What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

College Football 19-20: Where We Kinda Want Clemson As Champion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kepler said:
12 is a way to bridge to 16.

I wish they had just gone to 16.
Click to expand...

My assumption is that they’re assuming that the top 4 will be power conferences, but some of the unwashed masses (UCF, Boise, etc) might sneak into slots 5-8. So they wanted to make it look like they were opening up while still favoring 1-4 to the greatest extent possible.
 
LynahFan said:
My assumption is that they’re assuming that the top 4 will be power conferences, but some of the unwashed masses (UCF, Boise, etc) might sneak into slots 5-8. So they wanted to make it look like they were opening up while still favoring 1-4 to the greatest extent possible.
Click to expand...

Exactly. 8 teams would give us the Power 5 champs and then they'd have to give 2 or 3 spots to the overlooked conferences to not totally seem like dicks, with 1 or 2 left for at-large. Bah, not enough good money there. Open up another 4 and now Texas or Auburn or Florida or FSU or Michigan can still bring in their fanbases even if they drop 3 or so games.
 
Here are the top 16 in 2019 (2020 was so weird I'm ignoring it):


LSU
Ohio State
Clemson
Oklahoma
Georgia
Oregon
Baylor
Wisconsin
Florida
Penn State
Utah
Auburn
Alabama
Michigan
Notre Dame
Iowa

[TD="align: center"] 1 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 13-0 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 13-0 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 3 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 13-0 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 4 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 12-1 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 5 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 11-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 6 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 11-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 7 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 11-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 8 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 10-3 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 9 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 10-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 10 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 10-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 11 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 11-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 12 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 9-3 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 13 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 10-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 14 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 9-3 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 15 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 10-2 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 16 [/TD]

[TD="align: center"] 9-3 [/TD]
 
I wonder if this will disincentivise conference title games. If you have say the 1-4 and the 9-12 play, you risk knocking out a team with no gain.
 
The University Presidents that give zero farks about sportsball are really going to okay a 17 game season that extends into early February?
 
That actually would be kind of cool. Every FBS team in a single elimination tournament. Hell, since it's only 6 rounds, do two each year.

Sure, no one outside of TV makes money, but who cares!
 
dxmnkd316 said:
Let's just expand it to 128 then
Click to expand...
I don’t get it. The only people who should be upset by expansion are teams who have a reasonable expectation of perennially being in the top 4 - Bama, Clemson, and maybe OSU? They would have to win 3 games instead of 2, so their chances at a national championship goes down a bit. For every other team, their chances of a national title go up astronomically - from basically zero to “so you’re saying there’s a chance!” Unless you’re a closet Tide or Tiger fan, expansion should be a good thing.
 
LynahFan said:
I don’t get it. The only people who should be upset by expansion are teams who have a reasonable expectation of perennially being in the top 4 - Bama, Clemson, and maybe OSU? They would have to win 3 games instead of 2, so their chances at a national championship goes down a bit. For every other team, their chances of a national title go up astronomically - from basically zero to “so you’re saying there’s a chance!” Unless you’re a closet Tide or Tiger fan, expansion should be a good thing.
Click to expand...

I don't think the gophers will ever be eligible. And I don't think anything beyond the top four are necessary.

I'm not saying expanding is wrong. I just don't like it.
 
LynahFan said:
I don’t get it. The only people who should be upset by expansion are teams who have a reasonable expectation of perennially being in the top 4 - Bama, Clemson, and maybe OSU? They would have to win 3 games instead of 2, so their chances at a national championship goes down a bit. For every other team, their chances of a national title go up astronomically - from basically zero to “so you’re saying there’s a chance!” Unless you’re a closet Tide or Tiger fan, expansion should be a good thing.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has a problem with more teams, it's just 8 seemed so much more logical. Or 16. 12 with the byes just seems like a funny way to go but hey I'll take it over 4, don't get me wrong.
 
When they went to 4, I don't think they thought it would immediately become the Tiger/Tide Invitational, made even easier by everyone having free transfers where the most talented players go to Clemson/Alabama/Ohio State. The 2011 SEC Championship, er BCS Title game accelerated the playoff because no one outside the SEC watched the game and 2020 OSU-Alabama was the lowest rated title game in 23 years, thus the talk about playoff expansion. I doubt there's an easy way to fix it, since they'll end up with the same few teams in the semis anyway.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
I don't think the gophers will ever be eligible. And I don't think anything beyond the top four are necessary.

I'm not saying expanding is wrong. I just don't like it.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok. I kinda agree with you on the “necessary” part, if you’re looking at the purpose of the tournament as settling who the “best team” is. The best team (whatever that means) is very likely in the top 4, so in that sense, more teams are not necessary.

Another angle could be that it diminishes the importance of the regular season games. With just 4 teams, you have to go undefeated to be guaranteed a spot, so virtually every game (at least, the ones with an undefeated or 1-loss team) is a knockout game. For me, the excitement of the longer tournament outweighs that, but I could see how opinions could differ.
 
LynahFan said:
Ah, ok. I kinda agree with you on the “necessary” part, if you’re looking at the purpose of the tournament as settling who the “best team” is. The best team (whatever that means) is very likely in the top 4, so in that sense, more teams are not necessary.

Another angle could be that it diminishes the importance of the regular season games. With just 4 teams, you have to go undefeated to be guaranteed a spot, so virtually every game (at least, the ones with an undefeated or 1-loss team) is a knockout game. For me, the excitement of the longer tournament outweighs that, but I could see how opinions could differ.
Click to expand...

And that's where my opinion has firmly ensconced itself. I think playoffs are awful**. With a few exceptions (Stanley Cup, for example). Single elimination to crown the "best" team? Nah. They're the playoff champions. The best team is whomever is evaluated so by the sum of their accomplishments. Like the Gophers being crowned AP #1 in 60. They lost the Rose Bowl but were still voted #1. Winning the McNaughton was always much more difficult than even winning the NCAA title. You had to churn through 30 games against top caliber (and some dreck) every year.

If we treated playoffs as what they really are, TV fodder, then sure, do whatever. I'm in. And maybe that's MY problem and not everyone else's.

**I guess I don't have a problem with playoffs themselves. I just hate the idea that they give you the best team. It's a RNG. Entertaining and sometimes a lot of fun. But the best team is generally a subjective
 
I agree winning the RS makes sense if the RS is full and balanced, such as it is with European domestic soccer leagues. College football, unfortunately, is far from that if we are looking at the national scale, and with conference expansion it's even lost that distinction there as there are too many teams for full round-robins anymore. Teams in the top 4 probably have a better claim to the best compared to those in the top 8 or 12, but there still is some subjectivity in how the rankings are done, so teams don't go into the season knowing what all of the factors are that will ultimately come into play. At least with a larger playoff it is clear from the start of the playoffs exactly what a team needs to do (i.e. win and win). Yes there is still some subjectivity going into who makes the playoffs, but the sting is less if you move up the point where the goal is "just win until you are champ" and not "satisfy whatever the committee happens to truly like".

Of course this all comes down to what you prefer too. Some people liked the old days when you didn't necessarily have to have a specific NC. I can see the appeal there too, it was more mystical than an exact science who the best was, the debate was half of the fun. And to your point of WCHA RS versus NC, I can see that too. A conference RS champ is the same process every season so there's more of a sense of closeness and history to it. An NC process that seems to change every few years doesn't have the same history, as "winning 12 team tourny", "winning 4 team tourny", "winning CFP NCG", "winning BCS NCG game", "winning Bowl Alliance NCG", "winning Fiesta Bowl aiming to have #1 vs #2", "just winning the last poll", all mean vastly different things over time, so how are you supposed to consider them all the same thing.
 
Here's what I would do.

Do it how we currently do. Add the eight team playoff on the end. Then hand it to the Massey composite. That's your title winner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top