Subject: Re: I like the 4 team CFP
On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 6:41:14 PM UTC-8, JGibson wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 9:06:35 PM UTC-5, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> > On 2018-01-02, JGibson<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Maybe I'm in the minority, but the way I see it, it allows enough
> > > teams in to get all the teams that actually have arguments for #1
> > > while also being small enough to keep the regular season really
> > > exciting.
> > UCF says hi.
> Nobody was claiming that UCF was the #1 team going into the CFP selections.
no, but if you're just looking for #1 then there's no CFP. If you're talking about the CFP, as it
stands, then you'd need to say "nobody was claiming that UCF was one of the four best teams". But
some suggest that the field is too small and doesn't answer the question, "who's best?" Like the
basketball field is now 68 teams instead of 8, as it was originally.
When Villanova won in 1985 as an 8 seed that would have made them somewhere between 29 and 32, out
of 340+. There are about 1/3 as many FBS teams so the field, if it were equivalent, would be
something like 24 and UCF was definitely in the top 24. Using that Villanova comparison it'd be like
having the #11 or #12 seed (where UCF ended up in the last CFP ranking) win it all..