Kirby Smart embraces his inner Jim Boeheim.
“I think if you polled any coach it would be foolish to say you wouldn’t want playoff expansion.” No shit, Sherlock. Just think of all the new playoff bonus opportunities! (Not to mention how much longer Mark Richt’s career at Georgia would have been sustained had he coached in an era of Big Playoff.)
In other words, Jimmy Sexton approves this message.
Get The Picture 
If they expand, I hope they stop at 8. Talk of double digits is concerning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
CV, this reminds me of another current “societal issue.” Who’s to say how many(much) is enough? Also, if raising the number is the answer, then why are we having to raise it again? We “just” raised it to four. Eventually it’ll be a Basketball model. Is THAT the answer????
LikeLike
shorter Coach Smart: “I don’t give a fuck how many you let in, we are going to fucking crush whomever you put in front of us. I have built a 5 star football machine full of bad ass motherfuckers. We can start an intramural superstar at QB to start the season and still finish the season in the top 10. We are ready to fucking eat.”
LikeLiked by 5 people
“But if the powers that be want to make Alabama less of a road block for us, who am I to argue?” 😉
LikeLiked by 6 people
We keep forgetting expansion comes with qualifying criteria. If they go to 8, but guarantee spots for each of the power 5 winners plus ND likely grabs a seat, that leaves a lot fewer open seats at the table. This is before we even consider (laugh, chuckle) a spot for the highest ranked non-P5 school. It certainly improves UGA’s chances of making the CFP, but not by as much as we’d think.
LikeLiked by 2 people
All the more reason to go to 12, or 16, or… 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
Brux, you have an attitude problem. I like it.
LikeLike
Sorry, I read the buffet before getting to this.
The playoff bonus has nothing to do with his desire for expansion … right. Maybe if his team doesn’t lay an egg in Baton Rouge in 2018 and faceplant at home against South Carolina in 2019, he would have been able to test the hypothesis that losing the SEC championship game shouldn’t be a reason to be kept out of the final 4.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t like testing that…I think it’s a road to not getting in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Kirby Smart embraces his inner Jim Boeheim”, now i must pray for CKS, that he never, ever embraces an thought and or action that the ‘cuse douche does…
LikeLike
I agree … I just think if we had gone to Baton Rouge and beaten LSU and then lost to Bama in Atlanta, we would have been in the final 4.
LikeLike
Shit, that 2019 team didn’t deserve a trip to the playoffs after the showing against LSU, SCAR win or not. I was in Red Stick for the 2018 game, miserable from 1Q onwards, and I’ll agree with you on that one.
LikeLike
This train is only going one way. We killed all the other bowls with the playoff so now we have to expand the playoff. An expansion will be the very end of the old bowl season. They made them irrelevant and now they have to replace them to save college football nationally and keep the sport relative in all parts of the country. We created the problem now we solve the problem to our benefit.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hey and just think: you get one less guaranteed game a year so that 12 teams can play 12 and 2 can play 15 or so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Right now I really only have to win one game to get into the playoff, and it’s a game we haven’t won since 2007. Now you’re telling me that I don’t even have to win that one? Sign me up.” – Kirby Smart
LikeLike
If they move to 8 with the structure they have now (no conf champ guarantees, “best” 8 get in), I’d be good with that. Beyond that seems silly. I think it would be exceedingly rare that a team outside the top 8 would legitimately be a title contender.
LikeLike
Unpopular opinion alert: it’s exceedingly rare when anyone outside of the Top 3 is a legitimate title contender if you actually value the results of the regular season. The BCS, while it had its flaws, got the matchup right much more often than it didn’t. The four team solution was perfect for college football as it’s currently comprised.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Exactly, and I don’t think it’s unpopular. Even worse is when/if they make all conference champs tie ins. That’s where you will see a highly ranked SEC or B1G (possibly) runner up left out to 14th ranked UCLA.
LikeLike
Oh, I completely agree. I am just assuming the expansion is inevitable, in which case 8 would be the largest I’d be ok with it expanding to. It will still be primarily the top 3 with realistic odds, but you at least get some compelling matchups with the top 8. So if tis going to expand anyway, stop at 8.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t have minded a playoff format in 2007 (wouldn’t have needed the expanded playoff). Dawgs were unstoppable at the end of that season.
LikeLike
The 2002 Bulldogs would have beaten either Ohio State or Miami, too. Nobody would have wanted a piece of the ’07 Dawgs. But, that’s part of what makes the regular season in college football special, that it matters. They won’t ask me for my vote, but if they did it would be to keep things where they are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I go back to a very insightful conclusion @SB brought forth several months back when looking at the competitiveness of the playoff games — especially the Semis. With few exceptions, the semi’s aren’t close and 1&2 tend to be in the championship an awful lot.
Having said that, anything beyond 6 would be very detrimental to eyes on the screens. Teams 3-6 would probably be more competitive than 1v8, 2v7, 3v6. Close games are where it is at. Teeing up Cinncinati versus Alabama in an 8 team format doesn’t seem like a good format. tOSU v OU, ND vs A&M would be more compleling in a 6 team playoff.
LikeLike
Six would require that a team get a bye in the second round.
That would be unimaginably unfair to the other finalist.
Not going to work.
It has to be a multiple of four to work…as in 4-8-16-32-64.
LikeLike
No, you can do 6 or 12 with the top 2 or 4 seeds, respectively, getting a bye.
LikeLike