Red is Blue

November 5th, 2019 at 8:32 AM ^

Think the comments from coaches opposed are pretty funny.  My interpretation of what they said.

Kirk Ferentz, Iowa: - Get off my lawn.  Can't we go back to wearing leather helmets?

Dabo Swinney, Clemson: I've got a ridiculous easy schedule and conference to get through.  If we expand the playoffs, then we add a team that doesn't totally suck on our schedule which makes it harder to cake walk through to the semis.

Dino Babers, Syracuse: I don't think the champions should be determined based on skill or depth.  The closer to a random draw chance of winning it all the better.  

smitty1983

November 5th, 2019 at 8:35 AM ^

The Non-Conference Top Ranked would always be ND. Doesn't help us with recruiting against them or getting them to join a conference. I'm ok with the current system because they seem to get the right top 4 in every year and makes the regular season more compelling. 

MadMonkey

November 5th, 2019 at 9:57 AM ^

I think Harbaugh's plan actually creates a pathway for some teams to go independent.   The Texas, Michigan, and Texas A&Ms of the world can all negotiate their own massive TV (or post-TV era) contracts.  If there is no penalty to your standing to make the playoffs it is less important to belong to a Power 5 conference.   It has the added advantage of more interesting national home & home matchups that fans actually want to see.

Indy Pete - Go Blue

November 5th, 2019 at 8:38 AM ^

That was the most interesting ESPN article I’ve read in a while. Thanks for sharing. Once again, our coach is thinking more deeply and with more creativity than any other coach out there. He is the same guy who was the first to propose a freebie transfer for every college football player.

Salinger

November 5th, 2019 at 9:02 AM ^

This is clearly an error on my part, and I have no idea how it's escaped me until reading your comment, but Jim Harbaugh and Mike Leach are really similar in their peculiarities. They both adhere to a particular brand of football (one's very run dominant, the other very pass dominant) and are prone to bizarre behavior behind the microphone. 

Both coaches are lightning rods of controversy (rightly or wrongly) and probably take up more air time than is necessary. The last point probably because their personalities are so primed for entertainment-driven news media.

I approve 100% of my totally obvious and not at all special opinion.

You're welcome.

jmblue

November 5th, 2019 at 12:11 PM ^

are prone to bizarre behavior behind the microphone.

Sort of.  Harbaugh will say some unconventional things but most of what he says really isn't controverisal.  He's mainly only "bizarre" because 95% of coaches show no personality at all.  Leach will say some legitimately controversial things.

lostwages

November 5th, 2019 at 9:58 AM ^

In the corporate atmosphere, there's always "that guy/gall" that thinks they know more than everyone else, they fail to develop relationships, and even though their acumen in that given industry might be far superior, they just come off as "not a team player" 

So I'd completely disagree with your assessment of Harbaugh on this, in laymen terms he comes across like the geek in class who wants to show how smart he is. That sentiment hasn't equated to the field of play yet.

As far as the 'freebie' transfer... welcome to hell! Whereby you get to waste at least one, if not multiple scholarships on QBs every single year. The GOAT would have transferred... don't kid yourself. The transfer portal will have the negative affect on recruiting that the playoff system has had, it WILL NOT work in Michigan's favor.

You Only Live Twice

November 5th, 2019 at 11:54 AM ^

There is some hell involved, arguably, but it was also inevitable and far better to see future trends and get ahead of them.

The hypocrisy was getting unmanageable with coaches everywhere, recruiting kids and talking about "family" then leaving for a better paying gig.  At least this way the players feel like they have some control over their own destiny.  

O S Who

November 5th, 2019 at 8:41 AM ^

i dont understand harbaugh's statement where he says no team would play more than 15 games in his model. If any of the dec 1st teams won the playoff, wouldnt they have played 16 games?

Maybe the reporter misunderstood his quote because right before that it says clemson would have only played 15 games. or maybe I am a dummy and just dont understand.

To have won it all last year under the Harbaugh Plan, Clemson would have played a total of 15 games, ending with the national championship on Jan. 7.

"You'd still have the same bowl structure that you have now, and teams that lost on Dec. 1, it's like they would've been in a championship game and then they play in a bowl game," he said. "Nobody would play 16 games."

Red is Blue

November 5th, 2019 at 8:51 AM ^

If a team that doesn't get first round bye makes it to the championship:

12 regular season games + dec 1 game (first round) + dec 8 game (second round) + dec 29 game (semis) + jan 7 game (championship) = 16

 

And of course, the article was mistaken, Clemson would’ve only played 14 game 

Clemson (first round bye) -- 12 regular season games + dec 8 game (second round) + dec 29 game (semis) + jan 7 game (championship) = 15

Doesn't seem like the article was mistaken to me.

 

 

Indy Pete - Go Blue

November 5th, 2019 at 9:03 AM ^

In the current system, a maximum of two teams play 15 games. In the new system, with the elimination of the conference championship games, The total number of games played for power five teams is almost completely stagnant. Currently, 10 power five teams play in a conference championship game. All 10 of those teams would have one less game in their season before the playoffs based on this playoff format. The new format has 15 games, which nets 12 additional games over the current playoff format of three games. Thus, there are two new total games for all of power five. This does add one extra game for two total teams. This is about as close to a workforce neutral playoff system as possible, and also one that allows all champions and even at-large members a chance at the ultimate trophy. This resembles playoffs in every other NCAA sport.

Indy Pete - Go Blue

November 5th, 2019 at 9:22 AM ^

Gotcha, the above summary mentioning 15 games is wrong. Without power five conference championships, 10 teams play one last game; with a group of five team added to the playoff, the total number of net games for the power five is completely neutral.


just in case, I would like to phone a friend.

no, this is not my final answer...

Arb lover

November 5th, 2019 at 9:28 AM ^

The B1G championship is the week of 12/3-12/8 wherever that falls (a week past the Saturday after Thanksgiving). For instance we play OSU on 11/30 and then the B1G is 12/7. Harbaugh has a 12/1 game and a 12/8 game. If you look at his list my interpretation is he's saying one regular season game would be removed as well as the conference championships. I don't see how this is fuzzy math.

Alton

November 5th, 2019 at 10:01 AM ^

No, Thanksgiving is the 4th Thursday of November, so it is the Thursday that falls November 22-28.

The last week of the regular season is that Saturday, so November 24-30

The conference championship game is the next Saturday, so December 1-7.

Last season, the Ohio State game was November 24 and the BTCG was December 1.  He's using 2018 as an example here.

West Coast Struttin

November 5th, 2019 at 9:08 AM ^

8 team playoff is perfect IMO. All teams selected by committee. Keeps regular season games important as well.

Alton

November 5th, 2019 at 9:08 AM ^

Wait.  Harbaugh had a printed copy of his playoff plan sitting around?  And he took a pic of it with his cell and sent it to the reporter?

That's just wonderful, as is ESPN making sure to credit the photography to Jim Harbaugh.

Steve-a-wolverine-o

November 5th, 2019 at 9:12 AM ^

I wonder if this would help parity at the highest level. It seems right now there are a fewer number of teams getting all the best recruits and a larger second tier of teams. With 11 playoff teams their could be maybe 20 teams getting to the playoffs regularly instead of just around 6 teams. That could help with the spreading the recruiting talent. 

lostwages

November 5th, 2019 at 9:42 AM ^

It might...

Only because the larger pool of teams would dilute the current disparity at the top (Bama, Clem, OSU, LSU etc.). 

From my perspective, that would pull down OSU a little more... and given their current state of flux, might be enough to grant Michigan some leverage in the rivalry.

 

Arb lover

November 5th, 2019 at 9:21 AM ^

The entire SEC and Clemson believe the current system is good while almost none of the B1G.

Sometimes the best barometer of whether something is fair or not, is how those people with a conflict of interest/skin in the game vote, relative to their position. 

lostwages

November 5th, 2019 at 9:37 AM ^

The optics on this article... again... put a target on the back of Michigan.

Harbaugh should just abstain at times, then give his $.02 when we're in a position of power (at the top). Until then, a lot of this comes off as whining and complaining.

ScooterTooter

November 5th, 2019 at 9:45 AM ^

Its not hard. 

5 P5 conference champs and highest ranked G5 team. 

If you can't win your conference, why should you play in the playoff?

Actual Champions League style. 

If Notre Dame complains, join a fucking conference. 

NateVolk

November 5th, 2019 at 9:49 AM ^

On the too many games issue: If a couple teams ended up playing 14 or 15 or 16 games, I doubt they'd mind.

For them it beats 2 to 3 weeks of often rigorous practice in December for a bowl game they aren't always enthused about playing

Mongo

November 5th, 2019 at 10:04 AM ^

Harbaugh's format is better than a committee picked top 4 - it gets 11 teams involved, eliminates the duplicate conference title games, and gives an opportunity for the likes of UCF to compete.  The only issue is regular season schedules would need to be equalized and there would need to be limits to only one FCS opponent on the schedule.

The bowl games have become irrelevant for the good teams ranked outside the top 4, so we definitely need to expand the playoffs.  I think it would help level recruiting as well given it provides more teams a chance to showcase their players in a playoff type atmosphere.

FA_Wolverine

November 5th, 2019 at 10:10 AM ^

Gotta love how the SEC, ND, and about half of the ACC don't want a uniformed way of scheduling.

They can't stand to give up that free week in late November against an FCS opponent.