FBS: Has One Thing Right (Maybe)

[IdaGriz01]

I made the thread title deliberately provocative, of course. Still, that was easier to say than something like “FCS: 24 Playoff Teams Makes Regular Season Games Meaningless.”

Has anyone else come across this ESPN page: http://espn.go.com/ncf/notebook/_/p...r-college-football-week-10-victims-survivors
This Eliminator page provides an endless supply of argument, and fun (of a sort). Week-by-week, they divide all 128 FBS teams into three categories: "Still in Contention," "On the Fence," and "Better Luck Next Season."

Here’s a summary of their assessment (opinions) after ten weeks:

So with no teams being knocked out of playoff consideration after Week 10, it was a quiet week for The Eliminator, which will narrow the FBS field from 128 teams to four by the end of the regular season. With five weeks to go before the four-team field is announced for the College Football Playoff, 107 teams have been eliminated from playoff consideration, leaving 21 on the table.

My point, and the relevance to FCS, is that the feeble playoff approach at the FBS level has generated a tremendous amount of interest and made every regular season game important. Basically, only at the absolutely highest level can a team afford to lose even one game. Example: Boise State. They opened with some slight hopes, played Ole Miss tough for three quarters and then got blown out. The Eliminator opinion (probably correct): They were Eliminated after week one.

The Broncos' only chance at making the playoff was going unbeaten.

Now, I happen to think the fact that only four teams will get into their playoff goes too far. When almost every game is “life-or-death” for a team’s playoff hopes, outside factors are exaggerated: A key player gets dinged and is out for a crucial game, terrible weather, etc.

On the other hand, when 24 teams are allowed into the playoff, one can credibly talk about a team with four losses getting a bid. That’s nice, and it could end up helping the Griz ... But does it really make sense?

Individual games for FCS teams are still important, of course, because of the conference auto-bids. (I won’t comment further on some of the weak-a** conferences getting automatic bids.)

Personally, I thought the expansion from 16 teams was a bad idea, so 24 just makes it ridiculous. (And, obviously, the NCAA could give a s**t about my/our opinion. )

 

[ordigger]

My guess is that as the powers that be see what a wonderful idea they created, and the revenue being generated that they expand to 8 quickly, and 16 eventually. Imagine the uproar that will happen once one conference (ie the SEC) gets 2+ teams in while 2-3 other major conferences are snubbed.

No way Big Ten and Big 12 sit quietly this year if FSU, Oregon, Alabama and Miss State make the field and they are left in the cold.

 

[griz4life]

I-AA had it right at 16 teams. It would have been better if only schools with the maximum scholarships allowed participated and no more than two teams per conference were invited with those two teams in opposite brackets for the chance of a conference matchup in the championship.

If you want to participate, invest in your team by offering the maximum number of scholarships.

Finish at least second in conference.

I don't think FBS will expand much beyond 4. The current system allows all the chambers of commerce in bowl cities to keep their stake in winter tourism.

 

[IdaGriz01]

I-AA had it right at 16 teams. It would have been better if only schools with the maximum scholarships allowed participated and no more than two teams per conference were invited with those two teams in opposite brackets for the chance of a conference matchup in the championship.

If you want to participate, invest in your team by offering the maximum number of scholarships.

Finish at least second in conference.

I don't think FBS will expand much beyond 4. The current system allows all the chambers of commerce in bowl cities to keep their stake in winter tourism.

Four can probably be bought off by giving them the first round games for an 8-team playoff. And if you rotate those four, you could co-opt a few more bowl committees.

I think, as ordigger says, there's going to be a huge uproar if (when?) the Big Ten and Big 12 get left out of a four-team playoff. After that, they go to 8 teams sooner rather than later.

 

[garizzalies]

Should be 8 teams. It would make it a lot easier. A conf champ from each of the big-5 and 3 wild cards.

 

[AZGrizFan]

My guess is that as the powers that be see what a wonderful idea they created, and the revenue being generated that they expand to 8 quickly, and 16 eventually. Imagine the uproar that will happen once one conference (ie the SEC) gets 2+ teams in while 2-3 other major conferences are snubbed.

No way Big Ten and Big 12 sit quietly this year if FSU, Oregon, Alabama and Miss State make the field and they are left in the cold.

I'm guessing they get to 8 VERY quickly. 5 conference winners and 3 "at large"....with 60 teams, that's probably a good number for a while...

 

[kemajic]

I like 12 teams for FCS; that still allows for the top four seeds earning a bye, keeping value on the regular season. I do not believe we have ever had a NC that was not in the top 12. 24 is ridiculous.

 

[IdaGriz01]

My guess is that as the powers that be see what a wonderful idea they created, and the revenue being generated that they expand to 8 quickly, and 16 eventually. Imagine the uproar that will happen once one conference (ie the SEC) gets 2+ teams in while 2-3 other major conferences are snubbed.

No way Big Ten and Big 12 sit quietly this year if FSU, Oregon, Alabama and Miss State make the field and they are left in the cold.

I'm guessing they get to 8 VERY quickly. 5 conference winners and 3 "at large"....with 60 teams, that's probably a good number for a while...

That makes a lot of sense (even by the $$ numbers). Then the question becomes how you allocate the three at-large bid. Will they guarantee one or two of those slots to the "other five" conferences? Seem like they would have to throw them a bone to get them to go along.

But almost every year at least a couple of the "favorites" in the power-five conference championship games get upset. Personally, I say "tough ... win the damn game." But there will be huge pressure to keep those big-5 powers in the playoffs.

Of course, any number you pick will cause somebody heartburn. I do think 8 should be about right.

 

[Umista]

More football games for me to ref. I love it! I hope to see 30 ASAP!

I'd insist on seeing games far into spring track season!

 

[dupuyer griz]

My guess is that as the powers that be see what a wonderful idea they created, and the revenue being generated that they expand to 8 quickly, and 16 eventually. Imagine the uproar that will happen once one conference (ie the SEC) gets 2+ teams in while 2-3 other major conferences are snubbed.

No way Big Ten and Big 12 sit quietly this year if FSU, Oregon, Alabama and Miss State make the field and they are left in the cold.

I'm guessing they get to 8 VERY quickly. 5 conference winners and 3 "at large"....with 60 teams, that's probably a good number for a while...

Exactly what it should be, room for the extra teams that are very good and if at the end of the year there were a Marshall/Boise State that belonged it wouldn't be so hard to get them in.