The expanded College Football Playoff off to a rough start

[Patman]

I'm just pointing out that Clemson, who won that league, really benefited from the schedule. As these leagues expand, we are going to see more situations where teams can benefit from an unbalanced schedule. Indiana benefited from that as well, but they have the benefit of playing in the BIG, so it looks a little better.

They also went 11-1 or 10-2 with losses against other high and mighty teams

 

[SubbaBub]

So you think the semifinals will not be SEC/BIG10?

Don't care one way or the other. Whoever makes it will have earned it through their regular season and winning on the field.

I'm not sure what else people think could be better. A stacking of the top 8 based on biased polls and a disproportionately southeastern media pool?

I know the best SEC team was UGA, I know the best B1G was Oregon. After that there is no way to tell if SEC 3 is better than B12 #1 other than playing for it. ASU can absolutely beat an SEC team that loses to LSU or Kentucky or Oklahoma. Boise took Oregon to the wire. They can win a playoff game.

Tennessee could have too, they just didn't and they were clearly SEC #3 if games and standings matter at all.

So I fail to see your point. The SEC sorted itself and has exactly 2 contenders. Once Clemson lost there were no more stowaways.

 

[Patman]

Don't care one way or the other. Whoever makes it will have earned it through their regular season and winning on the field.

I'm not sure what else people think could be better. A stacking of the top 8 based on biased polls and a disproportionately southeastern media pool?

I know the best SEC team was UGA, I know the best B1G was Oregon. After that there is no way to tell if SEC 3 is better than B12 #1 other than playing for it. ASU can absolutely beat an SEC team that loses to LSU or Kentucky or Oklahoma. Boise took Oregon to the wire. They can win a playoff game.

Tennessee could have too, they just didn't and they were clearly SEC #3 if games and standings matter at all.

So I fail to see your point. The SEC sorted itself and has exactly 2 contenders. Once Clemson lost there were no more stowaways.

ultimately, teams at the very top are hard to compare against each other... did they win against the right teams? How closely do we measure their one or two specific losses. you'll never get great answers until they actually play each other

 

[huskymedic]

They’ll fix it…

 

[ScottVib]

They'd be better served by going ahead still guaranteeing the top-4 the byes and then reseeding based on the final poll in the quarterfinal "bowl games." Keep the conference championships semi-meaningful but avoid the scenario where the SEC & Big Ten runner ups arguably got an easier road to the playoff than the two conference champions and top seeds.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Let's try this again. There is literally NOTHING in the selection or seeding process that would make the CFP work. The talent is so lopsided at the top that there always has been and always will be mostly blowouts in the playoffs. If you want competitive contests in the playoffs, you are best off selecting another sport to follow.

 

[storrsroars]

Let's try this again. There is literally NOTHING in the selection or seeding process that would make the CFP work. The talent is so lopsided at the top that there always has been and always will be mostly blowouts in the playoffs. If you want competitive contests in the playoffs, you are best off selecting another sport to follow.

Depends on how you define "work".

It's often been stated that the sole purpose of the CFP is to help ensure the "best" team succeeds and wins the crown. It's not to guarantee entertaining contests.

If one goes by that definition, then this year's CFP is the best way to do that that's been devised thus far. Although I still think they could've accomplished the same with just eight teams.

 

[Patman]

Let's try this again. There is literally NOTHING in the selection or seeding process that would make the CFP work. The talent is so lopsided at the top that there always has been and always will be mostly blowouts in the playoffs. If you want competitive contests in the playoffs, you are best off selecting another sport to follow.

So when are you going to do that and leave us alone

 

[J187Money]

They’ll fix it…

Why on earth would the B12 or ACC agree to a change? It nearly guarantees that the SEC/B10 will take the top 4 slots most years.

 

[Windham4th]

Let's try this again. There is literally NOTHING in the selection or seeding process that would make the CFP work. The talent is so lopsided at the top that there always has been and always will be mostly blowouts in the playoffs. If you want competitive contests in the playoffs, you are best off selecting another sport to follow.

Yeah. We agree on something.

 

[ZooCougar]

Let's try this again. There is literally NOTHING in the selection or seeding process that would make the CFP work. The talent is so lopsided at the top that there always has been and always will be mostly blowouts in the playoffs. If you want competitive contests in the playoffs, you are best off selecting another sport to follow.

Conversely. Just because it didn’t work perfectly the first time doesn’t mean the whole thing needs to be thrown in the trash.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Conversely. Just because it didn’t work perfectly the first time doesn’t mean the whole thing needs to be thrown in the trash.

2/3's of the college football playoff games played to date, over 10 years, have been decided by more than 10 points, and those games only involved the top 4 teams. This is not a recent phenomenon.

If this format lasts 10 more years, there won't be 3 teams from the 9-12 seeds that even make the Final Four.

College football would be better off organizing some kind of salary cap or other mechanism to create more competitive balance. A different selection process is not going to make a difference.

 

[Husky25]

2/3's of the college football playoff games played to date, over 10 years, have been decided by more than 10 points, and those games only involved the top 4 teams. This is not a recent phenomenon.

If this format lasts 10 more years, there won't be 3 teams from the 9-12 seeds that even make the Final Four.

College football would be better off organizing some kind of salary cap or other mechanism to create more competitive balance. A different selection process is not going to make a difference.

I'm going to hold off judgement until at least tonight and even then there is no predicting what it is going to look like in 10 years. NIL Conglomerates will attract the best freshmen, but these kids want to play too. Nick Saban is not walking through that door and hording all the 5*s. It should even out.

 

[Purple Stein]

I'm going to hold off judgement until at least tonight and even then there is no predicting what it is going to look like in 10 years. NIL Conglomerates will attract the best freshmen, but these kids want to play too. Nick Saban is not walking through that door and hording all the 5*s. It should even out.

Boise is a good football team. On a neutral site they can get through to the final 4.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

Boise is a good football team. On a neutral site they can get through to the final 4.

I haven’t seen much of Boise this year. Are they more than just Jeanty? It feels like Penn St. should have the defense to somewhat control Jeanty and Boise will need to show a passing game.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I'm going to hold off judgement until at least tonight and even then there is no predicting what it is going to look like in 10 years. NIL Conglomerates will attract the best freshmen, but these kids want to play too. Nick Saban is not walking through that door and hording all the 5*s. It should even out.

So the next close game balances out 10 years of blowouts? Interesting.

College football has always been mismatched at the top. Most of the fun, close games are between mediocre teams.

 

[Purple Stein]

I haven’t seen much of Boise this year. Are they more than just Jeanty? It feels like Penn St. should have the defense to somewhat control Jeanty and Boise will need to show a passing game.

Jeanty is unbelievable. Only seen a couple Boise games but he is a guy that makes you catch your breath.

I don't think Boise will win because I think Penn State will be able to keep Boise behind the sticks enough to limit Jeanty's effectiveness. But I sure don't like that -11 number, and if things break right, Boise could sneak away with this one IMHO.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Is anyone still arguing that a selection process that would have gotten Alabama into the CFP is the answer?

 

[Husky25]

So the next close game balances out 10 years of blowouts? Interesting.

College football has always been mismatched at the top. Most of the fun, close games are between mediocre teams.

Not exactly what I said, but whatever.

Mediocre football is not fun just because the game might be close. It's still mediocre football. I found last year's CFP final to be enjoyable and it was a 3 score game. It was 100% better than back in the day when (for example) #1 might beat #16 in the Rose Bowl and #2 destroying #21 in the Orange Bowl and relying on voters to split the hardware.

Look at the NFL. Every single player is NFL caliber and yet playoff blowouts happen all the time. It took about a decade and a half for a wild card to win the Super Bowl.

My main point is NIL, transfer portal, and the 12 team playoff has been in existence together for about 7 days. Let it play out before jumping to anecdotal conclusions.

I'm for one am looking forward to the quarters.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Another game, another mismatch.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Another game, another mismatch.

What is your solution?

 

[storrsroars]

Another game, another mismatch.

If you look at the score as the be-all and end-all, you could say that. If you look at the actual offensive stats showing Boise outgained PSU,and had more 1st downs, you might come to a different conclusion. This was a classic "whomever wins the turnover battle" game, and PSU did win that, 4-1.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

Super Bowls, NFL playoffs since the 60s have been largely 2+ scores or more.

Another game, another mismatch.

Another Nelson post, another self-created opportunity to be right. Scoreboard!!!!

 

[SubbaBub]

Depends on how you define "work".

It's often been stated that the sole purpose of the CFP is to help ensure the "best" team succeeds and wins the crown. It's not to guarantee entertaining contests.

If one goes by that definition, then this year's CFP is the best way to do that that's been devised thus far. Although I still think they could've accomplished the same with just eight teams.

This is the paradox of CFB. How do you know the best teams until they play?

Winning a major conference championship is an actual thing. It's objective. So Boise and ASU get byes, big whoop. They have to still beat 3 too teams to win the title. If they were #5 and #6 we'd still have the same matchups. If they were #7 & #8, we'd still have similar matchups. It doesn't really matter.

All you'd he doing is saying the A team like Tennessee or SMU could beat them in the first round. While that's true, it doesn't affect the ultimate outcome

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Depends on how you define "work".

It's often been stated that the sole purpose of the CFP is to help ensure the "best" team succeeds and wins the crown. It's not to guarantee entertaining contests.

If one goes by that definition, then this year's CFP is the best way to do that that's been devised thus far. Although I still think they could've accomplished the same with just eight teams.

Did you really just post that college football is not about entertaining its viewers? You are aware that the players are not curing disease or inventing a new AI application, they are playing football. The reason there are billions of dollars to split among them is because people are entertained. If it stops being entertaining, a lot of people in the college football industry are going to make a lot less money.