16 team playoff isn't about

[CJHawkeyes]

16 capable winners or deserving teams. I often see playoff opponents argue that we don't need a larger playoff because there are only about four teams deserving or capable of winning in a given year and that is all the thought they place on their point. The problem is that the limited playoff is precisely why this is true if it is true. The national title race is a very exclusive competition with few exceptions to the rule. When ten schools account for more than half of the top 200 teams during a 30 year period, it doesn't indicate an open competition. A two team playoff limits parity. A 16 team playoff isn't about 16th seed winning. It is about the 16 seed building off of that opportunity to one day become one of few truly capable of winning. For example, which scenario would benefit Boise State's ability to attract recruits: Five straight playoff appearances due to five WAC titles or a Fiesta Bowl win over Oklahoma, no shot at the national title, and an opininated fifth place finish behind a couple of two-loss teams? Perhaps Boise State never becomes capable of winning it all. However, an expanded playoff makes it possible for many more teams.

Again, using my point system, 75 different schools have finished in the top 16 compared to 23 that have finished in the top 2. How can the increase in playoff opportunities for everyone not encourage greater parity and greater competition? What is so wonderful about the same 10-20 teams always competing for and winning the national title especially when they avoid each other as much as possible?

[Bucs90]

CJ you make a good point. Although parity is more relevant now, there is still an elite group of 8-10 teams. There is only so much true NFL-type talent, and that is usually concentrated in a certain core of major programs, with it sprinkled among the rest.

My personal format is a 6 team format, which I outlined in other posts. I've never argued, nor have I ever heard anyone argue, that a team who was ranked 7th or lower "shoulda" been the champion. At least not yet- I'm sure USC might get ranked 7th or 8th one day.

[CJHawkeyes]

CJ you make a good point. Although parity is more relevant now, there is still an elite group of 8-10 teams. There is only so much true NFL-type talent, and that is usually concentrated in a certain core of major programs, with it sprinkled among the rest.

My personal format is a 6 team format, which I outlined in other posts. I've never argued, nor have I ever heard anyone argue, that a team who was ranked 7th or lower "shoulda" been the champion. At least not yet- I'm sure USC might get ranked 7th or 8th one day.


I'm not sure if I would expect anyone below a six seed to ever win under my preferred format. However, it is not important that they do. I think giving everyone access to auto berth would make everyone more competitive. There might even be a nonBCS school that could be football's version of Gonzaga. Most schools have that one big year and that's it. Outside of the top 10-15 programs, going 11-1 and playing in a glorified consolation game doesn't really convince recruits that your school is a contender.

[Stumpy Stew]

I agree whole heartedly with you CJ. Just look at the other divisions. Sure App. St. is having a small dynasty right now, but before that, we started every season knowing that if we won the SoCon, we could have a shot at the national title. And every school that plays I-AA (that qualifies) has that opportunity and vision. And App has played 3 different teams for the title and even in the earlier rounds, has had a number of tough games and a few lucky wins.

A 16 team playoff let's teams like Troy St. know, that if they win their conference, they have a shot at the national title. That's what makes the NCAA Basketball tourny so good.

[FLORIDA HERD FAN]

Sometimes low-seeds actually win NCAA tournaments.

One of the best examples is Jim Valvano's 1983 Wolfpack which, with 10 regular-season losses, was the #6-seed in the West Region. The 1983 NC State national championship team would not have been included in a 16-team tournament field.

[Lincoln Tower]

I have a hard time arguing over which format is better. Any format is better than the BCS. Even the NCAA Basketball tourney gets tweaked from time to time from the 65th team to the pod system.

Once we get a playoff in place, the appropiate adjustments will be made. Just get a playoff.

[GatorGrad]

4, 8, or 16 I don't care at this point. Anything is better than just 2.

[Doc]

a playoff system that doesn't provide for every conference to have an entrant in the playoff. Nearly 50% of the teams in D1 are non-BCS teams. With apologies to the Georgia president and his 8 team scenario, you need a 16 team playoff which provides a spot for all conference champs and 5 at large teams. It would work, it would be a tremendous 4 week event and it would settle the discussion on the field. It's so simple yet they make it so hard.

[ZOOMBAG]

It's only in the brainwashed sea of Div IA college football that people even have a concept of "deserving" a post season spot. In every other team sport you win your division or conference and you go, even if you went 7-4 overall and some other team finished 9-2 but 2nd or 3rd elsewhere. In post seasons with at-larges or wild cards they usually go right down the won-loss record list and use record or points against common opponents, points for vs points against and such.

Other college playoff sports have begun to pollute and corrupt the process with brain-dead "selection committees" which makes those only a little better than Div IA football, but most of the rest use ratings like Pairwise and the RPI and just go right down the list for the at-large bids.

[ZOOMBAG]

North Carolina St in 1983 wasn't even in the top 50 RPI and won the national championship in basketball by beating Houston.... Who knows what 20th ranked team could win a title. Not likely but wild card teams occasionally win the Super Bowl.

[ZOOMBAG]

I don't see how we will get there without booting the hidebound Big 10 and Pac 10 OUT of the process like we did in 1995 with the original Bowl Coalition/Alliance...