• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

64-team College Football Playoff Bracket

I haven't looked in to any of the proposed 8 and 16 team playoffs but they involve playing all games at neutral bowl sites?
 
All of these sound wonderful but you know it will never be that simple. Plus there is that ridiculous argument that playoffs make the regular season losses meaningless (that’s funny because Auburns 14 point…almost 21 point loss to LSU turned out to be meaningless). Then you have to factor in 1 conference claiming or appearing to be tougher then other conferences in a given year. Then you have the gripe (sometimes legitimately) that schools from smaller conferences aren’t getting a fair shake.

It’s College football so it has to be convoluted, controversial, and confusing.

I’m thinking a 12 team playoff

Highest ranked 4 teams (regardless of Championship or not) get rd 1 bye and home field adv for field of final 8. Field of 4 and championship reverts back to Bowl locations.

5 major auto bids for champions of the 5 major conferences

2 (if eligible-whatever that means top 25, 1 loss etc) At large bids

then the 5 highest ranked teams according to Polls, Computers, “the Committee” and/or whatever.


1 Florida State (Auto Bid & 1st Round Bye)
2 Auburn (Auto Bid & 1st Round Bye)
3 Alabama ( last 5 in & 1st Round Bye)
4 Michigan State (Auto Bid & 1st Round Bye)

5 Stanford (Auto Bid )
6 Baylor (Auto Bid)
7 Ohio State (last 5 in)
8 Missouri (last 5 in)
9 South Carolina (last 5 in)
10 Oregon (last 5 in )
11 UCF (At Large Bid)
12 Louisville/ Fresno State (At Large Bid)
 
CheesePritchard said:
I haven't looked in to any of the proposed 8 and 16 team playoffs but they involve playing all games at neutral bowl sites?
Click to expand...

I think the first round on an eight team play off would have to be played on the home field of the higher ranked team. Otherwise that would be a lot of traveling to expect of fans. Conference championship game, then potentially 3 play off games.
 
Deacon2002 said:
Was thinking about the flawed "it's too many games" argument against a playoff last night, when I read an article about the state football championships coming up in North Carolina this weekend and saw that the teams had played 15 games each prior to the state championship. 64 teams is too many, but a 16 or maybe even a 32 team playoff would be awesome. And if 16 and 17 year old kids can play 16 games a year why can't the college guys?
Click to expand...

It's not a flawed argument. It's 5-6 extra games for the top teams with the top talent. A 64 team tournament proposal is ridiculous. This isn't hoops we're talking about. It's football where you get beat up on every play and you need at least a week to recover between games. Teams are very fortunate to get through a season without their star players unscathed. This essentially adds another half season. How many of those high school football games do you think involve going up against a whole team of college-level players with the ability to rip your head off?

4 teams is perfect, IMO. The fans and money will probably expand it to 8 teams, and maybe eventually 16, but I don't see why anybody from #5 onwards deserves a shot at all the marbles in football.

I think hoops is a lot different in terms of tournament size because there are so many competitive programs, so much room for upsets during the season, and the conference tournaments really screw things up with their automatic bids. Yet I wouldn't cry or think people got screwed over if it was still at 32 or 48 teams.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
It's not a flawed argument. It's 5-6 extra games for the top teams with the top talent. A 64 team tournament proposal is ridiculous. This isn't hoops we're talking about. It's football where you get beat up on every play and you need at least a week to recover between games. Teams are very fortunate to get through a season without their star players unscathed. This essentially adds another half season. How many of those high school football games do you think involve going up against a whole team of college-level players with the ability to rip your head off?

4 teams is perfect, IMO. The fans and money will probably expand it to 8 teams, and maybe eventually 16, but I don't see why anybody from #5 onwards deserves a shot at all the marbles in football.

I think hoops is a lot different in terms of tournament size because there are so many competitive programs, so much room for upsets during the season, and the conference tournaments really screw things up with their automatic bids. Yet I wouldn't cry or think people got screwed over if it was still at 32 or 48 teams.
Click to expand...

64 teams is silly, but the argument about too many games is silly. The lower levels do it with a lot less scholarships to add depth to their rosters.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
64 teams is silly, but the argument about too many games is silly. The lower levels do it with a lot less scholarships to add depth to their rosters.
Click to expand...

Yep, in fact games are on tonight. they expanded to 24 teams this year. You know these are all ridiculous excuses considering the fact that one of the biggest excuses forever was that a playoffs would interfere with students exam schedule and the reading period. If anyone thought that was real then NCAA should have put their money where there mouth was and killed all the bowls and end the season after week 10 like the Ivy league does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top