12 Team Playoff Will Dilute the Regular Football Season

[OregonDucks]

Someone mentioned this on the radio and I completely agree.  If we had the 12 team playoff this year, the Michigan/Ohio State game wouldn't have meant as much.  Neither would the Pac-12 championship game on Friday because both teams would be in the 12 team playoff - win or lose.  Sure you can make the argument that they are playing for pride or seeding but that is not the same as a regular season elimination game.

 

I wish they would have only expended the playoffs to 6 or 8 teams to preserve what makes college football special - every game matters.  

[cartm25]

On 11/29/2023 at 7:22 AM, OregonDucks said:

Someone mentioned this on the radio and I completely agree.  If we had the 12 team playoff this year, the Michigan/Ohio State game wouldn't have meant as much.  Neither would the Pac-12 championship game on Friday because both teams would be in the 12 team playoff - win or lose.  Sure you can make the argument that they are playing for pride or seeding but that is not the same as a regular season elimination game.

 

I wish they would have only expended the playoffs to 6 or 8 teams to preserve what makes college football special - every game matters.  

There are trade offs, but I don’t think it will dilute the regular season. I don’t believe the NFL regular season is diluted with 14 teams making the playoffs. There are amazing, urgent games all year.

 

I think the biggest problem with a small playoff field is how quickly it can “end” a season for a team with CFP aspirations. Imagine, last year, that the Ducks lose to WSU. Season over! No 2-loss P12 team is making the playoffs; literally nothing to play for, in Oregon’s case anyways.

 

The beauty of an expanded playoff is it rewards a team’s development and improvement throughout the year. It eliminates teams less quickly from contention.

 

Another way of putting it, an expanded playoff extends the amount of time a team has hope of making the playoff, especially if they’re an extremely talented team but hasn’t had a chance to gel due to coaching, player, transfer portal turnover.

[DUCKED]

On 11/29/2023 at 7:25 AM, cartm25 said:

There are trade offs, but I don’t think it will dilute the regular season. I don’t believe the NFL regular season is diluted with 14 teams making the playoffs. There are amazing, urgent games all year.

 

I think the biggest problem with a small playoff field is how quickly it can “end” a season for a team with CFP aspirations. Imagine, last year, that the Ducks lose to WSU. Season over! No 2-loss P12 team is making the playoffs; literally nothing to play for, in Oregon’s case anyways.

 

The beauty of an expanded playoff is it rewards a team’s development and improvement throughout the year. It eliminates teams less quickly from contention.

 

Another way of putting it, an expanded playoff extends the amount of time a team has hope of making the playoff, especially if they’re an extremely talented team but hasn’t had a chance to gel due to coaching, player, transfer portal turnover.

64+ teams play in March Madness and every year there are surprising upsets. With a 12 team college football playoff there will also be some shockers…..just makes it all the more fun….and interesting.

[Solar]

I am so sick of every game being a playoff game. Good riddance.

 

I just want to enjoy my team playing and feel happy when they win, rather than feeling relieved they didn't lose.

[RichardDuck]

The 12-team playoff enhances the regular season because so many more schools have a shot all season long.

[Pennsylvania Duck]

 

12-Team Playoff: Ducks to face intriguing path in hypothetical expanded CFP

 

The Oregon Ducks saw their ranking the penultimate College Football Playoff rankings change this week thanks to a loss from the Ohio State Buckeyes at the hands of the Michigan Wolverines.

 

After their blowout win over Oregon State, but Ducks moved up a spot, where they now sit at No. 5 in the nation ahead of their matchup with No. 3 Washington in the Pac-12 Championship Game down in Las Vegas on Friday. With a win, they will be in the College Football Playoff.

 

But what would things look like if the 12-team playoff model were put into place this year rather than next?...

 

12-Team Playoff: Ducks to face intriguing patch in expanded CFP

DUCKSWIRE.USATODAY.COM

---

The Oregon Ducks would have an intriguing path against some well-established teams in an expanded College Football Playoff...

 

 

 

[DanLduck]

With the expanded playoff, there should be fewer player defections like there are now for bowl games.

 

It will diminish regular season a little, can't help that, but will encourage many more teams to fill those last 8 spots.

 

So I think it's actually a bigger win.

 

I think that adding the wildcard spot in MLB added a ton to many teams season, and to all those fans.

 

I see the same thing happening for college football. And with all the changes, conference wise, NIL, transfers, etc, CFB needs all the help they can get.

[Steven A]

It doesn't diminish the regular season for me.  I live and die by every game.  If the Ducks are 2 - 2 (Good Gosh forbid) I'm still invested in game No. 5.

 

I want my team in the hunt as long as possible, past a single loss.  And when that dream dies, watch them ruin someone else's season.

 

Plus, it's only a matter of time before a 3 L team makes the 12-team playoff.  This year LSU is lurking at No. 13.  Another perk of going to the BIG is that it is one of the only two conferences that would get a 3 L team in.

 

 

 

 

[Jon Joseph]

I completely disagree. We heard the same when the BCS doubled to 4 teams.

 

No other college sport has a post-season where only 3% of the contenders compete in the post-season.

 

The 12-team PO will give many more fan bases year-long rooting interest and render the PO Committee, except for seeding, a group that has never done more than count Ws and Ls, irrelevant.

 

The eyeballs on the 2024 playoff will be huge. Players who currently sit out NY6 bowls will play in games that matter. Based on the Week 5 CT. rankings, OREGON, Ohio State, Texas, Alabama, Missouri, Penn State, Ole Miss, and Tulane fan bases would have their team in the playoff. Oklahoma fans will be ticked off but that's fine. That's part of the process.

 

Today, with 4 teams, please tell me how you can separate 5. OREGON, 6. Ohio State, 7. Texas, and 8. Alabama and why is there any need to do so? 

 

NFL teams rematch in the playoffs. CBB teams rematch in the NCAA Tourney. Viewership and interest are not affected.

[cartm25]

On 11/29/2023 at 1:51 PM, Jon Joseph said:

I completely disagree. We heard the same when the BCS doubled to 4 teams.

 

No other college sport has a post-season where only 3% of the contenders compete in the post-season.

 

The 12-team PO will give many more fan bases year-long rooting interest and render the PO Committee, except for seeding, a group that has never done more than count Ws and Ls, irrelevant.

 

The eyeballs on the 2024 playoff will be huge. Players who currently sit out NY6 bowls will play in games that matter. Based on the Week 5 CT. rankings, OREGON, Ohio State, Texas, Alabama, Missouri, Penn State, Ole Miss, and Tulane fan bases would have their team in the playoff. Oklahoma fans will be ticked off but that's fine. That's part of the process.

 

Today, with 4 teams, please tell me how you can separate 5. OREGON, 6. Ohio State, 7. Texas, and 8. Alabama and why is there any need to do so? 

 

NFL teams rematch in the playoffs. CBB teams rematch in the NCAA Tourney. Viewership and interest are not affected.

INCREDIBLE post @Jon Joseph!!!

 

Agree with everything.

 

I think there's an added benefit that a 12-team playoff will also release the recruiting stranglehold powers like tOSU, Bama, Georgia, Clemson have had over the years. Now that west-coast talent can have access to the CFP without "having" to go to one of the aforementioned teams will hopefully diminish those powers.

 

Long story short, I couldn't be more excited to have a 12 team playoff coming next year.

[Solar]

On 11/29/2023 at 1:28 PM, cartm25 said:

INCREDIBLE post @Jon Joseph!!!

 

Agree with everything.

 

I think there's an added benefit that a 12-team playoff will also release the recruiting stranglehold powers like tOSU, Bama, Georgia, Clemson have had over the years. Now that west-coast talent can have access to the CFP without "having" to go to one of the aforementioned teams will hopefully diminish those powers.

 

Long story short, I couldn't be more excited to have a 12 team playoff coming next year.

This. I've always thought that the argument "There are only 4 good teams that could win anyways" is a bad argument. It's a self fulfilling prophecy is what it is.

 

Increase the playoffs to 12 teams and every year thee will eventually be 12 competitive teams as recruits redistribute themselves to playoff contenders that offer a better chance to play. Increase it to 16 same thing

 Maybe over 20 and you will just be having spoilers in there every year, but that's a long ways from 4.

 

As others have said, you will have lower ranked teams that are hot at the end of the season that could potentially beat anybody, like an Arizona team and it's worth capturing them in the playoffs.

Edited November 29, 2023 by Solar

[cartm25]

On 11/29/2023 at 2:37 PM, Solar said:

Increase the playoffs to 12 teams and every year thee will eventually be 12 competitive teams as recruits redistribute themselves to playoff contenders that offer a better chance to play. Increase it to 16 same thing

 Maybe over 20 and you will just be having spoilers in there every year, but that's a long ways from 4.

 

As others have said, you will have lower ranked teams that are hot at the end of the season that could potentially beat anybody, like an Arizona team and it's worth capturing them in the playoffs.

All very good stuff.

 

I like, and agree with, the way you phrased the "redistribution" of recruits creating more parity among 12 teams in the nation.

 

However, I do believe that there is a tipping point where expanding too much will eventually have the result @OregonDucks mentioned at the beginning, where the regular season becomes diluted. I don't claim to know where that number is, but I really like the number 12 for now.

[Dave23]

The only regular seasons that might be diminished is that of the SEC and BIG10 which more or less have as automatic bids to the playoffs. 

 

The 2001 Ducks regular season would have sure counted for allot more or Bosie State in 2009. Just a few examples of teams that had regular seasons that counted for very little in the end.

[Grandpa Duck]

The "tipping point" happens when the teams trying to play-in to the playoff have no realistic chance of being the champion.  NCAA basketball has gone beyond the tipping point by expanding from 64 to 68, making the play-in games of interest only to their own fan bases.  Probably went beyond the tipping point when it expanded from 16 to 32.  I have lost all interest in men's basketball so I really don't know the answer to this question: "Has any NCAA basketball team seeded lower than 16 ever won the championship?"

 

Anyway, expansion to 12 just moves the end of season focal point of fan interest from the teams that are ranked at 1-7 to the teams that are ranked 9-16.  I'm thinking a team ranked #8 going into their last game is unlikely to drop all the way to 13 with a loss.  My belief is that the change will increase fan interest.

 

If you're curious about why my interest in men's basketball has waned, it's because the players are too big and too good for the size of the court and the height of the basket.  Raise the basket to at least 11 feet.  As to court size, too complicated to increase it, but I would reduce the team size to four.

 

I still follow women's basketball because they play on the floor, rather than three feet off the ground.  I can relate to the way women play becuase it's the game I played in the 50's, when even 7' plus Sweede Holbrook didn't dunk.  For a while the dunk was illegal, just like blocking within the cone of the hoop is now.  Then they widened the key and put in the 3-second rule.  If they had just raised the basket, as should have happened, the game would be more fun to watch.

 

How's that for modulating away from the topic of the thread?

[Log Haulin]

Who on here wouldnt love to see Bama or UGA head north in December to play UM or Ohio State? Or better yet, Wisconsin in a blizzard. Now that would be fun

[noDucknewby]

Nope don't see it diminishing the regular season at all.  Sure in some cases both teams playing for a conference championship may already be in, but only one can be top four with a bye.  That's a really big deal IMHO.

 

Besides, look at the bubble teams.  If we were at 12 teams this year, Iowa, Louisville and Okie State could get in with a win in their conference championship games.  That's a whole lot of incentive, and Michigan, FSU and Texas would all be playing for a first round bye.  Tell me that wouldn't matter to the teams involved?

[Dave23]

On 11/29/2023 at 3:38 PM, Grandpa Duck said:

Has any NCAA basketball team seeded lower than 16 ever won the championship?"

SDST came pretty close last year. 

 

For me it's not all about who wins the championship but who belongs in top. Was the Boise State team from 2009 good enough to win it all? We'll never know because they didn't come from the SEC or the BIG10 so they never got the chance to prove it.

 

12 team playoffs give those Cinderella teams a chance to play for it all even if they didn't come from a power conference.

[Charles Fischer]

On 11/29/2023 at 2:38 PM, Grandpa Duck said:

The "tipping point" happens when the teams trying to play-in to the playoff have no realistic chance of being the champion.  NCAA basketball has gone beyond the tipping point by expanding from 64 to 68, making the play-in games of interest only to their own fan bases.

A really good point.  The objective then for coaches is to "make the tournament," when none of those teams actually have a chance of winning the tournament.  I cannot tell you how many times I see protracted discussions about teams making the tournament or not and I say to myself..."the tournament is to establish a national champion...and that team should not even be in the discussion."

 

However this football year?  We could have seen some VERY interesting games if we went to 12 or even 16 teams.

[Jon Joseph]

How about these games?

 

2024 - 5 conference champs / 7 at large/ adjusted for 2024 realignment

 

1. Georgia - SEC vs, 9. Bama SEC at 8. Texas SEC

 

4. Arizona - B12 vs, 12. Tulane - AAC at 2. UW B1G

 

..................................................................................................................

 

2. Michigan - B1G vs. 10. Missouri SEC at 7. Ohio State B1G

 

3. FSU - ACC vs. 11. Penn State B1G at 6. OREGON B1G

 

5 B1G teams - Show Puddles the $! 

 

You can expect 4 to 5 B1G teams in the playoffs every season. Ditto the SEC. And OREGON to be in the PO fold season after season.

 

Why not THIS instead of a 4-team PO? Even with possible rematches.

 

I do not see this devaluing the regular season. I see it bringing far more interest to the CFB regular season.

[Charles Fischer]

Jon, I like your 16 team playoff—more games for revenue, and we would see an occasional upset.

 

A No. 13 beats a No. 4?

[Sandy Rocks]

The way things are now with the football playoff, a team needs to either be in a weak conference or have an almost perfect season. Being perfect has truly been impossible in the PAC which is why they have rarely had teams in the playoffs. A wider field will truly expose the teams who have soft schedules. It give opportunities to the teams who come on strong at the end which I find very exciting.
 

The way it is now, we just keep being served up the same tired, old teams who may or may not be the best teams. Now we will know who is the best. A real playoff will show that. The four team playoff is a joke. Changing the system will have many positive unforeseen consequences but I guess we will see.

[OregonDucks]

I guess I just have a different perspective than most on this board. 
 

The things that I loved most about college football were:

 

 1) The traditions, pageantry and rivalries 

 2) The importance of the regular season (every single game mattered)

 

College football is looking more and more like the NFL (without the parity) with free agency, NIL, super conferences, sidelining bands during games for DJs, introducing everyone on the field, playing games on the big screen, etc. Make no mistake, the only reason that the playoffs are expanding is because of the $$$$$.

 

I believe that a champion should be the team that played the best the entire season, not just the hottest team in December/January. It’s only a matter of time before a 2 or 3 loss team gets hot and wins the national championship (e.g., 2011 NY Football Giants). That might be exciting to some but I don’t believe that it’s deserving. 

 

I’ll continue to root for Oregon but my interest in college football has diminished and will continue to diminish with all of the “improvements.”
 

I’ll miss the PAC-10/12 and playing the winner of the Big 10 at The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, after attending the Rose Parade on a clear and crisp Southern California winter morning.
 

Hopefully the Ducks will win the conference championship tomorrow and play Michigan in Pasadena for one final Rose Bowl. 

Edited December 1, 2023 by OregonDucks

[Mike West]

On 11/29/2023 at 6:13 PM, Sandy Rocks said:

The way things are now with the football playoff, a team needs to either be in a weak conference or have an almost perfect season. Being perfect has truly been impossible in the PAC which is why they have rarely had teams in the playoffs. A wider field will truly expose the teams who have soft schedules. It give opportunities to the teams who come on strong at the end which I find very exciting.
 

The way it is now, we just keep being served up the same tired, old teams who may or may not be the best teams. Now we will know who is the best. A real playoff will show that. The four team playoff is a joke. Changing the system will have many positive unforeseen consequences but I guess we will see.

The only thing I disagree with is the four playoff teams really have been the best.  After COVID the balance started to change.  

 

Now, as in 21';22' and this year, the top 8 teams are fairly close with #s 1&2 separated from the rest.

 

This year there are 8 solid teams with little separation.  I think rankings will continue, and eventually the conference title games go away.  That will create some mismatches in my opinion, but unless a team focuses on winning ten every year, they will not be good enough to be in the playoffs, much less win the Natty.

[OregonDucks]

On 11/30/2023 at 9:33 PM, Mike West said:

The only thing I disagree with is the four playoff teams really have been the best.  After COVID the balance started to change.  

 

Now, as in 21';22' and this year, the top 8 teams are fairly close with #s 1&2 separated from the rest.

 

This year there are 8 solid teams with little separation.  I think rankings will continue, and eventually the conference title games go away.  That will create some mismatches in my opinion, but unless a team focuses on winning ten every year, they will not be good enough to be in the playoffs, much less win the Natty.

This year is the exception, not the rule. There usually aren’t this many teams, so closely grouped together, with so little separation. You shouldn’t design a permanent solution based on one observation. 
 

Most years a 6 or 8 team playoff would suffice. 

Edited December 1, 2023 by OregonDucks

[Mike West]

On 11/30/2023 at 10:07 PM, OregonDucks said:

This year is the exception, not the rule. There usually aren’t this many teams, so closely grouped together, with so little separation. You shouldn’t design a permanent solution based on one observation. 
 

Most years a 6 or 8 team playoff would suffice. 

I used to think that way.  Until I saw Utah give Penn State all it could handle (till Cameron Rising got injured).  They were good enough to give Michigan and Ohio State fits last year.  

 

And nobody expected a Mario Cristobal led Oregon team to beat Ohio State in Columbus.  Sometimes it's a matchup deal.  Ohio State sure surprised Georgia last year (as I suspect any team with a high caliber QB to do in the SEC).

 

I'm quite confident the best coaches (and  there are about twenty) can tango with the elite in a one off.  I believe the playoffs are going to surprise people the next couple of years.  Clearly I believe the SEC has been overrated a few years (even OBD ran in Georgia well.  Had Nix had elite WRs, that's a horse race of a game-their secondary rarely gets exposed- and I think that's because the conference has average QBs).  

[Log Haulin]

On 12/1/2023 at 12:33 AM, Mike West said:

I used to think that way.  Until I saw Utah give Penn State all it could handle (till Cameron Rising got injured).  They were good enough to give Michigan and Ohio State fits last year.  

 

And nobody expected a Mario Cristobal led Oregon team to beat Ohio State in Columbus.  Sometimes it's a matchup deal.  Ohio State sure surprised Georgia last year (as I suspect any team with a high caliber QB to do in the SEC).

 

I'm quite confident the best coaches (and  there are about twenty) can tango with the elite in a one off.  I believe the playoffs are going to surprise people the next couple of years.  Clearly I believe the SEC has been overrated a few years (even OBD ran in Georgia well.  Had Nix had elite WRs, that's a horse race of a game-their secondary rarely gets exposed- and I think that's because the conference has average QBs).  

I agree with this. Imo, the separation of the top 10-15 teams is pretty thin. It only takes catching lightning in a bottle, a bounce of the ball, a fingernail swipe on a pass to change everything.

 

At the top, it usually comes down to a couple playes that decide the outcome of games. Oct 14th was one of those games. Bama beat UGA in in CCG in 2021 only to see UGA win a NC.  Texas beat Bama then lost to Okie. Okie lost to 8-4 Jayhawks. As I said, the margins are thin.

 

There are to many factors in college football that dictate the success of a team. Much more than in the NFL.

 

One factor as you said is coaching. A better coach can often find a win over the better team on paper. Deboer has beaten Lanning twice. Lanning has the better talent.

 

Deboer has proven to be a winning coach with a 102-11 record. His experience over Lanning alone is huge. Deboer is brilliant and he has the record to back it up. Lanning is also brilliant but only has 26 games under his belt.

 

So what goes into what makes a team a successful winner. Whats most valuable. Is it coaching, player talent, strength and conditioning, diet, depth... 

 

Then there is the weather, officiating, lucky bounces, freak injuries, home field, lightning in a bottle...

 

All of the above

 

The more teams that are given a chance at post season the better imo. It gives more teams an opportunity.

 

It changes recruiting, the best recruits no longer have to choose between  4-5 teams to chase a title. When more teams have great players, the season is much more interesting and fun. 2023 proves that.

 

So I like the 12 team format. It incentivises team to win conference title with a bye. Keeping the CCG relevant. A loss late doesn't tank your season and it gives us more meaningful football throughout December. 

 

Go Ducks!

[Dave23]

On 11/30/2023 at 11:07 PM, OregonDucks said:

This year is the exception, not the rule.

Going forward I think NIL and the transfer portal will created more parity between the top 10. There's so many reasons "$" to stay in school.

 

I believe this most apparent in the QB room, we're in years past if you were a late bloomer out of high school you ended up on a team that had no chance of making the playoffs. Now instead of entering the draft and hoping for the best they can transfer to a team that has a chance. 

 

Carson Wentz, Trey Lance and Josh Allen are good examples of kids from small schools that could have made a run for it all with different teams. In the case of Wentz and Lance both of them could have benefited tremendously from playing at a higher level and honing their skills before the NFL.