Is the CFP ranking process flawed?

[YoloinOhio]

This is an interesting 9 minutes if you are a fan of CFB

 

 

[row_33]

Nothing will ever make everyone happy

 

the problem is they take so much time off between the last game and the bowl games, interest is lost and the NFL gears down to meaningful games 

 

 

[Fadingpain]

I agree with him that the Big 10 is almost undervalued as a competitive division.  Top to bottom, it's one of the toughest divisions in the country and it's been that way for many years. 

 

I'm not sure how to devise a perfect ranking system.

 

 

[wppete]

We need an 8 team playoff. 

[Bill from NYC]

6 hours ago, wppete said:

We need an 8 team playoff. 

Perhaps but if that happens, fans of lesser teams will scream until there are 64 playoff spots.

 

If they do expand the playoffs (and I am unsure where I stand on this),  they really need to do away with conference championships. 

 

Jmo.

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by Bill from NYC

[H2o]

7 hours ago, wppete said:

We need an 8 team playoff. 

This is my thought. People will still squabble about the last couple of spots in, but I think an 8 team playoff is what they should do. Like noted by others, people will always find a reason to complain. I think 8 teams is about as deep as you can go without a wide disparity between talent making the games of no consequence anyway. It also would only drag out about a month if you take two weeks between the semi's and final. Start the weekend after Christmas with the 1st Round, 2nd the following week, and then 2 weeks later have the Championship game. 

[PromoTheRobot]

Of course it's flawed. Every single FBS school should have at least a path to the national championship, like in basketball. If I ran things I'd have every conference champion in the playoffs plus one will card. 8 teams. I don't care if you think your team is better than the Sun Belt or MAC champ. Your team should have won it's conference. Case closed. No arguments.

[KD in CA]

1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Of course it's flawed. Every single FBS school should have at least a path to the national championship, like in basketball. If I ran things I'd have every conference champion in the playoffs plus one will card. 8 teams. I don't care if you think your team is better than the Sun Belt or MAC champ. Your team should have won it's conference. Case closed. No arguments.

 

Yes.  Unless of course you're Alabama, in which case you should be given an automatic bid even if you finish 3d in your conference because you're still the 'best' team.

[row_33]

One game is needed 19 of 20 years

 

in the rare event a third team has a cause have a 2/3 playin to meet the best, Auburn had a case a few years back undefeated and lost out to undefeated USC and Oklahoma?

 

Most of the games aren’t entertaining, the blue chips don’t want to risk injury 

 

enough already

 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by row_33

[Bill from NYC]

3 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

Yes.  Unless of course you're Alabama, in which case you should be given an automatic bid even if you finish 3d in your conference because you're still the 'best' team.

Or  a certain team which is not in a conference?

[Cynical]

On 11/4/2018 at 10:38 AM, PromoTheRobot said:

Of course it's flawed. Every single FBS school should have at least a path to the national championship, like in basketball. If I ran things I'd have every conference champion in the playoffs plus one will card. 8 teams. I don't care if you think your team is better than the Sun Belt or MAC champ. Your team should have won it's conference. Case closed. No arguments.

 

Every system is flawed. Every argument is flawed. Even yours.

Let's start with:

"If I ran things I'd have every conference champion in the playoffs plus one will card. 8 teams."

5 P5 conferences + 5 G5 conferences = 10 teams

1 wild card

 

Basic math: 10+1 = 11. Try again.

 

[Cynical]

On 11/3/2018 at 10:52 AM, YoloinOhio said:

This is an interesting 9 minutes if you are a fan of CFB

 

 

 

So, the SEC is over rated, the ACC is over rated, the BIG10 in under rated, and it's the ACC's fault.

 

Reality check. Klatt has argued for using 2-3 different committees.

If he has a problem with confirmation bias and influential bias, how does adding more committees eliminate that?

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, Cynical said:

 

Every system is flawed. Every argument is flawed. Even yours.

Let's start with:

"If I ran things I'd have every conference champion in the playoffs plus one will card. 8 teams."

5 P5 conferences + 5 G5 conferences = 10 teams

1 wild card

 

Basic math: 10+1 = 11. Try again.

 

 

You got me. So you seed them and give byes to the top seeds.  My point is the CFP is still a beauty contest until the path is open to every FBS program.

Edited November 5, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[May Day 10]

I think 12 teams would be adequate and amazing.

 

10 Conferences.  Take the winners of the power 5 conferences, as well as the ACC, Mountain West.  Sun Belt, MAC, and C-USA would need a compelling criteria to qualify as a Conference Champion.  Like undefeated, or 1 or 2 losses with a challenging out of conference schedule.

 

Then fill-in with as many teams as the top 10 allows.

 

Right now, I would go with (shooting from the hip)

 

East: 

6 Buffalo/Ohio (or UAB) (or Troy)

3 Georgia

 

5 UCF

4 West Virginia (or LSU)

 

Byes:

2 Michigan

1 Clemson

 

 

West:

6 Utah State

3 Oklahoma

 

5 Washington State

4 Ohio State

 

Byes:

2 Notre Dame

1 Alabama

[Bfanlc]

Why not just have a play in game? The fourth team vs say UCF this year for example? Whoever wins gets in. There is no need to change anything really because the ccommittees gotten it right every year. It should always be about who the best teams are. Not just because the pac 12 team won its conference championship and some other team didn't. Further I'm against an 8 team playoff or a ten team playoff because it devalues regular season games. If you like playoffs go watch the NFL, leave college football alone. 

[May Day 10]

I would argue that a wider playoff field increases the value of more regular season games.

 

 

Now, you might have a monster game every week or so, while other teams in or near the top 4 just need to hold serve against, say Northwestern or Florida State.

 

With a 12 team field where you open spots to other conferences, the Buffalo/Ohio game next week has national implications and interest.  Every game in tight division races would be huge.  Houston Cougars are looking to hold their Division, and get their chance at UCF and get into the tournament.  West Virginia and Oklahoma would be on pins and needles every game, instead of just hoping one or 2 of 4 or 5 teams slip up in the last few weeks.  Pitt and Va Tech this weekend would be a big game

[Bill from NYC]

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 9:25 AM, May Day 10 said:

I would argue that a wider playoff field increases the value of more regular season games.

 

 

Now, you might have a monster game every week or so, while other teams in or near the top 4 just need to hold serve against, say Northwestern or Florida State.

 

With a 12 team field where you open spots to other conferences, the Buffalo/Ohio game next week has national implications and interest.  Every game in tight division races would be huge.  Houston Cougars are looking to hold their Division, and get their chance at UCF and get into the tournament.  West Virginia and Oklahoma would be on pins and needles every game, instead of just hoping one or 2 of 4 or 5 teams slip up in the last few weeks.  Pitt and Va Tech this weekend would be a big game

How many games do you think these unpaid college students should have to play in a season? 16? 20? Every extra game gives many of them just that much more risk of losing millions in the NFL.

I think that even without expansion, conference title games should be eliminated. The team that wins the title this season will have played 15 games, which imo is too many. And what would be the justification? Allowing mediocre at best teams a chance to be in a playoff?

Sorry, I think that expansion might be a bad idea.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Bill from NYC

[Lofton80]

It is a better system than the previous one. I think the eventual winner is the best team be it Alabama, Clemson, Florida St or Oklahoma over the last 10 years. The teams ending up at the 5 and 6 positions squawk about the system but they are unlikely to win out.     

[Bill from NYC]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 11:00 AM, row_33 said:

 

the problem is they take so much time off between the last game and the bowl games, interest is lost and the NFL gears down to meaningful games 

 

 

The above doesn't seem to be a problem for everyone.

[Bfanlc]

On 11/6/2018 at 8:25 AM, May Day 10 said:

I would argue that a wider playoff field increases the value of more regular season games.

A wider playoff field allows you to lose games and still get in. That devalues games. If the players start thinking hey we can lose this game and still get in do you think they will try as hard? As it is now every game a team plays is important until you lose multiple games. You want to make the playoffs, dont lose, and play some good teams.