Stop telling half of college football they don’t belong.

[swede2]

That's comparing apples to oranges. There are different levels for a reason. We don't let Winona State into the D1 March Madness, because they are not a D1 school. They have their own tournament to play for the championship.

There is no official split between P5 and G5 conferences (or P4/G6 whatever). If that happens, fine. Then the G6 conferences can have their own national championship tournament. But as of now, all ten conferences fall under the designation of FBS football. They all have the same rules, same number of scholarships etc. Therefore, every team should have a chance on paper to win a natty.

That's how it works in every other level of college sports.

Comparing D1 March Madness to CFP is comparing apples to oranges, too, though. The NCAA obviously does not control the CFP tournament. I don't know what it would take for the NCAA to assert control over the FBS postseason, or if it even could, but the fact of the matter is that unless and until the NCAA does obtain that control, the institutions and individual leagues are free to associate with, play against and create a tournament for whomever they want (Edit: I wasn't previously aware that a 1984 Supreme Court decision has lead to this result.).

What's to prevent the G6 or the NCAA from creating a tournament for the G6? If the B1G/SEC and to a lesser extent, the Big 12 and ACC want to control access to the tournament, I view the prerogative no different than the individual conferences determining their own membership and who is eligible to play in the conference championship game. Toledo is an FBS football school. Why can't it play in the B1G championship game? I don't think anyone on this forum would suggest that Toledo belongs in the B1G or that it should be entitled to play in the B1G championship game. If the G5/G6 schools are feeling left out, the simple solution is to create their own tournament.

I do think that the P2/P4 would have less of an issue with automatic births if it weren't for so many schools moving to FBS that frankly have no place in the subdivision. Virtually the entire CUSA, and good chunks of the MAC, new MWC, and Sun Belt ought to be relegated to FCS. If the G5/G6 were instead two conferences comprised of the best AAC/MWC/PAC and a handful of other teams, its probably an easier sell to the power conferences to divide the pie. The indignant article probably should be headlined "Quit Telling Half of CFB they belong in FBS."

 

[GopherTheJugular]

It's more that winning your conference should provide a path to play for a national championship, because that's literally how it works for FCS, D2, D3 and NAIA. And pretty much every sport for that matter. There will always be weaker conferences/divisions in any given season.

In good nature debate (versus some of the arguing on other threads lol) I'd like to respond. Just because other leagues do it doesn't mean it's the best way - it might be the best way, or most profitable way, for other leagues, but college football was unique in this regard. I think a lot of fans liked that. I certainly liked the fact that the regular season was "kinda" the playoff.

If more people feel like you, great. But there is a risk of running off fans like myself.

And it's not fans of just the underdog school. A major upset occurring would be a huge deal and garner a lot of attention. Nobody would remember third place Ol' Miss playing second place USC or something. It would grow the game.

Well I already addressed this in the post you replied to. But yeah, upsets like this got me to be more of a fan. But it was rarely an upset of G5 beating a power conf team, it was usually lower rated P4/5 team beating a better one.

I'll agree though that upsets grow the game. I would question if you would see more than one every 20 years though in the CFP. It's one thing to upset a better team when they are looking ahead to a major matchup/rivalry, have only 6 days to prepare, etc. Anyone playing a G5 team in round 1 will have so long to prepare that they won't get surprised outside of a few scripted plays early.

 

[Slim Tubby]

Nope. Never will happen. Not to bring politics into this, but there is a better chance of a 3rd party winning the White House.

And yet, a lot of us would celebrate with great jubilance if both of those things happened.

 

[GopherTheJugular]

First off, nice post. You have good points. I'll try to respond in a good manner.

tell me, what game was competitive during last year's CFP 1st round? if anything, you're arguing we should just put OSU, Bama, Georgia, and Oregon in the playoff every year because you think they're good.

I'm more arguing that the point differential would be worse. There were two G5 teams right? (You left out the 38-10 game).

there were 2 one score games in the entire bracket (ASU, CFP autobid who finished behind Bama,-TX, PSU-ND). The SEC didn't make the title game and had losses by 14, 13, and 25 in the bracket. that plucky G5 team that didn't belong lost by 17 giving up a late TD in a game they turned it over 4 times, missed 2 FGs, and threw one of those picks in the end zone.

I think this is just a matter of perspective. You might be looking at it from the point of "hey, if Boise St doesn't have 4 TO's it could have been a close game" where I'm more looking at it like, "yep, once they play the big boys they're gonna have a bad game and lose by 3 scores".

This whole notion that "well I just know the teams are better" is proven wrong year after year. we've already proven the 5th best B10 or SEC team is not the best in their conference. Why do I need to see it again?

The bolded is how I feel about watching top teams go through the regular season beating up on lesser opponents - why do I need to see it again. Just gimme the top few and let them play.

your argument of TV viewership is also meh. TV viewership was as high for Texas-ASU as it was for ND-PSU. The Boise-PSU game was as popular as OSU-Tennessee. The joy is that ratings don't give a shit if you turn it off at halftime. They cite the peak viewership numbers and sell based on that. It's about reach to eyeballs when you're arguing advertising revenue

Ok, but how long til advertisers figure this out? I mean, if I want to run my commercial and you tell me this many eyeballs should see it, eventually I'll figure out that unless my commercials airs very early, a lot less people will see it than you are claiming.

Previously its been mentioned Boise was a huge dog against Oklahoma. The spread was OK by 7.5pts. we've had national title games with odds in that range so even Vegas disagrees that they didn't belong in that game.

That Boise St game was the best football game I've ever watched. A few things:

1. You could play that game 10 times and Oklahoma wins the next 9. I know, I know, why not leave the opportunity? It's a matter of how many beat-downs does one wanna tolerate watching in hopes of a miracle game like that.

2. I'll readily agree there were national championships where the outcome was already know (Miami/Nebraska to start the century, etc.) However, what else can you do in a "two team" tournament? Not play at all? Accidentally coming across a season like that is better than asking for post-season blowout games.

Cheers!

 

[GopherTheJugular]

I’m not a playoff fan. I prefer the old BCS format of picking two teams, hell I don’t even mind the old voting format. I mean the real point of the playoff was obviously just a money grab. But they sold it as a chance to give everyone a chance to remove any questions marks. To me though it could be argued that a lesser playoff is more pure as we watch all year and see who we think is the best, takes out the possibility of a flukes playoff loss removing the team that was the best that year.

My concern would be more of like a Joe Burrow going down against South Florida, where clearly the team that was the best during the regular season now can't even sniff the NC game because of an injury in a game they were 99.99999% likely to win.

And people bring up the NFL, but look back at 2010. The Packers sneak into the #6 seed with a 9-7 record and end up winning the super bowl. I'm sorry, but if you finish the season barely winning more than you lost, you shouldn't compete for the championship. This is more of a playoff size argument than a p4/G5 one though.

 

[Scottsdale Gopher]

The NCAA obviously does not control the CFP tournament.

This is simultaneously the most strange and most believable aspect of college football.

 

[disco]

To me though it could be argued that a lesser playoff is more pure as we watch all year and see who we think is the best, takes out the possibility of a flukes playoff loss removing the team that was the best that year.

But if someone loses in a fluke to Sam Houston or something, then they probably didn't deserve to win the playoff anyway.

 

[MaxyJR1]

Well, it’s Finebaum and Lewan, so I don’t know what you’d expect.

If you don’t remember Taylor Lewan from his days at michigan, give him a search, it’s worth a google. POS

Dad was a Gopher and people wanted him to be our POS at one time.

 

[upnorthkid]

First off, nice post. You have good points. I'll try to respond in a good manner.



I'm more arguing that the point differential would be worse. There were two G5 teams right? (You left out the 38-10 game).



I think this is just a matter of perspective. You might be looking at it from the point of "hey, if Boise St doesn't have 4 TO's it could have been a close game" where I'm more looking at it like, "yep, once they play the big boys they're gonna have a bad game and lose by 3 scores".



The bolded is how I feel about watching top teams go through the regular season beating up on lesser opponents - why do I need to see it again. Just gimme the top few and let them play.



Ok, but how long til advertisers figure this out? I mean, if I want to run my commercial and you tell me this many eyeballs should see it, eventually I'll figure out that unless my commercials airs very early, a lot less people will see it than you are claiming.


That Boise St game was the best football game I've ever watched. A few things:

1. You could play that game 10 times and Oklahoma wins the next 9. I know, I know, why not leave the opportunity? It's a matter of how many beat-downs does one wanna tolerate watching in hopes of a miracle game like that.

2. I'll readily agree there were national championships where the outcome was already know (Miami/Nebraska to start the century, etc.) However, what else can you do in a "two team" tournament? Not play at all? Accidentally coming across a season like that is better than asking for post-season blowout games.

Cheers!

SMU is in the ACC which is a P4 conference
Boise also lost to Oregon by 3 on the road in week 2 on a walk off FG where they led in the 4th quarter. That Oregon team was undefeated prior to the playoff buzzsaw that OSU turned into (that they probably always should've been. There will be some years the G5 is ass. There will be others a team is deserving. It's just really hard to slice it all out because the P4 won't play these teams super regularly. Tulane is the top looking team this year and is pretty bleh. But in that band around where the cutline is you have Utah (losses to BYU and TTU but no wins in the upper tier), Vandy (ditto on the no big wins), USC (hey they beat.... Iowa?), Miami (at least can claim the win over ND, though losses to SMU and Louisville). Some of this will sort itself out, but when we're getting down to discussing a 3 loss team getting in over 1 G5 who may or may not be good, that 3 loss also ain't that good. It was like when everyone was up in arms about the Vikings last year getting a lower seed because the NFC North was clearly so good, then they all lost in their first game. If we played more heavily cross conferences (similar to say college hockey or bball where you have more games under comparison) it gets easier. But to say we know that SEC, B10 or B12 #3-4 would for sure win just isn't true

On the TV stuff, we've known this can happen for forever, but companies still advertise to the Super Bowl which can be an absolute blow out. Same as any premier regular game or playoff game (remember when OSU shelled the fuck out of Oregon in the playoff to the tune of 34-0 before Oregon got off the bus? There's no predicting it). I get what you're saying. We do want to see "best on best" and that's super fair. But that's also the joy of this sport is we have no idea who the "best" really is half the time going in. NBC sports picked going in and no one picked OSU. On ESPN, no one had a perfect bracket and only 8% of people picked OSU. Top picks Oregon and GA both lost their first game. 87.5% of people didn't even have their title winner in the championship game. That's why I'm all for representation because most of the time we think we know but we really just don't, are basing it off limited sample sizes, etc. Let it get settled out on the field and if you were the 3rd or 4th placed team in your conference, at the end of the day you only have yourself to blame as you can win more games.

As far as the Boise State-OK game result if they replayed, we'll never know. I just know what I saw happen oddly enough if you lose, you don't get a second chance

Personally I'd be just fine going down to 8 or 2. 4 is a little weird to claim representation as you don't catch enough and now with mega conferences, 2 does get tough. If you're saying its just for ratings and you're going to try "pick" the best games based on what you think and Vegas tells you, then just go with 4 and call it a day as it wouldn't take long to see who Vegas has listed as pick ems compared with the rest of the country

 

[IceBoxGopher]

I mean, it's already kind of been the case for a long time. Even before the CFP era, there were basically five divisions of college football: P5, G5, FCS, DII and DIII.

Only one of those four groups of teams didn't get to play for a national championship at their level, because P5 and G5 are both in the FBS. With that being the case, I think it's fine that a G5 team gets a shot to participate in a tournament if they go undefeated in their division.

NFL, NHL, NBA, MLB, MLS, CFL, the FIFA World Cup, FCS Football, DII Football, DIII Football, NAIA Football, NCAA Basketball, NCAA Hockey, NCAA Soccer, NCAA Baseball, NCAA Volleyball and NCAA Softball all have tournaments where a team can get in if they play a great regular season and have a shot at a good run in the playoff. Why not college football?

I'm fine with the playoff system. I had fun last year. I figured eight teams is probably a better system than 12, but it's fine overall in my view. I'm glad we don't have years like 2004 or 1994 where teams with that go undefeated can compete for a national title.

 

[disco]

I mean, it's already kind of been the case for a long time. Even before the CFP era, there were basically five divisions of college football: P5, G5, FCS, DII and DIII.

Only one of those four groups of teams didn't get to play for a national championship at their level, because P5 and G5 are both in the FBS. With that being the case, I think it's fine that a G5 team gets a shot to participate in a tournament if they go undefeated in their division.

NFL, NHL, NBA, MLB, MLS, CFL, the FIFA World Cup, FCS Football, DII Football, DIII Football, NAIA Football, NCAA Basketball, NCAA Hockey, NCAA Soccer, NCAA Baseball, NCAA Volleyball and NCAA Softball all have tournaments where a team can get in if they play a great regular season and have a shot at a good run in the playoff. Why not college football?

I'm fine with the playoff system. I had fun last year. I figured eight teams is probably a better system than 12, but it's fine overall in my view. I'm glad we don't have years like 2004 or 1994 where teams with that go undefeated can compete for a national title.

I don't like 12 because I don't like there being byes in the tournament.

 

[PMWinSTP]

I don't like 12 because I don't like there being byes in the tournament.

Ditto. Go to 16 and find an unbiased way of seeding. If there ends up being 2-3 G6 teams, so be it. Top seeds get home games first two rounds.

 

[Goldmember]

Group of Five teams don’t control who wants to schedule them. When you’re Temple or Tulane or James Madison, you can’t just call up Ohio State and get them to agree to a home-and-home.

They ABSOLUTELY control who wants to schedule them. Sure… they aren’t going to be able to afford the cost of hosting Ohio State in front of their 5,000 fans. But they could agree to play at Big Ten and SEC venues and not demand like $2-million.

 

[disco]

They ABSOLUTELY control who wants to schedule them. Sure… they aren’t going to be able to afford the cost of hosting Ohio State in front of their 5,000 fans. But they could agree to play at Big Ten and SEC venues and not demand like $2-million.

The problem is, those buy games fund a lot of the athletic department.

 

[metrolax]

The only ones who can reel this in are the university presidents, and they seem reluctant to step in

 

[nitramnaed]

Ditto. Go to 16 and find an unbiased way of seeding. If there ends up being 2-3 G6 teams, so be it. Top seeds get home games first two rounds.

Maybe we could use Grok?

 

[Goldmember]

The problem is, those buy games fund a lot of the athletic department.

Right. So this is just as simple as them wanting their cake, and wanting to eat their cake too.

 

[btowngopher]

Who cares if a G5 team gets destroyed, the point of a playoff wasn’t to see if the 5th best SEC team can get hot and make a run.

That said the G5 teams don’t belong either.

 

[disco]

That said the G5 teams don’t belong either.

Are they FBS football programs? Yes or no?

 

[btowngopher]

Are they FBS football programs? Yes or no?

That doesn’t matter in my opinion. 99% of the time they simply have no argument for being the best team in the country.

 

[Gophers2Omaha]

What was the point then? Every year people were bitchin' about the #3 team not making it; they weren't upset the #13 team or where ever a G5 team ended up didn't make it.

Looking back from the time the BCS came along (late 90's) to when this 12 team playoff started, there is one time I can recall complaining about a G5 team, the 2006 Boise State team. (1) And they needed miracles to just compete with Oklahoma, they weren't anywhere close to the best.

(2) Some people just wanna see more football, or ignore the mammoth talent gap.

(3) G5 teams are on par with the Gophers this year in terms of their ability to compete with tOSU and such.

(1) Boise State trailed for the 1st time with 1:02 left in the game. Boise State led 28-10 with 8:05 left in the 3rd. Insane ending and OT but nothing separated those two teams.

(2) Disagree. History tells us G5 Champs do just fine when playing the upper tier of the Big Boy conferences in the Major/BCS Bowl games. Here you go:

BCS Era (1998-2013):

2004 Season: Fiesta: #6 Utah (MW Champ) 35 #21 Pitt (Big East Champ) 7
2006 Season: Fiesta: #8 Boise St (WAC Champ) 43 #10 Oklahoma (Big 12 Champ) 42 OT
2007 Season: Sugar: #10 Hawaii (WAC Champ) 10 #5 Georgia (SEC at large) 41 WAS a mismatch!!
2008 Season: Sugar: #6 Utah (MW Champ) 31 #4 Alabama (SEC at large) 17
2009 Season: Fiesta: #6 Boise St (WAC Champ) 17 #4 TCU (MW Champ) 10 Didn't get shot at P5
2010 Season: Rose: #3 TCU (MW Champ) 21 #5 Wisconsin (Big 10 Champ) 19
2012 Season: Orange: #15 N. Illinois (MAC Champ) 10 #12 Florida St (ACC Champ) 31
2013 Season: Fiesta: #15 UCF (AAC Champ) 52 #6 Baylor (Big 12 Champ) 42

New Year's Six Era (2014-Present):

2014 Season: Fiesta: #20 Boise St (MW Champ) 38 #10 Arizona (Pac 12 at large) 30
2015 Season: Peach: #18 Houston (AAC Champ) 38 #9 Florida St (ACC at large) 24
2016 Season: Cotton: #15 WMU (Fleck!!!) (MAC Champ) 16 #8 Wisconsin (Big 10 at large) 24
2017 Season: Peach: #12 UCF (AAC Champ) 34 #6 Auburn (SEC at large) 27
2018 Season: Fiesta: #8 UCF (AAC Champ) 32 #11 LSU (SEC at large) 40
2019 Season: Cotton: #17 Memphis (AAC Champ) 39 #10 Penn St (Big 10 at large) 53
2020 Season: Peach: #8 Cincy (AAC Champ) 21 #9 Georgia (SEC at large) 24
2021 Season: CFP SF-Cotton: #4 Cincy (AAC Champ) 6 #1 Alabama (SEC Champ) 27
2022 Season: Cotton: #16 Tulane (AAC Champ) 46 #10 USC (Pac 12 at large) 45
2023 Season: Fiesta: #23 Liberty (C-USA Champ) 6 #8 Oregon (Pac 12 at large) 45 WAS ugly!!
2024 Season: CFP QF-Fiesta: #9 Boise St (MW Champ) 14 #4 Penn St (Big 10 at large) 31

(3) I think you may be right this season. Hopefully the G5 surprises because otherwise it will be used as evidence to exclude G5 teams in the future which would be a real shame in my opinion.

 

[gopherintx]

I agree 100%. I think the big thing missing for some people is this... the playoff is not designed to get the best 12 teams in the bracket. Or best 16. Or best 18. Or whatever it will expand to. That was never the intent. It's the same thing with a lot of tournaments. Take the NCAA basketball tournament as an example. It's not the best 64 (or 68) teams. Not even close. Look at the MN state high school hockey tournament. If teams participate in any sport, they want to feel like they have a realistic shot at getting to the year end tournament... and it is good for the game. The excitement generated at a school like Temple, JMU or South Florida if their team made the CFP far outweighs the need to have the 5th best SEC or Big Ten team included. And yes, I mean that even if the fifth best Big Ten team is our Gophers in any year.

Maybe I missed something, I am not familiar with your statement that the tournament isn't designed to get the best x amount of teams in. Has this philosophy been established? Isn't that what they are currently deciding? I agree March madness is designed this way, but also think the amount of teams involved in both is too drastic to make correlations to each other.

Genuinely curious and interested in your thoughts on this.

 

[Crosby]

Maybe I missed something, I am not familiar with your statement that the tournament isn't designed to get the best x amount of teams in. Has this philosophy been established? Isn't that what they are currently deciding? I agree March madness is designed this way, but also think the amount of teams involved in both is too drastic to make correlations to each other.

Genuinely curious and interested in your thoughts on this.

No, I am sure it has not been stated. But I don't think they have to. By definition, if you are taking conference champions, or any other qualifiers that are conference or region related, you are prioritizing other things over getting the absolute best teams in the tournament. I already talked about March Madness as an example. But the next most glaring example of this is the NCAA hockey tournament. Every conference has an automatic qualifier (conference tournament champion usually). Some conferences are simply weaker than others across the board. So you end up with first round matchups like Canisius vs Boston University, while a more highly rated school than Canisius does not make the cut. Sometimes it's 10-1. But sometimes... upsets happen (I still have nightmares about the Gophers losing to Holy Cross). I know hockey and basketball are different than football. But the concept of team selection is the same. If the objective is to get the very best teams, then they would eliminate any conference qualifiers, regionalism, or other factor.

 

[disco]

Maybe I missed something, I am not familiar with your statement that the tournament isn't designed to get the best x amount of teams in. Has this philosophy been established? Isn't that what they are currently deciding? I agree March madness is designed this way, but also think the amount of teams involved in both is too drastic to make correlations to each other.

Genuinely curious and interested in your thoughts on this.

The D3 playoffs have 40 teams with 27 AQ's.
The D2 playoffs have 32 teams with 16 AQ's.

It can be done, and it is done at other levels.

 

[gopherintx]

No, I am sure it has not been stated. But I don't think they have to. By definition, if you are taking conference champions, or any other qualifiers that are conference or region related, you are prioritizing other things over getting the absolute best teams in the tournament. I already talked about March Madness as an example. But the next most glaring example of this is the NCAA hockey tournament. Every conference has an automatic qualifier (conference tournament champion usually). Some conferences are simply weaker than others across the board. So you end up with first round matchups like Canisius vs Boston University, while a more highly rated school than Canisius does not make the cut. Sometimes it's 10-1. But sometimes... upsets happen (I still have nightmares about the Gophers losing to Holy Cross). I know hockey and basketball are different than football. But the concept of team selection is the same. If the objective is to get the very best teams, then they would eliminate any conference qualifiers, regionalism, or other factor.

Thanks, and I agree with a lot of this. I do think fb and tv taking a bigger role in how to maximize money (in their mind) may create different priorities, at least short term. Not arguing it will happen, just saying it's a legitimate possibility.

 

[Goldmember]

Ohio State very easily destroyed the field last year in the CFP. They finished fourth place in the B1G.

Sorry, but if you think Tulane or James Madison or some other mediocre team that wouldn’t even be bowl eligible if they played a B1G or SEC belongs in the CFP, your opinion just can’t be taken seriously.

The real question is whether any Big 12 or ACC teams belong in ten CFP. That we may be able to have a serious discussion about.

 

[disco]

Ohio State very easily destroyed the field last year in the CFP. They finished fourth place in the B1G.

Sorry, but if you think Tulane or James Madison or some other mediocre team that wouldn’t even be bowl eligible if they played a B1G or SEC belongs in the CFP, your opinion just can’t be taken seriously.

The real question is whether any Big 12 or ACC teams belong in ten CFP. That we may be able to have a serious discussion about.

Actually it can be taken seriously because that's how it works in every other level of football.
As I posted, D3 has 40 teams with 27 autobids. Every conference champion gets in at ever other level, with the exception of the Ivy, MEAC and SWAC at the FCS level, but those are special cases because they have historically chosen not to participate.

People like yourself and Paul Finebaum just want to gatekeep for larger, older established programs. Or thiink that the point of a tournament is to fit your definition of entertainment.

 

[disco]

That doesn’t matter in my opinion. 99% of the time they simply have no argument for being the best team in the country.

Should the third or fourth place team in a conference have that argument? I don't think so. Win your conference, go to the playoff. It's really quite simple.

 

[IceBoxGopher]

Ohio State very easily destroyed the field last year in the CFP. They finished fourth place in the B1G.

Sorry, but if you think Tulane or James Madison or some other mediocre team that wouldn’t even be bowl eligible if they played a B1G or SEC belongs in the CFP, your opinion just can’t be taken seriously.

The real question is whether any Big 12 or ACC teams belong in ten CFP. That we may be able to have a serious discussion about.

I mean, I get that argument, but shouldn't they split into another division entirely then? What's the point of them being in the FBS then?

 

[gopherphil]

The Gophers showed today that they belong.