So the new 4 team playoff didn't eliminate all controversy.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

8 is a perfect number.

The first team out with 8 (#9), has a lot less chance of making a run to the title than the first team out with 4 team play off (#5). There would be a lot less controversy with 8 teams

it's obvious florida st shouldn't have been in the playoffs, but how the hell could they leave out the 29 game in a row winning defending national champs

If there's any controversy it's that the entire BCS era was a sham. In year one of the playoff era, the #4 team wins they whole thing. How many 3/4 teams might have won in the past 16 years we'll never know. Fuck polls and fuck the BCS.

Yeah, let's play unpaid college students even more games.  It's not like football destroys your body or anything.

Personally, I think TCU proved it was the best team of 2014. Their one loss was to an 11-2 quality team, while OSU's loss was to 6-6 Va Tech. OSU can call themselves champions, but to me and many others that label just means they were the best team aside from TCU.

I thing 4 teams is enough. #5 TCU may have an argument, but when you get to #6 and above, then those teams do not deserve consideration. Staee would have been in the playoffs with 8 teams and was blown out by both teams in the NC game and was blown out for 3 quarters by Baylor.

I wish it were 8 team this past year. I think TCU was the best team. When TCU played their best football they blew teams away. Unfortunately for them up big in the 4th vs Baylor, TCU couldn't close the deal or else I think they may of been national champs.

Game by game, OSU and TCU's schedules are pretty even, with 2 exceptions.

OSU won their conference and
TCU's loss was waaayyyy less bad

Other that, I would give TCU's results a slight nod, but it's close.

So which of those 2 differences do you prioritize? For me, it isn't close, that bad loss is a disqualifier. The committee got it wrong....unless the guys worried about ratings were in the selection room, too. (And You are crazy if you think OSU isn't a bigger draw than TCU. )

I am not sure why he is getting downvoted so much, he does bring up an interesting point. The National Championship will always be mythical. Yeah, OSU beat Oregon and Alabama but do you know who they didn't beat? TCU!

The problem that is involved is now teams three and four will rely heavily on politicking in order to make it into the CFP. Do you want a team voted in based on their pull in the media and with voters? I personally do not care because I really think the BCS was garbage and this will be even worse. I had no problems with Michigan sharing a national championship with Nebraska.

There is only one reason why a CFP exists and that is for money. It most certainly isn't to help the student athletes nor is it to short out and proclaim an outright national champion. If I am apart of the TCU athletic department, I would claim a national championship. After all they had one loss and got dropped despite winning games decisively.

Baylor won the Big 12. They beat TCU. End of story. Ranking TCU above Baylor was BS to begin with. It only helped to downgrade the credibility of the process and committee.

Expanding to 6 teams makes no sense. It takes 3 rounds. Might as well load it up with 8 teams.

All this illustrates is that we need 8 teams so that we don't possibly deprive the best team from winning the championship in the future.

As stated earlier, 5 conference champs plus 3 wild cards. Makes winning the conference actually meaning something.

Adds only 1 more game. How about moving the first game up and eliminate all those BS bowl games laden with 6-6 / 7-5 teams and fill them with 4 first round playoff games!

Seems to rational to me. But when did the mythical college football championship ever make sense?

To say that there is controvery isn't to say OSU didn't earn it.

 

As long as we have 5 major conferences and 4 playoff spots there is going to be controversy anytime the 4th and 5th seed champions have the same record.

 

The best case scenario is to roll the Big 12 into the other 4 conferences and give each of the 4 major conference champions an auto-bid. This makes it a defacto 8 team playoffs with the championship game being the first round.

 

I would rather listen to the mid-majors complain about getting left out than have to watch a team with a legit arguement get left out (TCU and Baylor in this case).

 

If the goal of the playoff is say "Team X is without a doubt the best team in college football" it didn't succeed this year. I'm not saying TCU is better or would beat OSU but they could and that's a problem.

 

The biggest travesty here is TCU was very good for 11.75 games this season and had 1 bad quarter on the road against the #5 team in the country cost them a shot at winning the national title. OSU got the benefit of the doubt getting outplayed by a 7-6 team from the ACC at home. That doesn't seem right.

If they did expand and both Michigan and OSU got in and eventually squared off for the title! Wow! What a game that would be!

"Four team" is a compound adjective and should therefore be hypenated like this:

four-team

I think that it's a terrible notion. Yes I would have liked to see TCU in the playoffs, but their conference didn't have an outright champion, they had a weak non-conference schedule, and they were beaten by Baylor. Who rightfully should have been above them. It did exactly what the BCS could not have done, a fourth place team won the national championship ( unfortunately). It had a title game that would not have had those two teams in it in the previous system. I would rather listen to somebody whine about who is 4th place or who is fifth place in the rankings than teams not getting to play into the championship. And as Seth pointed out a while back statistically there is no reason to have more than 4 teams. There will always be controversy regardless if it's 4 or 16 teams. So suck it up.