8-Team Play-off Format.

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Oct 16, 2003
895
353
1,613
Edmond, OK
#1
Ok, so lets say you take the Top-8 teams today from the AP Poll and seeded them as ranked. (Well, almost. I kicked out #8 Texas A&M in order to include presumed PAC-12 Champ Oregon). That includes the 5 Major conference winners, Cincinnati as the best of the Group of Five teams, Independent Notre Dame plus SEC runner-up Georgia. Seems fair enough... First round games would be:

* Clemson vs Oregon
* Alabama, vs Cincinnati
* Ohio St vs Oklahoma St
* Notre Dame vs Georgia.

How many upsets do you see in those games? I probably don't see any. Maybe Georgia. So what would really be the point of adding 4 more teams/games other than to say the next four were "included"?

I really don't have a problem with a 4-team playoff format.
 
Jun 4, 2007
4,587
1,380
1,743
Broken Arrow, Ok
#3
I wouldn't underestimate the excitement/revenue that would be generated from the full 7 games played with an 8 team bracket. It's only adding 1 more weekend to complete the bracket but you're adding 4 more "sudden death" games to the current 3 games.
 
May 4, 2011
2,056
1,017
743
Charleston, SC
#4
I wouldn't underestimate the excitement/revenue that would be generated from the full 7 games played with an 8 team bracket. It's only adding 1 more weekend to complete the bracket but you're adding 4 more "sudden death" games to the current 3 games.
Plus, you can easily set it up to where all P5 champs get in or something like all P5 champs ranked in the top 10. More conference bragging rights, more national TV audiences.
 

NinjaPoke

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Jul 9, 2016
289
198
93
26
Lawton, OK
#6
Interesting. On that same note, NY6 bowls will obviously be in the 8-team play off venues, but what about the other two?

I think Camping and Velero would be great venues to fill the other spots.
 

NinjaPoke

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Jul 9, 2016
289
198
93
26
Lawton, OK
#7
I've heard there is some actual talk about this happening this year. Any chance it does?
If there’s 5 P5 teams that go undefeated and win their conference champions. Ala

1. ACC: 11-0 Clemson,
2. SEC: 11-0 Bama,
3. BIG 12: 11-0 OSU,
4. B1G: 9-0 tOSU,
5. PAC: 7-0 Oregon,
6: AAC (G5): 10-0 Cinci.

That would definitely get the conversation started
 
Jun 4, 2007
4,587
1,380
1,743
Broken Arrow, Ok
#8
If there’s 5 P5 teams that go undefeated and win their conference champions. Ala

1. ACC: 11-0 Clemson,
2. SEC: 11-0 Bama,
3. BIG 12: 11-0 OSU,
4. B1G: 9-0 tOSU,
5. PAC: 7-0 Oregon,
6: AAC (G5): 10-0 Cinci.

That would definitely get the conversation started
followed by a 4 loss SEC team for #7 and a .500 B1G team for #8.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,545
6,984
1,743
Landlocked
#9
Ugh.......... flashbacks of getting destroyed by Tedd Ginn Jr. against Ohio State in the Alamo Bowl.... San Antonio was a great bowl game trip, but that was one of the worst OSU football experiences ever.
 
Last edited:
Nov 27, 2007
2,610
1,218
1,743
35
Tulsa
#10
How many upsets do you see in those games? I probably don't see any. Maybe Georgia. So what would really be the point of adding 4 more teams/games other than to say the next four were "included"?

I really don't have a problem with a 4-team playoff format.
On Paper.... Indiana doesn't beat PSU on paper. OU doesn't lose to KSU or ISU on paper. That's why we play the game... It is think its a disgrace to have the potential for an undefeated Power 5 champion have a chance at being excluded.

I don't understand your positioning... You would rather have less football to watch, blue-blood programs getting preferential treatment in the selection process, less upset potential, and the chance of an undefeated power 5 champ not having a chance to prove it on the field based off what some sports writer in Cleveland thinks.... Just because it looks like their might not be an upset.....
 
Feb 18, 2009
4,717
2,427
1,743
#12
Ok, so lets say you take the Top-8 teams today from the AP Poll and seeded them as ranked. (Well, almost. I kicked out #8 Texas A&M in order to include presumed PAC-12 Champ Oregon). That includes the 5 Major conference winners, Cincinnati as the best of the Group of Five teams, Independent Notre Dame plus SEC runner-up Georgia. Seems fair enough... First round games would be:

* Clemson vs Oregon
* Alabama, vs Cincinnati
* Ohio St vs Oklahoma St
* Notre Dame vs Georgia.

How many upsets do you see in those games? I probably don't see any. Maybe Georgia. So what would really be the point of adding 4 more teams/games other than to say the next four were "included"?

I really don't have a problem with a 4-team playoff format.
Notre Dame is in the ACC this year....
 
Nov 27, 2007
2,610
1,218
1,743
35
Tulsa
#14
An 8 team playoff should look like this:

ACC Champ
Big12 Champ
Big Ten Champ
Pac 12 Champ
SEC Champ
Group of 5 Champ (if Ranked in top 10) If none the Highest Ranked Non Champ.
Highest Ranked - Non Champ
Next Highest Ranked - Non Champ

This is the punch card to get to the playoffs, the seeding is made by committee based on ranking and resume. Bowl selection is made after the first round is played, two weeks after the conference championship week.

Top 4 get first round home game against bottom 4. Losers of 4 games are bowl eligible.

Then back to legacy format

2 BCS games serve as semi qualifiers
+1 NCG.
 
Oct 16, 2003
895
353
1,613
Edmond, OK
#16
I don't understand your positioning... You would rather have less football to watch, blue-blood programs getting preferential treatment in the selection process, less upset potential, and the chance of an undefeated power 5 champ not having a chance to prove it on the field based off what some sports writer in Cleveland thinks.... Just because it looks like their might not be an upset.....
I'm saying in the 6 years since the current format began, 8 of the 12 Championship game slots have gone to either the #1 or #2 seed. So you could say under the current format, only 4 of 12 times (33%) has the #3 or #4 seeds been relevant (although admittedly they did win the National Title twice).

So if the #3/#4 only mattered 1/3rd of the time under the current format, odds are the #5-#8 seeds are going to be even less relevant. Meaning, regardless of the number of teams in the play-off, the odds of the National Champion coming from outside the Top-2 (or for sure Top-4) are remote. So I'm saying playing those games and including those teams probably is not a relevant process.

Would it make the #5-#8 seeds feel more included? Probably. Do they have any realistic chance of actually making it to the Championship Game? Highly doubtful.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,652
1,345
1,743
#18
I think its rational to say that the #8 in an 8 team playoff wouldn't win it all, but on any given day the 8th best can definitely pull off an upset which then changes the champion.

This is also a true theory in college basketball but think of how much the Cinderella upsetting the blue blood changes the tournament landscape.

The best thing I see with expanding to 8 team is the number of different teams that get to be part of the discussion and there being more national champions resulting in "spreading the wealth". I think it would reduce the gap (within P5) of the haves and the have nots.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,303
821
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#19
An 8 team playoff should look like this:

ACC Champ
Big12 Champ
Big Ten Champ
Pac 12 Champ
SEC Champ
Group of 5 Champ (if Ranked in top 10) If none the Highest Ranked Non Champ.
Highest Ranked - Non Champ
Next Highest Ranked - Non Champ

This is the punch card to get to the playoffs, the seeding is made by committee based on ranking and resume. Bowl selection is made after the first round is played, two weeks after the conference championship week.

Top 4 get first round home game against bottom 4. Losers of 4 games are bowl eligible.

Then back to legacy format

2 BCS games serve as semi qualifiers
+1 NCG.
I think you take the top rated G5 team no matter their rating.
 
Nov 18, 2010
2,214
918
1,743
#20
No. It has already been decided on. It was shot down.
It was also decided that the big 10 wouldn't play football this fall...but a bit of legal pressure, following by political fallout fixed that right up.

Unfortunately I do agree. 8 teams is the obvious solution. But we're asking a committee of humans -who probably receive all kinds of perks/gifts because they are the gatekeepers to the playoffs- to step aside and allow a non-opinion based system to take over their jobs.
I mean, if you had wealthy universities pleading and begging and doing who knows what else, to get your 'Gatekeeper vote', would you willingly step aside?

The only thing stopping an 8 team playoff from happening is a smallish group of people who don't want to give up their power...even though it would improve things for everyone else.