Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[michigancat]

I hope that somehow everything goes back to how it was in 1990-ish.

Yeah it's legitimately better because it basically acknowledges you can't get it perfect with 130 teams playing 11 game schedules. At the same time I legitimately don't care as long as we don't lose KU, ISU, and OSU. Just shoot for conference champs and be happy with it.

I don't know how you felt the like 4 times we had a team good enough to play for a national championship, but I definitely didn't share this sentiment. We win the national championship with a CFP in 1998 and would have made it very interesting with a 12 team playoff in 2003. Oregon wins in it 2012.

Considering what actually happened in 98 I think it's crazy to think we would be guaranteed to win multiple games against top teams (as good as we were). Plus a committee of dumbshits might not have even put us in a four team playoff. Also if we'd won against aTm and won the Orange Bowl we would have been consensus National Champs in the old system!

2003 is a perfect example of how special a season can be without a real shot at a national championship.

[Katpappy]

I hope that somehow everything goes back to how it was in 1990-ish.

Yeah it's legitimately better because it basically acknowledges you can't get it perfect with 130 teams playing 11 game schedules. At the same time I legitimately don't care as long as we don't lose KU, ISU, and OSU. Just shoot for conference champs and be happy with it.

I don't know how you felt the like 4 times we had a team good enough to play for a national championship, but I definitely didn't share this sentiment. We win the national championship with a CFP in 1998 and would have made it very interesting with a 12 team playoff in 2003. Oregon wins in it 2012.

Considering what actually happened in 98 I think it's crazy to think we would be guaranteed to win multiple games against top teams (as good as we were). Plus a committee of dumbshits might not have even put us in a four team playoff. Also if we'd won against aTm and won the Orange Bowl we would have been consensus National Champs in the old system!

2003 is a perfect example of how special a season can be without a real shot at a national championship.

With the 12 team format we would have KSU and OU in '03.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

[Katpappy]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

[chum1]

The key to getting this done is finding a way to both expand the playoff AND keep out teams that don't bring the highest TV ratings.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The key to getting this done is finding a way to both expand the playoff AND keep out teams that don't bring the highest TV ratings.

I think the key is to stop worrying about "crowning the best team" and create the product that will actually be the most entertaining from week 1 all the way through the NCG. And that product is a 10 team playoff with conference champions and nobody else. Expand the playoffs every time a new conference forms. That is how we get back to regional 8 team conferences while also crowning a champion that actually earns it on the field.

[Katpappy]

The key to getting this done is finding a way to both expand the playoff AND keep out teams that don't bring the highest TV ratings.

I think the key is to stop worrying about "crowning the best team" and create the product that will actually be the most entertaining from week 1 all the way through the NCG. And that product is a 10 team playoff with conference champions and nobody else. Expand the playoffs every time a new conference forms. That is how we get back to regional 8 team conferences while also crowning a champion that actually earns it on the field.

YES! 

[cfbandyman]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

I mean Cincy got in, absolutely it takes us being undefeated or some crazy thing where there are 4 1 loss teams only but it definitely isn't close to many other teams.

In general, totally agree about the blue bloods crap. It's honestly like a really weird ass thing, IMO a "blue bloods" only thing is why the playoffs for the most part have been shitty AF. It's shitty because it's the same goddamn thing each time, and literally unless you are on the ins of that no one likes it. It's why the NCAA tourny works so well, people watch for the upsets, their small ass team gets in, or some crazy 1 seed goes down, people love chaos (also see this last weekend in the NFL).

Entertainment has variety and the CFP has consistently chose to let in teams that didn't "earn" their way in outside of being perceived to be the best. I wholeheartedly agree there should only be conference champs, a G5 team, and then maybe some at larges.

[ChiComCat]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

Typically, one loss conference champs get in.  KSU can make it but, by not being a blue blood, they'll be behind in any "subjective" category such as eye-test.

[MakeItRain]

There is no rebuttal to someone speaking in absolutes about a hypothetical situation from 23 years ago, so it's fruitless to even try. Assessing K-State's chances at being selected for a four team playoff also requires knowing the resumes of the other teams in the top 6. I know this, K-State finished the season ranked 3rd in both polls and the CFP committee never excluded a top 3 team in the AP poll. Ultimately K-State fans will likely always have an inferiority complex and admittedly the 1998 Alamo Bowl is a huge part of that.

[Katpappy]

There is no rebuttal to someone speaking in absolutes about a hypothetical situation from 23 years ago, so it's fruitless to even try. Assessing K-State's chances at being selected for a four team playoff also requires knowing the resumes of the other teams in the top 6. I know this, K-State finished the season ranked 3rd in both polls and the CFP committee never excluded a top 3 team in the AP poll. Ultimately K-State fans will likely always have an inferiority complex and admittedly the 1998 Alamo Bowl is a huge part of that.

We dropped like a rock in both '98 and '12.  Only the loss to Baylor was worst as far as ranking since we were ranked #1 coming into that game.  We were ranked #3 coming into the '98 game.  If you look at the losses that OU had and still played in the CFP, you can see the committee is a bunch of cross-eyed SOBs.

[michigancat]

There is no rebuttal to someone speaking in absolutes about a hypothetical situation from 23 years ago, so it's fruitless to even try.

We win the national championship with a CFP in 1998

[wetwillie]

LOL

[Spracne]

There is no rebuttal to someone speaking in absolutes about a hypothetical situation from 23 years ago, so it's fruitless to even try.

We win the national championship with a CFP in 1998

Not quite dax level, but also pretty funny.

[CHONGS]

Honestly, they should just dump this form of selection for the playoffs and just have the 8 highest recruiting teams (by whatever public metric they decide)  play for the real national championship at the end of the year (no matter  the record) and let everyone else in FBS play in regional bowl matchups.

Teams like Alabama can decide who they want to play in the meaningless regular season to get the best practice for the real three games at the end of the season.

I still think it's the answer.  It's effectively what's going to happen anyway.

[Katpappy]

We're mumped boys.  Here's what the big 10 is thinking to get more in the CFP.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-ten-considering-the-elimination-of-divisions-amid-college-football-playoff-expansion-talks/

[Katpappy]

Also, there's a good write up on how NIL is working just below the big 10 CFP article.

[TheHamburglar]

K-State will never win an NC. That’s not a K-State thing. That’s a everyone outside 15ish schools thing. With the internet making easy for anyone to be found, there aren’t nearly as many DITR to uncover. No school outside of 12-15 schools have the lines, team speed or depth to win 2 in the playoffs.

I want a 12-team playoff with home first round games because I want to host a playoff game. I want that experience. Expecting anything more than that is just setting myself up for disappointment. I don’t think that’s small-time K-State thinking either. I’ve watched ND, Washington, & Michigan St get boat raced in semis with generational teams.

[michigancat]

K-State will never win an NC. That’s not a K-State thing. That’s a everyone outside 15ish schools thing. With the internet making easy for anyone to be found, there aren’t nearly as many DITR to uncover. No school outside of 12-15 schools have the lines, team speed or depth to win 2 in the playoffs.

I want a 12-team playoff with home first round games because I want to host a playoff game. I want that experience. Expecting anything more than that is just setting myself up for disappointment. I don’t think that’s small-time K-State thinking either. I’ve watched ND, Washington, & Michigan St get boat raced in semis with generational teams.

Yeah honestly the CFP makes it harder for KSU, not easier. Embrace the 1991 model. CU, Washington, BYU, Georgia Tech were getting nattys back then.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

I mean Cincy got in, absolutely it takes us being undefeated or some crazy thing where there are 4 1 loss teams only but it definitely isn't close to many other teams.

In general, totally agree about the blue bloods crap. It's honestly like a really weird ass thing, IMO a "blue bloods" only thing is why the playoffs for the most part have been shitty AF. It's shitty because it's the same goddamn thing each time, and literally unless you are on the ins of that no one likes it. It's why the NCAA tourny works so well, people watch for the upsets, their small ass team gets in, or some crazy 1 seed goes down, people love chaos (also see this last weekend in the NFL).

Entertainment has variety and the CFP has consistently chose to let in teams that didn't "earn" their way in outside of being perceived to be the best. I wholeheartedly agree there should only be conference champs, a G5 team, and then maybe some at larges.

At large bids make end of season games anticlimactic. Fill the playoffs in with G5 champs.

[Katpappy]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

I mean Cincy got in, absolutely it takes us being undefeated or some crazy thing where there are 4 1 loss teams only but it definitely isn't close to many other teams.

In general, totally agree about the blue bloods crap. It's honestly like a really weird ass thing, IMO a "blue bloods" only thing is why the playoffs for the most part have been shitty AF. It's shitty because it's the same goddamn thing each time, and literally unless you are on the ins of that no one likes it. It's why the NCAA tourny works so well, people watch for the upsets, their small ass team gets in, or some crazy 1 seed goes down, people love chaos (also see this last weekend in the NFL).

Entertainment has variety and the CFP has consistently chose to let in teams that didn't "earn" their way in outside of being perceived to be the best. I wholeheartedly agree there should only be conference champs, a G5 team, and then maybe some at larges.

At large bids make end of season games anticlimactic. Fill the playoffs in with G5 champs.

The NCAA BB tournament auto qualifies the conference champs and does give a eff what conference they are from.  Why does FB have to be different?  Let the G5 teams in.  Does FB have to be rigged so the government has to straighten it out to a point of fairness.

[nicname]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

I mean Cincy got in, absolutely it takes us being undefeated or some crazy thing where there are 4 1 loss teams only but it definitely isn't close to many other teams.

In general, totally agree about the blue bloods crap. It's honestly like a really weird ass thing, IMO a "blue bloods" only thing is why the playoffs for the most part have been shitty AF. It's shitty because it's the same goddamn thing each time, and literally unless you are on the ins of that no one likes it. It's why the NCAA tourny works so well, people watch for the upsets, their small ass team gets in, or some crazy 1 seed goes down, people love chaos (also see this last weekend in the NFL).

Entertainment has variety and the CFP has consistently chose to let in teams that didn't "earn" their way in outside of being perceived to be the best. I wholeheartedly agree there should only be conference champs, a G5 team, and then maybe some at larges.

At large bids make end of season games anticlimactic. Fill the playoffs in with G5 champs.

The NCAA BB tournament auto qualifies the conference champs and does give a eff what conference they are from.  Why does FB have to be different?  Let the G5 teams in.  Does FB have to be rigged so the government has to straighten it out to a point of fairness.

This is the way. I still think there is room for 1 or 2 at large teams tho.

[MakeItRain]

There is no rebuttal to someone speaking in absolutes about a hypothetical situation from 23 years ago, so it's fruitless to even try.

We win the national championship with a CFP in 1998

  damn 

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

I mean Cincy got in, absolutely it takes us being undefeated or some crazy thing where there are 4 1 loss teams only but it definitely isn't close to many other teams.

In general, totally agree about the blue bloods crap. It's honestly like a really weird ass thing, IMO a "blue bloods" only thing is why the playoffs for the most part have been shitty AF. It's shitty because it's the same goddamn thing each time, and literally unless you are on the ins of that no one likes it. It's why the NCAA tourny works so well, people watch for the upsets, their small ass team gets in, or some crazy 1 seed goes down, people love chaos (also see this last weekend in the NFL).

Entertainment has variety and the CFP has consistently chose to let in teams that didn't "earn" their way in outside of being perceived to be the best. I wholeheartedly agree there should only be conference champs, a G5 team, and then maybe some at larges.

At large bids make end of season games anticlimactic. Fill the playoffs in with G5 champs.

The NCAA BB tournament auto qualifies the conference champs and does give a eff what conference they are from.  Why does FB have to be different?  Let the G5 teams in.  Does FB have to be rigged so the government has to straighten it out to a point of fairness.

This is the way. I still think there is room for 1 or 2 at large teams tho.

No, hold the line on at larges. It will make for a rough few years, but eventually conferences will regionalize and everything will be better.

[Houstoncat93]

I don't believe a committee would have put Kansas State into a 4 team playoff in 1998. Bowl selection committees chose to leave us out of the BCS.

There is close to no chance KSU gets in a four-team playoff period.  That's why it needs to be conference champs of P5 and G5 with two at large teams.  This takes the rough ridin' paid-off committee out of it.  Those fucks will/would only put blue bloods in.

I mean Cincy got in, absolutely it takes us being undefeated or some crazy thing where there are 4 1 loss teams only but it definitely isn't close to many other teams.

In general, totally agree about the blue bloods crap. It's honestly like a really weird ass thing, IMO a "blue bloods" only thing is why the playoffs for the most part have been shitty AF. It's shitty because it's the same goddamn thing each time, and literally unless you are on the ins of that no one likes it. It's why the NCAA tourny works so well, people watch for the upsets, their small ass team gets in, or some crazy 1 seed goes down, people love chaos (also see this last weekend in the NFL).

Entertainment has variety and the CFP has consistently chose to let in teams that didn't "earn" their way in outside of being perceived to be the best. I wholeheartedly agree there should only be conference champs, a G5 team, and then maybe some at larges.

At large bids make end of season games anticlimactic. Fill the playoffs in with G5 champs.

The NCAA BB tournament auto qualifies the conference champs and does give a eff what conference they are from.  Why does FB have to be different?  Let the G5 teams in.  Does FB have to be rigged so the government has to straighten it out to a point of fairness.

In the BB tourney half the field is auto-qualifiers and half is at large.  That is the big difference.  If you want all the conference champs then have an equal (or near egual) number of at large teams.