Current Playoff format

[CC Mac]

I read that the current format is to be used next year as well.
Then they will reevaluate and make changes accordingly.
I’ve also read they are considering changing the selection process because of the first round ‘blowouts’ this year.
First of all who is to say next years first round games won’t be more competitive? You can’t go making drastic changes based on one year.
Secondly if they do change the process that will mean more SEC teams thanks to Kiffen,Saban and Finebaum’s continuous whining.
Not a Michigan fan at all but I would love to see them beat Alabama.

 

[OpenWheels]

Hopefully the B1G Ten reps will fight for the B1G, without throwing everybody else except the big three or four in the B1G under the bus.

Hopefully there will be reps for Indiana, laughing their ass off and ridiculing anybody on the committee who claim that Indiana wasn't clearly one of the ten best teams in the country.
,

 

[OpenWheels]

Also, we didn't exactly get 'blown out' even with a tough road draw. They must mean the other teams.

 

[CC Mac]

Also, we didn't exactly get 'blown out' even with a tough road draw. They must mean the other teams.

That why I but blow out in parentheses

 

[Irregulars]

I read that the current format is to be used next year as well.
Then they will reevaluate and make changes accordingly.
I’ve also read they are considering changing the selection process because of the first round ‘blowouts’ this year.
First of all who is to say next years first round games won’t be more competitive? You can’t go making drastic changes based on one year.
Secondly if they do change the process that will mean more SEC teams thanks to Kiffen,Saban and Finebaum’s continuous whining.
Not a Michigan fan at all but I would love to see them beat Alabama.

I don't think there should be any seating. Just the same formate only take the top 12 as they appear in the final "top 25" ranking. Priority ranking conference winners is what screwed this all up. And I know that makes conference championship worthless but they are only really played as a money maker.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

Someone posted the other week that the score differential is only like 1 pt higher than the average over the last 10 years in the previous playoffs.

The blowouts aren't different than in years past when it was 4 team playoffs. Just SEC babies making a stink because their pride and joys lost multiple games this year.

 

[CC Mac]

Someone posted the other week that the score differential is only like 1 pt higher than the average over the last 10 years in the previous playoffs.

Much complaining about nothing.

There have been many blowouts in the 4 team format but the SEC fanboys don’t want to talk about that.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

There have been many blowouts in the 4 team format but the SEC fanboys don’t want to talk about that.

Likely don't want to talk about Tennessee getting blown out either.

If they really want to reduce blowouts and not just succumb to SEC whiny babies, then quit with the home games. That is likely the biggest change that could be made to reduce score differentials.

 

[CC Mac]

Likely don't want to talk about Tennessee getting blown out either.

If they really want to reduce blowouts and not just succumb to SEC whiny babies, then quit with the home games. That is likely the biggest change that could be made to reduce score differentials.

I said way before IU got beat that there should not be any home games.
If you make the playoffs you should not have to go on the road to play a game,they all need to be played on a neutral field with tickets split 50/50.

 

[DANC]

I read that the current format is to be used next year as well.
Then they will reevaluate and make changes accordingly.
I’ve also read they are considering changing the selection process because of the first round ‘blowouts’ this year.
First of all who is to say next years first round games won’t be more competitive? You can’t go making drastic changes based on one year.
Secondly if they do change the process that will mean more SEC teams thanks to Kiffen,Saban and Finebaum’s continuous whining.
Not a Michigan fan at all but I would love to see them beat Alabama.

Another interesting game should be S. Carolina v Illinois.

 

[CC Mac]

Another interesting game should be S. Carolina v Illinois.

Yes,I forgot about that one.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

Likely don't want to talk about Tennessee getting blown out either.

If they really want to reduce blowouts and not just succumb to SEC whiny babies, then quit with the home games. That is likely the biggest change that could be made to reduce score differentials.

As evidenced by the blowouts prior to this year? When no home games were played? LOL

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

I said way before IU got beat that there should not be any home games.
If you make the playoffs you should not have to go on the road to play a game,they all need to be played on a neutral field with tickets split 50/50.

Just like the NFL right? lol

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

I read that the current format is to be used next year as well.
Then they will reevaluate and make changes accordingly.
I’ve also read they are considering changing the selection process because of the first round ‘blowouts’ this year.
First of all who is to say next years first round games won’t be more competitive? You can’t go making drastic changes based on one year.
Secondly if they do change the process that will mean more SEC teams thanks to Kiffen,Saban and Finebaum’s continuous whining.
Not a Michigan fan at all but I would love to see them beat Alabama.

They are discussing not giving auto byes for next year. It would have to be unanimously approved to go into effect next year. That’s the only possible change for next year.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

As evidenced by the blowouts prior to this year? When no home games were played? LOL

going to home games for 1st round likely more than accounts for the 1 pt difference this year.

so in your opinion, there is no benefit to having a home game when it comes to the score?

You're about as dumb as they come.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

going to home games for 1st round likely more than accounts for the 1 pt difference this year.

so in your opinion, there is no benefit to having a home game when it comes to the score?

You're about as dumb as they come.

ABSOLUTELY! That 1pt difference in a 4 game analysis versus 20 or so data points from the 4-team playoff.

When I watch a game I definitely feel like 1 point is the make or break between a good game and a blowout.

 

[DANC]

Yes,I forgot about that one.

Iowa and Missouri tied in the 2nd qtr.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Someone posted the other week that the score differential is only like 1 pt higher than the average over the last 10 years in the previous playoffs.

The blowouts aren't different than in years past when it was 4 team playoffs. Just SEC babies making a stink because their pride and joys lost multiple games this year.

8-4 Texas A&M loses to 6-6 USC on a neutral field: hmmmmmmmm...... Something tells me they wouldn't have done any better than Tennessee at the horseshit and definitely wouldn't have done any better at Notre Dame. But, what do I know......

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Iowa and Missouri tied in the 2nd qtr.

We have another mighty SEC team, 9-3 Mizzou, that is losing 21-14 at the half to a 8-4 Big Ten team. Lane Kiffin's words of wisdom just become more and more meaningful as time passes: what a sage.

 

[red hornet]

Unfortunately, Missouri came back to win, 27-24.

 

[DANC]

Unfortunately, Missouri came back to win, 27-24.

That great Iowa offense really came through, didn't it?

 

[mattndallas]

I said way before IU got beat that there should not be any home games.
If you make the playoffs you should not have to go on the road to play a game,they all need to be played on a neutral field with tickets split 50/50.

If next year the first four are blowouts again for the home team...might need to adjust. I mean, we had to play @ Notre Dame NOT because of some well-defined tie-breaker, but because of a beauty contest. That blows.

I'd still try and make it as "regional" as I could...at a neutral site. For instance, this year I would have flipped SMU and Clemson and had:

OSU v Tennessee @ Commenwealth or Bengals
ND v IU @ Lucas Oil
PSU v Clemson @ Blacksburg
TEX v SMU @ Waco or College Station

I'm assuming locales like Blacksburg or Waco would LOVE the added tourist love...would be kinda like the old NCAA's where the games were more regional, at mostly college venues, but still neutral.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

If next year the first four are blowouts again for the home team...might need to adjust. I mean, we had to play @ Notre Dame NOT because of some well-defined tie-breaker, but because of a beauty contest. That blows.

I'd still try and make it as "regional" as I could...at a neutral site. For instance, this year I would have flipped SMU and Clemson and had:

OSU v Tennessee @ Commenwealth or Bengals
ND v IU @ Lucas Oil
PSU v Clemson @ Blacksburg
TEX v SMU @ Waco or College Station

I'm assuming locales like Blacksburg or Waco would LOVE the added tourist love...would be kinda like the old NCAA's where the games were more regional, at mostly college venues, but still neutral.

12 day window isn’t gonna work to pivot to a location based on matchups.

 

[BattleCreekHoosier]

If next year the first four are blowouts again for the home team...might need to adjust. I mean, we had to play @ Notre Dame NOT because of some well-defined tie-breaker, but because of a beauty contest. That blows.

I'd still try and make it as "regional" as I could...at a neutral site. For instance, this year I would have flipped SMU and Clemson and had:

OSU v Tennessee @ Commenwealth or Bengals
ND v IU @ Lucas Oil
PSU v Clemson @ Blacksburg
TEX v SMU @ Waco or College Station

I'm assuming locales like Blacksburg or Waco would LOVE the added tourist love...would be kinda like the old NCAA's where the games were more regional, at mostly college venues, but still neutral.

Under the system as it was this year, I don't think Notre Dame would ever agree to play IU in Indy.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

Under the system as it was this year, I don't think Notre Dame would ever agree to play IU in Indy.

They wouldn’t have a choice if it were predetermined.

 

[mattndallas]

12 day window isn’t gonna work to pivot to a location based on matchups.

Why not?

No one knew where they were playing. Find a venue/school/town that is cool with bringing Taylor Swift to town on a week's notice. They'll make it work. It pays.

 

[mattndallas]

They wouldn’t have a choice if it were predetermined.

Exactly.

What are they gonna do? Opt out?

We gave up home field (which if you were there, was LEGIT) over a beauty contest.

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

If next year the first four are blowouts again for the home team...might need to adjust. I mean, we had to play @ Notre Dame NOT because of some well-defined tie-breaker, but because of a beauty contest. That blows.

I'd still try and make it as "regional" as I could...at a neutral site. For instance, this year I would have flipped SMU and Clemson and had:

OSU v Tennessee @ Commenwealth or Bengals
ND v IU @ Lucas Oil
PSU v Clemson @ Blacksburg
TEX v SMU @ Waco or College Station

I'm assuming locales like Blacksburg or Waco would LOVE the added tourist love...would be kinda like the old NCAA's where the games were more regional, at mostly college venues, but still neutral.

The committee favored historical powers ND, OSU, Penn St., and Texas, and they liked their stadiums: it is that simple why they got home games. There was no significant difference between teams 5-12, and there would be even less of a difference if the conference winners didn't get a bye. Could you imagine this happening in the Sweet 16 of the college basketball tourney? If the committee was really interested in a fair fight instead of a beauty contest, then the games would have been at a neutral spot and fans would have had equal access to tickets.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

The committee favored historical powers ND, OSU, Penn St., and Texas, and they liked their stadiums: it is that simple why they got home games. There was no significant difference between teams 5-12, and there would be even less of a difference if the conference winners didn't get a bye. Could you imagine this happening in the Sweet 16 of the college basketball tourney? If the committee was really interested in a fair fight instead of a beauty contest, then the games would have been at a neutral spot and fans would have had equal access to tickets.

You seriously think there was no significant difference between us and Ohio state?

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

You seriously think there was no significant difference between us and Ohio state?

Ask Michigan. Cig has beat UM as many times as Day has. What happens if IU plays OSU at home instead of the horseshit? OSU does have more 4* and 5* players, but so does UM. They call it home field advantage for a reason.

IU played ND. IU lost to #2 OSU at the horseshit, and ND lost to a MAC school. Why does ND deserve a home game? SOS was basically identical.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

Ask Michigan. Cig has beat UM as many times as Day has. What happens if IU plays OSU at home instead of the horseshit? OSU does have more 4* and 5* players, but so does UM.

So NIU was better than us?

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

So NIU was better than us?

Did IU lose to a MAC school? Is that what IU needed to do to qualify for a home game?

 

[C_Point]

Responding to the comments regarding home field. Agreed. IMO home field is the primary determining factor between a close game and a blowout. If the committee wants better TV games, get rid of home field. However, I think the home college atmosphere views much better, generates more electricity than neutral sites do which is better for TV. And it gives the high seed a benefit for having the better record, which I also agree with.

 

[82hoosier]

I read that the current format is to be used next year as well.
Then they will reevaluate and make changes accordingly.
I’ve also read they are considering changing the selection process because of the first round ‘blowouts’ this year.
First of all who is to say next years first round games won’t be more competitive? You can’t go making drastic changes based on one year.
Secondly if they do change the process that will mean more SEC teams thanks to Kiffen,Saban and Finebaum’s continuous whining.
Not a Michigan fan at all but I would love to see them beat Alabama.

Everybody outside of Tuscaloosa will be cheering for Michigan.

 

[Army88]

Current CFP stinks.
Follow the $$$!
The Primary reason for the Home games in Large, full Stadiums Is $$$.
Fairness was probably not even listed as a consideration, or at least not in top 10.
They somehow ended up with what is the optimal, 8 team playoff.
But, 2 of the BYE teams did not earn the status/right for a bye.
If there had just been 8 teams, starting with 4 bowl games (Without the ludicrous “play-in” games), 2 deserving teams (Indiana and Tennessee) would have been in neutral bowl/playoff games, rather than unfair conditions.
If the $$$ make it necessary to still go with 12 teams and home games, there needs to be significant “fairness” changes.
1. Designate 4 non-college Stadiums for the 1st round games with equal tickets to both teams. OR:
2. Visiting teams allowed at least 30% of tickets at face value.
3. If they insist that Conference Champs are given special consideration,
they should be seeded according to final CFP rankings. No “byes” just for winning a conference. IMO, only guarantee 4 conference champs in 8 team playoff, 5 if 12 team, but seed according to rank.

 

[Army88]

Responding to the comments regarding home field. Agreed. IMO home field is the primary determining factor between a close game and a blowout. If the committee wants better TV games, get rid of home field. However, I think the home college atmosphere views much better, generates more electricity than neutral sites do which is better for TV. And it gives the high seed a benefit for having the better record, which I also agree with.

If home games are inevitable:
IMO, Home Field advantage definitely contributed significantly to the 1%st round blowouts.
Close, competitive games leads to better TV. Blow-outs are Not good TV.
Concessions and parking revenue, home stadium routines for players and fans, with local commerce benefit is enough reward for the higher seeded home teams.
Allow the visitors enough tickets to ease the noise.

 

[BattleCreekHoosier]

They wouldn’t have a choice if it were predetermined.

I don't think that's true? I read somewhere before the brackets were set for this year, that the committee wanted to match up IU with OSU instead of Notre Dame & IU said no to that. I don't have a link to back that up, I just remember reading it.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

I don't think that's true? I read somewhere before the brackets were set for this year, that the committee wanted to match up IU with OSU instead of Notre Dame & IU said no to that. I don't have a link to back that up, I just remember reading it.

No. Absolutely not.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

If home games are inevitable:
IMO, Home Field advantage definitely contributed significantly to the 1%st round blowouts.
Close, competitive games leads to better TV. Blow-outs are Not good TV.
Concessions and parking revenue, home stadium routines for players and fans, with local commerce benefit is enough reward for the higher seeded home teams.
Allow the visitors enough tickets to ease the noise.

Explain how home games lead to blowouts this year, yet ten years of data in a 4-team format at neutral sites delivered nearly the same margin of victory difference.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

Explain how home games lead to blowouts this year, yet ten years of data in a 4-team format at neutral sites delivered nearly the same margin of victory difference.

changing from home to neutral would have more of an effect on scores than altering the selection process because crybaby SEC fans were upset that their 3 loss teams didn't make it.

Yea, scores didn't change much (which is why the crying over blowouts is completely ridiculous) but it's pretty asinine to think that home field doesn't provide an advantage. If it doesn't provide an advantage, then why is it considered a reward for finishing 5-8?