Quantcast
Sports

It is what it is: College Football Playoff

Comments

Return To Article
  • Mike W Syracuse, UT
    April 24, 2013 10:29 a.m.

    Not perfect, but it is an improvement over a BCS system that was an improvement over the previous decades - good step for the NCAA.

    Can't imagine Utah or BYU will get here very much, if ever. 12-0 or 11-1 Utah teams in the PAC 12 seems unrealistic, and while independent 12-0 BYU seems more possible, the committee will likely weed them out based on strength of schedule in years like that.

  • Thinkman Provo, UT
    April 24, 2013 10:42 a.m.

    A playoff with what, 4 teams? That ain't a playoff. Only when they have at least a 16-team playoff will I call it a playoff.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 11:05 a.m.

    I think they should make an 8 team playoff, with the winners of the 6 "significant" conferences each earning an automatic bid, and the remaining 2 being the highest 2 remaining teams from "significant" conferences.

  • DEW Cougars Sandy, UT
    April 24, 2013 11:14 a.m.

    Now I can see it what they are up to. Boise State not going to like it if they stay with mwc and BYU will stay at Independent. The bcs system does allow one more for have nots getting in but this new 4 team playoff will keep them out along others (conferance usa, mwc and etc.). I can see it coming sometime 20 years later having 8 team playoff and still will not allow those have nots. Oh well, might as well forget about college football all together. Can you tell those Commish smiling in front of the camera.

  • Che26 SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 24, 2013 11:42 a.m.

    Money speaks louder then anything. If you look at March Madness they are trying to add more teams every year...because they want more money.

    As soon as they see a potential for more money they will expand. I predict 5 years from now we will see an 8 team playoff and no more then 10 years there will be a 16 team playoff.

    Money from a 16 team College Football Playoff will put March Madness to shame. I don't see how they can resit that.

  • dden45 Provo, Utah
    April 24, 2013 1:28 p.m.

    What the four team playoff means is that no school other than Oregon or USC is going to have a shot at the championship. Same with the B1G (Ohio State, Michigan and Nebraska). Until it expands, it still means that BYU and Utah will be left out.

  • uteBusters Park City, UT
    April 24, 2013 8:12 p.m.

    Chris B

    No, they should make it an 8-team playoff with the 8 highest ranked teams, regardless of conference. If the PAC 10.2 champion isn't good enough to be ranked in the Top 8, they don't deserve to be playing in the national championship tournament.

    Regardless, the Utes will never be a "significant" contender, so you needn't worry yourself about Utah's prospects of receiving a berth in the playoff.

  • 2BCSWINS West of I15, UT
    April 25, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    @ utebusters..."Regardless, the Utes will never be a "significant" contender, so you needn't worry yourself about Utah's prospects of receiving a berth in the playoff."

    Neither will the cougies so not sure what your point is. Nice screen name by the way shows how obsessed you are with everything Utes, I love it!

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    April 25, 2013 2:17 p.m.

    Chris B:

    "I think they should make an 8 team playoff, with the winners of the 6 'significant' conferences each earning an automatic bid."

    There are only 5 "significant" conferences. The Big [L]East had already been talked about being downgraded to mid-major status. And rightly so. The MWC was a better football league since at LEAST 2008, and THAT was the OLD Big [L]East. Seriously...had you SEEN what the Big [L]East will look like next year?

    Cincinnati, Temple, UConn, USF, UCF, E. Carolina, Memphis, Tulsa, SMU, Houston, and Tulane?

    And they'll eventually add Navy, but even then, you couldn't honestly rank THIS league in the same company as Pac-12, Big 12, B1G, ACC, or SEC. They're nothing more than a glorified C-USA outfit.