Expansion is eminent

[king ward]

Booger sees the big picture.

CFP will consider expanding to 12-team format

The College Football Playoff management committee will consider expanding to a 12-team format that would include the six highest-ranked conference champions and the next six highest-ranked teams.

www.espn.com

 

[Conway Gamecock]

Also seems to be imminent.

 

[usc1855]

In the entire history of college football there has NEVER been a single season in which, at the end, 12 teams were legitimate contenders. Not even 8 teams.

...a season like this could happen in the future, though.
But even if there are only 5 legitimate contenders, you'd need more CFP than we have today.

 

[BTMGarnet]

View embedded media

I honestly look for it to be approved.
Not mentioned is I have seen the top 4 will get first round byes.

I wouldn't necessarily call this imminent. The earliest this could come into effect would be 2023 due to the current contract.

 

[Gamecockben1979]

Look at basketball. There's 68 teams in that tournament. But, the same 4 - 5 teams have the highest rated classes every year. Those programs have the greatest tradition, the best facilities and put the highest premium on coaching and talent.

Yeah Duke, North Carolina and Kentucky would probably be in those same 4-5 teams that have the highest rated classes, tradition and facilities and they all sat home and watched the Baylor Bears win it last year....and the Virginia Cavaliers won it before that. Jay Wright has done such a great job at Villanova they have outperformed any of the blue bloods recently as well.

 

[Boom4life]

This is a totally ludicrous proposal for many of the reasons previously mentioned, so I won't reiterate those. But here is another reason. This is far too many games for college football. They already play too many games at 12 plus the playoffs. These are 18 - 22 yo young men and this sport is brutal and punishing. We're not talking about tennis matches here. This is too much to put these young men and their bodies through. This would push the season into well into February. From the end of August until the middle of February is entirely too long of a season for college football players. After that they will head almost immediately into spring practice. Give these these guys a break and let them have a little bit of the college experience rather than all year football.

They will have to play way more if they make it to the pros I think that is a mute point.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

Of course, Kirk Herbstreit was on ESPN dutifully reporting that the expansion to 12 teams was the right move. I'm sure his opinion is in no way affected by who his employer is.

 

[Boom4life]

I wouldn't necessarily call this imminent. The earliest this could come into effect would be 2023 due to the current contract.

Not true, it could be in effect in 2022

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

This is a totally ludicrous proposal for many of the reasons previously mentioned, so I won't reiterate those. But here is another reason. This is far too many games for college football. They already play too many games at 12 plus the playoffs. These are 18 - 22 yo young men and this sport is brutal and punishing. We're not talking about tennis matches here. This is too much to put these young men and their bodies through. This would push the season into well into February. From the end of August until the middle of February is entirely too long of a season for college football players. After that they will head almost immediately into spring practice. Give these these guys a break and let them have a little bit of the college experience rather than all year football.

So why isn't this an issue for FCS teams. They have had a 8 team playoff for years now.
If FCS can navigate these issues, it stands to reason FBS teams can do the same.

 

[Gamecock Lifer]

If they make the Power 5 into the Power 6 by including the AAC and turn the G5 into the G4, then that is overdue imo and I'm good with that. They lose me at picking 6 additional teams based on opinions in a board room. That works for 32 or 64 but not a handful. Id rather them let the G4 champs play a play-in game and take the two left standing, add them to make 8 and pick no at-large. I think I've posted that before. That or just let the Power 6 champs play with two getting byes. Either way, should have gone from 4 picks as it is today to no picks not more picks. Champs only (berths) and a clear path written in stone... guess that wouldnt keep ND relevant tho would it.

I agree. My point from the start was that removing the subjectivity of the selection process is the most important thing. By eliminating “at large bids” where possible (and it is possible to eliminate them completely), you end the outrage was saw last year when OSU was selected and the farce that occurred when UCF claimed their fake Natty…. Base selections off of winning their conference or some formula related to actual wins and losses like the NFL wild card system if they “must” extend it beyond conference or division champions. Come up with a real, quantifiable selection criteria. As ling as they use some idiotic made up “ranking” system to select playoff participants, the system if open for ridicule and manipulation.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

In the final regular season poll of 2019, you had two 3-loss teams in the top 12. Wisconsin, with 3 losses, was ranked 8th. Who wants to see 3-loss teams competing for the title? (besides the 3-loss teams, of course)

In 2018, there were four 3-loss teams in the top 12.

 

[Captain Weegie]

In the entire history of college football there has NEVER been a single season in which, at the end, 12 teams were legitimate contenders. Not even 8 teams.

There are not 68 legitimate contenders for the MBB championship either. But it's a great tournament that allows the champion to earn the title by playing for it.

 

[Gradstudent]

I can understand the perspective of being against a 12 team playoff given the potential for saturation and lower quality of games, and being a playoff participate having less meaning.

I don't think it can be understated how good a 12 team playoff is for South Carolina and bad for Clemson, from a pure gamecock fan perspective.

The 4 team format has resulted in the top players funneling to the top 4-6 schools and a rinse and repeat of the playoffs. Actually the playoff games have not really been that great of games imho under the 4 team format

Unfortunately for us Clemson has been one of those 4 teams, rolling in the top recruiting classes and appearing in the playoff each years and getting a couple of trophies along the way

Meanwhile awful management (Ray Tanner as AD) has allowed us to become a doormat in the SEC east. We are not close to ever making te 4 team playoff and I do not think ever would make it consistently.

College football teams do cycle in and out and a 12 team playoff, will help us get to a better cycle for us then the current one we live in which, is horrible, Clemson dominant, we are average to below average to just plain horrible, it will take time, but the 12 game playoff gets us started to a new cycle.

From that perspective, pro South Carolina, anti Clemson, I don't know how you could be against this unless you just don't get the bigger picture, or are a Clemson fan on this board and like the last few years performance at both programs. If I was a Clemson fan I would be knocking this change for sure. As a Gamecock fan, I would love a 12 team playoff!!!

 

[Captain Weegie]

In the final regular season poll of 2019, you had two 3-loss teams in the top 12. Wisconsin, with 3 losses, was ranked 8th. Who wants to see 3-loss teams competing for the title? (besides the 3-loss teams, of course)

In 2018, there were four 3-loss teams in the top 12.

I don't have a problem with a 3 loss team competing for a championship. It would actually be intriguing. If they don't belong, that will be proven through an actual game rather than through a computer or someone's opinion.

 

[DarkCock]

I don't think it can be understated how good a 12 team playoff is for South Carolina and bad for Clemson, from a pure gamecock fan perspective.

Unfortunately for us Clemson has been one of those 4 teams, rolling in the top recruiting classes and appearing in the playoff each years and getting a couple of trophies along the way

Ugh! Every Gamecock fan should have seen a playoff would be the demise of Gamecock football, but many still whined and moaned for a 4 team playoff (looking at you, Jay Phillips).

12 team playoff would be an absolute disaster for college football, It couldn't be any worse for Carolina, though, so let's blow up the entire sport since we suck at it.

 

[DarkCock]

I don't have a problem with a 3 loss team competing for a championship. It would actually be intriguing. If they don't belong, that will be proven through an actual game rather than through a computer or someone's opinion.

Delete your account

 

[GarnetBeamer]

I don't have a problem with a 3 loss team competing for a championship. It would actually be intriguing. If they don't belong, that will be proven through an actual game rather than through a computer or someone's opinion.

lol...well, i just don't know what to say to that. Well, I sort of do. You say, "if they don't belong, that will be proven through an actual game." Well, you don't think whether or not a team belongs in the playoff would have been demonstrated through 12 previous actual games in which they lost 3 actual games? If that's your rationale, why stop at 3? Maybe a 6-loss team should have a shot. What about a 10-loss team? The season composed of 12 actual games tells you who belongs.

 

[DarkCock]

Bama just how arguably the best season in college football history. Maybe LSU's the previous season could top it. Yet someone how the conclusion to draw from the last two seasons is the champion needs to play MORE games? IDIOTIC!

 

[GarnetBeamer]

Bama just how arguably the best season in college football history. Maybe LSU's the previous season could top it. Yet someone how the conclusion to draw from the last two seasons is the champion needs to play MORE games? IDIOTIC!

Right. The last 3 champions have been absolutely dominant teams. But some people are so stupid as to think they needed to win another game or two to prove it? Morons.

 

[Boom4life]

Ugh! Every Gamecock fan should have seen a playoff would be the demise of Gamecock football, but many still whined and moaned for a 4 team playoff (looking at you, Jay Phillips).

12 team playoff would be an absolute disaster for college football, It couldn't be any worse for Carolina, though, so let's blow up the entire sport since we suck at it.

You simply do not know that. While the playoff might have been bad for Carolina, we are only one team. As a whole I think the 4 team playoff is great for college football. More money and revenue, drama and excitement. The funneling of talent and the same teams is a problem. 12 teams will fix both of those. I for one like the proposal and hop it happens. We were ranked 12 once would have been nice to play for a national championship. Just saying

 

[GarnetBeamer]

We were ranked 12 once would have been nice to play for a national championship. Just saying

Well, I said it a few posts back. The sad thing will be watching a 12th-ranked team celebrate making the playoffs. It's just pathetic.

It used to be you had to have a great season just to get a bowl game. Then it was downgraded to pretty good. Now most teams who to go bowl games had mediocre or bad seasons. Now we're calling 3-loss teams title contenders.

This culture of celebrating mediocrity is utterly baffling to me. I'm raising kids right now and desperately hoping I can shield them from this toxic philosophy. It's an absolute loser's mentality.

 

[USC2USC]

What’s going to be really pathetic is seeing team #12 celebrate making the playoffs.

If we were #12 and making the playoffs, I for damn sure would be celebrating.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

If we were #12 and making the playoffs, I for damn sure would be celebrating.

It's because, sadly, we have encouraged a culture of celebrating mediocrity around here. Some fans simply can't shake it off. Heck, we had fans passionately in favor of, and willing to travel, to see our 2-win team play in a make-believe bowl game last year. Losers, losers everywhere.

 

[USMCatFan]

I agree. My point from the start was that removing the subjectivity of the selection process is the most important thing. By eliminating “at large bids” where possible (and it is possible to eliminate them completely), you end the outrage was saw last year when OSU was selected and the farce that occurred when UCF claimed their fake Natty…. Base selections off of winning their conference or some formula related to actual wins and losses like the NFL wild card system if they “must” extend it beyond conference or division champions. Come up with a real, quantifiable selection criteria. As ling as they use some idiotic made up “ranking” system to select playoff participants, the system if open for ridicule and manipulation.

Treating ALL conference champions and therefore all conferences as the same is a MADE UP ranking. It's as artificial as trying to setup a Playoff where everyone is "included" and has and "opportunity". If a Playoff is about rewarding excellence. It's about putting the best teams into the Playoff.

Not everyone should be included and not everyone deserves an opportunity. If your not worried about the score, want to see participation trophies, and want to see everyone bat...go watch some Tee Ball.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

Treating ALL conference champions and therefore all conferences as the same is a MADE UP ranking. It's as artificial as trying to setup a Playoff where everyone is "included" and has and "opportunity". If a Playoff is about rewarding excellence. It's about putting the best teams into the Playoff.

Not everyone should be included and not everyone deserves an opportunity. If your not worried about the score, want to see participation trophies, and want to see everyone bat...go watch some Tee Ball.

oorah!

This is the thing for me, it's all artificial. It's made-up. Fantasy. Make believe. It's like those fans who were celebrating us getting a bowl invite last year.

There is no appreciation for excellence any longer. Sad times.

 

[Boom4life]

Well, I said it a few posts back. The sad thing will be watching a 12th-ranked team celebrate making the playoffs. It's just pathetic.

It used to be you had to have a great season just to get a bowl game. Then it was downgraded to pretty good. Now most teams who to go bowl games had mediocre or bad seasons. Now we're calling 3-loss teams title contenders.

This culture of celebrating mediocrity is utterly baffling to me. I'm raising kids right now and desperately hoping I can shield them from this toxic philosophy. It's an absolute loser's mentality.

Give me a damn break. That’s the dumbest shit I have ever heard. So I guess when your child gets a trophy at the end of the Rec league season you are going to take it from them and tell them losers only get participation trophies.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

\

Give me a damn break. That’s the dumbest shit I have ever heard. So I guess when your child gets a trophy at the end of the Rec league season you are going to take it from them and tell them losers only get participation trophies.

In your mind there's no difference between college football and rec league football?

I think we've stumbled on the root of your problem.

 

[OzWizard]

The problem with the current setup is 5 conferences playing for 4 spots waters down the conference championships. Then say SEC gets 2 in and ND gets in, then there are 4 conference competing for 1 spot.

For me it is a simple fix. 8 teams, using CCG games as the 1st round of the playoffs, which would essentially create a 12 team playoff. An actual 12 team playoff is no good, because bye teams would lose out on revenue / gate sales.

For example, the 8 team playoff bids in 2019 could have looked like this. Teams in parenthesis indicate CCG loser, which is part of the 1st round. (2020 was too F'd up to use as an example)

ACC Champ - Clem (UVA)
Big 12 Champ - OK (Bay)
Big 10 Champ - OSU (Wisc)
PAC 12 Champ - ORE (Utah)
SEC Champ - LSU (UGA)
Highest ranked non-P5 Champ or Ind - ND
Nest highest ranked non-P5 Champ or Ind - Memphis
The 2nd Chance Spot - Highest ranked P5 CCG loser - UGA

If there are not enough ranked nonP5 champs, then take next highest ranked P5 CCG losers.

Under this set up
The CFP Rankings show would still generate interest for the non P5 teams and eventual P5 CCG loser.
The CCG would have significant meaning as the unofficial 1st round of the playoff
Regular season OOC matchups could improve because schools could schedule higher caliber competition without the fear of a loss destroying the season.
One P5 CCG loser gets a 2nd chance
NonP5 teams finally get a chance to make some noise.
All D1 teams have a chance to make the playoff. Currently only about 50% are eligible to make the playoff

 

[Boom4life]

Give me a damn break. That’s the dumbest shit I have ever heard.

\


In your mind there's no difference between college football and rec league football?

I think we've stumbled on the root of your problem.

You said you were going to shield your kids so I asked a question. I never said they were the same.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

You said you were going to shield your kids so I asked a question. I never said they were the same.

But it's interesting to me that in comparing the CFP you went to rec league.

In any event, yes, as a parent it's my job to prepare my kids for the real world. Would I take their participation trophy from them and smash it in front of their eyes? Of course not. But I would certainly take some to explain to them what their trophy signifies. Kids are tough.

 

[USMCatFan]

The problem with the current setup is 5 conferences playing for 4 spots waters down the conference championships. Then say SEC gets 2 in and ND gets in, then there are 4 conference competing for 1 spot.

For me it is a simple fix. 8 teams, using CCG games as the 1st round of the playoffs, which would essentially create a 12 team playoff. An actual 12 team playoff is no good, because bye teams would lose out on revenue / gate sales.

For example, the 8 team playoff bids in 2019 could have looked like this. Teams in parenthesis indicate CCG loser, which is part of the 1st round. (2020 was too F'd up to use as an example)

ACC Champ - Clem (UVA)
Big 12 Champ - OK (Bay)
Big 10 Champ - OSU (Wisc)
PAC 12 Champ - ORE (Utah)
SEC Champ - LSU (UGA)
Highest ranked non-P5 Champ or Ind - ND
Nest highest ranked non-P5 Champ or Ind - Memphis
The 2nd Chance Spot - Highest ranked P5 CCG loser - UGA

If there are not enough ranked nonP5 champs, then take next highest ranked P5 CCG losers.

Under this set up
The CFP Rankings show would still generate interest for the non P5 teams and eventual P5 CCG loser.
The CCG would have significant meaning as the unofficial 1st round of the playoff
Regular season OOC matchups could improve because schools could schedule higher caliber competition without the fear of a loss destroying the season.
One P5 CCG loser gets a 2nd chance
NonP5 teams finally get a chance to make some noise.
All D1 teams have a chance to make the playoff. Currently only about 50% are eligible to make the playoff

The only problem I see with you work here is...

An actual 12 team playoff is no good, because bye teams would lose out on revenue / gate sales.

You're being too simplistic. The Playoff is a Big Money Operation. I am confident that the majority of the gate receipts will not be going to the home teams. It will likely be pooled and split amongst all of the Playoff teams.

And, as I posted before. I don't care how many teams are in the Playoff. As long as the effort is made to place the best teams into the Playoff Field. Which is why I don't like your plan of automatically including ALL of the P5 conference champions. Many years not all 5 deserve to be in the Playoff.

If you're going to go with 12 teams (6 highest rated conference champs + 6 highly rated At-Large Teams) yo better embrace the possibility of 4, 5 or 6 SEC teams filling those brackets. The thing that will really piss off the Football World is how successful the SEC would be against the rest of the field.

 

[bucketdad]

I agree. My point from the start was that removing the subjectivity of the selection process is the most important thing. By eliminating “at large bids” where possible (and it is possible to eliminate them completely), you end the outrage was saw last year when OSU was selected and the farce that occurred when UCF claimed their fake Natty…. Base selections off of winning their conference or some formula related to actual wins and losses like the NFL wild card system if they “must” extend it beyond conference or division champions. Come up with a real, quantifiable selection criteria. As ling as they use some idiotic made up “ranking” system to select playoff participants, the system if open for ridicule and manipulation.

Agreed. Personally I dont see the point in second chances. And I certainly dont like the thought of someone deciding who gets a second chance and who doesnt. You want in? Win your conference. Everything is earned on the field. So what if one conference is perceived as not worthy. One could argue that's the way it is now.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Gentlemen: (And Ladies)
For the most part this has been a fairly good exchange between Traditionalist (no expansion) , Nonconventional (agreeable to expansion) and those who are just resigned to the new format. (I'm in this camp)
There is no reason to taint this thread with personal insults.
Just my 2 cents.
Carry on.

 

[Captain Weegie]

lol...well, i just don't know what to say to that. Well, I sort of do. You say, "if they don't belong, that will be proven through an actual game." Well, you don't think whether or not a team belongs in the playoff would have been demonstrated through 12 previous actual games in which they lost 3 actual games? If that's your rationale, why stop at 3? Maybe a 6-loss team should have a shot. What about a 10-loss team? The season composed of 12 actual games tells you who belongs.

By your standards, we should have not participated in the 2017 MBB tournament and never would have made the Final Four. Why should a marginal top-25 team have that opportunity? Silly from your perspective, right?

Inviting the top 12 out of 100+ football teams to compete in a season ending tournament to determine a national champion is not some egregious error in logic. It's fairly rationale, and more select than how college basketball has been handled since the 1980s.

 

[gamecockengineer2011]

Bowl games mean pretty much nothing when they are are 300 of them. Id rather see an expanded playoff system.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

By your standards, we should have not participated in the 2017 MBB tournament and never would have made the Final Four. Why should a marginal top-25 team have that opportunity? Silly from your perspective, right?

Inviting the top 12 out of 100+ football teams to compete in a season ending tournament to determine a national champion is not some egregious error in logic. It's fairly rationale, and more select than how college basketball has been handled since the 1980s.

Different sports. Don't see the point in trying to make one like the other.

But, yes, you seem to agree that this is just a money grab like the NCAAT. I get that aspect of it.

 

[Captain Weegie]

Different sports. Don't see the point in trying to make one like the other.

But, yes, you seem to agree that this is just a money grab like the NCAAT. I get that aspect of it.

I think most will agree that the process of determining the MBB champion is far superior to current football model. So yeah, football would be wise to follow in the path of basketball.

Football is already a huge money grab. That wouldn't change even if we went back to the BCS model. We'll always have that to contend with. In the meantime, let's improve the way that football determines its champion. The current proposal does a lot to move us in that direction.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

I think most will agree that the process of determining the MBB champion is far superior to current football model. So yeah, football would be wise to follow in the path of basketball.

Football is already a huge money grab. That wouldn't change even if we went back to the BCS model. We'll always have that to contend with. In the meantime, let's improve the way that football determines its champion. The current proposal does a lot to move us in that direction.

Again, they are two totally different sports. Do you think we should also have college football teams playing a playoff game on Thursday and another on Saturday?

 

[JGH 35]

They will have to play way more if they make it to the pros I think that is a mute point.

The very few who choose to play in the pros as adults will be mature adult grown men and will be well compensated and can choose if they think it is worth it. The vast majority will not. You have to have reasonable limits in place at each level. Otherwise, why don't we have Jr High schools playing 16 games a year? It's because there is some amount reasonable common sense invoked and a recognition that it would be physically harmful to the kids.

 

[GarnetBeamer]

The very few who choose to play in the pros as adults will be mature adult grown men and will be well compensated and can choose if they think it is worth it. The vast majority will not. You have to have reasonable limits in place at each level. Otherwise, why don't we have Jr High schools playing 16 games a year? It's because there is some amount reasonable common sense invoked and a recognition that it would be physically harmful to the kids.

Correct. Nearly 98% of college players are preparing for something else in life besides the NFL. The NFL is only a good comparison if NFL players are also going to school full time.