»
Topic: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion
Replies: 66   Last Post: Dec 18, 2018 9:01 AM by: RC Tiger®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 66  

TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[3]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 4:44 PM
 

 
Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

The current College Football Playoff format sits at four teams, but there have been the recent talks of expanding the field to eight teams. Don’t count Clemson head coach Dabo Swinney as a fan of that scenario. Full Story »



Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 5:19 PM
 

Makes sense. I don’t like the idea UG(L)A should have been included since they lost their chance in the SEC game. Ohio State got pummeled by a bad team and was not impressive outside of Mich game. I like the concept of being unique.


Dabo gets it

[3]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 5:20 PM
 

Who you play and the results of the regular season have to matter. You shouldn't just get a ticket to play and perhaps hit a hot streak for a few games at the end of the season just because you finished at the top of mediocre conference and didn't beat anyone outside of it.


Re: Dabo gets it

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 5:38 PM
 

I agree. The fewer the teams, the more the regular season matters and more intense it becomes. If UCF wants the chance to get into the dance, they should have scheduled with FL to beef up their schedule. Clemson plays 2 non-conference games a year against the SEC (although one is by default) but it's not Mercer the week before Auburn. Oh yeah, UGA don't lose 2 games and cry for a spot.

2019 white level member

Re: Dabo gets it


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 12:46 AM
 

It’s too bad we have to play SCAR every year. We could easily line up against U.K., Ole Miss, MSU, Florida, and UT and start running up wins against them just as easily.


Re: Dabo gets it


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:26 PM
 

The more water you add to stew, the worse it tastes. I think that we're in danger of diluting our bowl system to the point it becomes meaningless. On the other side of the coin, we Americans have an insatiable appetite for football, so I guess if there's a market somebody's going to fill it. I graduated from San Diego State, and if the Aztecs had won five games and were playing in a bowl game, I'd d##n sure watch it. It is what it is.


Marlborocountycoot = dgcannon39 = tiger michael = Reggaeman


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:43 PM
 

fno


Re: Dabo gets it


Posted: Dec 14, 2018 5:38 PM
 

I agree. The fewer the teams, the more the regular season matters and more intense it becomes. If UCF wants the chance to get into the dance, they should have scheduled with FL to beef up their schedule. Clemson plays 2 non-conference games a year against the SEC (although one is by default) but it's not Mercer the week before Auburn. Oh yeah, UGA don't lose 2 games and cry for a spot.

2019 white level member

100000% agree With Dabo!!

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 5:47 PM
 

Stop watering down the regular season. The games matter. Its what makes college football 100x better than nfl or garbage D1AA and below garbage. I could do without 300 bowl games, but whatever on that.


DITTO! Dabo is right --- as usual***

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 9:25 PM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:23 PM
 

Well of course the coach of a team who is heads and shoulders above everybody else in his conference doesn't want to see the playoff expand.

You let Clemson be sitting on the outside one year with a strong strength of schedule and see what he has to say about it.


You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[2]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:25 PM
 

If we have a strong SOS, we won’t be on the outside. That’s what the committee looks at.


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[2]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:36 PM
 

I meant with a couple losses and you know that.

UGA played multiple teams that finished in the top 15 including the #1 team. The highest ranked team we played was #19.

Ohio St. had wins over #7 and #12 and only had one loss on the season. They deserve a shot at it.

UCF was barely behind us in some SOS rankings and yet they don’t get a chance.

You let Clemson be one of those teams and I guarantee you Dabo is ranting about it....


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[5]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:47 PM
 

Why would we want to fraudulently represent ourselves as a national championship contender if we lost 2 games? No thanks

2019 purple level member

This^^^^

[1]
Posted: Dec 15, 2018 7:25 AM
 

And Dabo won’t say a word in protest about it.

military_donation.jpg

If we would have lost to A&M this year


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 10:28 AM
 

And finished #5, Dabo would not be saying this system is perfect and his players don't deserve a shot. He would have stuck up for his guys (because that's what he should do) and argued that we're a different team now, Trevor wasn't playing yet, etc., and that we deserve a shot to play for it all. His job is to argue for what benefits his team (and him) the most and right now this system benefits us. He'll want it to stay top 4 until we're not in the top 4.

2019 student level member

Re: If we would have lost to A&M this year

[2]
Posted: Dec 15, 2018 11:00 AM
 

I don’t think so. Dabo is a man of accountability. If Clemson is #5 it’s because we lost. Dabo understands that and he’s not a man of double standards where he is willing to hold UGA, OSU or anyone else to a different standard than Clemson. Sorry but I don’t buy it. Nothing Dabo has done up to this point would lead me to believe otherwise.

military_donation.jpg

Re: If we would have lost to A&M this year


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:13 PM
 

You’re moving he goalpost. Dabo would argue why we should be 1 of the teams in the dance. Not that the field should be enlarged to include us at #5. OSU and UGA have no argument why they should be top 4 so they want a field of 6 or more.


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:49 PM
 

I along with a lot of other people thought UGA had an argument. I thought the committee could go either way and they went with OU. I was fine with that. OU had the better record and were conf champs. UGA had a shot at determining their own destiny, so they really have nobody to blame but themselves.

tOSU had a really, really bad loss to Purdue...not even a close loss like Pitt or Syracuse but a total blowout. So, once again they have nobody to blame but themselves.

I think you found one guy that said that UCF's SOS was comparable to ours. The other major ones have us listed at the top. I think UCF played Memphis three times last year and twice this year. It looks like their schedule is starting to improve, but until they manage to schedule and beat top-ranked teams, they aren't going to get the respect they want.

I said at the beginning of the season that we would have to win big and probably have to go undefeated because of the ACC being down. Dabo and the Tigers met that challenge. They left no room for doubt. This year was probably the least debate I remember about us even being in the CFP.

So my view is, if you're conference is weak, you had better win convincingly and have at least one or two OOC good wins as well. If Clemson doesn't do that one year, I'll just have to live with that.


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself


Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:59 PM
 

If UCF would play in DV every year, i bet Dabo would give them a shot...

2019 white level member

Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 8:38 PM
 

why do you think one loss is "worse" than any other loss, they are the result of mistakes made by one team and capitalized by another team... it all comes down to a few plays.

Ohio State was in the Purdue game until the fourth quarter, it was not a head to tail blowout... every time OSU made a play, Purdue responded with a big play... OSU defense made mistakes, Heisman finalist quarterback D. Haskins made a bad play for a pick 6...

I think our win over Syracuse was the best win of the season, others would say we almost lost. That was a huge win, lots of adversity that week and Chase Brice steps up along with the rest of the team and pulls out a win... is that a bad win?

IMHO a loss is loss and a win is a win... they end up in one column or the other.

What you could say is Ohio State was working thru defensive issues; especially with assignments and linebacker play (hence the 3 long runs).. I think the Michigan game demonstrated they fixed that.

Georgia lost 2 games, one to hapless LSU, that was a loss. If you watch the game they were never in it. I don't consider it a "bad loss" I consider it a loss. That was one loss. OU lost to Texas in a defenseless game on both sides, as is the Big-12 style of play... Texas had one more stop than OU. That was a loss, same as Georgia's loss. In the rematch Texas made mistakes, it cost them the game.

how can anyone excuse the coaching decisions made in the Ga-'Bama game and defend Georgia as a contender? They are a 2 loss team, not because "Bama was better but because Georgia was worse...

My 2 cents... fire away.

military_donation.jpg

Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself


Posted: Dec 14, 2018 8:56 PM
 

I’m not interested in debating the whole UGA thing again. I said I accepted the committee’s decision to put OU in.

However saying a loss is a loss doesn’t make any sense at all. Did you say that when we lost to Syracuse because we played most of the game without our starting QB? Were you sorry that the committee evaluated that and decided to place us in anyway? Likewise, should we relinquish our Natty because we played poorly and got robbed by the officials in a one point loss to Pitt? Again, they considered our whole body of work and the fact that we were on fire for the rest of that season. That’s why there is a committee and the point of human evaluation.

tOSU lost by 29 points to an unranked team. It wasn’t close. There were no mitigating factors. I would hardly call LSU “hapless” at #11. That’s like what Dabo says about people complaining about the Gator Bowl. They are a good team. UGA lost to them at the beginning of the season. At the end of the season they lost to the defending national champ and unanimous, undisputed #1 team with supposedly the best team and QB they have ever had. They lost in the last 3 mins after leading the entire game. You can say what you want about the stupid coaching and I will agree. However, I’m pretty sure on every level that is not as bad as a 29 point loss to an unranked team.


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself


Posted: Dec 14, 2018 9:04 PM
 

In 2016 when Pitt beat our Tigers on a last second field goal, 3 of the next 4 teams behind us (I believe) lost the same day. Not much changed in the rankings and made it possible for the Tigers to eventually move back up to #2. That was a loss that could have been a disaster that had little consequence as far the playoffs.

2019 white level member

Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[2]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 7:26 PM
 

Jhop83® said:

I meant with a couple losses and you know that.

UGA played multiple teams that finished in the top 15 including the #1 team. The highest ranked team we played was #19.

Ohio St. had wins over #7 and #12 and only had one loss on the season. They deserve a shot at it.

UCF was barely behind us in some SOS rankings and yet they don’t get a chance.

You let Clemson be one of those teams and I guarantee you Dabo is ranting about it....


I'll ask again.... WHO'S WE?....


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself

[2]
Posted: Dec 15, 2018 12:50 AM
 

Jhop83® said:

I meant with a couple losses and you know that.

UGA played multiple teams that finished in the top 15 including the #1 team. The highest ranked team we played was #19.

Ohio St. had wins over #7 and #12 and only had one loss on the season. They deserve a shot at it.

UCF was barely behind us in some SOS rankings and yet they don’t get a chance.

You let Clemson be one of those teams and I guarantee you Dabo is ranting about it....


Can you please stop pretending to be a tiger...it makes you look even more like a coward coot fan in hiding.

PS: We’ve won the ACC 4 years in a row so we would have been in the Playoffs either way.


no, that's exactly it. those teams blew their chances


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 10:51 AM
 

Uga and Ohio state got blown out by lester teams.

The season just means more in this format.

This system gives 2 more teams a shot vs the old BCS system. I think it's sufficient and if we lose 2 games oh well, we're probably out for that year.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 3:02 PM
 

Hey man, what more can Dabo do than go undefeated?


Re: You just managed somehow to argue against yourself


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:11 PM
 

Not fair. These schedules are set years in advance, so how could Clemson or anyone else possibly effect that. Plus, we are getting set to go against the number 3, and undefeated, team in the country. How is that a pass? How is that "easy"? Give me a break. What? Do we have to play the New England Patriots to satisfy you? Look man, I've been one of the harshest critics of our team this year, and have taken some heat for it. And I've cautioned my fellow fans on this thread against overconfidence, while hoping desperately that we'll win. I think that we will, but suspect that it will be a slug-fest. But, we have the best QB in college football, and that I think will be the difference, in addition to the best RB.


Dabo to Jhop...

[2]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 10:18 PM
 



Go troll somewhere else kook.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 11:22 AM
 

Well said. The fewer the teams the easier it is for Clemson.

8 teams guarantees at least two SEC teams every year.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

"Smelley, Garcia, and Beecher are going to lead you to 4-8." - york_tiger


I know you like the idea because the best seasons in gcock history

[2]
Posted: Dec 15, 2018 12:30 PM
 

have two losses or more but there’s no need to water down the sport for underachieving hack programs like SC.

military_donation.jpg

Re: I know you like the idea because the best seasons in gcock history


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 1:29 PM
 

Why are you afraid of expansion?

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

"Smelley, Garcia, and Beecher are going to lead you to 4-8." - york_tiger


There you go with another coot conspiracy. Nobody is “afraid” of expansion.


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:31 PM
 

Why do you insist on lowering the standards of the sport? Never mind. We all know why.

https://www.tigernet.com/forum/message/The-playoff-doesnt-need-to-be-fixed-24668947#24668947

military_donation.jpg

Re: I know you like the idea because the best seasons in gcock history


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:39 PM
 

I'm not "afraid" of expansion, but am really concerned about injuries to players who are already exhausted by a full season's play. I mean, frankly, I'd love the extra games, but how much do we want to load onto our players? I read a statement online by by one of our top receivers about how tired they were, and how much they needed the oncoming break. I just don't know.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:23 PM
 

Excuse me, you lost me on the first turn. How would the other-world scenario that you propose benefit Clemson?? Good luck in the Belk Bowl. Now where is that played? Here in the U.S., or does one need a passport to get there?


09 - Just consider every SC-Clemson game a playoff game


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:31 PM
 

Whatever works … no argument from me that SEC West is strong but SEC East is weaker sauce with UGA and UF coming up ...

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

at least?***


Posted: Dec 16, 2018 3:59 AM
 




It'll give you Coot fans an extra team you'll buy gear for***


Posted: Dec 18, 2018 9:01 AM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:30 PM
 

You are saying that BC and NC state aren't good teams? Syracuse?? Hello??


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[6]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:46 PM
 

I agree with Dabo but for different reasons. I have heard and read the outcries for an expanded playoff bracket. I have not heard anyone speak from the view of the players. Expansion means adding yet another game to the schedule. Their bodies have already taken a beating since August. A common theme among players after the ACC Championship game was a longing for the time off to heal. Add another round to the playoffs and this is not an option for eight teams. I am well aware they are young and resilient, but there comes a point where enough is enough. If you want to be part of the playoff, schedule tough competition and win convincingly.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:43 PM
 

Well put. I totally agree!


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:49 PM
 

I’m not opposed to an eight team format. That allows all “Power 5” conference champions to compete for the National championship. However, now is not the right time. There’s currently one company that dominates the sports media market, and they want a return on their investment. So, an eight team format simply means at least two, (champion and runner-up) probably three, SEC teams get in the tournament every year. The good ole “eye test” would again prevail. A better solution would be to geographically realign to eight conferences. Shorten the regular season a bit, then the eight conference champions, and ONLY the eight conference champions, compete for a title.


Dabo

[4]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 6:50 PM
 



2019 purple level member

Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 7:03 PM
 

Funky "Called" Medina?? Baby, it's "called" outside.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


My take on the playoffs

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 7:10 PM
 

First off...
In most years, teams beyond the 5th ranking don't even deserve to be playing for a Nat.
Championship. But if they wanna expand the play-offs, fine. But several things need to
happen. First, do away with the divisions in each conference- or- regardless of what
division you're in. The top 2 teams play for the conference championship- Making a con-
ference championship alot more important, because they should be.
Or, we could add another regular season game, and keep the 4 teams- either way.

#21


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[4]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 8:20 PM
 

I've said this a couple of times before, but I'll say it again:

The CFP playoff is to determine a National Champion, ergo, the goal is for THE BEST team to be selected for the playoffs. Not the four best teams; The Best team.

Not once has The Best team been left out of the playoffs. It's true that there is controversy about whether the playoffs have always represented "the top four teams," but that's missing the point - if you're the fourth-best team, and you're left out ... so what?

As long as the #1 team in the nation is included in the playoffs each year (and it always has been), the format is working. This way, the #1 team gets a fair chance to be national champion.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 14, 2018 8:51 PM
 

you do need someone to play....I disagree with "the goal is for THE BEST team to be selected for the playoffs" the goal is to allow the best team to play for the championship, the way you describe it we don't need a playoff we already determined the "Best Team" ...

If the goal is the "Best Teams" what determines the "Best Teams" .... should there be criteria? I would love to see some transparency in the selection committee, not the talking head that comes out and makes the same comment each week... the bylaws state that Conference Champions should be given consideration but obviously that doesn't matter... so what exactly determined the outcome? Inquiring minds (millions of them) want to know...

These people are not compensated for the their work and I believe they are doing their best to get the right teams into the CFP.

from the CFP site:

"Four Teams

The selection committee ranks the teams based on the members’ evaluation of the teams’ performance on the field, using conference championships won, strength of schedule, head-to-head results, and comparison of results against common opponents to decide among teams that are comparable. "

no "eye test" anywhere.. :)

military_donation.jpg

Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[2]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 8:57 PM
 

"I disagree with "the goal is for THE BEST team to be selected for the playoffs" the goal is to allow the best team to play for the championship, the way you describe it we don't need a playoff we already determined the "Best Team" ..."

There's an uncertainty principle at play here. Selecting 4 teams, instead of 2, reduces that uncertainty to probably less than 10%, maybe less than 5%.

You can't just "name" a best team - well, sometimes you can - and having a playoff with only 2 teams increases (exponentially) the odds that the Best Team won't make the playoff.

Having 8 teams is, in my opinion, overkill. 4 seems like a good number, and I suspect (TV revenues aside) that's why they chose 4. (Not to mention that an 8-team playoff will increase the chance of injuries).

Cheers,
DR


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 3:14 PM
 

You make some great points. The fact is that there is no perfect way to make these determinations. How do they do it in the Olympics? On performance, not on the opinion of sportswriters. "Potential" and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee---and nothing more. Write it down.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 14, 2018 10:43 PM
 

Last year we were #1 Alabama was #4. Alabama and UGa had lost to Auburn team that we had beaten. I know no one that thinks CUT would have beaten either of them. Years ago fsu and um went all over the country playing tough teams that is what ucf has to do if they want respect.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:34 PM
 

But, if you lose, you lose, which is why they call it a loss. We had no way of beating Bama with Kelly Bryant at QB. They were salivating at the prospect. If we get past Notre Dame, we can have a shot at Alabama because we have a QB who can stretch the field, and make them defend it. And they can't totally concentrate on that because we have running backs who can burn them. So I think we have a shot---if we can get past Notre Dame. We play our best game (whatever that is)against them, or all the rest is academic.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 8:25 AM
 

2014 TCU and 2017 UCF may well have been the best teams and they were left out.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:53 PM
 

I agree! How else can you judge it other than performance on the field. "Best team" is a subjective judgement, an opinion. Best performing team is right there up on the scoreboard. Who won, who lost.
Numbers!! "Potential" will get you a cup of coffee and not much more. Basically BS for losers.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 16, 2018 1:38 AM
 

Except for the fact that since the playoff era began, the team ranked #1 coming in has yet to win a Natty

2019 orange level membermilitary_donation.jpg

Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion

[1]
Posted: Dec 14, 2018 9:14 PM
 

+ 1 Dabo. THIS ***


Nein ! Nein ! Nein !


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 12:11 AM
 

Without writing a book ... we need to determine the true Champion ...

SIXTEEN team playoff

Championship of EACH FBS Conference automatically goes (10 Teams)
+
SIX Wildcards, determined by ranking
=
16 Team Playoff, Sweet 16 of College Football

Everybody lose one cupcake game a year, for 11 game regular season, make room for playoff games

FCS has very similar system now, works very well

What do with extra week, lost revenue ???

Use that extra free weekend in the stadium for a Rock Concert, Rap Concert, Country Concert, Trump Rally, Hillary Rally, Don Lemon Rally, Tractor Pull, Demolition Derby, whatever ... whatever the local population is "in too" ... Also gives our Student-Athletes more time to study for bio-chem, math class, recover from injuries ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeD3S_Vmb0g

fred

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Nein ! Nein ! Nein !


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:09 AM
 

How about 11 teams... top 3 get a double bye and an 8 team playoff for the fourth slot. All conference champions get in and one wild card.

Top teams get some rest and UCF gets their chance to (get) expose(d by) the 4th best team in the country.


Re: Nein ! Nein ! Nein !


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 2:56 PM
 

Ich weiss nicht was soll es bedeuten. Man, not funny.


That'll work ...***


Posted: Dec 16, 2018 5:32 PM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

They have a hard time placing just 4 good teams


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 8:25 AM
 

Both the top seeds in the semi-finals are double digit favorites this year. I don't remember a truly competitive semi game other than UGA/OU last year. An eight team field this year would've meant Alabama playing UCF with a backup quarterback. Anyone who thinks that should be a part of determining the championship is an idiot.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: They have a hard time placing just 4 good teams


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 3:17 PM
 

I agree. I personally think that Notre Dame is to be respected, if not feared. I really hope that I'm wrong.


The Funky Cold Medina Poulan Weedeater Bowl.


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 10:46 AM
 

Another classic from Dabo.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 1:08 PM
 

Regular season has to matter, season already drags out as it is.

Maybe get rid of divisions and conference championship games which are becoming meaningless (although lucrative). Top 2 in each power 5 plus 2 wildcards for 12 team deal. Number of games about same, every legit team gets chance.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 1:17 PM
 

This is the rare thing I don’t agree with Dabo on. I would prefer a 6 team playoff as long as they don’t stick 3 3 loss sec teams that were overrated at the beginning of the season and barely drop in the ranks cause they go against other overranked teams. I think the 6 team playoff would give teams like ucf an opportunity as wildcards. The 2 tops seeds like us and bama would get bye weeks while the bottom 4 battle it out. Also if the team doesn’t have a conference championship game that should automatically count as a loss when determining the six teams. But what do I know I’m just a cfb fan and they’d probably find a way to put 4 sec teams in everytime. I think less bowl games would be better because literally that is what dilutes the postseason imo. Of course a star/nfl prospect on a 6-6 team getting into a bowl game isn’t gonna play and risk his livelihood on the rv world bowl


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:44 PM
 

I think that the current system works just fine. I'm not an expert, and have no horse in this race.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 15, 2018 5:46 PM
 

Ok, I'm going to watch a couple of movies. Hope we beat ND.


Re: TNET: Swinney makes the case for no College Football Playoff expansion


Posted: Dec 17, 2018 6:48 PM
 

Six is perfect.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Replies: 66  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Boston College
FOR SALE: TWO TICKETS ON 40 YARD LINE VISITORS SIDE SECTION P, ROW NN, SEATS 22-24. GREAT SEATS 8 ROWS DOWN ...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
4790 people have read this post