Bowlsby: Playoff Expansion Talk is Happening, Is Legit

  • 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.

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
52,556
18,181
1,743
#62
I tend to agree with you on a 9 seed winning the whole thing. However, I think an interesting angle to it is not necessarily them winning it all, but winning a game or two & thus altering the bracket significantly.
Of course the 9 seed's odds are lower. And you're on point they will win some and it makes the games interesting. And occasionally, just as it happens in BB, one of them will win the playoffs.
 
Jul 25, 2018
3,420
1,021
243
49
Boulder, CO
#63
Of course the 9 seed's odds are lower. And you're on point they will win some and it makes the games interesting. And occasionally, just as it happens in BB, one of them will win the playoffs.
9 seeds since the CFP began:

14 Ole Miss 9-3 (Beau Wallace-led team who beat Bama)

15 FSU 10-2 (Everett Golson-led team)

16 USC 9-3 (Sam Darnold-led team that won its' last 9 games & the media was pushing them for the CFP)

17 Penn St. 10-2 (McSorley & Barkley-led team)

18 Washington 10-3 (best of a very weak PAC 12)
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,384
2,595
1,743
So Cal
#64
Do they have an automatic bid for the Big 12 currently? No.

You're nuttier than squirrel turds if you don't think a guaranteed bid for the conference would stabilize it.

For the 2 richest schools in the Big 12, why would they want to slog their way through the SEC West, or B1G for that matter, to make the playoff? They stand a much better chance of getting there, year in & year out, in the Big 12.
yes... that is exactly what I said. Not sure how you misunderstood my point.
 
Apr 14, 2008
1,064
629
1,743
Texas
#65
What's your evidence? You aren't disagreeing with me. You're disagreeing with the actual outcomes of the games.
I'm not disagreeing with actual games...the games in which you are referring are hypothetical in a bracket expanded beyond 8 teams. You are using NCAA MBB as your basis and I am of the opinion that your basis is nontransferable to a hypothetical FB bracket of 12-16 teams
 
Jul 25, 2018
3,420
1,021
243
49
Boulder, CO
#66
yes... that is exactly what I said. Not sure how you misunderstood my point.
Yes, I misunderstood it, because you have no point here.

An automatic bid (dumbing it down here for you) means the conference will automatically get a team in the playoff each year. To anyone but you, that's more than 3 out of 5 years, which has happened under the current setup.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,145
788
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#67
No, the independents are part of the pool with those non power 5 conferences.

The issue is a subjective formula to select two teams from that pool.
Then I don't understand your "2 automatic qualifiers", since there are 3 spots to fill.

I think the most likely scenario will be the five Power 5 champions, top ranked group of 5, and then 2 at large bids.
 
Last edited:
May 20, 2010
800
422
613
Bethel Acres, OK
#68
Why cant we have a 12 team playoff?
10 conference champs
the 5 power five conferences
and the 5 group of 5 conferences
plus 2 at-large

seed them top 4 seed receive first round bye.

Then instead of bowl games move the bowl games to the start of the season and play as exhibition or something.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,145
788
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#69
Why cant we have a 12 team playoff?
Too many games. Those teams that make it to the NCG currently play 15 games, 12 regular season and 3 post season. The powers that be aren't ready to bump "student athletes" to potentially 16 games. So if you add another round to the playoffs then there will be 11 regular season games and there a lot more teams that don't make the playoffs than do, and they won't stand for losing games (12 reduced to 11). Could teams that don't make the playoffs schedule a 12th game? Sure, but that will leave less than a week to get the game scheduled as you're dealing with conference standings, who's the home team, who wants to play who, etc. It's too much uncertainty.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
52,556
18,181
1,743
#70
Then I don't understand your "2 automatic qualifiers", since there are 3 spots to fill.

I think the most likely scenario will be the five Power 5 champions, top ranked group of 5, and then 2 at large bids.
At a minimum 2 teams must come from the non Power 5 Conferences (i.e. two automatic qualifiers from those 5 conferences and independents). The issue with those 2 teams is how are they selected? Usually there is or two of those teams that stand out but the selection would have to be more subjective than it is with the 5 confernce champions from the power 5 conferences.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
52,556
18,181
1,743
#71
I'm not disagreeing with actual games...the games in which you are referring are hypothetical in a bracket expanded beyond 8 teams. You are using NCAA MBB as your basis and I am of the opinion that your basis is nontransferable to a hypothetical FB bracket of 12-16 teams
Good lord man I showed you were the winning percentages of the top 10 teams between BB and FB is essentially the same! You stated there is more parity in BB than there is in FB, there isn't and I gave you the facts to support that.

Do you have anything other than your opinion to suggest otherwise.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,384
2,595
1,743
So Cal
#72
Yes, I misunderstood it, because you have no point here.

An automatic bid (dumbing it down here for you) means the conference will automatically get a team in the playoff each year. To anyone but you, that's more than 3 out of 5 years, which has happened under the current setup.
try turning up your comprehension indicator instead. I said nothing about automatic bids, nor about 8 team playoff.

I was simply replying to your statement that suggested the Big12 is unstable and OU/UT could leave unless we enhance their chances of a playoff. However there is no evidence to suggest that UT/OU would leave for those conferences exactly because it would make their chances harder to make the playoff (without expansion).

OU/UT have a better chance at a playoff in the Big12 without playoff expansion, and have a better chance at the playoff in the Big12 with playoff expansion. Neither scenario suggests that either team leaving the Big12 now would have anything to do with making the playoff.
 
Apr 14, 2008
1,064
629
1,743
Texas
#73
Good lord man I showed you were the winning percentages of the top 10 teams between BB and FB is essentially the same! You stated there is more parity in BB than there is in FB, there isn't and I gave you the facts to support that.

Do you have anything other than your opinion to suggest otherwise.
Of course there is more parity in BB; the Tourney proves it every year with all the upsets in the first round or two until it settles back toward the norm.

MBB is 351 teams from 32 conferences. The Tourney is not even made up of the 68 best teams, so that right there skews the win percentages. If you took the top 64 teams there would be even more MBB upsets, not to mention just 1 guy can get hot and take his school deep.

FB is much more top heavy and the same ole cast of characters are at the top. FB is 130 schools from 10 conferences and a few indies. An 8-team FB playoff bracket would most likely be made up from 5 Power champs + 1 top ranked Group of 5 + 2 at-larges. This year that would most likely be #1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9 ranked teams. There is a huge drop off after that. IMO its a waste of time beyond 8 teams if you are trying to assemble the best teams that have a legit shot at winning 4 games to win champ.

Taking this years playoff rankings, an 8-team bracket would be...

1 Bama (13-0) v 9 Wash (10-3)
4 Okla (12-1) v 5 UGa (11-2)
3 Notre (12-0) v 6 Ohio St (12-1)
2 Clem (13-0) v 7 Mich (10-2)...or maybe UCF

I could envision Georgia or Ohio St winning that.

But, taking this years playoff rankings, a 16-team bracket would be...

1 Bama (13-0) v 16 WVa (8-3)
8 UCF (12-0) v 9 Wash (10-3)
4 Okla (12-1) v 13 Wash St (10-2)
5 UGa (11-2) v 12 Penn St (9-3)
3 Notre (12-0) v 14 Kent (9-3)
6 Ohio St (12-1) v 11 LSU (9-3)
7 Mich (10-2) v 10 Fla (9-3)
2 Clem (13-0) v 15 Tex (9-4)

IMO...there's nobody on that right side that's winning it all in that format, so its irrelevant outside 8 teams. I think pretty much every year only 8 teams would legitimately have a shot...teams 9-16 not so much.
 
Sep 9, 2013
857
433
613
60
#74
Of course there is more parity in BB; the Tourney proves it every year with all the upsets in the first round or two until it settles back toward the norm.

MBB is 351 teams from 32 conferences. The Tourney is not even made up of the 68 best teams, so that right there skews the win percentages. If you took the top 64 teams there would be even more MBB upsets, not to mention just 1 guy can get hot and take his school deep.

FB is much more top heavy and the same ole cast of characters are at the top. FB is 130 schools from 10 conferences and a few indies. An 8-team FB playoff bracket would most likely be made up from 5 Power champs + 1 top ranked Group of 5 + 2 at-larges. This year that would most likely be #1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9 ranked teams. There is a huge drop off after that. IMO its a waste of time beyond 8 teams if you are trying to assemble the best teams that have a legit shot at winning 4 games to win champ.

Taking this years playoff rankings, an 8-team bracket would be...

1 Bama (13-0) v 9 Wash (10-3)
4 Okla (12-1) v 5 UGa (11-2)
3 Notre (12-0) v 6 Ohio St (12-1)
2 Clem (13-0) v 7 Mich (10-2)...or maybe UCF

I could envision Georgia or Ohio St winning that.

But, taking this years playoff rankings, a 16-team bracket would be...

1 Bama (13-0) v 16 WVa (8-3)
8 UCF (12-0) v 9 Wash (10-3)
4 Okla (12-1) v 13 Wash St (10-2)
5 UGa (11-2) v 12 Penn St (9-3)
3 Notre (12-0) v 14 Kent (9-3)
6 Ohio St (12-1) v 11 LSU (9-3)
7 Mich (10-2) v 10 Fla (9-3)
2 Clem (13-0) v 15 Tex (9-4)

IMO...there's nobody on that right side that's winning it all in that format, so its irrelevant outside 8 teams. I think pretty much every year only 8 teams would legitimately have a shot...teams 9-16 not so much.
I wouldn't be so sure! Id like WVU, FLorida, and LSU in round 1. after that, who knows.
 
Feb 7, 2009
182
28
1,578
#75
I agree the CFP should be expanded to 8 teams. In that setup ALL the power 5 conference champs get invited with 3 at large teams. In that group (at large) only 1 team from a conference. This plan makes great sense, probably so much so that it will not be passed.
 
May 20, 2010
800
422
613
Bethel Acres, OK
#76
Too many games. Those teams that make it to the NCG currently play 15 games, 12 regular season and 3 post season. The powers that be aren't ready to bump "student athletes" to potentially 16 games. So if you add another round to the playoffs then there will be 11 regular season games and there a lot more teams that don't make the playoffs than do, and they won't stand for losing games (12 reduced to 11). Could teams that don't make the playoffs schedule a 12th game? Sure, but that will leave less than a week to get the game scheduled as you're dealing with conference standings, who's the home team, who wants to play who, etc. It's too much uncertainty.
Why not???
Current FCS and Lower divisions play as many as 16 games... Is the FBS to afraid of the extra TV revenue???
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
52,556
18,181
1,743
#77
Of course there is more parity in BB; the Tourney proves it every year with all the upsets in the first round or two until it settles back toward the norm.
The only thing that proves is that higly ranked teams can get beat, happens in football as well which I gave you those facts earlier.

MBB is 351 teams from 32 conferences. The Tourney is not even made up of the 68 best teams, so that right there skews the win percentages. If you took the top 64 teams there would be even more MBB upsets, not to mention just 1 guy can get hot and take his school deep.

FB is much more top heavy and the same ole cast of characters are at the top. FB is 130 schools from 10 conferences and a few indies. An 8-team FB playoff bracket would most likely be made up from 5 Power champs + 1 top ranked Group of 5 + 2 at-larges. This year that would most likely be #1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9 ranked teams. There is a huge drop off after that. IMO its a waste of time beyond 8 teams if you are trying to assemble the best teams that have a legit shot at winning 4 games to win champ.

Taking this years playoff rankings, an 8-team bracket would be...

1 Bama (13-0) v 9 Wash (10-3)
4 Okla (12-1) v 5 UGa (11-2)
3 Notre (12-0) v 6 Ohio St (12-1)
2 Clem (13-0) v 7 Mich (10-2)...or maybe UCF

I could envision Georgia or Ohio St winning that.

But, taking this years playoff rankings, a 16-team bracket would be...

1 Bama (13-0) v 16 WVa (8-3)
8 UCF (12-0) v 9 Wash (10-3)
4 Okla (12-1) v 13 Wash St (10-2)
5 UGa (11-2) v 12 Penn St (9-3)
3 Notre (12-0) v 14 Kent (9-3)
6 Ohio St (12-1) v 11 LSU (9-3)
7 Mich (10-2) v 10 Fla (9-3)
2 Clem (13-0) v 15 Tex (9-4)

IMO...there's nobody on that right side that's winning it all in that format, so its irrelevant outside 8 teams. I think pretty much every year only 8 teams would legitimately have a shot...teams 9-16 not so much.
Excluding this year I checked the final rankings for the last 4 completed seasons. Here is what I found.

25 Different teams finished ranked in the top 10 for basketball. It was 23 teams for football.

For Basketball 1 team finished ranked in the top 10 all four seasons. 2 for Football.

For Basketball 3 teams finishied ranked in the top 10 three of the four seasons. 3 for Football.

For Basketball 5 teams finished ranked in the top 10 two of the four seasons. 6 for Football.

For Basketball 15 teams finished ranked in the top 10 one of the four seasons. 13 for Football.

Pretty much the same parity across both sports. Given there are so many more basketball teams I wonder why more of them don't get into the top 10?
 
Nov 8, 2013
460
302
613
#78
I agree the CFP should be expanded to 8 teams. In that setup ALL the power 5 conference champs get invited with 3 at large teams. In that group (at large) only 1 team from a conference. This plan makes great sense, probably so much so that it will not be passed.
100% agree with limitation that 3 at-large teams have to come from different conferences. No conference should have 3 teams in an 8-team playoff.
 
Oct 7, 2015
1,918
1,153
243
St. Elmo, CO
#79
I'm pulling it out!

I've had this in my pants for a long time and it's time for it to see daylight again.

If expansion is inevitable -- and I, too, do believe that it will come sooner than later, one way to keep from playing many more games in a March Madness format (with fewer number of teams, of course) is for the power conferences to face each other in regular season games.

There are too many BS games early in the season (and late in the SEC season) that are unattractive and meaningless (unless your Grambling beating Bama). Make some games where we play other power conference teams and get an idea of how that could stack up toward the committee's selection at the end of the season. Then make as many of the non-CFP bowl games make for an elimination game or two for the ultimate NC game.

Every conference gets their champion playing some other conference champion (or #2s) at the end of the season and see where that gets us.

Okay. That's me showing what I've got.

It's going back in the pants to await another "expansion talk" post.
 
Sep 12, 2013
1,145
788
743
Broken Arrow, OK
#80
At a minimum 2 teams must come from the non Power 5 Conferences (i.e. two automatic qualifiers from those 5 conferences and independents). The issue with those 2 teams is how are they selected? Usually there is or two of those teams that stand out but the selection would have to be more subjective than it is with the 5 confernce champions from the power 5 conferences.
Ah, ok. Now I understand. And yes, selecting those teams would definitely be more subjective and we'll get a yearly dose of "this power 5 team deserves it more than that group of 5 team". To that I say, "didn't win your conference? Then you don't deserve to be in the playoffs." However, with the current conference arrangement some team that wasn't the conference champ will get in.

That also means no more than 2 teams from any one conference. That part I most definitely like.