26. "Not a fan. Keep it at 4 or 8 at max. No need to saturate the CFP." In response to In response to 0
There hasn’t been a single team yet who I genuinely thought was robbed of a bc they didn’t finish in the top 4/CFP. I guess you could make a case for UCF a few years back.
Years back when this was a hot topic on here, I was an advocate of a 6 team playoff (top 2 seeds get a bye), and still prefer that setup. As someone who started watching college football in the late 80s/early 90s, I hated the ambiguous formula for crowning a champion. You honestly didn’t know in real time who the champion was unless it was crystal clear. Think of the split in ‘90 between Colorado (who never should’ve been in position to play for a title) and GTech. Or the following year with Miami/Washington. That was less controversial, but pretty anticlimactic. Then in ‘94, Nebraska wins the championship outright over a pretty dominant PSU team (I get it, fuck PSU, but try to look at it objectively). Just 3 years later, Michigan gets to split the title with Nebraska. Makes no sense to me bc that Michigan team didn’t do anything better than the ‘94 PSU team. Flash forward to ‘03 when the polls favor a clearly inferior Oklahoma team over USC in the championship game. LSU got a gift from the polls.
The BCS did help to correct a lot of the ambiguities in determining a CFB champion. But as we can see now, has no answers for the super powers that are forming with Alabama, Clemson, and OSU. If the PAC 10 ever gets their shit together and Oklahoma/Texas rise to power again, it’ll only complicate things. That’s why I’ve always favored the 6 teams. You still have controversy over the top 2 - who get a bye, and you ensure that no great team gets left out.
As someone else mentioned, CFB has so many issues right now. The playoffs aren’t near the top IMO. I’d prefer they kept it in the 4-8 range though.