Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
If you want to improve the CFP
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 40
| visibility 1

If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 12:11 PM

You need to increase it to 8 teams (& reduce the number of regular season games by one).

And you need to reduce the number of scholarships to stop big teams from stockpiling talent.
Pro teams only carry 53 players. Surely college teams could get by with say 75 scholarships.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Six is better than eight. The #1 and #2 get a bye, and


Dec 18, 2020, 12:17 PM

#3 vs #6 and #4 vs #5. The two winners play #1 and #2.


From my post further down, the CFP Champions have been nothing but #1 and #2 seeds. No #3 seed has won the CFP title.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Six is better than eight. The #1 and #2 get a bye, and


Dec 18, 2020, 4:17 PM


the CFP Champions have been nothing but #1 and #2 seeds. No #3 seed has won the CFP title.


No #3 seed has won it, but the #4 seed has won it twice: Ohio State in 2014 and Alabama in 2017.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Increasing it to 8 would only bring on more arguments.


Dec 18, 2020, 12:18 PM

Instead of just arguing about who is 4th, which is the discussion most years, then we would be arguing about who gets the 3 at large bids, assuming each Power 5 Champ got in automatically. If conference champions did NOT get in automatically, it would SHIRLEY be a free for all argument all the time. :)

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Increasing it to 8 would only bring on more arguments.


Dec 18, 2020, 12:40 PM

76,

There are always going to be arguments. College football fans LOVE the arguments. Whole TV shows are built around the arguments. I am not trying to reduce that.

But it gives more teams the chance to win the arguments - on the field.

It increases the excitement and motivation for more programs - more players - and more fans.

One of the reasons that the NFL is the most popular sport in America is because more teams and their fans have reason to believe that they have a shot at a championship. An 8 team CFP (& scholarship reduction) moves the NCAA one more step in that direction - a more competitive league.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The NFL is a bad case to use for your argument. Because,


Dec 18, 2020, 7:46 PM

the NFL Playoffs have SO many teams, that the eventual winner may not in fact be anywhere close to the best actual team that year. As proof, I give you the 2011 New York Giants. They won the Super Bowl, but nobody in their right mind (or anyone outside the state of New York) actually believes they were the best team that year. A 9-7 record barely even got them into the playoffs. But, they were hot at the right time, and succeeded in ruining The Evil Empire's perfect season. (I guarantee you when Tom Brady is laid to rest, he will still be cursing the name David Tyree.)

Sooner or later, if you expand the playoffs, you will give a team, or teams, "Do Over's". You will certainly reduce the validity of the regular season, much like the NBA, which plays a whole season just to eliminate 8 teams. We might get left out with only 4 teams some years, but I think 4 is a good number. What REALLY needs to happen is for the CFP to use its influence to FORCE all the Power 5 conferences to play meaningful out of conference games, so that the relative strengths of the good teams can be gauged on the field. That would negate the need for 8 teams at the end, because the pretenders would already have been separated by then.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: The NFL is a bad case to use for your argument. Because,


Dec 18, 2020, 10:59 PM

76,

You MAY be right, but people sure do watch & support the NFL in massive numbers, despite your misgivings.

March Madness doesn't always crown the "best" team, but people watch it like crazy, too. I think people care more about exciting competition that pure accuracy of results. And I think more schools and more conferences would benefit from an expansion.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Unlike some on here, I can cordially agree to disagree on


Dec 19, 2020, 9:26 AM

this subject. You are just as entitled to your opinion as I to mine. It's one of the things that makes America great, and which politicians and a whole lot of people seem to have forgotten. The Playoff may well expand to 8 when the current contract is up. we shall see.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Increasing it to 8 would only bring on more arguments.


Dec 18, 2020, 11:18 PM [ in reply to Re: Increasing it to 8 would only bring on more arguments. ]

Leave it be at four. NFL is popular more from a fantasy football perspective than how easy is it to get pounded in the postseason. College is different and always will be. Four trams. The end. Bowl games are still fun for 5 through whatever

2024 orange level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Increasing it to 8 would only bring on more arguments.


Dec 19, 2020, 12:41 PM

If not for gambling and fantasy football the NFL’s ratings would be down significantly more during the age of propaganda and protest!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Don't have 3 at large..if you go with 8 teams, 5 conference


Dec 19, 2020, 10:19 AM [ in reply to Increasing it to 8 would only bring on more arguments. ]

champs automatic, along with the best two group of 5 conference champs, then only ONE at-large team!

Or if you just have a six team playoff, it's the five P5 champs, and the highest ranked G5 conference champ. No at-large at all!

Make conference championships mean something, and take most of the subjectivity out of the committee's hands!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 12:20 PM

"College teams could get by with 75 scholarships"

This year they couldn't even get by with 85 in many cases.

Pro teams with 53 can cut players and find new ones mid-season if players are injured or not playing well. Slightly different in college.

Also how in the world would you rationalize giving fewer young men the opportunity to attend college?

What an absolutely ridiculous suggestion!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 12:31 PM

O,

First of all, I don't think we can use this year as a guide going forward.

Secondly, if you are concerned about young people not getting a chance at a college education, do you support scholarships for everyone - or just athletes.

Reducing the # of scholarships would improve competition across the board, and give more young men a chance to play.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 12:41 PM

In reverse order:

There is no logical explanation for claiming a reduction in scholarships gives more athletes a chance to play.

It would also not improve competition, though it would bring the top down and the bottom up creating a more mediocre product in general.

Everyone does have the opportunity for scholarships. Those who excel with their intelligence get academic scholarships. Those who excel athletically get athletic scholarships. If you remove athletic scholarships from football, then you have fewer athletes who get an education. Sure the guys who Clemson can't sign would go elsewhere, but at some point you run out of trickle down and you are left with thousands fewer kids getting a chance at college.

College isn't for everyone (meaning some people don't want to go), but essentially anyone who graduates high school can get into some level of college. There is also financial aide for almost all of those attendees as well in the form of the previously mentioned scholarships and need-based grants or scholarships.

Lastly (to your first comment) the teams who have lost players to COVID are an exception for this year hopefully, but the "opt-outs" and injuries are not something that is going to go away. Some teams played their games but put a terrible product on the field due to quality players lost to injury or quitting.

There just isn't a logical way to support taking scholarships away.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 4:37 PM

O,

I certainly appreciate your focus on sending more kids to college. I taught high school for 22 years, and that was one of my major goals - motivate kids to go to college and find them the help they needed to go.

I DO have to tell you that there are [plenty of kids who want to go to college and who are capable of doing college level work who are NOT able to find a way to afford it. I have seen far too many of them in my 22 years.

Perhaps we can agree to disagree on the competition aspect. I love that Clemson is now recruiting all of the 5 and 4 star athletes. But I think that competition in the ACC would be better oeverall if a few of them went to other ACC schools instead. And a 3 star that might spend most of his time on the bench here, would find more playing time at Virginia or Duke.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 4:57 PM [ in reply to Re: If you want to improve the CFP ]

Are you suggesting the athletes who did not get scholarships could not find another way to earn a college degree?

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 12:49 PM

I don’t know what he is suggesting but I know for a fact that’s the case, especially for black kids. Clearly you don’t understand the statistics and the demographics of college students and especially college athletics. It doesn’t take a math major to understand the basics!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 5:59 PM [ in reply to Re: If you want to improve the CFP ]

There are loads of students that don’t play sports that get scholarships . In fact I suspect there are more scholarships In schools for non sports than for sports

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 12:47 PM

A vast majority of athletes black and white that get an athletic scholarship are the first in their family to go to college. Blacks would be in fact disproportionately affected by reduction in scholarships because the main reason blacks don’t go to college is lack of finances. A college degree is the key For most of these kids to getting out of the projects because most of them don’t have fathers our role models they don’t have mentors they don’t have a lot of creativity and imagination in regards to starting small businesses because I don’t have people that teach them. The overwhelming majority of the issues in a black family because black kids are being raised by mothers and grandmothers. Fix that and you go a long ways towards fixing the black community.

Yes there are more kids in college on scholarship than athletes but from a percentage standpoint the overwhelming majority of scholarships for athletes are black. Academic scholarships of overwhelming go to white kids and disproportionately Asians. The high school graduation rate for white kids as bad but it is abysmal with black kids.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 2:59 PM

so scholarships are now a social equality issue and not a talent issue? Its all going to change after they totally screw up the NIL issue... have you seen what Congress wants to do?

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 12:24 PM

the conference championship games. 5 regular season power 5 champs plus 3 at-large. Push CCG weekend back one (two weeks after Thanksgiving), let the top 4 seeds host (great incentive for regular season sanctity plus two weeks prep time for home crews), and cast the losers of this round with the 9-12 seeds that missed the CFP and there's your 8 teams for the four NY6 games that aren't CFP.

Would allow for greater variety in league play versus these horrible divisions, like this year allowed. Can't imagine a better scenario than this.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 12:33 PM

Lou,

I am a bit confused. How do you decide the 5 regular season power 5 champs if you scrap the conference championship games ?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 12:45 PM

Tie breakers if they didn't play each other or go by who is ranked the highest.


But, Tobias what about the rest of college football? What I mean is, if you reduced it by one game you are hurting a bunch of athletic budgets.
We think on the National scale here as Clemson fans/Alumni/Followers! But, what about that school out there that will go into spring, summer, fall camp, beginning of season knowing "they won't really have a shot at the CFP"? The young men on these teams just want to play the game - and some want to play because they are good enough for the next level.

The other incentive a school like the above mentioned has is: "money"! Football pays for all the "non-revenue" sports you have to have on campus that people aren't tripping over to spend money on. In your model, you are taking a gate away! That's taking a pay day away!
It wouldn't get passed I am afraid. Football purest don't like talking money or addressing the business part of college sports. But, it is a business that drives the athletic departments bus even for teams that aren't particularly great at it.
Football stadiums hold significantly more than basketball coliseums or arenas or gyms! People coming into town for "their teams" game will spend money at the hotel, for parking, concessions, etc. Football games have a bunch of band parents at the game. Which is great - it just is a generator of money and cutting a game wouldn't be a way to go.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 4:48 PM

Hillrock,

I am aware of the financial considerations and I appreciate the athletics that that money helps promote.

But I think, in the long run, that the wider level of competition might be worth it. I think Herbstreit made a good point. Everyone knows before the season begins who will be in the playoffs. The expansion to 8 teams and a little bit wider distribution of talent would ameliorate that and allow for more programs and their fan base to believe that this year they COULD make it.

Heck, on average, school revenues might increase enough to counterbalance the 8% loss in revenues from losing one game.

Finally, deciding champions by rankings introduces politics into the mix. Heck, that is wht we moved to a playoff to begin with - because perceptions were overruling reality on the field.

No change is without its damage, but I think in the long run, this would be better for the sport.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 19, 2020, 1:08 PM

You’re wrong about the scholarships. You’re right about the playoffs but wrong about the scholarships. There used to be no scholarship limit. Then it went to 105 and now it’s 85. As the number of scholarships have gone down the competitive balance has become top-heavy. So your argument is actually backwards!

You’re trying to use a commonsense argument. That’s what liberals and progressives and academics do all the time. They come up with theories that sound good in a vacuum, but in practice in reality they don’t work.

College football history has proven the more you were straight scholarships the less competitive the sport is.

South Carolina has the same number of scholarships as Clemson but South Carolina loses to Duke and Pacific and the citadel and Appalachian State and can barely beat Power five competition.

Clemson was a football nobody for 20 years after Denny Ford was fired yet during the BCS and playoff era we turned our program around and we are now a powerhouse.

That’s like people to talk about limiting the amount of money on a football program. People are screaming and crying because the SEC pay South Carolina more money so I gave them a competitive advantage. Money beyond a certain point is a relevant. If money is all that mattered every SEC school would be better than every other school. If money is all that mattered Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas, Oregon, Stanford, and schools like that would be in the top five and win the national championship every year because they have more money than God because of the number of billionaires that support those programs.

Money and scholarships don’t matter beyond a certain point. It’s about coaching. It’s about culture. It’s about recruiting. And history has proven that over and over and over! You’re arguing something that history has already proven is a false narrative.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 4:09 PM [ in reply to Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap ]

Yeah. What Hillrock said. Regular season conference records first, and from there you'd just use the same tie-breaker formulas that are in place for division crowns today. Even with as few as 8 league games and 14 teams, if you go back and look at regular season conference records over the past decade this produces legit league champions across the board, or in this case simply the CFP auto qualifier - clear cut. CFP committee rankings would serve as a final tiebreaker if needed. This approach would have cost us the ACC auto bid in 2017 to Miami (lost the common opponent tiebreaker with Syracuse), though we would have still likely claimed the #1 seed as one of the 3 at-larges considering we entered the ACCCG ranked as such.

This approach does assume that a true quarterfinal CFP round (4 games) would be more financially lucrative than the now 5 individual CCCG's that currently take up that space. Regular seasons would absolutely improve though with a greater variety of league teams rotating in more often. Were the ACC to assign 3 "rivalry" games per school that we would play every year, everyone would play everyone else 2x every four years, home and away, from there, so at least one game both home and away versus every league team for each recruiting and student body class. Hard to beat that.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Conference championship games SHOULD be the first round


Dec 18, 2020, 4:51 PM

of the playoffs. Go "best two" to the conference championship game if you want (scrapping divisions), then best 4 conference champs to the CFP.

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 4:58 PM [ in reply to Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap ]

lou,

Over the long run you may be right, but most fans live with playoff hopes year to year. If you have 14 ACC Teams (and some conferences have more), even if Clemson plays ten of them, that leaves four who we have not played. And if one of them has the same record, who is the champ ? What about comparative strength of schedule.

I know you have mentioned tiebreakers but most fans would rather see things settled on the field. And once you start using rankings or other off the field considerations the process becomes increasingly subjective. i don't think anyone likes THAT.

I am not sure I understand what you have against Conference championship games - settle it on the field.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 18, 2020, 5:43 PM

To me, conferences do settle it on the field, during the regular season. Before the SEC game started the process, for a while they had 10 teams and played only 7 conference games and there really wasn't any dispute over who the champion was any given year. The ACC allowed, and still allows, tied teams to claim a respective title (conference, now division). This scenario is more for determining which one of tied teams would get the CFP auto-berth as a Power 5 champion. With 3 at-larges, if you're having a great season but got edged out in the conference auto, you're still likely in the CFP, and may even gain a higher seed than the champ. This, rankings as a final tie-breaker, rankings for 1-4 home seeding, these would all factor comparative strength of schedule in order to get there.

The CCG's are also such a hodgepodge today. Some act as a semi-final style game at a quarterfinal stage. Others offer a "play in" opportunity for one of the participants, maybe a "play out" for one of the programs, while others may as well be an exhibition match (see Pac 12) that offer no further path for either participant. To me that's incredibly inefficient, inconsistent, lacks drama, offers too many rematches in a sport that doesn't offer enough crossover opportunities as it is, and in the end doesn't offer a clean comparison of participants because it's still all in-conference, just a more hyped up regular season league game.

Most previous seasons look as tasty as this year's would if this weekend were a quarterfinal round instead of conference champ games:

Friday Night - 5 Texas A&M @ 4 Ohio State
Saturday Noon - 6 Iowa State @ 3 Clemson
Saturday 4pm - 7 Cincinnati @ 2 Notre Dame
Saturday 8pm - 8 USC @ 1 Alabama

As an undefeated Group of 5 team ranked in the Top 12, Cincy would trigger this clause in CFP selection, in my universe. Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Indiana would be waiting in the wings to pool with this weekend's losers for the other 4 NY6 games.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap


Dec 19, 2020, 12:57 PM [ in reply to Keep the regular season number where it is and scrap ]

We should go back to an 11 game regular season because that 12 game is nothing but a cupcake that gives teams seven home games for monetary purposes. It’s just a game that ends up getting players hurt.

Go back to an 11 game regular season and have the conference championship games. Those are fantastic! And if done right they could be defacto playoff games.

I have always been in favor of the 4 team playoff and I think it works, but it is going to eventually go to8 and there’s no stopping that.

Ideally I see an 11 game regular season plus the conference championship games with the playoffs being 8 teams By way of the 5 conference championship game winners And 3 at large selections.

That is extremely fair and would be better for college football and the teams involved and for TV and revenues.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 4:14 PM

Usually not much separation between no. 3-6 but definitely big gap between 3-8 when you look at the rankings. Also usually a huge gap between 1-8 or even 2-7 so eight teams would be way too much but I could go for a 1-6 where 1 and 2 get a bye.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 5:01 PM

I think a bye confers too much advantage over the other teams. 1 & 2 can get a small break by playing 7 & 8, but that is all. I think we might all be surprised by what could happen by expanding to 8.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 6:40 PM

No reason to expand it. Most years it is hard to even find 4 worthy teams.

Add a bowl game Championship weekend for the top two ranked teams not eligible to play in a power 5 championship game. The committee then picks the four best teams of the championship winners and that bowl game.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 18, 2020, 11:23 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Why would 8 teams improve it?


Dec 19, 2020, 9:40 AM

What’s the problem with 4 teams? I think it works fine now.

Plus, I want the regular season to mean something.

Reducing scholarships is something I’d be more willing to consider.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"All those 'Fire Brownell' guys can kiss it." -Joseph Girard III

"Everybody needs to know that Coach Brownell is arguably the best coach to come through Clemson." -PJ Hall


Re: Why would 8 teams improve it?


Dec 19, 2020, 1:14 PM

There used to be unlimited scholarships. Then they were 105. Now there are 85. There’s less competition in college football today than in the 60s and 70s. History has proven restricting scholarships doesn’t create competitive balance. Look at the NFL. The NFL has roster limitations and a salary cap and a draft that rewards teams that are bad yet there is no competitive balance in the NFL. You can’t create balance just like you can’t create equality in society. There will always be smarter owners better coaches better talent evaluation etc. etc. etc.

I don’t care how you structure college football or the NFL there will always be a handful of teams that dominate at the top and a certain percentage of teams that were just flat suck and the overwhelming majority will be mediocre and in the middle. That’s life. You can’t social engineer life and you can’t social engineer athletics. The NFL is absolutely positively proof of that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 12:32 PM


You need to increase it to 8 teams (& reduce the number of regular season games by one).

And you need to reduce the number of scholarships to stop big teams from stockpiling talent.
Pro teams only carry 53 players. Surely college teams could get by with say 75 scholarships.



Count me on board ??????

People are going to argue all they want. I am happy we are heading toward expansion.

People want to complain about (potential) blowouts and a (potentially) watered down season.

Seems to have worked out okay for college basketball and about every other sport outside of college football ??

If we're worried about the toll on student athletes, shorten the regular season. We don't need conference championships. Go to 8-9 team conference splits or 4-team pods like the NFL and rotate for scheduling.

Some fans act like this is some sort of rocket science - it's not. What are we preserving with the regular season? Other than rivalry games and a conference slate...what are we preserving?

Give me interesting playoff matchups instead of waiting 5-10 years to play other competitive teams or hoping one of our conference members catches fire and we play them regular season or conference championship.

Let me see a Clemson vs Oregon; Clemson vs Texas; Clemson vs USC.

I honestly haven't seen one argument AGAINST expansion that makes sense to stay at 4-teams.

Yes, as a Clemson fan, we benefit HUGELY by being the hot team right now and as long as it stays at 4-teams I believe Clemson is going to be competing for a spot with Dabo running the ship because recruits wanna compete for a Championship and not many other programs have the culture and success to do that like Clemson.

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 1:57 PM

Dude you have tons of teams in the NCAA playoffs that Clemson could smack around all day long. The NCAA tournament is great for TV and it generates a lot of money but it’s not even remotely fair or competitive. Only once and that was two years ago has a 16 beaten a 1.

The NCAA tournament was much better when they were only 32 teams. There are plenty of teams that get left out of the NCAA tournament that are far better than a bunch of teams in the NCAA tournament. This whole thing is an equity BS it’s just that BS.

Sure it works for other sports in college because nobody cares nobody watches nobody gives a crap. And really other than football other sports play a lot of games. Football is a different animal and it’s too physically taxing on the body.

And what you’re talking about is also why nobody cares about the regular season that watch another sports. The regular season matters in football and it should. You play less games because you have to play this game because of injuries and other factors.

Why do you think the atmosphere is so fantastic in a big regular season game? It’s not just because those are two highly ranked teams. It’s because the winner of that game has a chance to win the national championship and the loser is now waiting on next season! Anything more than eight teams in the playoffs and all of that is gone. But honestly four teams works great because most of the semifinal games are not very competitive.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 12:36 PM

They will for sure. They need the entire nation involved.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you want to improve the CFP


Dec 19, 2020, 12:39 PM

There’s only one ball and only so many players can play at one time. Stockpiling talent is grossly overrated today with 85 scholarships. Schools used to do that when they were no scholarships and then when it was like 105, but now it’s not an issue. We see it every year and these kids will go to schools that aren’t that good because they want to start right away.

But where you really show your football ignorance is comparing the NFL to college football. First of all 53 is the active roster. They actually have another 12 to 15 players on what’s called the scout team that they can elevate if needed because of injuries. Also NFL teams can go out and claim someone off the waiver wire at any time. If Trevor Lawrence gets hurt we can’t go out and bring in a free agent in the middle of the season. Professional teams can add anyone they want at any time during the season. You can’t do that in college. So you’re making a ridiculous comparison when it comes to roster size.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

the pros have 53 but if 5 guys get hurt they go get 5 more***


Dec 19, 2020, 12:58 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 40
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic