I wouldn't say any of those G teams is better "across the board" but that's not the point. In football, you only have to be better for 60 minutes. Did you believe the likes of George Mason, Butler, VCU, Loyola and numerous others were better "across the board" when they made deep runs during March Madness? Probably not but those teams were better on the days they advanced.BeauFoster wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:38 amAs it stands now (4 team playoff), you're completely correct - the odds of a G5 school making the playoff is probably worse than those of being struck by lightning while holding the winning Powerball jackpot ticket. Is that right or fair? Probably, honestly. Who here thinks that Appalachian, Memphis, Boise, etc was as good or better than either Clemson or LSU were last night? Every year there are going to be 3 or 4 real contenders for the title of best team in college football, and no school from G5 will likely ever have the talent ACROSS THE BOARD to match up with those guys. It's just called being realistic.
I honestly don't know that the playoff needs to be expanded past 4 teams. It would be nice to do so, and it would likely allow for an App (or UCF/Boise St./whoever) to be included many years. So that would be nice, and would give schools a "legitimate" opportunity at a title. But I doubt we see it happen.
College football is the only sport where there is not an inclusive playoff to determine a champion. The argument against expansion is always "watering down the product" because a G5 team will be the #8 seed going against #1 (LSU, Bama or Clemson) and getting beat down in the 1st round. History of the CFP/Invitational is the counter to that argument. There have been beat downs between the "top 4" every single year the playoff has existed. Expansion does not change what already appears to be a trend. Expansion does offer the opportunity for a Cinderella. America is the "land of opportunity" except when it comes to college football.