Until they change the equation for ranking teams during preseason and how they grade teams for post season, you can add as many teams as you want, the results will not change. Instead of having 4 P5 teams in the playoffs, you will have 8 P5 teams. I know that many say that a “G5 Playoff” is like bringing your sister to the prom, however if done right, with enough muscle and $$ behind it, I could see it working. If not, then we just need to stop bitching and understand G5’s purpose in college football - being the bitches to P5 and keep hoping for big paydays when we play them (until that changes too)
Good discussion there.
The best way for the rich to stay rich is to make the little guy feel like he’s got a chance if he works hard enough. Right now, they aren’t doing that. That’s typically when the door opens on something drastic happening.
2 Likes
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." JFK
Compare / contrast the CFP with this CBB ranking and tell me which sport is healthier ?
The AP rankings aren’t much different. Half of the top 6 are from non P5 conferences. That is a sport I am much more interested in watching.
1 Like
Since 2000, 12 diff teams (20 championships) have won a natty in college basketball. 15 of those championships came from 2 conferences.
Butler went to back to back championship games and came within a couple inches of winning one of them. Gonzaga is ranked #1 and has one of the longest consecutive NCAA streaks. Neither of those are possible in the CFP.
3 Likes
They both have issues with parity. One more so than the other. They should expand the field in football but that likely won’t fix much.
I would argue that if a non P5 football team hired HOF coach (say Urban Meyer at Cincy) then yes they could play for a natty.
I guess no one is surprised that I would point this out, but take a look at college baseball. Coastal, Cal St Fullerton, Fresno St, and Rice all have national titles since 2003. Ironically, it’s the terrible 11.7 scholarship rule that helps make this possible.
1 Like
This is the same as the argument you previously, that you didn’t respond to. By your logic then, the P5 should really just be the P2.
I don’t know what you mean.
My point is you can expand the CFP (and I think they should) but I don’t think it changes much as it relates to who wins national championships. The P5 teams will still have a distinct advantage. They’ll make sure with the seeding. I wouldn’t point to the NCAA tournament as a bastion of fairness.
It absolutely matters regarding competitive balance, especially for recruiting. But it also prevents stagnation of the product which is in danger of running more and more fans away. The current fanbase is aging out and ESPN has fucked this up by alienating all but about 8 schools at any one time. It’s myopic as hell.
I don’t disagree but the NCAA tourney is stagnant as well. 3 teams have won 6 of the last 10 tournament titles. That’s competitive balance?
I could list 5 teams this year and barring COVID I think I will get it right.
Everyone has a path to an NCAA championship in hoops. They are not all equitable, but at least there’s a path. Again, see Gonzaga and Butler and even Loyola and George Mason and VCU and San Diego State, and on and on.
2 Likes
Are we just focusing on who wins the title or who gets invited to the title party?
Personally I just want more folks invited to the party. If bama wins it every year that sucks but it is what it is and maybe we can look at how to even that our. We can fix who gets invited to the party immediately though.
In basketball most everyone with a remote shot gets invited to the party no where even close to that in football.
Fully agree on who gets invited but I saw the words competitive balance somewhere.
If it’s just let an arbitrary number in just to let them in then fine. Okay with me. It likely will not have any affect on competitive balance. It hasn’t in the NCAA tourney. Are there a few HOF coaches outside of the P5 who have been successful in the tourney? Yes. If you expanded the CFP to 8 or 16 and a G5 hired a HOF coach they could likely make some noise too.
If every team in D1 can tell a player he has a path to the tourney I am not sure how it helps recruiting. If you’re telling me a recruit would pick Charlotte over a top P5 if they expand the CFP and they now theoretically have a shot a CFP national championship, I would have a hard time believing it.
More teams in the playoffs could also help even out recruiting classes. Right now the top recruits pretty much know they aren’t going to win a championship unless they go to 1 of about 4 or 5 programs. This could help spread out some of the talent. I don’t know that going to 8 teams would make much of a difference but 12 or 16 probably would. Right now the drop off in talent from the top 5 programs to that next level is pretty big. Spread that talent out among 16 teams instead of just 4 or 5 & it could really cut down on the gap & help the competition.
1 Like
I think it’s the trickle down impact. The top 5/6 P5 stock pile talent. If some of the players start to go to other schools down the line because they have a better shot the recruiting says more fall to our level. So we don’t pick up the 5 stars but maybe we grab some givers 3s and some 4s.
2 Likes
What I mean is, if your argument is you think they should expand but it doesn’t matter, you’re not helping your argument at all. You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.
It might be a long shot for G5 but at least it’s a shot. No one is saying it won’t be difficult.