The expanded College Football Playoff off to a rough start | The Boneyard

The expanded College Football Playoff off to a rough start

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,687
Reaction Score
34,733
4 games so far, 4 blowouts. And let's not blame the selection committee, because that argument implies that different teams would have had different outcomes. Alabama's best lost was to Tennessee. How did Tennessee do last night? Do we really think that Alabama's absence was the reason there were 4 non-competitive games in the first round of the CFP? Who should have the committee picked to replace the other 3 tomato cans that got smashed this weekend? Should Alabama have played in those games too?

The blowouts have always been a problem in the sport. I didn't watch much college football before UConn went FBS because of all the blowouts, and I kind of ignored this issue for a while because A) I wanted to watch UConn football, and B) there was maybe a decade or 15 years when the rules worked in a way that distributed talent more equitably. With scholarship caps, greater enforcement against cheating by the NCAA, and revenue differentials between the conferences that were manageable, college football had a stretch between the late 90's and early 2010's where there was at least a semblance of competitive balance. Since then, the mega-programs have started to pull away, slowly at first so fans didn't get that concerned by what was happening to the sport. But even during the 2000's, there was a pretty significant competitive imbalance and a lot of blowouts. NIL briefly moved the game pieces around, giving a team like TCU a chance to make the CFP, but the House decision is moving the entire sport where there will be a huge disparity, not just between leagues, but within leagues.

The sport got a big help from ESPN and Fox's deceptive marketing to hide the fact that millions of fans were tuning in for 4+ hours of TV to watch blowouts week after week. ESPN mastered spinning a game between Alabama and whichever SEC victim was coming up next as a David vs. Goliath where David actually had a chance. ESPN and Warner Discovery, desperate for live football product, spun up the CFP because they knew ratings would be huge at first. But by putting all of these games back to back, ESPN also highlighted college football's competitive balance problem It was easier to only talk about the one or two close New Year's Day games when no one was paying attention to the other 5 blowouts. That is a lot harder when there is a bracket that contains game scores. And if the CFP games are not close, fans may start paying attention to the fact that most regular season games are not that close.

Other leagues have faced this problem, and they responded with salary caps. I don't know if that works for college football, but the alternative is increasingly non-competitive games, not just between the teams at the very top and everyone else, but all the way down the list. Maybe college football fans won't care that they are investing dozens of hours every fall into a sport where most of the outcomes are known before the game is played, but it would seem like college football has a problem.
 

uconnbaseball

Hey there
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
6,903
Reaction Score
9,264
South Carolina should have been in and would have given someone a tough fight. Otherwise, I agree. The lack of parity is an issue.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
27,753
Reaction Score
38,367
This can be easily improved upon by actually running a competent tournament. But structurally in college football there are big problems.


Here are some ideas to fix it.



1. Seed the teams based on ranking, Conference Champions get into the playoff and aren't guaranteed a bye.

-Sorry but ASU and Boise didn't deserve a bye. I think the next round will be out of whack too.

I think this might have been better.

Notre Dame-Clemson

Ohio State-ASU

Tenn-SMU

Boise-Indiana

Home field advantage really was an advantage.


2. Just go to 16 and have 1 play 16 and so on... No Byes. 24 is too much. At 16 if you are left out, nobody but you will care.

The reasoning for this is that we have these enormous conferences. You have teams like Indiana and SMU skating through a conference schedule that they have no control over. This is going to keep happening. Every year. You can make a case to include or exclude.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
27,753
Reaction Score
38,367
South Carolina should have been in and would have given someone a tough fight. Otherwise, I agree. The lack of parity is an issue.

Not unless they were at home they wouldn't. Bama/Ole Miss/Miami/etc wouldn't have fared differently.
 

UConnDan97

predicting undefeated seasons since 1983
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
12,437
Reaction Score
46,929
South Carolina should have been in and would have given someone a tough fight. Otherwise, I agree. The lack of parity is an issue.
Tennessee was better than South Carolina and they got whooped by more than 3 touchdowns. At this point, there is no "should have been in" anymore, certainly not for the SEC.

Reality is beating perception so far in these playoffs. ACC got soundly beat, and the SEC can stop complaining about not getting South Carolina and Alabama, now that they actually have to go north to play after September...
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
27,753
Reaction Score
38,367
Tennessee was better than South Carolina and they got whooped by me than 3 touchdowns. At this point, there is no "should have been in" anymore, certainly not for the SEC.

Reality is beating perception so far in these playoffs. ACC got soundly beat, and the SEC can stop complaining about not getting South Carolina and Alabama, now that they actually have to go north to play after September...

I can't like this enough.

The Vols didn't look ready for the Shoe.

Making the SEC play for it is the truth we all needed.
 

UConnDan97

predicting undefeated seasons since 1983
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
12,437
Reaction Score
46,929
Let's not act like the 4 team play off the last 5 years or so wasn't absolute blowouts for most of the games no in the championship game. Once more teams consistently make the playoffs it'll balance out.
And really, who cares if it balances out?? Does that make it more legitimate? Was the NCAA Tourney last year illegitimate because UConn won every game by double digits??

Sometimes, you just can't match up well against the team that's across from you. At least 12 teams get to try this year instead of 4, which at least helps somewhat in fighting against the "popularity contest" picks. And I'm glad about that, as evidenced by Tennessee's performance...
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
27,753
Reaction Score
38,367
Let's not act like the 4 team play off the last 5 years or so wasn't absolute blowouts for most of the games no in the championship game. Once more teams consistently make the playoffs it'll balance out.


Yup.

It's like some people think we should just reduce college football to Georgia, Bama, OSU and Michigan. Why even bother letting anyone else play and try to compete.
 

SubbaBub

Your stupidity is ruining my country.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
32,207
Reaction Score
25,199
The playoff is acting as expected. In CFB, there is a huge gap between a top 5 team and a top 10 team. There is also a new input that these big games have almost never been played in cold weather. Southern teams rarely travel north and when they do it's usually in September.

Ohio St dogging Tennessee was a bit of a surprise but then again in a lot of ways it wasn't. Indiana and it's JMU heavy roster wasn't going to match athletes with ND, same for SMU in ice house of death noise that was Happy Valley yesterday. Only Texas/Clemson had the look of a past postseason game and let's face it, Clemson backed in.

There are just not 12 teams that can actually win the title. This isn't the basketball tournament. Upsets are going to be rare.

And don't listen to the SEC whining, the right 12 teams got it unless you just want to go back to the polls deciding the championship. All 12 had one thing in common that no other team did. All 12 either won their conference championship or didn't lose to multiple mediocre teams. Go ahead and look.

Oregon, obv not
Georgia, champ Ole Miss, Bama
Boise, champ, Oregon
Arizona St, Champ
Texas, UGA x2
Penn St, Oregon, Ohio State
Notre Dame, NIU another loss, any loss and they'd have been out
Ohio St, Oregon, Michigan, one more and they'd be out
Tennessee, UGA and Arkansas, one more and they'd be out though likely replaced by another undeserving SEC team.
Indiana, Ohio State, would not have been given the benefit of the doubt with another loss
SMU, BYU and Clemson in the CCG. They were always going to be in and ahead of AZ St and Boise if they went by straight sending.
Clemson, champ and bid stealer.

Also rans, not that the bubble was that large.

Bama, lost 3 to Ole Miss, Vandy, OU. You can't have 3 losses, 2 to lousy teams and expect to make it. It's only Bama/SEC entitlement that they were in the discussion to begin with. They still snag the last spot without Clemson sneaking in. They were never and should never have been ahead of the other at large teams.

Ole Miss, Florida, LSU, and Kentucky. They actually beat Bama and UGA. But the fact is you can't lose to bad team they lost 3 to bad team and as such, they were behind Bama and Tennessee in spite of having the two best wins from anyone on the bubble.

Don't listen to the talking heads, beat the teams you are supposed to beat and you'll be in. How many bad losses you're allowed is what your SOS really determines. If you lose 3, don't whine about not getting an at large. You had your shot to play yourself into the field.

Lastly, keep the byes for the top 4 conference champs. I don't want to see the SEC/B1G 3s and 4s loading up on home games because of poll biases. If your seeded 5-8 you'll have a winnable home game. If you're 9-12, be happy you're playing and STFU. If you're Oregon and complaining about playing an underseeded Ohio State, then forfeit. Thr champ plays and beats whomever is is front of them.

The SEC are a bunch of crybabies, don't be like the SEC.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,587
Reaction Score
55,950
Folks wanted more teams. They got more teams and they still complain. America 2024.

And those who are suggesting wholesale changes based on ONE WEEKEND, you're nuts. Tweaks maybe, but let's get a larger sample size before going crazy.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
11,293
Reaction Score
18,455
I guess the regular season meant something didn't it, if your not a top 12 team then you should shut your mouth.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
11,293
Reaction Score
18,455
Folks wanted more teams. They got more teams and they still complain. America 2024.

And those who are suggesting wholesale changes based on ONE WEEKEND, you're nuts. Tweaks maybe, but let's get a larger sample size before going crazy.
I'm sure there would be no complaints if Bama and Ole Miss got in just because their SEC.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
7,593
Reaction Score
28,607
Going to 12 teams was probably a bit much. 8 would have been good enough I think. Even at 8 you probably still get a blowout.
 

storrsroars

Exiled in Pittsburgh
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
21,032
Reaction Score
45,405
This women's volleyball final is waaaaaay more entertaining than any of the CFP games thus far (or any of the NFL games, except maybe Eagles/Commanders).

I always thought eight teams would've been fair and representative, even allowing for the one G5 slot.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,587
Reaction Score
55,950
Going to 12 teams was probably a bit much. 8 would have been good enough I think. Even at 8 you probably still get a blowout.
They needed to go to 12.
At 8, you were looking at p5 champs plus g5, leaving 2 at larges.
So this year you’re looking at no ND, no OhioSt. You think complaining was bad this time?

Yes the demise of the PAC would’ve freed up another at large, but still.

While folks of course complain, I don’t think too many are bent out of shape that Bama or Miss or SC didn’t make it. All had significant flaws in their resume.

Also 12 was to protect the conference championships. If there’s no reward for winning that, then they will go away. Unlike in other sports, that extra game is an extra chance for major injury or conversely a chance to heal if not playing. The reason to play is the chance at a playoff advantage.
 

Jetskies

I hope my takes age like milk!
Joined
Oct 18, 2022
Messages
482
Reaction Score
2,257
i know it won't happen because sec and B1G run the show, but:

bring the BCS back and let the best 16 or 20 teams in, as follows
  • all P4 conference champions, regardless of BCS ranking
  • Cinderella G5 Champion (i.e. highest BCS ranked G5 Champion)
  • all the other slots are the highest ranked teams in the BCS.
Done.
 

CTBasketball

Former Owner of the Pizza Thread
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
10,024
Reaction Score
33,951
Let a computer pick 2 teams to play for the national championship.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,687
Reaction Score
34,733
Folks wanted more teams. They got more teams and they still complain. America 2024.

And those who are suggesting wholesale changes based on ONE WEEKEND, you're nuts. Tweaks maybe, but let's get a larger sample size before going crazy.

It is 10 years worth of blowouts in the CFP, and that was with just 4 teams.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
5,475
Reaction Score
22,714
The first 4 game results were as expected. In college football, the home favorite wins ~80% of the time. The teams had completed their seasons so the committee had pretty good data on how to rank the teams (unlike early and midseason ranked upsets) and created matchups in which the home team was a favorite by at least 7 points. If the committee had mis seeded teams, the odds would have reflected that. And teams had 2 weeks to prepare for their opponent. Given the format, I think it would be rare for a visiting team to win a first round CFP game.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
21,174
Reaction Score
53,690
Let a computer pick 2 teams to play for the national championship.
BCS formula for 8 teams is what I was hoping for. But then ESPN couldn't milk their weekly selection show for views.
 

Online statistics

Members online
358
Guests online
2,407
Total visitors
2,765

Forum statistics

Threads
160,370
Messages
4,227,200
Members
10,085
Latest member
ctalum23


.
Top Bottom