16 team playoff (1 Viewer)

[Kaladin]

Link

The structure exists to add four more teams to the expanded playoff field. It has been discussed, even modeled. It was one of the 63 options presented by that working group to the CFP Management Committee. As recently as July, Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith was quoted by ESPN as saying, "Sixteen just seems to be out there. You can't ignore it."

People are going to bitch and say that only a few teams are capable of winning it, blah blah blah, but I don't see any downside to adding more playoff games. The stakes will be higher than bowl games. And you'll get home playoff games in December, which is way more exciting than some useless bowl game that no one watches.

 

[alt f4]

Link



People are going to bitch and say that only a few teams are capable of winning it, blah blah blah, but I don't see any downside to adding more playoff games. The stakes will be higher than bowl games. And you'll get home playoff games in December, which is way more exciting than some useless bowl game that no one watches.

There is still a significant amount of viewership of lower tiered bowl games.

There games were played before Dec 22nd.
Vegas Bowl, 2.5M
Celebration Bowl, 2.42M
LA Bowl, 2.39M
New Mexico Bowl, 2.03M
Fenway Bowl, 1.96M

For comparison
Nebraska v Cockeye 1.4M
Nebraska v Wisconsin 1.6M

 

[2010sarenevercoming]

Link



People are going to bitch and say that only a few teams are capable of winning it, blah blah blah, but I don't see any downside to adding more playoff games. The stakes will be higher than bowl games. And you'll get home playoff games in December, which is way more exciting than some useless bowl game that no one watches.

12 vs. 16 isn't much of a difference, and I agree 16 is the more natural of the two.

Now that the bowl game magic & originality has been been slaughtered, & the drama & pressure of the regular season has been reduced to near-basketball levels, might as well make it a 16 team playoff, since that's about where the line usually is between teams in the 2nd & 3rd tier each season. 32 or more would be asinine, though, so let's all agree to draw a red line here.

 

[Kaladin]

There is still a significant amount of viewership of lower tiered bowl games.

There games were played before Dec 22nd.
Vegas Bowl, 2.5M
Celebration Bowl, 2.42M
LA Bowl, 2.39M
New Mexico Bowl, 2.03M
Fenway Bowl, 1.96M

For comparison
Nebraska v Cockeye 1.4M
Nebraska v Wisconsin 1.6M

I figured they would be lower.

The two playoff games had 20 million + viewers.

 

[That SOB Van Owen]

12 teams is good with me.

 

[Dell Husker]

I’ve always been a fan of 8.

Winner of each Power 5 conference plus 3 at large teams.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

it's crazy to me that adding a 12th regular season game was a heated discussion not that long ago and we're now at 15 games with potentially up to 17 and it barely gets a reaction

 

[djw004]

The only way to save bowl season and maintain ANY level of interest/competition is to expand the playoff. Hopefully expanding would make for more meaningful games that guys are willing to play in so we can address the opt-out crisis. Mike Leach was a proponent of 64

For the longest time I HATED the idea of a playoff. Main reason is - it's WAY easier for more teams to argue that they were top 12 or 16 than to claim they were top 4. The argument only gets bigger, it's HARD to claim you're one of the top 2 teams in the country unless you actually are. Maybe 5 teams can claim that in a year? It's easy to say "we were top 16" - I think 32 or more could claim that they could be considered top 16 by SOME metric or scenario. So I think you either go old school - pair up the bowls and have your top 2 play OR go BIG with the bracket and have specific criteria to get in. No arguments - no snubs. Either meet the criteria, or you're not in.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

The only way to save bowl season and maintain ANY level of interest/competition is to expand the playoff. Hopefully expanding would make for more meaningful games that guys are willing to play in so we can address the opt-out crisis. Mike Leach was a proponent of 64

For the longest time I HATED the idea of a playoff. Main reason is - it's WAY easier for more teams to argue that they were top 12 or 16 than to claim they were top 4. The argument only gets bigger, it's HARD to claim you're one of the top 2 teams in the country unless you actually are. Maybe 5 teams can claim that in a year? It's easy to say "we were top 16" - I think 32 or more could claim that they could be considered top 16 by SOME metric or scenario. So I think you either go old school - pair up the bowls and have your top 2 play OR go BIG with the bracket and have specific criteria to get in. No arguments - no snubs. Either meet the criteria, or you're not in.

my biggest fear all along was devaluing the regular season. looking at this season and how it might have played out with no Big 10 divisions and a 12 team playoff, we would have had Mich and tOSU playing back to back weeks with both locked into the playoff no matter the results. there's no way that makes college football better

for me a 6 team playoff is the ideal. top 2 have a bye so there's incentive to finish at the top, then you'd have the top 4 conference champs plus 2 wildcards

 

[djw004]

my biggest fear all along was devaluing the regular season. looking at this season and how it might have played out with no Big 10 divisions and a 12 team playoff, we would have had Mich and tOSU playing back to back weeks with both locked into the playoff no matter the results. there's no way that makes college football better

for me a 6 team playoff is the ideal. top 2 have a bye so there's incentive to finish at the top, then you'd have the top 4 conference champs plus 2 wildcards

In a larger playoff, you'd shrink the regular season schedule by removing the number of non-con games, taking away cupcakes. Every game would matter more.

 

[BluesBucksNHuskers]

But what about all the tradition we have in the 12 game playoff that hasn’t started yet. Does no one care about tradition?

16 is the right way to go, it makes the most sense.

I’m so sick of hearing people whine about how it diminishes the importance of bowl games. “Dude, I’m sorry the Duke’s Mayo bowl apparently holds such a sacred place in your heart but college football is just finally aligning with the same way any other sport in the world uses to identify a winner.”

We’re going to go from what started as 1-2 bowl games that actually mattered, then moved to 1 bowl game that actually mattered, then moved to 3 bowl games that actually mattered to potentially 15 bowl games that matter. Every counter argument to that is fucking stupid

 

[Pepe Silvia]

In a larger playoff, you'd shrink the regular season schedule by removing the number of non-con games, taking away cupcakes. Every game would matter more.

fewer regular season games equals less revenue. the one thing we can guarantee is that whatever happens no one is making the choice to reduce revenue

schools with little or no shot at the playoff will never agree to that

 

[Huskers633]

Since the 4 team playoff was announced I always thought they should go to 16. 16 just sounds right to me.

 

[BluesBucksNHuskers]

fewer regular season games equals less revenue. the one thing we can guarantee is that whatever happens no one is making the choice to reduce revenue

schools with little or no shot at the playoff will never agree to that

I’m too lazy to go and look but I would guess in the last 20 years over 50% of schools have had at least 1 season they finished the regular season in the top 16. There’s a lot of schools with at least a punchers chance at a title who would have never got a sniff

 

[Jim14510]

I kind of like the 12 with the top 4 getting a bye

 

[Ripping Lips]

I don't think it matters whether it's 8, 12 or 16 teams, people will still watch it regardless. As for the rest of the bowls, eliminate about half of them, make the minimum win requirement 7 or 8 wins, quit the conference alignment to the bowls, and allow the bowls pick and bid for teams to play in their bowl game.

 

[Cash68847]

I don't think it matters whether it's 8, 12 or 16 teams, people will still watch it regardless. As for the rest of the bowls, eliminate about half of them, make the minimum win requirement 7 or 8 wins, quit the conference alignment to the bowls, and allow the bowls pick and bid for teams to play in their bowl game.

I would rather get rid of the bowls all together and have the top seeds have home field advantage. I know it won’t happen, but it would be fun seeing teams duking it out in the elements.

 

[Alcaus]

I kind of like the 12 with the top 4 getting a bye

This makes the most sense to me

 

[Jim14510]

Why we getting rid of bowls? I say screw the minimum win requirement. Anyone not in the playoff is eligible for bowl games. I don't want less football. I want more.

 

[Fargo Husker]

I kind of like the 12 with the top 4 getting a bye

I also like 12 a lot because it rewards the tops teams with that bye week.

As far as the other bowl games go, I always get a kick out of those who treat them with such veneration. Maybe it's an upbringing or generational thing, but outside of the top 5 or 6 bowl games, they've always just been glorified exhibitions so who gives a shit how many there are? I can tell you one thing for sure though, the numbers aren't going to shrink because even the lowest of the low tier bowl games pull decent enough ratings to justify them money-wise.

To me, the more college football, the better.