I think the drop off in talent is to big for 16 teams. 8 is perfect like Roam said but 4 conference champs is fine with me that way it gives us something to argue about on which power 5 conference champ got left out, that makes it fun lol

4 teams has been working. I’ve yet to see the final #1 undeserving of the title. Sure some 5’s are better than 3’s or 4’s but not better than the 1’s. Want to get in, then win when it counts.

I agree... If you can't win when it counts and qualify for your own conference championship game then you don't belong playing in a playoff to determine the national champion... I couldn't agree with you more.. .

Now we talking FD. When you lose the last game of the season knowing what’s on the line you don’t deserve to make the playoffs....really why should Alabama try to win if they can sit at home rest and watch other teams beat each other up and know they’re in the playoffs...it’s crap.

A 16 team playoff would make many games meaningless in the regular season. To be honest, those schools FCS have 16 game playoffs (actually it's now 24 teams) because:

1. They don't play as many games in the regular season

2. Their season isn't as physically demanding (I'm sorry, but it isn't. Even players that have left the FBS to play in FCS schools have stated this)

3. Their travel schedule isn't nearly as big, as most FCS and down conference are very regional.

4. Most FCS programs are on equal footing. There's no discrepancy between leagues like there is at the FBS level. Sun Belt and MAC are not equivalent to the Big Ten and SEC.

8 is enough. I don't really care to see the 4th place Big Ten team playing for the national title. 8 makes winning your conference paramount, while still allowing a small bit of wiggle room for a team that maybe had 1 bad day. 16 IMO opens it up too much and makes the regular season less meaningful.

Ohio State won in 2014, yet TCU was ahead of them in the standings going into the final week.

Can you explain how the system "worked" that year, considering TCU's only loss was to #5 Baylor and Ohio State lost to an unranked team that year?
TCU played 4 ranked teams, Ohio State played 2.
TCU beat Minnesota 30-7 while Ohio State only beat Minnesota 31-24.

Logically there was really no reason Ohio State should have been picked over TCU that year.

I'll never understand how losing to an unranked team early in the year is better than losing to a top 10 team late in the year.

Sorry, but I go by WHO you lost to... not when you lost.

I will take a shot at trying to help you understand where I am coming from Roam...Do you agree that football teams improve during the season? Could an injury or 2 to key players impact a team in week 3 and those players return and a team be much better in week 10 or playoff time? How about young teams with Freshman at key positions who improve throughout the course of the season? In every sport isn't it better to be playing your best ball at the end of the season into playoff time? A big game is a big game and when you lose a big game at the end of the season that eliminates you from playing in your conference championship is in effect an elimination game as far as I am concerned...So yes when you lose matters to me...Just as I believe head to head games should be given more importance....I believe this to be of more importance in football than in any other sport...You play less games so improvement from week to week is important and how far you develop as a football team is more apparent to me than any other sport...I ask myself if a team is hot and on an 8 or 9 game win streak if they played the team that beat them week 1, 2 or 3 right now who would win? Who have they beaten over their hot streak? Nobody is going to convince me that Penn State wasn't playing the best football in the country at the end of the 2016 season and didn't deserve a shot in the playoff...I say this not as a Penn State fan but as somebody who understands the game...You can find examples of this in other sports year after year...A team gets off slowly for injury, youth or whatever reason and then catches fire heading into the playoffs...Sorry but in my mind if you lose in a must win game to get into your conference championship game that eliminates you from playing for a national championship...If for no other reason that it gives that team an unfair advantage...They get to sit home, rest, heal, scout and most importantly not risk injury to their players by playing in that game...If you can't even qualify for your own conference championship game you have no business playing for the national title let alone denying an undefeated team an opportunity to play and compete...There ya go Roam...That is my explanation as to why when you lose matters...I agree the games have to count and YES some games are more important than others....

In essence Southern they gave Bama a mulligan...They knew God damned well if they lost that game they weren't going to be in the SEC championship game..That was an elimination game and they knew it...But they also knew with their arrogance that if they lost it wouldn't matter because they are the girl with the curl and were in no matter what happened...That was wrong and if it was any other team in the country they would have been eliminated with that loss and rightfully so...That is what pisses me off the most...That game didn't matter and it should have...It should have been an elimination game like it would have been for any other team in the country...Could you imagine the narrative if it was Penn State vs. Michigan or Michigan State at the end of the year...Win and your in or lose and your out...What do you think the ESPN narrative would have been? You think if Penn State loses that ballgame they are in the CFP? How bout Wiscy? Washington? ….Nough said....

So again, losing to an unranked team doesn't matter... but losing to one of the top teams in the nation in the regular season does matter if it happens to be at the end of the year.

If that's true, why the heck would teams even schedule good games at the end of the season anymore? Ridiculous. Wisconsin plays Minnesota while Alabama has to play #5 Auburn? Georgia gets to play GT while Ohio State has to play #14 Michigan?

Seems a bit unbalanced. One set of teams gets an easy game at the end and gets rewarded for it, while the other team has to play a tough game and in your system would be nixed.

To me, it's called the REGULAR SEASON for a reason. It's not post season. There are no elimination games. That's the freaking point of a regular season, all games count not just the ones at the end.

Everything you just said betrays the central point you've been trying to make, that you hate the eye test.

Yet now you are saying "teams get better as the season goes on".  Well, what exactly are you basing that on? Hint: Eye test. That's a completely subjective way to look at teams...

"Well Penn State lost late in the season, so they don't deserve to go because this team over here got better as the season went on" - How on earth is that not an "eye test"??????

And again, I still don't see how losing to an unranked team in November is somehow more forgivable than losing to the #5 team in the nation. Just because of when they played.

I don't know how you came to that conclusion Roam? What don't you understand about If you do NOT qualify for your conference championship game you shouldn't qualify for the national title...ie...If a hot team with 2 losses plays for their conference championship and WIN they should be in before ANY and ALL 1 loss teams that did NOT qualify and play in their conference championship game...As far as I am concerned Alabama knew the stakes last year when they played Auburn...The arrogant son of a bitch Saban knew God damned well his sacred cow could lose that ballgame and would still get into the playoff over a more deserving conference champion...They started that propaganda campaign on ESPN with the shills Booger McFarlan and David Pollack going on about a 2 loss Bama team getting in based on the "eyeball test"...As I said earlier...A team may lose 2 games early and go on a streak and win their conference championship...They deserve to be in the CFP BEFORE a 1 loss team who didn't qualify for their conference championship...PERIOD!!!!

I don't know if I am typing in English or if I am not being clear regarding my statement...If a team loses 2 games early in the year and I don't give a shit if they lose to our lady of the blessed sacrament at home week 1 and lose to our lady of assumption week 3...If they win the rest of their games go on a streak and WIN their conference championship they deserve to be in the CFP ahead of a 1 loss team who didn't qualify for their conference championship...What gives a team the right to compete for the National Championship if you didn't even qualify for your own conference championship? To me that is just common sense...When you have 4 slots open you pick the best 4 conference champions and somebody stays home...Any other way makes the conference championship irrelevant and the whole thing a beauty pageant...And that is what you have now...You have a bunch of suits who are beholden to the network ESPN and the big money advertisers picking the 4 teams they feel will generate the most eyeballs and ad revenue...You now take the games out of the equation and make it an opinion tournament...It's a farce....

What is arbitrary about WINNING your conference championship to be eligible for the CFP? You win or you go home...NO eyeball test there Roam...5 conference champs are eligible and you leave one home...What's even more ridiculous is the fact that a team that didn't even friggin qualify for their conference championship let alone win it is chosen to play in the CFP...Oh so you aren't good enough to play for your conference title but we will give you a pass to be 1 of just 4 teams to play for the national title...It's not only illogical but makes a sham of playing for your conference championship...McFarlan and Pollack were pontificating back in early October of last year that if Wisconsin would win the B1g championship with one loss that a 1 loss Bama should get the nod over them even if they didn't qualify for the SEC championship game...It's a joke...

What the you fail to realize is you doing the same thing. Yeah, it is a beauty contest... Of course it is. Same way taking just conference champions is a beauty contest too if there are only 4 slots.

Which conference should be left out? Why? Why not a Sun Belt team? Why not an AAC team? Which conference gets who in? At least I am acknowledging that it is a beauty contest. In the current system, I want the 4 best teams. How is that determined? What did they do in every game.

You are trying to convince yourself that somehow taking conference champions is "objective". It isn't in a 4 team system. What about Notre Dame? BYU? Etc.? How do they get in? Why is the Pac 12 champ over the Big 12? Who gets picked? It's still a beauty contest.

That's why I am for 8. I think it is a good balance of objective and subjective

Taking 4 conference Champs is a hell of a lot more objective than this system is... You had an undefeated UCF get left out last season so those teams need to create their own subdivision because they are never going to have an opportunity to play for a national title under this system anyway... At least by taking conference champions you take away 95% of the arbitrary nonsense out of the process...

Roam is for a 8 team playoff, he always has been. We have 5 power conferences take the highest ranked 4 champions and let them battle it out on the field and let’s us argue about who got left out, I love the way that sounds lol

No you don't. You just make it an arbitrary BS choice between what conference is better than another.

Every single year you get to tell a conference that they suck, and leave out better teams in favor of a team that won and inferior conference. A few years back Florida hammered Florida State, FSU lost like 3 games, but FSU won the ACC. Florida lost someone, I forget who, but didn't win the SEC with one loss.

Congrats, you have a 3 loss FSU squad that was embarrassed by Florida playing for a national title while a one-loss Florida is on the sidelines. That's just stupid. It is why a 4 team playoff doesn't work.

Again, taking just conference champions doesn't remove 95% of anything. All it does is arbitrarily value all teams in theconference, then try to make a value judgment about which conference champion is better. So now you're not selecting teams by who's the best, you're selecting teams by how good the other teams are in their conference.

This doesn't even begin to address what you do with Notre Dame and other teams. I guess you just force them to join a conference at that point? But which conference do they join, because depending on when they're good you might leave that conference out. So now, that team is left out of the playoff and in a conference they never wanted to be in to begin with.

Again, that's why I want an eight playoff system. There's no way to make a four-team playoff equitable. It will always come down to some sort of beauty contest, and making it about conference champions doesn't change that. It doesn't mitigate the fact that you're arbitrarily selecting teams based on how good other teams in their conference are.

This is why I want 8, 4 sucks and it always will suck.

Oh I get it, I just don't agree with it. In 2016 Penn State was on fire, we then promptly lost the Rose Bowl to USC. So what, that doesn't count we should have been playing for the national title? yeah we were on a streak and won the Big Ten, we also went to a bowl game and lost to a team that didn't even play in their title game.

I know you want to wax all poetic about streaks and how teams from conferences that win a lot of games at the end are better at the end of the year than the beginning... but at the end of the day our 2016 team proved that that doesn't mean jack. We still lost to the third place team in the Pac-12 in the Rose Bowl.

Are you telling me that our 2016 team would have won the national title, or beaten Alabama? Because we couldn't even beat USC.

This argument is entirely pointless, because you're arguing for a system that only has four spots yet five power conference champions. So rather than pick one team that didn't win their conference, you'd rather pick between teams that did win their conferences.

As I've said all along, I am for an 8 team playoff. you keep rebutting with theoretical arguments about a four-team playoff, I just don't give a crap about a four-team playoff. as I've said multiple times, anyway you slice it a four-team playoff is an eye test and always will be. No matter who you select or what criteria you use

I didn't say winning a conference championship was arbitrary, I said that picking between 5 conference champions and independents is an arbitrary choice when there are only four spots.

I don't know how many times I have to say this, a 4-team system sucks no matter what criteria you use to pick. with five power 5 Conference champions, you are arbitrarily saying which conference is worst and leaving them out. you also aren't taking any Independents, so Notre Dame doesn't get in while four other conference champions do. Or you choose to leave out two conference champions in favor of Notre Dame.

I will say it one last time, no matter how you slice it a four-team playoff is completely arbitrary. Period. There's no way around it. you can't make it about the best teams, because then you're leaving out Conference champions. You can't make it about conference champions, because then you're leaving out an entire conference and Independents, or two conferences in favor of an independent. NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, IT IS STILL COMPLETELY ABOUT AN EYE TEST.

This is why I am for an 8 team playoff. You get to take all Power 5 champions, you guarantee one group of 5 in there every year, AND you still get 2 other teams with a wild card. It satisfies the conference champ crowd, the group of 5 crowd, and still allows the crowd that likes eyeball tests their teams as well.

I think it is the best way to satisfy everyone.

To be fair #1 it was a home game for USC and #2 It just so happens that USC was arguably the hottest team in college football at that time as well...They put the 2 hottest teams in college football against each other...Is the outcome of that game different if it is played in Tampa as opposed to being played in LA? Before you discount that keep in mind how the NFL lines are affected when a west coast team travels east to play a 1pm game….So yes I think Penn State deserved and earned their way into the playoff by beating Ohio State head to head and winning the B1G championship game...It may just be perception but it sure seems like all of Bama's semifinal games are either in New Orleans or Atlanta...I would love to see these southern teams travel north once in a while to play a meaningful game on a late November Saturday in 30 degree weather in a hostile environment...It just seems every game is at a neutral site in the south...

I am done arguing about this. I simply will not continue in an argument where you continually deride people using "eye tests", then use rebuttals like "well arguably the two hottest teams at the end of the year" WHICH IS AN EYE TEST.

USC did not win it's conference. It didn't even play for it. You have continually used that as a disqualifer for everything I say, yet use it when it conveniently becomes useful. You can't have it both ways. You can't say teams that don't play for conference championships aren't worthy, then turn around and say losing to USC in 2016 isn't important because "they were hot".

Oh, and BTW Alabama went out to LA that year and embarrassed USC. So the west coast didn't affect them any.

I am for an 8 team playoff.

I hope y’all see what kind of debate we can have with a true top 5, look no further than this true top 5 and the debate we had! I only rank the top 5 because this is where the big dawgs play!

You know me Southern, I love a good debate and take no offense to someone having a different opinion.

I thank you and Funeral for a nice back and forth!

I am right there with you Roam...It's enjoyable to have these debates and discussions with knowledgeable people...This forum is tremendous...I come here to find out all of recruiting information, injury information and general information regarding the program...All of the guys here are tremendous and I would be remis if I didn't give Caven props for continuing this forum...Well done Roam and we can continue this next week when Southern riles me up by ranking Bama 1st again....LOL...