What's your best argument against expanding the CFP to eight teams? (Poll!)

[SeabeeGator]

And your statement was that LSU playing "on another planet". I said no, they are playing like the #1 team in the country usually does (that's why they're ranked #1). I'll let you in on a little secret - I don't follow moving goal posts, so don't bother.
8 teams are going to get you shytty games. That's not debatable.
And it's going to get 2 maybe 3 SEC teams which will mean redundant rematches.
As a Gator fan looking out for the best interest of the Gators I don't want it. Wining the SEC is going to get us #1 or #2 most years. I'd rather go straight to the NC than play two stupid playoff games. Personally I'd take my chances that we don't get that #1 or #2 ranking. Instead we do have a 4 team playoff so for all you participation trophy fans when we don't get #1 or #2 then we get in via the playoffs.

Lol I love that - the old “moving goal post” argument because you know you’re wrong. The reason you go to 8 is precisely because of the rankings - its subjective and prone to errors. As we’ve seen consistently with the supposed best team never winning the playoff. More teams means less human error until you hit the point of diminishing returns. You’re about to see another example of human error in the Clemson game - the #3 team is going to wax the #2 team. I guarantee you that you would have to wait a while before you saw a straight seeded bracket - there would always be upsets because of the humans are ranking teams that rarely play.

But you’re right about redundant games - they would happen but rarely more than a rematch due to divisions. Possible but not common. Y’all are using this year as a litmus test when history doesn’t support your arguments.

 

[SeabeeGator]

Outside of just having more games to watch, what are the drawbacks to the current model? That’s what I’ve yet to see answered. We have never had more than 3 teams that were truly considered NC caliber teams all trying to get in, which is why I’m good with the 4. But I don’t see any tangible benefits to expanding. And the drawbacks look horrific.

Reduces human error that is rampant. Can’t even get the #1 team right. How do we know #4 is right most years? Most years have multiple teams with similar records vying for that last spot but only one gets it - and we know that #4s can win it all. Just don’t agree man. I would agree that 16 is ridiculous because its past the point of diminishing returns.

 

[ThreatMatrix]

Lol I love that - the old “moving goal post” argument because you know you’re wrong. The reason you go to 8 is precisely because of the rankings - its subjective and prone to errors. As we’ve seen consistently with the supposed best team never winning the playoff. More teams means less human error until you hit the point of diminishing returns. You’re about to see another example of human error in the Clemson game - the #3 team is going to wax the #2 team. I guarantee you that you would have to wait a while before you saw a straight seeded bracket - there would always be upsets because of the humans are ranking teams that rarely play.

But you’re right about redundant games - they would happen but rarely more than a rematch due to divisions. Possible but not common. Y’all are using this year as a litmus test when history doesn’t support your arguments.

Not using this year, using about 40 years. After the top 2, occasionally top 4. the field drops way the fck off. That's where the diminishing returns are.
And again I don't give a shyt about anybody but us. And wining the SEC gets us a shot at the NC game more often than not. Playoffs are superfluous

 

[soflagator]

Redundant games, players sitting out games like the Iron Bowl/UF-fsu, etc., garbage teams getting in because of the automatic birth, and an absolute nightmare every year trying to determine who are teams 5-8, from a group of about 6 teams with near identical resumes(subjectivity, bias, etc).

That’s a lot to swallow so we can get a few extra games.

 

[SeabeeGator]

Not using this year, using about 40 years. After the top 2, occasionally top 4. the field drops way the fck off. That's where the diminishing returns are.
And again I don't give a shyt about anybody but us. And wining the SEC gets us a shot at the NC game more often than not. Playoffs are superfluous

Without the BCS and playoffs writers would still be awarding Big 10 teams championships. Those were the best things that happened to the SEC. Expand it more and it increases the SEC strangle hold. Heck, we might’ve had a shot this year. Only losses were at a neutral site to #5 and away at #1 - and we were competitive in both.

 

[SeabeeGator]

Redundant games, players sitting out games like the Iron Bowl/UF-fsu, etc., garbage teams getting in because of the automatic birth, and an absolute nightmare every year trying to determine who are teams 5-8, from a group of about 6 teams with near identical resumes(subjectivity, bias, etc).

That’s a lot to swallow so we can get a few extra games.

I’m fine with disagreeing. We don’t know the model so the auto bids isn’t foregone. We’ve had years where multiple 1 loss teams could claim the 4 spot and 4 seeds have won - so who knows, maybe one of those left out teams was really best? You’re stretching to make an argument by highlighting everything that might go wrong. How about the fact that the potentially best team might not have a shot? Not the case this year but definitely a possibility in other years.

 

[t-gator]

Oklahoma getting it pushed in is a prime example of why we don't need expand the freakin playoffs.

 

[78]

After tonight I think we’ve got a pretty good case for contraction to three with the top seed getting a bye for week one.

 

[JCTow]

I’d be ok with a 6 or 8 team playoff ONLY if it was really the 6/8 best teams. Oklahoma went 12-1 and won their conference champ game. You can’t convince me they are 1 of the 6-8best teams in the country. I’d put bama, Auburn, hell even us in their in front of Oklahoma (I’m excluding UGAy for obvious reasons) I think the pac 12 shouldn’t be a power 5 conference. Switch the the AAC or whatever the fook it is and that would help.

 

[GatorJB]

Lol I love that - the old “moving goal post” argument because you know you’re wrong. The reason you go to 8 is precisely because of the rankings - its subjective and prone to errors. As we’ve seen consistently with the supposed best team never winning the playoff. More teams means less human error until you hit the point of diminishing returns. You’re about to see another example of human error in the Clemson game - the #3 team is going to wax the #2 team. I guarantee you that you would have to wait a while before you saw a straight seeded bracket - there would always be upsets because of the humans are ranking teams that rarely play.

But you’re right about redundant games - they would happen but rarely more than a rematch due to divisions. Possible but not common. Y’all are using this year as a litmus test when history doesn’t support your arguments.

Most of the teams ranked 5-8 with the exception of 2-loss Oregon already lost to one of the top 4 teams. I've said this before, but the conference championships already sufficiently act like first-round playoff games. Adding more playoff games essentially gives the losers of the first round a second chance, while the winners don't get that luxury.

The purpose of expanding to a 4 team playoff was to ensure that the two best teams had a chance to play for the title. Mission accomplished. Expanding to 8 teams is pointless.

 

[GatorJB]

How about the fact that the potentially best team might not have a shot? Not the case this year but definitely a possibility in other years.

That's not a fact at all. Please name a team and year where the best team in the country wasn't ranked in the top 4. And I'll laugh if you say UCF two years ago.

The two best teams are in at least the top 4 every year. You may disagree, but I've never seen a serious debate that says otherwise.

 

[Swamp Donkey]

After tonight I think we’ve got a pretty good case for contraction to three with the top seed getting a bye for week one.

Two was fine.

Four is usually way to many.

 

[Swamp Donkey]

This just boils down to a couple of azzhats being unable to accept losses. They know we will never win in October yet they some how think doing it again in January will make a difference.

There is no logic to it. It is their delusion and you arent going to change their mind.

 

[SeabeeGator]

That's not a fact at all. Please name a team and year where the best team in the country wasn't ranked in the top 4. And I'll laugh if you say UCF two years ago.

The two best teams are in at least the top 4 every year. You may disagree, but I've never seen a serious debate that says otherwise.

Lol the very first one. OSU, a one loss #4 seed wins it all. Baylor and TCU were both one loss teams that many felt earned the spot over OSU. No telling if either of those teams could’ve won but we’ll never know because they didn’t get a shot. What we do know is that NOONE gave OSU a shot but they still won it after controversially getting into the playoff.

2017 is another example. All 4 teams that made it were 1 loss teams. Bama got in and won it even without a conference championship. OSU was a two loss 5 and Wisconsin was a 1 loss 6. Both had arguments to get in over Bama but Bama got the nod and won it all. Of the 6 playoffs so far, that two solid examples.

 

[-THE DUDE-]

My argument is to make a playoffs of conference champs and 2 wildcards. Nobody complains about a blowout in the NFL playoffs...**** happens and just because there are some blowouts doesn’t mean the playoffs shouldn’t be expanded.

 

[Gator By Marriage]

FTR I voted for leave it $%@# alone, but actually I’m starting to wonder if expanding it to 8 would make the semis more compelling. Thus far the Clemson-OSU game is must see TV, whereas LSU-Okie was over early. A fifth seed team might have beaten Okie and made a better game (though watching LSU maybe not).
The other question of course is why not a larger tourney style championship when it works for D3, D2, & D1-FCS?

 

[GatorJB]

If

Lol the very first one. OSU, a one loss #4 seed wins it all. Baylor and TCU were both one loss teams that many felt earned the spot over OSU. No telling if either of those teams could’ve won but we’ll never know because they didn’t get a shot. What we do know is that NOONE gave OSU a shot but they still won it after controversially getting into the playoff.

2017 is another example. All 4 teams that made it were 1 loss teams. Bama got in and won it even without a conference championship. OSU was a two loss 5 and Wisconsin was a 1 loss 6. Both had arguments to get in over Bama but Bama got the nod and won it all. Of the 6 playoffs so far, that two solid examples.

Baylor and TCU didn't get a shot because they didn't play anyone good outside of their conference and didn't have a conference championship. Of those two teams, TCU (who lost to Baylor) may have had the better chance to win it all, but it's doubtful they would have. You're right that we'll never know, but most the country never seriously thought they were legitimately the best team in the country.

No one outside of a few people in the Big 10 thought Ohio St or Wisconsin were better than Bama (who was ranked 1 most of the year) in 2017, especially after the bowl games.

I see what you mean, but I think the chances of crappy or redundant games are much much higher with an 8 team playoff than the best team in the country getting left out. The current system is more than sufficient.

 

[Gator By Marriage]

You know @Swamp Donkey , your predictability is starting to become dull.

 

[SeabeeGator]

If


Baylor and TCU didn't get a shot because they didn't play anyone good outside of their conference and didn't have a conference championship. Of those two teams, TCU (who lost to Baylor) may have had the better chance to win it all, but it's doubtful they would have. You're right that we'll never know, but most the country never seriously thought they were legitimately the best team in the country.

No one outside of a few people in the Big 10 thought Ohio St or Wisconsin were better than Bama (who was ranked 1 most of the year) in 2017, especially after the bowl games.

I see what you mean, but I think the chances of crappy or redundant games are much much higher with an 8 team playoff than the best team in the country getting left out. The current system is more than sufficient.

Think about your arguments against in both cases. Pure opinion based. The same people who said TCU and Baylor had no shot also thought OSU was going to be an afterthought. Expand it, remove that subjectivity - or at east to a point that makes sense. 6 might be the right number but byes seem unfair.

 

[Swamp Donkey]

You know @Swamp Donkey , your predictability is starting to become dull.

Ox says I cant threaten to kill people who advocate fvkking up college football.