Just some thoughts on the playoffs

So it's no secret, I'm a Clemson fan.  Here's a couple of my thoughts about the playoff selections, whatever that's worth, probably nothing, but anyway:

 

First - so, under the current system, a premium is given to conference champions, well, most of them.  The top 4 get the top 4 seeds and an automatic bye - great.  Why is the 5th conference champion not automatically given the 5 seed?  Either we should put a premium on winning a conference championship for ALL conference championship teams, or we shouldn't give any of them any reward for winning their conference.  And for the record, I agree, Clemson didn't deserve a bye.

Second - I understand putting a value on winning a conference championship, but you do so at the expense of having the best 12 teams in the playoffs.  Isn't that what it should be about - finding out which team is the best?  You've got several inferior teams in the mix, and some much better teams left out completely.  I say give the first 4 seeds and automatic byes to the 4 highest ranked teams - conference champions or not, and give the remaining 8 seeds to the teams ranked 5-12.  And a team like Clemson, that wins a conference championship, but is clearly not one of the best 12 teams, should be left out.

Third - Is Alabama better than SMU and Boise State and AZ State and Indiana?  Yes.  However, Alabama couldn't find a way to beat Vandy, so they really have no one to blame but themselves.  Same with SC, MIA and Ole Miss.

Fourth - If the committee doesn't take into account strength of schedule, which it appears they don't, at least not with any meanful weight, then I think it's bad for college football overall.  This is especially true for the fans, because we're not going to see as many regular season big games played between highly ranked teams, which is what the fans want to see.  There's no real reason for 2 really good non-conference schools to play each other now.  Indiana played no one, except OSU, where they got destroyed, and there they are with the 10th seed.

Fifth - In my view, the college game needs to move rapidly in 1 of 2 directions:  Either get rid of conferences altogether or go back to having 8 FBS conferences, with all 8 conference champions making the playoffs, with 4 at-large teams.  With NIL and the transfer portal can of worms already opened up, getting rid of conferences is probably the way to go.

Sixth - No matter how many teams they allow into the playoffs, someone will always be the odd man out. 

Seventh - the committee is made up of 13 members, and a lot of them are current ADs, ex-coaches, etc...  Perhaps we'd be better off expanding the committee to 25 members, with at least 12 of them not having a college athletic background.  Get a stat geek from MIT, a psychology prof from Stanford, a janitor from Ball State and maybe a a diesel mechanic from Cheyenne - these people would offer every bit as valuable insight and opinion as the current committee members do.

Vanderbilt was not 'garbage' this season.  The loss to Oklahoma was far worse - only scoring 3 points.  

  The more teams added, which is coming makes it a bigger joke.  Money will be made.

The playoffs will expand to 14 or 16 in a couple seasons.  Then people will complain about not being in the top 14 or 16 (instead of the 12 today).

@benhogan76

 

You make some excellent points and I agree with most everything you say.  My personal choice would be to expand the playoff to 16 teams and eliminate the byes.  Take the 6 highest ranked conference champions and the 10 other teams with the highest ranking.  Seed them as they are ranked with #1 vs #16, #2 vs #15, etc.  First round games on the campus of the higher ranked teams.  Then use bowl games for the next 2 rounds as they do this year.  

They should have just went to 6 teams....top 2 get a bye.....beyond that is just stupid.....on top of making these kids possible play an NFL seasons worth of games....Playoff schools should definitely profit share with the kids who are gonna have to play extra for the school...

This is the MAIN REASON Alabama is NOT in the playoff..........

And the Sooners were below .500 when they played if I remember correctly.

 

@bluecompass

 You are not feeling too excited about playing my pissed off Longhorns in Austin, eh...;) You guys have a good team...with probably the better QB on the field for the 1st round...Ewers and some of Sark's play calling kept us from going undefeated...Dabo has a chip on his shoulders, and the Tigers will come to play...It should be a good game. 

@bluecompass

 Liked what you had to say except

1) The SEC getting only 3 teams in the playoff is the biggest joke since Joe Biden was elected. Easily the strongest conference in the country and Oregon is an SEC designed team. Lanning learned from Smart who learned everything he knows from Saban. As you correctly pointed out - Bama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina would all be favored over SMU and Indiana.  

2) Notre Dame should be banned completely until they join a conference. Why do they continue to get such a pass? If somehow they were a number one ranked team they would not have to play in a championship game AND they would get a bye. How is that fair?

Just my 2 cents....

If you agree it's bad for college football to not take into account enough SOS then that completely contradicts and rightly so your point that Alabama shouldn't be in..listen my friend, I've seen your Clemson team,Miami, SMU, Louisville, your whole conference is in totality light years behind the SEC..so Alabama lost to Vandy, hey South Carolina beat you at home..how do you think you and SMU would have done playing Alabama's schedule? 

This whole system is a joke, let the top12 teams get in and I don't care if 4 or 5 are from 1 Conference..maybe have a cap for that but you saw what you're real value is vs Georgia..And then the #1 seed plays the winner of the 8/9 game, Tenn/Ohio State? While ASU gets a bye? Are they the 4th best team in the country? These idiots thought they could create a March Madness deal, are you in a pool this week? Idiots..at least that committee seeds the 4 best teams #1 regardless of how many are from 1 Conference

When they expanded the CFP to 12 teams the feeling was that the Power Four conference champs would own the top four seeds. They threw a bone to the G5 schools, thinking NO WAY would their top conference winner be any better than a 12 seed. I'm laughing my ass off at the arrogance of the powers that be! They've done everything humanly possible to widen the divide between the haves and have nots, with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. No doubt in my mind there will be a "Boise State" rule on the horizon, but I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of this moment while it lasts! 

 The SOS argument either has to be considered all season or not at all. Why was SMU ranked so high if they really didn't think they were as good as bama? Maybe they looked at bama playing Mercer in week 10 & thought "hmmm, if they played 9 conf. games they might have 4 losses." Some sec teams play a tough opponent OOC, others don't. Their records get artificially inflated by only playing 8 conf. games.

 I also don't agree with who gets a bye. I can see a conf. champ getting an auto bid, but if they're not ranked in the top 4 don't give them top 4 treatment.

Appears to be a conflict. Say should go to 8 conferences w champs getting auto bids but in other parts says it should be based on rankings regardless of whether conf champs. In my view, the rankings r a joke and based reputation and the NFL draft. The whole purpose of the playoff system is to show it on field. Yes everyone thinks The SEC is the best but other than playing the ACC where have they shown it on the field. Who has Penn St beat etc. 4 power conferences. Each designate 2 teams and then the jokers at ESPN can pick the last 4. If yur not in a power 4 conference then get in 1 or become 1. Even Saban acknowledged if you can’t come in the top 3 teams in yur conference then u don’t deserve to be in a natl playoff.

@bluecompass

 Why didn't they take into account strength of schedule? Alabama lost 3 games. SMU 2. Does the team with the hardest sos get to lose 5 games and not be punished? Not to mention strength of schedule is also subjective as we see different rankings.The SEC and Acc had inherent advantages in Sos because they only play 8 conference games. Right off the bat they each had 8 less losses because in a conference game there is one win and one loss attributed to the conference. They need to mandate a number of conference games like 9 or 10. They also need to mandate a power 4 game to make sos make sense. 11-2 Mercer is not as good as 11-2 SMU. AS FAR AS SOS cares it is.