College Football Playoff Looking At Expanded Field Options

Drew

Its a post, about nothing!
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
6,626
Likes
10,179
Even going to 16 means 12% of FBS teams would make the playoff- which is drastically below the average of roughly 25% across other NCAA sports. There’s no doubt the ratings are great for CFB across the board- especially compared against CBB. But that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t be even better for more games across FBS with an expanded playoff/opportunity. Essentially every single G5 game today doesn’t matter- you’re already cutting out half of FBS. With auto bids for each league, those late regular season and conference title games matter. Additionally- you allow for teams to improve throughout the course of the season and get their shot at the title. Someone like Oklahoma last year was playing their best ball at the end of the season. Yet because they lost to Kansas State 3 months prior- they didn’t even have a remote chance at making the playoff. Stupid.

It’s also dumb/worthless to compare CFB and CBB ratings IMO. 1. CFB is immensely more popular nationwide- this is obvious and has been proven time and time again with the numbers but 2. The relative scarcity of the TV product compared to CBB means those games are naturally going to draw more. If Alabama football was playing 3 games a week for 3.5 months, it’s not a must do to carve out 3.5 hours and watch their game. You can’t ignore the sheer number of CBB games played and that are available across networks when looking at this data- it absolutely has an impact on the viewership.

My personal opinion is 16 is great- every league is represented and 6 at larges for 124 teams is still extremely exclusive. A governing organization shouldn’t be depriving student athletes of the experience to compete for a national championship due to the format of your postseason structure. It doesn’t mean it’s not going to be difficult/impossible for those teams to win, but you have to give them the opportunity to compete. That’s what collegiate athletics are about.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
6,275
Likes
2,581
As I have posted...increase to 16...but seed on merit...the strongest teams.....no AQ's.

An AQ is the antithesis of merit.

If you want a G5 national Champ ...go for it...a G5 or two would almost always be seeded in the 16....
 

Drew

Its a post, about nothing!
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
6,626
Likes
10,179
As I have posted...increase to 16...but seed on merit...the strongest teams.....no AQ's.

An AQ is the antithesis of merit.

If you want a G5 national Champ ...go for it...a G5 or two would almost always be seeded in the 16....
In what world is an AQ the antithesis of merit? It’s literally rewarding teams that earned their conference titles by winning games on the field. There are 10 conferences in FBS. In every single NCAA sponsored championship- the winner of a respective conference automatically qualifies for the postseason format. Nothing is more merit based than that.

Your counter argument will be “well the teams in those leagues stink”- guess what? That’s why there’s 6 at large bids awarded in a 16 team format. To compensate for the fact that this is a sport where different teams in different conferences play different caliber, number, and quality of games and opponents within their own leagues.

The idea of staging a separate G5 national championship is moronic. These teams are in FBS. They’re not in a separate division- until that day comes (never), they have every right to play for the same national title in a fair system that gives them a legitimate opportunity to compete. You are allowing for your opinion of what you deem to be “competitive/the best” teams override what is a fair system. They’re two different topics. This is collegiate athletics- the literal basis for these sports is to provide opportunities for these student athletes to fairly compete across the board for national championships- whether they’re at Ohio State, Tulsa, Alabama A&M, or Oregon.

And by the way- it’s of my opinion that with more exposure and opportunities, some of these afterthought programs would become even more relevant and competitive in the future. Not even just G5 teams- what would it have done for the brand of someone like Penn State to have made the playoff twice? Iowa State last year? Utah? Wisconsin? You don’t think that would’ve opened the doors to higher quality recruits and a chance to build their programs past where they are today? This is a good thing for ALL of FBS.
 

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
17,311
Likes
14,535
Lol, I'm sure you do.

FWIW here's last year's football numbers:

View attachment 67242

Feel free to compare these to the BB rating above. I will just note that the highest rated game was the football national championship game.
Eh, it's kind of a worthless exercise to compare the ratings of individual football games to individual basketball games. There are three times as many Div. 1 basketball programs playing three times as many games. A given football program plays once a week, at best.

Comparing football to football is more valuable. Average ratings for the NYD6 and CFPNC games are more than 1.5 points lower than the BCS set up was. For the first year of the playoff (2014-15), game ratings averaged 9.54, but other than 2017-2018, the average rating has not been above 8.43 since then.

Average BCS ratings didn't dip below 8.5 in any year.
 

CL82

Unfinished Business
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
40,755
Likes
70,854
Eh, it's kind of a worthless exercise to compare the ratings of individual football games to individual basketball games. There are three times as many Div. 1 basketball programs playing three times as many games. A given football program plays once a week, at best.

Comparing football to football is more valuable. Average ratings for the NYD6 and CFPNC games are more than 1.5 points lower than the BCS set up was. For the first year of the playoff (2014-15), game ratings averaged 9.54, but other than 2017-2018, the average rating has not been above 8.43 since then.

Average BCS ratings didn't dip below 8.5 in any year.
Agree, but it is helpful to look at championship and bowl games vs. NCAA MBB tournament and championship games with the point being that there are a whole lot of eyeballs watching March Madness. It takes away the "no one care about basketball" canard.
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2013
Messages
2,324
Likes
2,731
The NFL doesn’t take the top 14. It takes the winner of each division, regardless of record. I can’t remember a team making it with a losing record, but a few .500 teams have. Then They take a bunch of wild cards based on record. Works pretty well, I’d say. Follow that model. Take each conference winner, then pick the next 4-6 wild cards from teams that didn’t win their conference. It would be one thing if there was some really good way to compare teams outside leagues. Clearly there isn’t. And the rankings you so dearly love have sort of shown that when you look at the semi finals it’s a tough case to make that the losers are really among the Top 4 most years. Only 2 nonblowouts.
I believe Seattle made the play offs at 7-9
 

Drew

Its a post, about nothing!
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
6,626
Likes
10,179
Agree, but it is helpful to look at championship and bowl games vs. NCAA MBB tournament and championship games with the point being that there are a whole lot of eyeballs watching March Madness. It takes away the "no one care about basketball" canard.
I don’t think it does- CBB has a smaller but passionate following. By using the Final Four ratings you’re basically using the ratings of the Masters to say golf is insanely popular or the Daytona 500 for NASCAR. The Final Four is an event on the calendar that people watch, same with the aforementioned tournaments and things like Wimbledon, World Series, Stanley Cup, etc. But that doesn’t necessarily mean people are in depth living and dying with it throughout the country throughout the entire season, which they do in CFB and NFL.
 

CL82

Unfinished Business
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
40,755
Likes
70,854
I don’t think it does- CBB has a smaller but passionate following. By using the Final Four ratings you’re basically using the ratings of the Masters to say golf is insanely popular or the Daytona 500 for NASCAR. The Final Four is an event on the calendar that people watch, same with the aforementioned tournaments and things like Wimbledon, World Series, Stanley Cup, etc. But that doesn’t necessarily mean people are in depth living and dying with it throughout the country throughout the entire season, which they do in CFB and NFL.
Fair point, but it does provide support for the popularity of an inclusive tournament format. Believe me I get that football "drives the bus" but I think that broadening the playoff format makes the season and the playoffs more attractive.
 

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
17,311
Likes
14,535
But that doesn’t necessarily mean people are in depth living and dying with it throughout the country throughout the entire season, which they do in CFB and NFL.
And they already have those fans' attention. Those are the fans who will watch a 28 point Alabama blow out in the CFP title game. At the end of the day, sports is entertainment and you leave money on the table by providing boring product. We are all sports junkies on this forum. I don't remember watching a single play from the CFP title game.

Is it a good thing that Alabama's backups might be arguably the 3rd best team in the SEC? In time, the more avenues made available to players will balances out the competition and make for a more entertaining product.
 
Joined
May 30, 2015
Messages
56
Likes
29
An undiscussed question is WHY was P5 created? For money, yes, but peel back the onion. They may call themselves FBS because of the number of scholarships, but there are very few non-P5 schools that are willing or able to expend the $$ on recruiting, coach salaries, and facilities to be competitive at the P5 level. This is different from BB where you only recruit 3-5 players in any year and can "catch lightning in a bottle" with a star player to be competitive in March Madness. The football P5 schools believe that they deserve the financial rewards because they invest the expenditures.
 

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
17,311
Likes
14,535
An undiscussed question is WHY was P5 created? For money, yes, but peel back the onion. They may call themselves FBS because of the number of scholarships, but there are very few non-P5 schools that are willing or able to expend the $$ on recruiting, coach salaries, and facilities to be competitive at the P5 level. This is different from BB where you only recruit 3-5 players in any year and can "catch lightning in a bottle" with a star player to be competitive in March Madness. The football P5 schools believe that they deserve the financial rewards because they invest the expenditures.
Please. There are more than a few P-5 programs who are unwilling to expend the $$ on recruiting, coach salaries, and facilities to be competitive at the P5 level. Those who are basically included because they are legacy. The only reason they have the money in the first place is because they are P-5 football programs that allow the top teams beat up on them in-conference.

Syracuse was on the outside looking in until they weren't. Don't act as if they are on third base because they hit a triple.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
6,275
Likes
2,581
There is no AQ used in the seeding of basketball tournaments.

The #1-#16 seeds are based on a determination of strength....

If you are having a smallish football playoff, say sixteen, you want to go basketball's route....seed #1-#16 based on a measure of strength....

Does not make sense to AQ unless you have a huge play off where half the seeds have no chance to win.
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2013
Messages
2,324
Likes
2,731
A sixteen-team CFP series means that the last two contenders in the final championship game will have played four post-season games in addition to their regular scheduled ones. That's a lot of exposure to potential injury, and represents a lot of academic disruption (assuming there's still such a thing as a "student athlete"). Networks and streaming services may relish the idea of increased revenues, but folks who worry about the welfare of athletes and liability issues may feel differently.
FCS, D2 and D3 has no problem with additional games. all of which is more than 16 teams. There is 0 reason why DI cannot go to 16 team playoff.
 

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
17,311
Likes
14,535
FCS, D2 and D3 has no problem with additional games. all of which is more than 16 teams. There is 0 reason why DI cannot go to 16 team playoff.
I don't know if they have conference championship games or play 12 games in the regular season. Easiest thing to do would be to remove one regular season game.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
6,275
Likes
2,581
FCS, D2 and D3 has no problem with additional games. all of which is more than 16 teams. There is 0 reason why DI cannot go to 16 team playoff.

They well may....but there will be some who will be concerned that the regular season will be diluted....with 16 teams, it really becomes about making the cut for the 2nd season....

If the G5 want a big play off...I say...break away and have a welter weight championship. Play a 32 game field.

In a 16 game FBS field, seeded on strength, there will usually be one or two G5 teams..but that's about it.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
6,275
Likes
2,581
... and you complain about passive-aggressive posts/comments/tactics?
Passive aggressive ?

I was answering a poster who thinks that being like FCS and Div II and III is a good idea...

Do you object to the term welter weight? Maybe you can come up with another word....but I am thinking that a 16 team playoff, of a 120 plus team league will not be inclusive of many G5...musing that a split off G5 would accomplish that inclusion.

In reality, there are only about 10-12 teams that are the most powerful...
 
Joined
May 19, 2015
Messages
919
Likes
2,448
They well may....but there will be some who will be concerned that the regular season will be diluted....with 16 teams, it really becomes about making the cut for the 2nd season....

If the G5 want a big play off...I say...break away and have a welter weight championship. Play a 32 game field.

In a 16 game FBS field, seeded on strength, there will usually be one or two G5 teams..but that's about it.
I’m pretty sure this is all anybody’s asking for... the current structure will never provide any G5 representation. You talk about dilution of the regular season, but more than half the D1 regular season is already meaningless in the national title picture.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
6,275
Likes
2,581
I’m pretty sure this is all anybody’s asking for... the current structure will never provide any G5 representation. You talk about dilution of the regular season, but more than half the D1 regular season is already meaningless in the national title picture.

As I have stated...the national title in football is not the big chase it is in basketball....it is secondary to most teams...only 4 play for it.

It would be like basketball seeding for the Final Four only....and that's it.

The national title has never been relevant for other than the few top rated teams.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
6,275
Likes
2,581
If basketball seeded the national #1-#16 and just skipped straight to the Sweet Sixteen....that would be like a seeded 16 team football play off...

What do we know from basketball? Those seeds #9-#16 are not relevant in terms of winning the national title...they never have won.

The Seeds #1-#3 win. (87%)

Yes...we could have the appearance of football inclusion...but I think the outcome may mirror that of basketball.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,185
Likes
4,046
If basketball seeded the national #1-#16 and just skipped straight to the Sweet Sixteen....that would be like a seeded 16 team football play off...

What do we know from basketball? Those seeds #9-#16 are not relevant in terms of winning the national title...they never have won.

The Seeds #1-#3 win. (87%)

Yes...we could have the appearance of football inclusion...but I think the outcome may mirror that of basketball.
Your argument again with the one through 3 seeds is unpersuasive. 1,2, and 3 seeds get knocked out with regularity very early. That’s what an expanded cfb tourney gives us, upsets, and less chance of a deserving team being excluded. I am not sold on the AQ at all for football but can be persuaded - but I am absolutely for the mandatory inclusion of two at large G5 schools. 16 is the best number for a football playoff.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
159,950
Messages
3,817,886
Members
8,480
Latest member
AZgirl

Top Bottom