B..b…but brackets!

Tell me he’s wrong.

80 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

80 responses to “B..b…but brackets!

  1. 69Dawg

    The law of unintended consequences is what controls the NCAA and the CFP. ESPN rules (money) and the rest is just BS.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Down Island Way

      Those extra institutions get invited to Micky’s expanded playoff picnic, that vegas views as 20 point all you can beat teams, can boast of their roasting and scream “wait till next years ass whipping” are nothing but collateral damage….2 or 4 team playoff is all that’s required to keep college football fan interest or does vegas need more sports wagering…

      Like

  2. Gaskilldawg

    My thoughts exactly.

    Like

  3. The only playoff expansion that makes sense would be a champions only format with 8 super-conferences (either a total of 80 or 96 schools in a separate division). Even that would require so much realignment to maintain competitive balance that it’s not worth it.

    Every other format requires wild cards who didn’t even win their leagues. No thanks.

    Liked by 1 person

    • sniffer

      So, what so you do with a 12-1 Alabama that loses the SECCP game and doesn’t win the conference?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Faltering Memory

        Snif-hoped for but not reality

        Like

      • Tough … they didn’t win their league. Why should they have a claim to be the national champions?

        Liked by 2 people

        • sniffer

          And an 10-3 Pac12 champion is more deserving? I see more strife with that outcome. I get your point about the league champions but there’s an argument for the “better” Bama team.

          Liked by 1 person

          • You didn’t read my comment about why it doesn’t work. It would require so much realignment for competitive balance that college football wouldn’t be recognizable (of course, the conferences have pretty much already made it that way). The SEC would likely be broken up into at least 2 leagues. It would also require a new governance structure to allow the conferences to work together.

            Wild cards devalue the results of the regular season. An expanded playoff in the current structure will require multiple wild cards and a spot for a Group of 5 qualifier. That’s the main reason I’m a 4-team guy who wants a BCS type of selection system over the committee we have now.

            Like

          • stoopnagle

            Yes.

            Here’s why: whomever beat Bama in that scenario shouldn’t have to play Bama again. AND who is to say that the Pac12 that year isn’t a tougher, more balanced, league? If it isn’t, then the team that beat Bama would beat that 10-3 right? Only one way to find out and it’s make games count.

            Also: FUCK BAMA.

            Like

      • Josh Hancher

        There will be an at large spot(s)

        Like

      • Bulldawg Bill

        Shit can ’em!!!

        Like

    • rigger92

      EE, I just can’t get behind “auto qualifiers”. That will still leave better teams out of it. At the same time, I also hate how winning a conference isn’t heralded like it should be/used to be. Both things play off each other. Still, I would think that the SEC runner up would consistently beat a PAC champ until they get their acts together over there.

      Liked by 1 person

      • How did you feel about losing the national title to a team that didn’t qualify for the SECCG? I hated it. If the SEC champion and the runner-up will typically get in the playoff, it completely cheapens the value of a conference championship.

        All of this is why I don’t like expanding the playoff but changing the selection criteria and method.

        If you have 8, you’re going to have 5 automatic qualifiers and a Group of 5 champion (essentially 6 automatic qualifiers). If ND has 1 loss, they are going to get in more often than not. Therefore, you only have 1 or 2 spots for teams that didn’t even win their league.

        Liked by 1 person

        • rigger92

          It’s a healthy debate. Problem is, CFB is wildly inconsistent. Yes, it sucked. We lost by one play and one bad ref call. Still, we would have hit any other team in the mouth easily, save OK. That was a good game. Would have been fun to whip Washington or USC or OK again though. In the end, it came down to the best vs. best. That’s how it should be.

          Like

    • 5 into 4 was the original problem. 5 conference champions, 3 at large. First round on campus. Not that hard.

      Like

      • Other than the fact that every 8 scenario has a Group of 5 qualifier and that Notre Dame will take an at-large as often, there will be 1 true at-large.

        Like

        • 5 + 1 = 6, no? So there are at least 2 at large, plus ND very well might be in the ACC by then.

          Like

          • If you think ND is going to join the Almost Competitive Conference and give up their NBC contract, I have some nice oceanfront property in Hahira to sell you.

            Like

            • Ok, even if they don’t, that’s still 2 at large bids each year, and that’s assuming ND gets in every single year.

              5 conference champs + 3 at large makes too much sense to happen.

              Like

              • If ND gets in most every year and there is going to be a guaranteed spot to a Group of 5, you have 1 spot left.

                Like

                • 5 + ND = 6. 8 – 6 = 2. I’m not giving G5 a spot. 5 P5 champs, plus 3 at large. If a G5 is good enough, then find. But no auto tie in.

                  Like

                • I get your math, but that isn’t going to be how the spots get decided. Every plan for 8 has a Group of 5 guaranteed spot.

                  Like

                • I think they can work around that, but even if they can’t: 1) I think it’s at least 50/50 that ND does end up in the ACC in the next 5 years, and 2) the point if this is to keep the regular season meaningful, so win your conference.

                  You don’t want to be squeezed out of an at large? Then win your conference. Also, in the scenario, scheduling other P5 out of conference games can only help. A loss doesn’t hurt you in conference, and a win helps your at large case.

                  No matter what they do, 6 or 8 or whatever, the original problem was 5 into 4. That was a dumb idea from the start. It was great for ginning up attention and froth, but it wasn’t practical.

                  Like

  4. DawgStats

    He’s wrong. Confirmation bias. Same teams are gonna win is the dumbest argument. And the “trip to Home Depot” week three argument while
    Is a new one – I don’t get it.

    Having the same 5/6 teams play for the same thing and the season essentially decided in August will damage the sport long term.

    Rip away

    Like

    • College football has less parity than any other organized sport. That’s why the cream rises to the top, and will do so with an 8-team field.

      Liked by 5 people

    • When’s the last time you watched a meaningful — not entertaining, but meaningful — regular season college basketball game?

      Liked by 1 person

    • What would the stats say? The teams that are deeper in talent are likely to make it through an extended playoff unscathed. That means the teams that currently are the best are more likely to rise to the top. I don’t see any confirmation bias in that.

      The season is decided in December and February with the distribution of talent on the signing days. The only way to get more parity is to change the way talent is distributed. I don’t think anyone would like that.

      Like

      • Josh Hancher

        You are not wrong. But, can’t stand the subjective element to picking four teams to play a BCS and 1 game.

        Make a bracket. Make AQ and an at large spot. Give two byes. Get down to Semis by NYD.

        Like

        • As mentioned, I think the 4-team format is fine. I detest the way the 4 teams are currently selected with this non-transparent committee. I would like to see a BCS type of formula where the polls don’t come out until mid-October, the computer rankings drop the highest and lowest ranking, a strength of schedule component, and a conference championship bonus.

          Everyone who wants brackets by saying the bowl season is meaningless misses the real point of the bowl games to the schools. The NCAA has shortened spring practice multiple times. The pre-bowl game preparation is essentially pre-spring practice for the players who are returning. I hate that players are opting out of non-playoff bowl games and fan enthusiasm has waned. The powers that be in college football made that bed and now have to sleep in it.

          Like

  5. DawgStats

    Bubble games in Feb are awesome. Champ week games are awesome. AQ games are awesome

    Like

  6. DawgStats

    I am not going to say that Reg season won’t change. But those rivalry games will ALWAYS matter.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I hate to break it to you, but as someone growing up who cut his teeth on ACC basketball in an era of an 8-team men’s basketball playoff, the regular season is a shadow of its former self, if that.

      Liked by 4 people

      • DawgStats

        I think a reg CFB season with expanded playoff is more Comparable to that reg season than it is to the 68 team NCAA’s reg bball season

        Like

      • dawg100

        Late 60s, early 70s ACC Tourneys were magic. 1974 Md-NCS game still best ever game in college basketball (EIGHT players that night were pros later). 1976 UVA run to win the tourney was incredible. Shame, those days are long gone.

        Like

      • PTC DAWG

        The 8 team ACC was the tits, no doubt…

        Like

    • Ask Duke and UNC fans if they had their choice of sweeping the regular season rivalry or winning the NCAA tournament. I think you would find that the rivalry doesn’t matter. Entertaining? Yes. Meaningful? No.

      Liked by 1 person

      • DawgStats

        Are you saying that there was a time where winning the series was more important than wining ACC/NCAA ?

        Like

        • Listen to people here that bitch about not winning the SEC when we sweep all of our rivals. The “natty or bust” mentality is getting old, and expanding the playoff is only going to serve to grow that mentality.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Down Island Way

        College hoops fan (at one time), played the game…would go out of my way to view Duke-UNC games…then, if they made it to the acc finals…look out…EEntertaining, Yes…could care less…YES…

        Like

  7. DawgStats

    A Ole Miss UGA game with both teams at 16 wins (suspend belief) and trying to get into tourney is awesome. Will either win the NCAA? No.

    But making it means something to the players. Bowl games are MEANINGLESS now.

    But, a team wining an exciting game v conference game in late November with a chance to make an expanded playoff is more interesting than bowl seeding amongst an Outback or Citrus Bowl where significant players will opt out

    Liked by 1 person

  8. practicaldawg

    Creating new problems is what the NCAA does best

    Liked by 2 people

  9. SoCalDawg

    Unrelated CFB news that kinda got swept under the news cycle w/ the ongoing NFL draft, but Leipold going to Kansas makes me think:
    (1) such a good coach deserves a far better fate
    (2) knowing he was ready to leave Buffalo (for KU of all places), I am super thankful he didn’t end up @ AU, SC, or UT.

    (I should say, “yet,” bc if he gets to a bowl somehow in the next 4 years at KU, some SEC AD will come calling.)

    https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31364799/kansas-expected-hire-buffalo-lance-leipold-football-coach-sources-say

    Like

  10. mg4life0331

    Senator are you of the opinion the teams or the amount of teams at the top wont change?

    Like

  11. David D

    Can we just blame Florida? FTMF.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Russ

    Ditch the playoff, ditch the conference ties to bowls. Have a normal bowl season and then pick the top two for a NC game after the bowls. If someone gets left out, tough shit.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. TN Dawg

    I wouldn’t go to Home Depot and skip the Georgie/Clemson game because Georgia has a safety net of the expanded playoffs. And it wouldn’t make the game less important to me.

    So yes, I think he’s wrong.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. TN Dawg

    And unlike him, I feel like if we had played Alabama again with JT in the second round of the 16 team playoff, we would have gotten our brains kicked in.

    Just as Florida gave them a helluva gave, I believe we would have too.

    But we’ll never know because the field was limited to 4 teams of which overrated ND was one of them.

    And I believe TAMU, UF and UGA were all better than ND. So actually an expanded playoff would have brought better teams into the playoffs, not worse.

    So yes, I think he is wrong.

    Like

  15. We already have a 10 team playoff and at large picks. Some just don’t like how the final four are selected from that group. That seems easier to fix by offering a formula that favors P5 OOC wins over cupcakes. In fact, just don’t count the cupcake wins and see a massive improvement in matchups, fan interest, and selection of the final 4.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Exactly. All of the Power 5 champions can get in if they have 1 loss. ND typically plays a schedule that enables them to have a path with 1 loss. Penalize teams in the formula with a weak OOC schedule. Everyone understands the rules under a BCS type selection system as opposed to what we have now which is 13 people who all have bias and change the rules as they go along to get the answer the WWL wants.

      Like

  16. Let’s make Alabama play more teams on their way to a national championship said no SEC fan ever. It’s just pointless, right?

    Like

  17. stoopnagle

    He’s right.

    But it’s not about making games matter. Shit, they play 160-odd games in baseball and still feel like they need a playoff to figure out who the best team is. SMH. And they keep adding teams. Because it’s ain’t about the games or finding out who is best, it’s about money.

    Like

  18. Hogbody Spradlin

    What is the break even revenue point for a college football game? How much does it cost to produce and broadcast a game from a decent size city/stadium? I know little about the subject, but I’d speculate that there’s profit for ESPN and handsome revenues for our beloved alma maters right up to the point of 64 teams in a college football playoff, maybe even further.
    Analogy: third tier bowl games.
    Think about a first round playoff game, 6-6 South Carolina or 6-6 Indiana taking on a top seed, in front of how many fans? If that generates marginal profit for ESPN and revenue for the colleges/conferences, then ESPN will broadcast it and the “non-profit, charitable” colleges will assume the position for it.
    How many games will the champion have played? How many more players will have nagging long term orthopedic problems, or worse?
    I was okay with NIL rights already, but the thought of a big playoff field makes me like them even more. At least with the third tier bowl games there’s an end to sending players out there to make money for Ole Siwash U.

    Like

  19. I understand the argument that MLB or NFL don’t need any more playoffs. But MLB and NFL teams only play other MLB and NFL teams. CFB schools play plenty of games against lower-level teams, so the way to equalize this is to let the playoffs expand. Then, you know you’ve got good-on-good, and whoever comes out on top is your national champion.

    Like

  20. Robert Machen

    SB,

    I’m a long-time UGA Fan and an Alumnus from UGA having graduated twice many years ago. I really enjoy Josh Pate’s “Late Kick Show” on TV two to three times per week. I have found Josh to be very fair and complimentary to all college teams and especially to Georgia (but then if you aren’t Dan Mullen, what is there to criticize). Josh pretty much “calls it like he sees it” and has not been overly critical of Kirby and Company, but then that is true of Josh in general.

    So generally I agree with Josh’s comments about football, but in this one area he is wrong about expanding to eight teams versus four. It will not destroy the game. Instead, it will make it stronger and better by providing four more teams the opportunity to win the National Championship, which expands interest and viewership.

    When the two best football teams were picked prior to playing for a National Championship, it was like a Beauty Pagent and a complete joke. it was all about what the Media thought, or whomever on the committee had the most pull. Any game worth being called a National Championship should be decided on the field of play, because as we all know, that is what all Sports are all about. Add to this there is no group of people who are not predisposed enough to pick the best two teams as these people all went to college and were predisposed before they got on the Committee to select two teams.

    All you have to do is to look at last year when the final four were selected: Bama, ND, Clemson and Ohio State. The Playoff Committee seated Bama # 1, which was right but then they got #2 and #3 wrong as Ohio State was rated #4 and they obviously were the next best team to Bama.

    Added note: We all have to be honest here; there has never been a College Football team with the level of success and domination that Bama has experienced under Nick Saban. Plus Coach Saban he has accomplished things that may never be topped, ever! Just sayin…..and I don’t like the man, but then I never met him, so I should say nothing other than he is best Head Football Coach ever in College Football, and that is in no way meant to be disrespectful to the Bear!

    Every sport with any merit and a major following has some form of a playoff to determine the best in the nation or best in the world.

    Professional Baseball has it with the Pennant races and then the World Series. The NFL has it with their eight-team playoff to win the Super Bowl. Division 1 College Basketball has March Madness with 64 teams that gets down to the Sweet 16, the Great 8 and then the Final Four before a National Champion is crowned. College Baseball has the College World Series that Georgia was fortunate enough to win once several years ago. Rugby which is the closest thing to Football has the equivalent of a World Championship known as the Rugby World Cup which was started in 1987. I could go on and on, but it is useless.

    Josh, like all of us, is entitled to his opinion and I will still continue to watch him when he is on weekly because he is one of the few who covers college football so thoroughly and in an unbiased fashion. But Josh sees it differently than I do when it comes to College Football. An Eight Team College Football Playoff will improve the game, not destroy it.

    Add to this the fact that an 8 Team College National Championship Playoff will do nothing to harm the rivalry we have with the Florida Gayturds, The Aubun’ War Chickens, or the puking Orange TInny Sea Volunteers, Old Slammer Bammer, the South Carolina War Chickens or any other SEC team, no puns intended!

    Plus it will have no impact on how badly we want to beat Clem and his Son in the opening game to start the 2021 Season either (Go Dawgs! Sic ’em!).

    In closing on this subject, expanding to 16 teams would be a whole different story because I believe it would add too many games to the two teams that wind up playing the final game for the National Championship. But an eight team playoff where you play three games to win the National Championship should not be a problem. We will see how it works out, as I do believe the Playoffs will eventually be expanded and we will go from four to eight teams. Still, it could be years down the road and you would probably need to provide a week between the semifinal playoff games and then another week to rest before the finals. So it would add at least a week to the season, but this would give the guys more time to study for classes as well as continuing to not allow any contact in between games as bodies do need time to rest and heal. But these are young men between the ages of 18 and 22 and they heal quickly. Nothing helps you heal faster than adrenaline, and man is it ever flowing when you get to the Championship level.

    Sorry for being long-winded, but this is not an easy subject to discuss, and you can state what needs to be stated in a paragraph.

    Keep up the good work,

    Bob Machen bobmachen@hotmail.com

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bob, thanks for your comment. It’s well thought out.

      That doesn’t mean I don’t disagree with it. But you probably knew I would. 😉

      Where it begins and ends is with your assertion that “Every sport with any merit and a major following has some form of a playoff to determine the best in the nation or best in the world.”

      Historically speaking, college football hasn’t been like every other sport and that’s what has been its glory. No other sport has a history where independent postseason games — the bowls — were allowed to take root independently from the ownership of the sport. No other sport has allowed a subjective element on the level CFB does to surround the crowning of its champion. And no other sport came as late to the table to chase money the way college football did.

      And make no mistake about it, playoff expansion occurs for one reason: money. And more of it.

      That’s why ultimately I have to dismiss your argument. The college football postseason has reached the point where any further expansion will be driven by dollars. You may bemoan a 16-team playoff, but if the money’s there, so will college football be there. And the selection of the field will always have a subjective element to it, although it will be reduced somewhat by auto bids to conference champs.

      I presume even with that, you’ll find it a better arrangement than what we have now, and that’s certainly your prerogative. Me, I think the people in charge are jettisoning everything that makes their sport uniquely attractive because the money’s good. From my selfish standpoint, seeing college football embrace what all the other sports do is something that won’t end well.

      Thanks again for your comment. You should pitch in more often!

      Like

    • SoCalDawg

      Mr. Machen – while I have always been anti expansion, just wanted to say that’s its so great to read your thoughts here, Sir. Hope y’all are well. HBTD. Cheers.

      Like