Are you ready for a playoff? 2014

[Paperback Writer]

I'm assuming you think 8 is too many? Do you think it would make the regular season significantly less...significant?

Yes, I think 8 teams is too many. But I wouldn't be totally opposed to it. The problem with another round of games is that will be difficult to pull off at neutral field bowl sites. For example, a fan base might have to travel to San Diego for the first round and then to Miami for the next round. If playoff games were played at home fields like the NFL, then I would be more in favor of 8 teams.

I'd have to go back and look, but I think most years there are not more than four teams that have a legitimate claim to a national title. Take last year for example, I'd expect the selection committee to come back with LSU, OK St., Bama, and Oregon. Now, Stanford would cry foul but that's when winning one's conference comes into play. Does Arkansas deserve another chance of beating Alabama and LSU? Given Boise St.'s schedule, do they deserve to have a shot at a NC after losing to TCU? And Kansas St. lost to both OU and OK St., anyone think the Wildcats are going to win it all??? So yes, I think an 8-team playoff could make the regular season less significant. If a team loses a couple of conference games, they might desrve a bowl game but probably not a spot in the playoffs.

[Omaha 680]

I'm assuming you think 8 is too many? Do you think it would make the regular season significantly less...significant?

I'm with PBW. 8 is too many. 4 should be plenty but I wish there could be rules in place to encourage competative scheduling. Like rewards in the selection process for winning outside your time zone or playing no more than one more home game than you play away. And FCS games should be banned or count against you.

[Jacob]

8 is barely enough.

Sincerely, every sports playoff...ever.

[Omaha 680]

8 is barely enough.

Sincerely, every sports playoff...ever.

Every regular season ever blows.

[Coach McGuirk]

Every regular season ever blows.

really? you think the NFL regular season blows and if you do, if it was only 12 games would it still blow in your mind?

[Maximus]

Yes, I think 8 teams is too many. But I wouldn't be totally opposed to it. The problem with another round of games is that will be difficult to pull off at neutral field bowl sites. For example, a fan base might have to travel to San Diego for the first round and then to Miami for the next round. If playoff games were played at home fields like the NFL, then I would be more in favor of 8 teams.

I'd have to go back and look, but I think most years there are not more than four teams that have a legitimate claim to a national title. Take last year for example, I'd expect the selection committee to come back with LSU, OK St., Bama, and Oregon. Now, Stanford would cry foul but that's when winning one's conference comes into play. Does Arkansas deserve another chance of beating Alabama and LSU? Given Boise St.'s schedule, do they deserve to have a shot at a NC after losing to TCU? And Kansas St. lost to both OU and OK St., anyone think the Wildcats are going to win it all??? So yes, I think an 8-team playoff could make the regular season less significant. If a team loses a couple of conference games, they might desrve a bowl game but probably not a spot in the playoffs.

Except with 4 there is still not a clear path to the playoffs for anyone besides a team in the 4 major conferences. Plenty of teams could still go undefeated and not make this playoff. (Was Utah in the top 4 before the bowl in 2008? 2004?)

[Omaha 680]

really? you think the NFL regular season blows and if you do, if it was only 12 games would it still blow in your mind?

Compared to CFB, absolutely. In 2008 the Giants lost at home to the undefeated Patriots to finish the season with 6 losses. They then manage to go on a run and beat them in the Super Bowl to be champions. Does the regular season really mean that much at that point?

Don't get me wrong, it can be fun and exciting at times. But compared to college football it doesn't measure up. 4 is good. The last thing I want to see is a 16 team playoff where half the SEC gets in and the first half of the season are warmup games.

[Coach McGuirk]

Compared to CFB, absolutely. In 2008 the Giants lost at home to the undefeated Patriots to finish the season with 6 losses. They then manage to go on a run and beat them in the Super Bowl to be champions. Does the regular season really mean that much at that point?

Don't get me wrong, it can be fun and exciting at times. But compared to college football it doesn't measure up. 4 is good. The last thing I want to see is a 16 team playoff where half the SEC gets in and the first half of the season are warmup games.

I don't want 16 either, but 8 out of 121 teams would be perfect and every regular season game would still count.

[Portland Ute]

I don't want 16 either, but 8 out of 121 teams would be perfect and every regular season game would still count.

[Omaha 680]

I don't want 16 either, but 8 out of 121 teams would be perfect and every regular season game would still count.

If it goes to 8 I don't think you can prevent it from going to at least 16. Conferences will want autobids, and then will complian there aren't enough atlarge spots for their comference runner ups when lesser conference champions get in. People will complain about beingleft out no matter how many teams are in. Basketball has 68 and there arebpeople saying it's unfair every year.

All I'm really concerned with in college football is that any undefeated team who made anbeffort to play a decent schedule has a shot at the title at the end. 4 accomplishes that just fine. It doesn't bother me that multiple one loss teams will be left out each year. Tjey ahouldn't have lost.

[The_Douger]

Eight is enough to not miss any undefeated teams, but still include other deserving teams. Plus, it still keeps the regular season important and interesting.

[Coach McGuirk]

If it goes to 8 I don't think you can prevent it from going to at least 16. Conferences will want autobids, and then will complian there aren't enough atlarge spots for their comference runner ups when lesser conference champions get in. People will complain about beingleft out no matter how many teams are in. Basketball has 68 and there arebpeople saying it's unfair every year.

All I'm really concerned with in college football is that any undefeated team who made anbeffort to play a decent schedule has a shot at the title at the end. 4 accomplishes that just fine. It doesn't bother me that multiple one loss teams will be left out each year. Tjey ahouldn't have lost.

Why can you stop at 4 but not 8? That reasoning doesn't make sense. Also what about in 2009 when there was 5 undefeated teams at the end of the regular season? That doesn't bode well for your hypo.

[Portland Ute]

I could see 10 with 6 teams getting first round byes while the other 4 have a first round game.

Beyond that, the regular season is compromised.

Basketball is now stretching beyond 64 and the regular season in the ACC, Big East, etc are a joke. When more than half your conference makes the post-season, then why even play a regular season.

Add to that the fact that basketball takes the tournament winner from smaller conferences over the regular season winner and regular season NCAA basketball is as close to meaningless as it can be.

DI football needs a small, concise playoff that REWARDS accomplishment in the regular season. 8 is the right number. 4 may cut out deserving programs.

16 is far too many when you really only have 4 remaining relevant conferences. That is going to put 3 sometimes 4 teams from a given conference into the playoff. Is that necessary? 2 max. If you can't finish in the top 2 of your conference, you have no business in a postseason playoff to determine a national champion.

[USUC]

I think 8 is too much. I would like to see 6, with the top two teams getting a bye.

[Omaha 680]

Why can you stop at 4 but not 8? That reasoning doesn't make sense. Also what about in 2009 when there was 5 undefeated teams at the end of the regular season? That doesn't bode well for your hypo.

Yeah I forgot about 2009. Without looking it up, I'd be willing to bet that's the only time there has ever been 5 undefeated teams since the advent of 11 game schedules. I remember thinking how extraordinary it was in 2004 when there was 4.

I don't have a good answer as to why you can stop at 4 but not 8. I guess I don't think we'll be stopping at 4 anyway.