• Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Should the Playoff change?

Leakfan12

VIP Member
I think should be extended to six teams, the Power 5 Conference Champs and an at large team. Granted it would depend if the Power Five Conference champ has one or no losses though it would open up to the at large teams. The top two teams get a bye.
 

Escambia94

Aerospace Cubicle Engineer (ACE)
Moderator
I am against playoff expansion, but the only alternative I would consider is exactly as stated above: Power 5 conferences plus an at-large team. In this scenario I would not clarify the number of losses for the Power 5 champion. Just keep it simple: win your conference and you are in. What this does is incentivize conference alignments. Notre Dame can choose to remain independent, or make a move to join the ACC. Brigham Young, Boise State, UCF, and others will have to keep fighting Notre Dame for that at-large slot or choose to join a Power 5. Win (the conference) and you are in. This also incentivizes Power 5 conferences to play more conference games without having to schedule powder puff teams in order to avoid losses. Just make sure that you only lose to a conference opponent and make it to the conference championship game. Let the conferences continue choosing how that conference game should look. I really want the SEC to keep its division alignment for the conference championship, but I also want to play more conference games instead of group of 5 schools. I do not care how the ACC, Big 12, B1G or Pac-12 do their conference championships and I do not care how many conference opponents they play. I just want each Power 5 conference to choose how they want to send a champion into the playoffs, and I want to see one outsider at a time challenge Notre Dame for that at-large spot.
 

Leakfan12

VIP Member
The downsides to my suggestion is 1. If it's expanded once it's going to be expanded again. and 2. It's not going to stop Oklahoma, Clemson, Bama, and Ohio State from dominating their conferences.
 

DRU2012

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
I think should be extended to six teams, the Power 5 Conference Champs and an at large team. Granted it would depend if the Power Five Conference champ has one or no losses though it would open up to the at large teams. The top two teams get a bye.
We need to be careful about this, LF.
Please see my latest comments on this very subject over on “K.I.S.S.”-thread.
The short-version for the moment is that I am against making ANY decision, indeed consider it premature to even CONSIDER changes to the CFB Playoff System of ANY kind until the complicating factors associated with Covid (and in turn ITS reactions and effects) have passed and we have a season or two DEVOID of its effects, in effect see what a “return to normalcy” brings before we overly react.
(Read my latest posting on the “K.I.S.S.”-thread, which greatly expands on all of this—You may in fact be right in your analysis and recommendations...I have in the past come to similar conclusions, but these last couple of weeks have challenged all my thinking of late.)
 

Escambia94

Aerospace Cubicle Engineer (ACE)
Moderator
The downsides to my suggestion is 1. If it's expanded once it's going to be expanded again. and 2. It's not going to stop Oklahoma, Clemson, Bama, and Ohio State from dominating their conferences.
Agreed. This is the problem with all modern rules: the slippery slope of expansionism. In the pre-CFP days there were 2 playoff teams, and it was good. The CFP expanded it to 4, and people demanded more. Years from now it could expand to 64 unless there were a way to balance out the expansionism, and the only buttress against expansion is the conference alignment. That is why I am only in favor of expansion if it sets are fairly hard threshold: Power 5 conference membership. If the playoff committee expanded the playoffs in such a way that it favored SEC, ACC, B12, B1G, and Pac-12 then those Power 5 conferences would collude together to prevent Group of 5 teams from stealing their revenue.

To DRU's point on COVID, this all assumes that the vaccines hit the streets as planned, which they are. I have a few friends who were test subjects for Operation Warp Speed. Before I continue, please, no political discussion here. The city that I live in happens to have a some of the key testing facilities for COVID vaccines. It really was fascinating to see how quickly these vaccines made their way through testing in record time. The military bases had a lot more volunteers (all volunteer military) to help bump the numbers up. Yes, there were a few reactions, but not with all the vaccines in the same demographics. BioNTech/Pfizer is already on the streets, and Moderna/NIAID will be distributed in a couple weeks. Johnson & Johnson will probably be next (with Novavax, Inovio, and Acturus right behind them), and will likely be the vaccine that is issued to NCAA athletes over the summer. That last statement is speculation, but everything else I stated here is public knowledge corroborated with information provided by friends, the city, and the military base where I work. The point being that by the time there is even a hint that the CFP committee would change the playoffs, there will be vaccines in place.
 

DRU2012

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Agreed. This is the problem with all modern rules: the slippery slope of expansionism. In the pre-CFP days there were 2 playoff teams, and it was good. The CFP expanded it to 4, and people demanded more. Years from now it could expand to 64 unless there were a way to balance out the expansionism, and the only buttress against expansion is the conference alignment. That is why I am only in favor of expansion if it sets are fairly hard threshold: Power 5 conference membership. If the playoff committee expanded the playoffs in such a way that it favored SEC, ACC, B12, B1G, and Pac-12 then those Power 5 conferences would collude together to prevent Group of 5 teams from stealing their revenue.

To DRU's point on COVID, this all assumes that the vaccines hit the streets as planned, which they are. I have a few friends who were test subjects for Operation Warp Speed. Before I continue, please, no political discussion here. The city that I live in happens to have a some of the key testing facilities for COVID vaccines. It really was fascinating to see how quickly these vaccines made their way through testing in record time. The military bases had a lot more volunteers (all volunteer military) to help bump the numbers up. Yes, there were a few reactions, but not with all the vaccines in the same demographics. BioNTech/Pfizer is already on the streets, and Moderna/NIAID will be distributed in a couple weeks. Johnson & Johnson will probably be next (with Novavax, Inovio, and Acturus right behind them), and will likely be the vaccine that is issued to NCAA athletes over the summer. That last statement is speculation, but everything else I stated here is public knowledge corroborated with information provided by friends, the city, and the military base where I work. The point being that by the time there is even a hint that the CFP committee would change the playoffs, there will be vaccines in place.
Thanks for the latest details/background
...some of it I had already picked up on, but between confirming much of that AND adding MORE INFO, I am overall even more optimistic regarding (EVENTUALLY) “MOVING ON” in 2021
...Take all of that, the further “accumulating information” that suggests things like how “the second shots” MAY turn out to be unnecessary for full immunity after all (still to be determined with further study/research/study and follow up), and a generally GROWING view out there that “side effect”-risks or not, most of us WILL get the shot(s) once given access to them—I know I will!
All of which points to likely SOONER THAN EVER our moving past all this—in sports AND society at large!
More than ever then, a full and proper 2021 College Football Season will all the more likely be just ONE of the great and joyful “RETURNS” we may well all get to live and CELEBRATE TOGETHER relatively “soon”— within the next YEAR after ALL, perhaps.
No, we’re not there yet, and there are trials, disappointments and difficulties between here and there...Some unavoidably no doubt hurtling towards us as we speak. I have that “feeling of foreboding” that our Bowl Game, with all its “missing pieces” for us on the heels of the way EVERYTHING has seemed to fade, even begin to come apart for us this “trying season in a trying year”, is about to put the “capper” on all of the promise falling just short.
I’m personally TRYING to build and LIVE WITH more of a “patient, let’s wait and SEE” attitude now, harden myself to weather a possible “rough patch” straight ahead, looking ahead with some hope and optimism to the spring, summer—and the season & YEAR beyond.
BOTH have the potential to bring us great promise and joy themselves.
HAPPY NEW YEAR, Fellow Gators!!!
 

Escambia94

Aerospace Cubicle Engineer (ACE)
Moderator
Some things we can assume: the playoffs will not change this year and sports may not be 100% normal next season even with vaccines. If the playoffs do change, I hope expansionism is limited to Power 5 plus 1 wild card.
 

DRU2012

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Some things we can assume: the playoffs will not change this year and sports may not be 100% normal next season even with vaccines. If the playoffs do change, I hope expansionism is limited to Power 5 plus 1 wild card.
At the moment and for now,
I stand by two basic points:
(1) We should do NOTHING further NOW to “change” or “improve” the system—NOT based on the dubious experience and “data” that THIS PAST “outlier” of a season/year has provided, and
(2) For the moment, whatever “changes” we DO eventually try to make should be INCREMENTAL OVER TIME...
The smaller the better each season—and even THEN probably wait at LEAST another year and begin to assess the results before going further or backing up again...So far, one could argue whether the system has improved, year by year with our “adjustments”, gotten worse, or merely traded imperfections and arguments—If not for Covid, about the only thing one MIGHT be able to argue is that there’s more money-to-be-made! And let’s face it, that’s the one “guiding light” that has and WILL be followed in all of this!
But if we are just talking “for the good of the game”, a clearer picture of who will be crowned the annual National Champion, and keeping our game healthy and prospering well into the Future, the above two general “rules” are pretty safe starting points, I’D say...
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
20,339
Messages
90,513
Members
1,226
Latest member
GeorgeDuema
Top