AGDAD14 said:

---

The problem is the teams are selected/invited and did not earn their playoff spot. (This is football, not an invitational basketball tournament.)

Teams that have multiple losses and don't win their conference championship shouldn't earn a playoff spot. Period.

And you damn sure don't earn a playoff spot by losing to the same team twice!

---

This is a silly argument every other football league has a large playoff. We actually let a few teams compete in a division they have been part of forever and people lose their minds.

vander54 said:

---

Yep

First round

5 vs 12
6 vs 11
7 vs 10
8 vs 9

If they did this tge playoffs would have been much more enjoyable. Instead you have tu and UGa with easy paths to the NC and no serious drama. At least early on.

---

UGA has an easy path ? Wrong.

ND will give UGA all it can handle and has a 50/50 chance of beating them. Same with PSU.

tu has an easy path to the semis but they're not beating OSU or Oregon.

Correct

This has been known from day 1. 5 seed would get a home game with 12 seed and easy second round game against the Big 12.

The only thing that was different than expected is the 3 seed was Bouse State. I along with many thought it would be a solid ACC champ so at the least the 6 seed would get a stronger second round game.

But nope

The top 4 should have always been from the so called big 4 conferences.

My biggest beef with the committee was always Boise State getting a top 4. And ND should have been higher than Penn State but of course it protected the Big 10 from playing the SEC. Thats no surprise at all. The one thing I stated from the beginning with the 12 team playoff, I have no doubt the Big 10 would ensure a bracket protecting them from SEC match ups as best as possible.

cevans_40 said:

---

vander54 said:

---

The idsue with this years playoff was seeding. It should be seeded how they are ranked and not based off winning their conference. Games would have been much more competitive if they did it right.

---

This. Just put in the 12 best teams and don't have any auto bids.

---

And no "home fields" Play all the games at nuetral sites There are plenty of Bowl Games and stadiums in the Country.

Some of these 6-6 teams may not get to go bowling, but that's the breaks

mustang1234 said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

vander54 said:

---

The idsue with this years playoff was seeding. It should be seeded how they are ranked and not based off winning their conference. Games would have been much more competitive if they did it right.

---

This. Just put in the 12 best teams and don't have any auto bids.

---

And no "home fields" Play all the games at nuetral sites There are plenty of Bowl Games and stadiums in the Country.

Some of these 6-6 teams may not get to go bowling, but that's the breaks

---

User name checks out.

the playoffs have just been terrible thru 5 games

what a postseason picnic for Penn State

What are you talking about? There is no reshuffling or re-seeding after rounds. It is a set bracket with 12 teams, period. If anything with the current system they SHOULD re-seed after each round but they do not.

Ole Miss nor Bama had any argument to be included , as soon as you have 3 losses you lose any argument to be included, as at that point it is not just about wins or quality wins but also about your losses (Ole Miss losing to Kentucky, Bama losing to Vandy and OU).

12 teams is perfect, and I am even OK with the 5 highest ranked champions being included. HOWEVER, they need to drop the 4 highest rated conference champions receiving a top 4 seed (and getting a bye). They are trying to implement an NFL model, but in the NFL all teams play each other or in the same league. Even then there is a strong argument that just because you are division winner you should not be guaranteed a home playoff game (one of 14 win Detroit or Minn. Is going to have to play on the road to a team that won 4 or 5 less games than they did)

It is fine to include ASU and Boise and Clemson in the 12 team field as conference champions, but they should have been seeded 9 - 12. It is ludicrous that ASU and Boise got top 4 seeds. It also then has the problem of some lower seeds have an easier path than higher seeds, and also knocks out a higher seed in the QUARTER finals instead of the semi-finals. The 12 team field just needs to be set based on the final CFP rankings with any conference champs outside the top 12 supplanting teams ranked 10-12.

Final CFP rankings this year:

1 Oregon
2 UGA
3 Cow
4 PSU
5 Notre Dame
6 Ohio State
7 UT
8 Indiana
9 Boise State
10 SMU
11 Alabama
12 ASU
……
16 Clemson

So that should have resulted in ASU being # 11 and Clemson being # 12. With the current system ASU got moved all the way up to #4 and #9 Boise being moved all the way up to #3!!!!

FWIW I do think they will make this change in the off-season. Will still guarantee the 5 highest rated conference champions are included in the 12 team field, but the top 4 seeds will be based solely on the final CFP ranking and any conference champs finishing outside the top 12 will be seeded 11-12 depending on how many there are.

northeastag said:

---

Someone on here knows.

Why did they go from 4 to 12? If there were a couple deserving teams that got left out (like we did one year at number 5), why didn't they just go to 8 or even 6 with a couple play-in games?

Was it all about the money?

---

The vote to expand had to be unanimous. That meant inclusion. Guaranteeing the G5, the ACC and the Big12 a spot meant less spots for the SEC and Big10 if it was only 8 teams. And yes, it's always about the money.

Have BCS computers pick 8, seed 8 l, and be done with it.

Our hot takes so far:

1) Twelve seeds is too many
2) SOS must be taken into account
3) Guaranteed conference seeding has to go, at this rate (ASU starting to struggle badly as of posting)

OTOH, two of the three SEC misses lost their bowl games, so...

The CFP is a reflection of the poor job conferences and teams do in scheduling during the regular season.

There are 16 and 18-team P4 conferences that play only 8 or 9 conference games with very few P4 v P4 non conference games. Use the 12 regular season games better. The teams in the playoffs shouldn't be a product of a lucky 8 game conference schedule.

Make the regular season more interesting and getting better tested teams in the playoffs.

I'm not anti-playoffs, as I've followed college playoffs (NAIA, NCAA II) most of my life as a Texas A&I graduate. As a Javelina, we attended all their playoff games during their consecutive undefeated seasons and multiple national championships.

The FBS CFP process has no resemblance to the other football divisions playoffs.

It's not rocket science… get rid of the committee and just set the "criteria" to earn a playoff spot. Everything else is just subjective manipulation.