Home field advantage in all the games so far has been massive and intimidating. But i guess that's the way it goes.

bluehenbear said:

---

Home field advantage in all the games so far has been massive and intimidating. But i guess that's the way it goes.

---

It's by design to give the big name schools even more of an advantage.

How about home and away - total points? Not unprecedented in the Professional Sports world.

Yeah, but all the round one losers were obviously way worse teams to begin with.. so did it really matter?

Bobodeluxe said:

---

How about home and away - total points? Not unprecedented in the Professional Sports world.

---

And double the number of playoff games? Or at least the initial round? Not possible, especially in college ball. Even the pros wouldn't consider this for football.
One could argue neutral site for all games, but that punishes the team with the better record.

TandemBear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

How about home and away - total points? Not unprecedented in the Professional Sports world.

---

And double the number of playoff games? Or at least the initial round? Not possible, especially in college ball. Even the pros wouldn't consider this for football.
One could argue neutral site for all games, but that punishes the team with the better record.

---

And presumably you want people to actually attend these games. How realistic is it to expect a fan base to travel to four bowl sites in a month? They're already pushing it with three.

ACC not doing too well. Basketball conference.

https://athlonsports.com/college-football/acc-college-football-playoff-first-round-everyones-saying-same-thing

sycasey said:

---

It's the only logistically feasible thing for round one, and an incentive for compiling a better record. It's fine.

---

No its not.

Round 1 should be a fixed bracket based on ancient bowl affiliations.

Pac12 vs Big10 in the Rose Bowl, for example.


Then rotate venues for the next two rounds, and hold the championship game at the Rose Bowl. Every Year. No exceptions. No pay-to-play. To tie the sport to a traditional foundation to give an anchor to the changing environment.


If this wasnt a free for all cluster****, and there was any planning at all, there would be 128 FBS teams in 8 conferences.

Season would be 7 conference games, 4 OOC games between labor day and Thanksgiving for an 11 game season. No cross division play (ensure the winner of the division had equal path, vs happening to play the weakest member of the opposite division for an easy path).

Round 1 would be 16 teams playing in conference championships on T Day weekend.

Round 2 would be 8 teams in traditional bowls+ For example.
eg Rose Bowl:Pac16 vs Big1(6)0 on


Only allowing conference champions ensures the regular season matters. If you are the best team and fail to make the championship game... you are not the best team. It also ensures voting doesnt matter. Only performance. No one votes on the top NFL teams. There are at-large spots, but with (what was) 128 teams, there is no need for at-large spots.

But ALSO, it allows for championship games to be the first round, allowing a better cadence between games.

Keeping tie-ins with traditional bowls keeps the traditions relevant at a level that would be the traditional post season goal.

The next round rotates between the major bowls. No "New Stadium" pay-to-to-destroy tradition. Final game is in the grand daddy of them all. That allows 4 games with about 10 days between them, with the first game having no extended break.

It would be tough to get the NCG to New Years day, but you could easily have it the weekend after new years.



Now you have all the tradition, bigger conferences, a true playoff, regular season games matter, etc.

LunchTime said:

---

sycasey said:

---

It's the only logistically feasible thing for round one, and an incentive for compiling a better record. It's fine.

---

No its not.

Round 1 should be a fixed bracket based on ancient bowl affiliations.

Pac12 vs Big10 in the Rose Bowl, for example.


Then rotate venues for the next two rounds, and hold the championship game at the Rose Bowl. Every Year. No exceptions. No pay-to-play. To tie the sport to a traditional foundation to give an anchor to the changing environment.


If this wasnt a free for all cluster****, and there was any planning at all, there would be 128 FBS teams in 8 conferences.

Season would be 7 conference games, 4 OOC games between labor day and Thanksgiving for an 11 game season. No cross division play (ensure the winner of the division had equal path, vs happening to play the weakest member of the opposite division for an easy path).

Round 1 would be 16 teams playing in conference championships on T Day weekend.

Round 2 would be 8 teams in traditional bowls+ For example.
eg Rose Bowl:Pac16 vs Big1(6)0 on


Only allowing conference champions ensures the regular season matters. If you are the best team and fail to make the championship game... you are not the best team. It also ensures voting doesnt matter. Only performance. No one votes on the top NFL teams. There are at-large spots, but with (what was) 128 teams, there is no need for at-large spots.

But ALSO, it allows for championship games to be the first round, allowing a better cadence between games.

Keeping tie-ins with traditional bowls keeps the traditions relevant at a level that would be the traditional post season goal.

The next round rotates between the major bowls. No "New Stadium" pay-to-to-destroy tradition. Final game is in the grand daddy of them all. That allows 4 games with about 10 days between them, with the first game having no extended break.

It would be tough to get the NCG to New Years day, but you could easily have it the weekend after new years.



Now you have all the tradition, bigger conferences, a true playoff, regular season games matter, etc.

---

Okay:

This is the most logistically feasible option without completely realigning conferences and remaking the postseason schedule away from what it is now.

golden sloth said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Home field advantage in all the games so far has been massive and intimidating. But i guess that's the way it goes.

---

It's by design to give the big name schools even more of an advantage.

---

Tennessee and Clemson aren't "big name schools?" The gate from the games went to the Playoff pool(the schools got parking and concessions)....it's always about money.

Home field advantage is ok, But allocate at least 30% of the seats to the visiting program.