How FUBAR is that? What a whiney assed attitude. Just because you’re a “conference” you should get a team in? Swofford’s problem is that he’s looked at his conference and sees only a potentially damaged FSU as the only hope to even sniff at the final four. Other than that (and it is fleeting) he’s got nothing.

    Like

  5. Dawg521

    Six teams seems ideal to me. #1 and #2 seeds get a bye in opposing brackets. Seeds 3-6 get a play-in game on either side of the bracket (3 vs 6 (to play #1 seed) and 4 vs 5 (to play #2)). That covers the Power 5 conference champions (championship required for entrance) and one Group of 5 champion chosen by a committee.

    Like

    • reipar

      Why does every power conference get an automatic bid? What if the team winning the conference has 3 or 4 losses? They just automatically get in with no questions asked? Isn’t that how we end up with a Pitt v Utah Fiesta bowl?

      Like

      • Dawg521

        I believe that winning your conference should be required to get into the playoff. If 2014 turns out like 2007 and UGA is the hottest team at the end of the year but is shut out of the SECCG, well then we have no one to blame but ourselves. We should have taken care of business in the first place.

        I think that given the current state of affairs ala recruiting, IPFs, TV networks, etc., the likelihood of a 3 or 4 loss conference champion is highly unlikely. Currently, the Big 12 leader has 1 loss, likely Pac-12 winner has 1, SEC winner has 1 or 2, ACC has 0-2 and Big 10 has 1 or 2. I appreciate a traditional outlying team making inroads and surprising their conference i.e. Utah, Arizona, TCU, Duke, Miss St., etc. If they are really worth a damn, then they will prove it vs the other conference champions in the Playoff. You may have a crappy [insert play-in/semifinal sponsor] game, but you can also have a good team crap the bed on a big stage on any given day, just like our Dawgs did in Jacksonville this year. I think that giving each conference a spot in the playoff is a valid course of action and doesn’t leave it up to a committee of so-called experts to mull over data. The only rankings that need to come out are the seedings 1-6 at the end of the regular season.

        Like

    • Uglydawg

      Giving those teams a bye would be way too huge an advantage. A week off that late in the season is golden.

      Like

      • Faulkner

        The bye sure didn’t help the dawgs before Florida. I think a team getting hot at the end of the year may want to keep playing and not lose momentum. How many times have we seen a team lose after a bye in the NFL playoffs?

        Like

  6. hassan

    It is ridiculous to not give the #65 team in the country a shot. I thought this was going to get settled on the field?!?! 64 teams is simply not enough. We need a play in game for that final spot.

    We really need to look at 128 teams. That is the only real way find out who the champion is.

    Like

    • Bob

      +1

      I can only smirk. Some of us knew that 4 would not be enough long before we went that route. And if you think 8 will be enough for folks, you need to be looking for that beachfront property. Playoff junkies will never be satisfied.

      And yup, who in the hell is going to be able to afford these multiple playoff games all over the country? Corporate America is who. And we will have a second version of the NFL…except there will be bands and real cheerleaders. That is unless we opt for more of the pumped in high volume stuff that passes for music.

      Like

  7. reipar

    The sooner we get to eight the better. It will help the SEC as much as anyone. I could see 16, but I still think to do that the regular season would have to go back to 11 games and I do not see the big money schools giving up a home game unless the TV money significantly increases and the attendance significantly decreases.

    Like

  8. Dog in Fla

    “It’s a mix of former coaches and players and administrators and journalists and current A.D.s,” Swofford said, “and Condoleezza Rice.”

    Like

  9. The problem is you can’t really hybrid this thing.

    The bowls need to be scrapped – as least as they are now and the SECCG needs to be scrapped. Go to a 16 team playoff. Higher seed hosts until championship round and that game would be at a neutral site.

    Yes, historically, the BCS “got it right,” but the BCS is dead. Time to move on. Let’s do this right.

    🙂

    Like

    • RocketDawg

      There is already a 16 team tournament….it’s called the NFL where a shitty Falcon team at 4-6 is still alive to win the championship!!!!!

      Like

      • Don’t forget the 4-6 Saints, too…

        But, really, with 50+ teams in the Power 5, I wouldn’t expect that we’d ever see 16 playoff teams with sorry records like that.

        Like

      • Bob

        Not only are they alive, they would host a playoff game against a team with 12 or so wins. We don’t need a Saturday version of the NFL. Sixteen is utterly insane and would make all these important games we have seen week after week after week meaningless. Why should Georgia risk Chubb against Tech if the Top 16 make it in a tournament?

        Like

  10. RocketDawg

    If it goes to 8 I am officially done with College Football (AKA NFL Lite). Some asshat on the radio this morning was talking about scrapping conferences and making 4 “super regionals” that were split into two divisions each. Division champs would play for the right to advance and so on and so forth. Of course we would “still maintain the regional rivalries so that the regular season still means something”. Screw that! I swear these dickheads are going to screw up the sport that I love.

    Like

  11. Hogbody Spradlin

    Johnny groks that the ACC is gonna wait a while to get a team in a 4 way playoff.

    Like

  12. “As long as there’s more money in it for them, of course.”

    Why are you always so worried about how much money other people make?

    Like

    • Why do you think postseasons expand?

      Hint: the same people who run the CFP tried a couple of years ago to enlarge the MBB tourney from 68 to 96 teams. They couldn’t find a broadcast partner willing to pony up for that, so they didn’t.

      Like

  13. Chris

    We can only hope for at least 8 teams. #PlsPlayoffJesus #I’mFullyAroused #GoodbyeOldFoogies #IWon’tGetOffYourGrass #Well….Bye

    Like

  14. Merk

    If you go to 8 you open the door for crap:
    -Take big 5 champs- works until some 9-3 or 8-4 team wins a big 5 championship and leaves out a 11-1 or 10-2 team that is clearly better.
    -Big 5 are not equal- Not all have championship games, so can you punish a 11-2 team for a 13th game, that another conference did not have to play? Also even the talking heads have proclaimed that the Big 10 and ACC are pretty weak this year.
    -ND- not a conference member, but wants all the benefits and none of the downsides (champ game) of being a big 5 team.

    Like

  15. PatinDC

    I think we have 4 games this year and next and move to 8 after. I think we stay at 8 for a while until travel patterns and money are established. I have no problems with 5 conf. champions and 3 others. I could care less about the champion record. All these conferences (cough Big 10) talk about how they would beat the SEC heads up, well show it.

    I do think the fans will not be able to afford a 16 game setup and that injuries will be a real concern. I agree with the comment that expansion this far will require reducing the home games to 11 or even 10.
    I also think the bowls are antiquated and silly at this point. Good for extra practices and that is it.

    I could work out a better system I am sure, but I don’t work for ESPN 😉

    Like

    • I do think the fans will not be able to afford a 16 game setup…

      They’ll alleviate some of that by playing the first round of the postseason at the home stadiums of the higher seeded teams.

      Like

  16. If you give automatic bids to conference champs, you must give one to the Group of 5. Now, 6 of your 8 spots are taken leaving 2 at-large. This year all of the projected conference champions are all ranked very highly, but in most years this is not the case. When one of those years comes and the fifth-ranked team doesn’t get in the playoff, we’ll need to go to 16. That, and most teams will be tired of the #1 seed getting to play teams like Marshall while everyone else gets a top power 5 opponent.

    Like

  17. Uglydawg

    Let computers pick the top four. Leave it at that.
    But protect the computers from hack jobs or we’ll get four nerd teams every year.

    Like

  18. Cousin Eddie

    How much of it has to do with his #1 undefeated team dropping to #3 behind two one loss teams? Just a slight screw up and his #1 team gets to watch the play off.

    Like

  19. Cojones

    I’ve advocated 8 teams as the representative number before we went to four. That would be the top 8 best teams regardless of conf champ. A 3-4 loss conf champ wouldn’t be ranked in the top 8.

    Even if Delany got his way and got a conf champ in, the remaining teams would more than likely be chosen from the strongest teams in the strongest conf – that’d be us. Take a look at how they have ranked the SEC teams thus far this year and you see the possibility of more than two from the SEC. You gotta believe that two SEC teams would make hay in a playoff and stop the whiney chorus from without with their play. The SEC is getting mucho pub based upon our play in the last 10 yrs of NCs. The 2007 team from UGA would have played in an 8-team playoff and probably have whipped everything in sight.

    We would have a shot most years when 8 teams are in this. I think that 8 teams would quickly settle in as the representative number of NC-qualified teams. The rational for more than 8 teams doesn’t hold up to logic whereas capturing a deserved NC in 8 teams is logical to me. The logic against 8 teams professed by most doesn’t hold up for 4 or even 2 teams, so we either should go back to bowl champs picked by the press as the best cfb in the land or go to a Playoff of 8 teams. This present piece-meal approach sucks.

    Like

    • Hackerdog

      First, your preferred approach isn’t even a remote possibility. Conferences will insist that any playoff consisting of 8 teams have automatic berths for conference champs. So you’re kind of arguing about unicorns being better than horses.

      Second, your preferred method for selecting the 8 teams is still subjective. You think that the #5 ranked team being left out of a 4-team playoff has a legitimate beef, but the #9 ranked team being left out of an 8-team playoff doesn’t. That’s not logically consistent.

      Like

      • Cojones

        The preferred method for selecting 8 teams is most certainly subjective, but better suited when measuring the equivalence of teams at the 8-9 cutoff level. It doesn’t matter what number you choose, the choices and the cutoff will always be subjective. To me, 8 teams will cut deep enough to include up and coming teams who gel into NC status late in their season. More teams would dilute that championship team value you are seeking.

        Yes, power 5 conferences will want to have their champion included and I don’t blame them, in fact I expect that all conferences would push for that, but the remaining teams to be selected would be sufficient to select a NC-worthy team no matter the conference that they may belong. It also opens the possibility of a Boise St and/or this year’s undefeated Marshall being included. Choice of 8 would most certainly include more than one SEC team most years and would get consideration for the two teams matched in the SECCG or one more with a better record than played and lost in the SECCG.

        I view 8 teams as solving many problems we are now faced with in Choose Four and that would reward deserving teams in conferences that have to face daunting teams from a conference where members play the reigning NC year in and year out. After all, isn’t that why we are blogging about this subject? 🙂

        Like