The ACC is all about Clemson, or so it seems.....

[Legendary Cock]

Of course it will be a blowout when Alabama hosts Sun Belt champion Troy St. in a first-round playoff game in Tuscaloosa. But like basketball, it gives Trojan fans something to cheer about as a "reward" for the team winning the Sun Belt championship.

Idk what the best format should be under the new expansion. On one hand, having all P5 and G5 champions sounds like the simplest solution.

But the obvious problem with that is everyone would know that 2nd and 3rd place teams from the SEC and B1G would obviously be much better teams than many G5 Champs.

So I think to appease the crowd that only wants "the best" teams in, it may have to be all P5 Champs and maybe the top-ranked G5 Champ (or two). After that, all at large bids -- regardless of conference.

 

[king ward]

Those factors absolutely could help to mitigate things. But I agree with the other poster that their advantages are being compounded by the national media in an unprecedented way in this current setup. .

Besides that, the ratings have been plummeting in recent years. If there is no effort to consistently include teams from all over the country, then the rest of the country will just keep tuning out.

Excellence above all. Go away from that and it becomes whoredom to a greater extent than it already is.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Top seed gets first round bye. It’s not that hard.

So you're not throwing them all into the same pool. One is special. Since nobody plays the same schedule it would be subjective as to who was special. I thought you wanted subjectivity eliminated. I apologize if I got your take wrong.

 

[Legendary Cock]

Excellence above all. Go away from that and it becomes whoredom to a greater extent than it already is.

Professional sports as well as the NCAA Tournament and college baseball give preference to conference/division winners along with wild card/at large bids. It works very well because they understand that that the more teams (and their fans) that feel like they really have a shot at playing for a title, the more invested they are throughout the season and postseason.

Maybe it's the microwave society we live in now or maybe people are tired of the rich getting richer in college football. But people just don't want their hopes hinging on whether certain coaches retire or move on. 🤷‍♂️

 

[atl-cock]

Professional sports as well as the NCAA Tournament and college baseball give preference to conference/division winners along with wild card/at large bids. It works very well because they understand that that the more teams (and their fans) that feel like they really have a shot at playing for a title, the more invested they are throughout the season and postseason........

Precisely. That's what keeps Sun Belt members motivated. Wentzel addressed that in his December 2009 Yahoo! column.

 

[atl-cock]

I do want to add a comment regarding those who state that they're okay with a true playoff, but have reducing the regular season to 11 games as a criterion (criterion = singular of criteria). I think schools such as USC may find that problematic. My guess is that USC would lose a home game, and the associated revenue.

 

[Lurker123]

I do want to add a comment regarding those who state that they're okay with a true playoff, but have reducing the regular season to 11 games as a criterion (criterion = singular of criteria). I think schools such as USC may find that problematic. My guess is that USC would lose a home game, and the associated revenue.

This is true. Had nit even thought of that. Losing a single home game is a pretty big deal. Wonder if the increased TV revenue would offset it for teams not in the playoffs?

 

[turncock]

Excellence above all. Go away from that and it becomes whoredom to a greater extent than it already is.

It depends how you define excellence. Do you believe Kirby Smart was the best coach in the nation last year or would you look coaches that don't have the built-in advantages of UGA who excelled? Luke Fickell is one that comes to mind.

 

[atl-cock]

I do want to add a comment regarding those who state that they're okay with a true playoff, but have reducing the regular season to 11 games as a criterion (criterion = singular of criteria). I think schools such as USC may find that problematic. My guess is that USC would lose a home game, and the associated revenue.

This is true. Hadn't even thought of that. Losing a single home game is a pretty big deal. Wonder if the increased TV revenue would offset it for teams not in the playoffs?

USC usually has 7 home dates and 5 road ones.

4 of the 5 on the road are vs SEC members. The fifth is at Clemron in even numbered years, and over the past 15 years or so has usually been vs UnCarolina, NC State, East Carolina, etc. either in Charlotte or Chapel Hell, Raleigh, Greenville (NC), etc. in odd-numbered years.

4 of the 7 home dates are vs SEC. Of the remaining 3, it's hosting Clemron in odd-numbered years, and the other 2 are often FBS mid-majors or maybe 1 of the remaining 2 is vs an FCS school. In even-numbered years, 1 of the 3 might be P5 OOC, and the remaining 2 again FBS mid-major/FCS.

Given this scenario, it looks like cutting back to 11 would make us lose a home game at least every other year. Increased revenue might make up the difference. I would think USC would want to more than make up for it. And with a true playoff, the additional revenues the conference makes may very well more than make up the difference, since you're cutting out the middle man, e.g, the Sugar Bowl.

This is something the ADs, the conferences, and the NCAA most definitely would have to work through.

 

[king ward]

It depends how you define excellence. Do you believe Kirby Smart was the best coach in the nation last year or would you look coaches that don't have the built-in advantages of UGA who excelled? Luke Fickell is one that comes to mind.

It's overall excellence; comprehensive excellence. It's not cherry picking one excellent aspect.

 

[turncock]

It's overall excellence; comprehensive excellence. It's not cherry picking one excellent aspect.

Accounting for inputs that have nothing to do with the game itself would be the opposite of cherry picking. The binary view would be: Alabama=great; Vandy=terrible.

Who do you believe was the best coach in College Football in 2021 if you have one?

 

[king ward]

Accounting for inputs that have nothing to do with the game itself would be the opposite of cherry picking. The binary view would be: Alabama=great; Vandy=terrible.

Who do you believe was the best coach in College Football in 2021 if you have one?

I would have to study your first conclusion, but as to your question, I would say Nick Saban. Alabama was markedly inferior to what they have been in the past, yet they were right there at the end.