CFP expansion discussion

[Richard Kimball 1492]

18 hours ago, BigHornedLurker said:

however large we go: fuck bye weeks, the last thing some team like alabama needs is another advantage. 

re more games ruining bowls, i don't get this at all. 

work the new playoff games into various home games and bowl games, and boom solve 3 problems at once including the ones with kids dropping out of bowl games. 

 

There are guys with clout that make a lot of money doing nothing but wearing ugly, bowl specific sport coats and going around watching football games and extending invitations to teams. Combined with the TV contracts, the bowls are pretty ingrained in the system. They won't go away without a hard push. Particularly on the lower bowls, I think a lot of colleges actually lose money going to a bowl game after spending for team travel expenses and having to buy an allotment of tickets that nobody will buy because they have to sell them at face value.

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I’ll do a $1 gentlemen’s bet that it doesn’t go to 16 in the next 5-10 years 

As I've posted before, I'm open to a lot of options (like anyone that makes the decisions cares what I think,) BUT there are two things that really aren't negotiable if you want an actual playoff. 

1. Entrants shouldn't be decided by a committee. 

2. Every team should have a path to the playoffs by winning. 

[BurntOrange&White 39659]

3 minutes ago, Richard Kimball said:

There are guys with clout that make a lot of money doing nothing but wearing ugly, bowl specific sport coats and going around watching football games and extending invitations to teams. Combined with the TV contracts, the bowls are pretty ingrained in the system. They won't go away without a hard push. Particularly on the lower bowls, I think a lot of colleges actually lose money going to a bowl game after spending for team travel expenses and having to buy an allotment of tickets that nobody will buy because they have to sell them at face value.

As I've posted before, I'm open to a lot of options (like anyone that makes the decisions cares what I think,) BUT there are two things that really aren't negotiable if you want an actual playoff. 

1. Entrants shouldn't be decided by a committee. 

2. Every team should have a path to the playoffs by winning. 

And my proposition earlier does just that.

 

5 power 5 conference champions(includes every power 5 team from each conference chance)

1 highest ranked g5(includes every g5 teams opportunity to the playoffs)

2 at large bids(could be another g5 team if applicable, any of the independents, etc)

Edited April 27, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[IPoopOnWhoop 93]

16, all conference champions get in (just like every other ncaa sport) and the rest are at large.  Play the first 2 rounds at the higher seeded team’s home stadium and the final 4 just as it is done already.  Begin the playoffs the week after the regular season ends.  I don’t give a shit that the worst team will most likely get beat badly, that happens the other sports as well.  We would finally have a legitimate tournament.

[Machinator 32097]

 

[BigHornedLurker 1893]

3 hours ago, Richard Kimball said:

There are guys with clout that make a lot of money doing nothing but wearing ugly, bowl specific sport coats and going around watching football games and extending invitations to teams. Combined with the TV contracts, the bowls are pretty ingrained in the system. They won't go away without a hard push. Particularly on the lower bowls, I think a lot of colleges actually lose money going to a bowl game after spending for team travel expenses and having to buy an allotment of tickets that nobody will buy because they have to sell them at face value.

As I've posted before, I'm open to a lot of options (like anyone that makes the decisions cares what I think,) BUT there are two things that really aren't negotiable if you want an actual playoff. 

1. Entrants shouldn't be decided by a committee. 

2. Every team should have a path to the playoffs by winning. 

and all of them would profit more from having their bowl game be a playoff tie in instead of having some shit game like fresno vs umass. 

[ATXbronco 4060]

I'd like to see it with each conference winner in a playoff type situation.

 

 

[closetohumping 17401]

1st round match ups from last year would’ve been:

bama/coastal Carolina 

clemson/thieves

georgia/aggy

matt campbell/Florida 

cincy/osu

indiana/Nd 

 

im watching

[MonkeyDoughnut 10145]

I'm with Saban on this one-  if playoffs are expanded again, go ahead and get rid of all the other bowl games as no one will care about them.  So if you are doing that, my vote would be go to 16 teams.

[closetohumping 17401]

4 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I'm with Saban on this one-  if playoffs are expanded again, go ahead and get rid of all the other bowl games as no one will care about them.  So if you are doing that, my vote would be go to 16 teams.

Tie the bowls into the games.

[clapclapclap 9000]

9 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Tie the bowls into the games.

Exactly, and you can still keep the unconnected bowls as a NIT.   I'll continue to watch, and am not the only one.  Just like currently, a portion of the fans will still go to those bowls, some will use it as a vacation, a lot of players not going pro that year will enjoy the trip, coaches get the extra practice, selling point of being a bowl team, and related bonuses.  Thus another BS excuse to not expand the playoffs stays muted.

[BurntOrange&White 39659]

2 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Tie the bowls into the games.

Yup, in an 8 team playoff just make the "orange bowl" "fiesta bowl" "Rose Bowl" and "sugar bowl" or whatever the locations for the quarter-final and rotate other major bowls in.

 

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[Cardinal12 34]

On 4/27/2021 at 12:01 PM, IPoopOnWhoop said:

16, all conference champions get in (just like every other ncaa sport) and the rest are at large.  Play the first 2 rounds at the higher seeded team’s home stadium and the final 4 just as it is done already.  Begin the playoffs the week after the regular season ends.  I don’t give a shit that the worst team will most likely get beat badly, that happens the other sports as well.  We would finally have a legitimate tournament.

I think football is too top heavy. Only the power 5 and American actually have talented enough teams for a tourney style consistently. Seeing #1 Alabama curb stomp the sunbelt flavor of the month seems pretty pointless. Definitely don't think that justifies legions of potential player injuries with a longer season just to try to copy the basketball tourney. 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Cardinal12
Spelling

[Richard Kimball 1492]

42 minutes ago, Cardinal12 said:

I think football is too top heavy. Only the power 5 and American actually have talented enough teams for a tourney style consistently. Seeing #1 Alabama curb stomp the sunbelt flavor of the month seems pretty pointless. Definitely don't think that justifies legions of potential player injuries with a longer season just to try to copy the basketball tourney. 

Hey! I got to give you your first like, unless you meant Stanford Cardinal, which is the color, not the bird. If you meant Stanford, I'm taking back my like. 

Everyone uses Alabama as an example, but Alabama beats everybody. Nick Saban is probably the best coach in the history of college football. 

So, if we throw Alabama out, Boise State has beaten Oklahoma, Houston beat Oklahoma, UCF beat Baylor when they were conference champs, TCU beat Wisconsin when the Frogs were in the Mountain West, and in the NY6 bowls, the G5 is 3-3 against the P5. 

One of the reasons football tends to be top heavy is because the playoffs and many top tier bowls are all selected by committees, and those committees are looking as much at ratings as they are quality. That means the same teams always get the best bowls and playoff spots, and this helps them with recruiting, which further tilts the table towards them. 

If a SMU or UCF goes two rounds in the playoffs, their recruiting will jump the next year. They make the playoffs a few times, and yeah, they'll be able to compete. Coastal Carolina would have had a solid chance of beating PAC 12 champ Oregon last year. 

 

[Ignatius 4002]

I hate the idea of at large teams because:

1. Involves some type of committee/formula

2. Wins late in the season mean more than wins early in the season

3. Incentive for shitty/marginal non-conference scheduling

[DanTheHorn 4901]

I am on the 8 team 5 p5, 1 g5 and 2 at large bandwagon now. Years ago I thought six but after UM said rich have gotten richer due to playoff exclusion I jumped on 8 bandwagon. 

Also, seeding should be as follows:

First 4 seeds should be p5 conference champs even if at large is ranked ahead of them because fuck'em they did not win their conference.

G5 is always #8 seed due to cup cake schedule.

5th champ and 2 at large are seeded 5 through 7 based on their final ranking. So two at large could in theory be seeded ahead of 5th champ.

F Notre Dame even if #1 they get 5th seed because they want to be an independent.

Edited April 28, 2021 by DanTheHorn

[clapclapclap 9000]

I'm toying with an 8 team playoff that starts with 4 New Years-ish bowls, then on campus games hosted by the 2 highest ranked winners, and a bowl site title game.  5 guaranteed slots for the P5 conf champs, 1 guaranteed G5 slot, and 2 wildcards.  But here's the catch:  The G5 and wildcard slots would involve play-in games.

So the first weekend after the conf champ games 4 of the G5 champs play off on campus.  3 wildcards and the other G5 champ play 2 games on campus.  Wildcard bracket winners advance to the playoffs, G5 bracket winners play a game the next week for the final playoff spot.  The top ranked G5 conf champ gets the choice of competing in the G5 (usually easier but needs 2 wins, but gets to host both games) or the wildcard bracket (perhaps harder, maybe on the road, but just need to win the first game.)   

That's 13 teams in some form of the post-season, for those scoring at home.  (And if you are scoring at home, congratulations!)

It's far too complex for the college presidents to ever approve as the next step, but it would be entertaining and should provide more even matchups.  However, I know the objections:  Finals week, academic standards will be incinerated and students will die if 2 teams play a single game after some schools start their spring semesters/quarters, BS, BS, BS, etc.

If you could convince the G5 to finish their season a week earlier, you could reduce some issues.  The first round of G5 play-in and the wildcard games could be played during the P5 conf champ weekend (1st in December) and thus all but 1 playoff bowl and 1 non-playoff bowl slot would be decided 4 weeks in advance.  And would allow 17 teams if the wildcard bracket got expanded another week.)

Edited April 29, 2021 by clapclapclap

[Huckleberry 32702]

4 hours ago, Cardinal12 said:

I think football is too top heavy. Only the power 5 and American actually have talented enough teams for a tourney style consistently. Seeing #1 Alabama curb stomp the sunbelt flavor of the month seems pretty pointless. Definitely don't think that justifies legions of potential player injuries with a longer season just to try to copy the basketball tourney. 

Irrelevant.

If the "playoff" system leaves open the possibility that a member of the league could play a full legal schedule, go undefeated and untied, and not win the championship then it's not a real playoff. So there are only 2 valid solutions - either all conference champions get in or split the P5 away from the G5. I'd actually prefer the latter but it should be one of the two.

[markstanco 12507]

Same. G5 with a 4 team championship (not 8, not 16 for sure) would be certainly watched by me. You do more than 4 then it gets watered down and not watched.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

Inside the inevitable College Football Playoff expansion and why it will be anything but easy

Quote

For a guy with a journalism background, Bill Hancock sure knows now to bury the lead.

In a Friday statement summarizing the College Football Playoff spring meetings, the CFP's executive director waited until the 17th paragraph to unload a bit of a shocker: A working group was modeling expansion possibilities that could see as many as 16 teams compete in a playoff.

It had been all but forgotten that the CFP Board of Managers commissioned the working group from the CFP Management Committee in 2019. COVID-19 slowed down that group's progress until now.

As it turns out, it is considering five possibilities, playoffs including six, eight, 10, 12 or 16 teams.

The existence of that working group – consisting of Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick and Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson -- and the detail of its progress so far would seem to indicate an expansion of the CFP bracket is an inevitability.

After teasing us with Friday's nugget, Hancock has spent the subsequent days fielding calls about the details of expansion.

"When a butterfly flaps its wings about the CFP, it makes news," he told CBS Sports.

Except you don't throw raw meat to lions and be surprised by a feeding frenzy. Hancock was the one who further baited the hook by noting that "63 possibilities" of an expanded playoff model were discussed.

Still, there will not be a format change this season or the next.

"If I was a reporter, I'd have to report the timing is unclear," Hancock said.

That suggests, even if expansion of the bracket is approved this year, it would take at least two years to implement. That hints that the current 12-year contract with ESPN could be altered before it runs out at the end of the 2025 season.

It was previously believed the size of the playoff field would not change until that contract expired.

Now that the prospect is on the table, expansion seems to be inescapable. CBS Sports has spoken with multiple sources directly or indirectly involved with the process to create a primer on what's ahead for the CFP.

CFP expansion could be approved soon 

… but will it be? Probably not.

The FBS commissioners will next meet June 17-18 at the tail end of the annual Collegiate Commissioners Association meeting, which will happen in person this year in Chicago. The next week, the commissioners will meet with the CFP Board of Managers in Dallas.

The working group will share some more information among those groups at that time. The next date to watch is the fall meeting between the commissioners and presidents (date to be determined). That's when the presidents could make a move. They would have to decide by unanimous vote.

The complexity of the situation was stressed as a significant issue by nearly every source contacted by CBS Sports. Because of COVID-19, that working group essentially had a year of work tabled. The fact it is considering as much as a 16-team bracket only adds to the work ahead.

For an organization so secretive about its dealings, one administrator was ticked that so much detail was released Friday.

"We, honest to God, talked no details about playoff expansion," that source said. "We talked a little about process."

One person with knowledge of the situation described the suddenness of Friday's announcement this way: "Now, everyone's antenna is up and vibrating."

Who has the most to lose/gain?

On the surface, the Big 12 and Pac-12 would have to be big fans of an expanded playoff. The Pac- 12 has been to the CFP twice in seven years, missing the last five straight. These are the only two Power Five conferences that have not yet won a national championship in the CFP era.

That doesn't necessarily mean their conference presidents would vote for expansion. The Pac-12 is having a hard time finding a new commissioner. The Big 12 has never advanced past a semifinal. Oklahoma has lost all four of the Big 12's CFP appearances.

Only 11 teams have played in the CFP. Only four have won it. Any expansion -- depending on the size of the field -- could benefit the Group of Five conferences that are guaranteed a New Year's Six bowl but are all but shut out from CFP consideration.

But any expansion means more Power Five participants and more money in its coffers. The Power Five currently collects approximately 85% of CFP revenue annually.

It would make it even easier for conferences like the SEC to get multiple teams in the field. Consider that the SEC has seen 3-4 teams in the top 10 of the final CFP Rankings every year since 2017.

63 possibilities?

There are at least that many variations of playoff expansion. Think of three flavors of ice cream. Pick one, two or all three. Now decide whether you want sprinkles, gummy bears and/or chocolate syrup. You're starting to figure out the scenarios the working group is working through.

With each expansion scenario, the working group has to consider:

Whether to embed bowl games in an expanded playoff. A playoff of eight teams or will almost certainly have to begin at campus sites. Any expansion probably impacts the current bowl structure.

Dates. It's laughable to consider the presidents once said, "No more second-semester football," in the old BCS days. We crossed that boundary with the CFP. Now the presidents may consider what Hancock used to warn was "bracket creep" -- the imposition of a larger bracket into the football and academic calendars.

Play-in games. A simple six-team playoff means adding two teams to the four-team field with a bye for the top two teams. That means two play-in games. Ah, but how to populate it?

One insider helped lay out these choices for a six-team format:

Top five teams as selected by the committee plus a guaranteed Group of Five spot

Top six teams as selected by the committee

Power Five champions plus one an at-large team

Power Five champions plus the highest-ranked Group of Five champion

Top four, five or six ranked conference champions (additional at-large teams as needed)

Top undetermined number of conference champions limited by a minimum ranking (top 10, 12?)

The contract

Hancock reiterated there won't be a change this season or next. That means the soonest an expanded playoff could debut would be the 2023 season with three years left on the current 12-year, $7.2 billion contract with ESPN.

If that happens, NRG Stadium in Houston would host the first CFP National Championship of the expanded bracket on Jan. 8, 2024. The semifinals that season are in the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl. That's what it looks like for a four-team bracket. It would take the addition of four more games in the quarterfinals to stage an eight-team playoff.

As I wrote six years ago, there are not any look-in clauses in the 12-year, $7.2 billion contract. In other words, there's no ability to reopening and rewrite the existing contract.

"We don't know whether that's possible or not," Hancock said, "whether it can be done, whether the parties can agree."

There's lots to consider, but one thing is clear: If a new deal makes sense to both parties, of course they'd alter the contract. Considering the stakes, everything is negotiable. There could always be a reason to reopen the contract. Things could change tomorrow.

What remains to be seen is ESPN's appetite for tearing up the current contract and paying more in the current financial climate.

Wait … 16 teams? Really?

It's "not inconceivable" the bracket could move from four to the max of 16 teams, according to a person close to the process. The template is there with the FCS playoffs, which in a normal year features 24 teams.

The difference being FCS teams play an 11-game regular season. And those FCS athletes, for the most part, don't have the pressure of an NFL career looming. Talk about issues with opting out. That's why there would have to be a health and welfare consideration for adding 12 additional playoff games.

Given the current schedule, that means two teams would be playing their 17th game in the national championship. In that scenario, playoff games would have to start in early December, either replacing the conference championship games or coming immediately after them. 

Preserving the bowls

Many think we've already reached critical mass with 42 bowls. They weren't all played last season because of COVID-19. Any expansion bumps up against the traditional bowl season and the ability to keep all 42 of those games in business.

"It's a sliding scale," said one person close to the process. "The more [playoff] access you grant, the more impact there is on the existing bowls.

"A lot of these things will work if you don't worry about blowing up the bowl season. If you do care about that, it creates other imperatives for you."

TLDR:

• Earliest anything will likely happen is 2023 and would require reworking the contract, no look-in built into current deal, which expires in 2025
• Support of "all in one semester" eroding
• Looking at all scenarios from 6 to 16, from committee to champs
• Leadership pissed that word leaked

Quote of the article:

"A lot of these things will work if you don't worry about blowing up the bowl season. If you do care about that, it creates other imperatives for you."

[Horn of Gabriel 1590]

No one - NO ONE cares about the bowls, aside from the dudes in sport coats with the bowl patches on them.  You think a team gives a shit about the Gasperalla Weed Eater bowl?  The only reason the bowls have lasted this long is their ability to get TV-contracts and money to throw at the schools.  Guess what?  That's done.  Because the marquee players have figured out they don't need the bowls and are opting out.  When you get Florida in a 2nd-tier bowl game without their big players, that bowl is even more meaningless and will affect ratings and money.

Incorporate the bowls in the the expanded CFP where possible.  We can have our Round of 16 game Sponsored by the Cotton Bowl/Outback Bowl, etc.  Make the shit bowls and offer or tell them "good luck going alone" because they'll be selecting shitty bowl teams after the cutoff line of 12- or 16-teams for the CFP.  The bowls are just such a shitty, good 'ole boy system that exposes the total hypocrisy of the University Presidents' and anyone who says the CFP will "devalue the regular season."  Like, oh no we can't go to Mobile Alabama for the get-shit-on-your-face bowl, nooooo...blow it up.

[tokamak 6352]

38 minutes ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

No one - NO ONE cares about the bowls, aside from the dudes in sport coats with the bowl patches on them.  You think a team gives a shit about the Gasperalla Weed Eater bowl?  The only reason the bowls have lasted this long is their ability to get TV-contracts and money to throw at the schools.  Guess what?  That's done.  Because the marquee players have figured out they don't need the bowls and are opting out.  When you get Florida in a 2nd-tier bowl game without their big players, that bowl is even more meaningless and will affect ratings and money.

Incorporate the bowls in the the expanded CFP where possible.  We can have our Round of 16 game Sponsored by the Cotton Bowl/Outback Bowl, etc.  Make the shit bowls and offer or tell them "good luck going alone" because they'll be selecting shitty bowl teams after the cutoff line of 12- or 16-teams for the CFP.  The bowls are just such a shitty, good 'ole boy system that exposes the total hypocrisy of the University Presidents' and anyone who says the CFP will "devalue the regular season."  Like, oh no we can't go to Mobile Alabama for the get-shit-on-your-face bowl, nooooo...blow it up.

Gamblers do, bro

[tokamak 6352]

The Tokamak Plan (TM), which I've been posting in these threads maybe since the HornFans days:

• forced realignment into 8 10-team conferences
• conferences play a round robin, no CCGs
• each conference winner into the playoffs
• worst team in each conference relegated to FCS

Won't happen in a million years (also I can't figure out what to do with non-conference games), but would be awesome. Not only are the playoffs extremely clearly defined, the end of season relegation battles would be amazing.

[Hagbard Celine 10763]

On 4/24/2021 at 9:09 AM, CooterBrown said:

8 with a requirement that P5 conferences play a minimum number of conference games and no more than one OOC G5 game.

I also wouldn’t mind that if two teams from one conference get in, the first playoff round pits those teams against each other to prevent both finalists from being from a single conference.

so you want the secX3 title game to be replayed the following week.

okay then.

/hayseed

[Hagbard Celine 10763]

#killthebowls

[LTbear 4161]

19 hours ago, Ignatius said:

I hate the idea of at large teams because:

1. Involves some type of committee/formula

2. Wins late in the season mean more than wins early in the season

3. Incentive for shitty/marginal non-conference scheduling

Disagree. Auto-bids for champs plus a couple at-large incentivizes BETTER scheduling. If you schedule a huge non-con matchup that you know will generate shitloads of money, you can rest assured it has no impact on your qualification for the conference auto-bid. On the other hand, if you end up not winning your conference, winning a big-time non-con game helps make your case for one of the at-large spots. 

[NeverMarryAStripper 21781]

6 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

so you want the secX3 title game to be replayed the following week.

okay then.

/hayseed

The loser of the SEC Championship game has never made the CFP

[Hagbard Celine 10763]

1 hour ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

The loser of the SEC Championship game has never made the CFP

superdome

20120109

satan 21 - 0 miles

and you're going to say the bcs is not the cfp.  and in this case there were no semifinals to get in the way which makes it more egregious.

[notre dame joe 172]

On 4/27/2021 at 12:48 PM, BigHornedLurker said:

and all of them would profit more from having their bowl game be a playoff tie in instead of having some shit game like fresno vs umass. 

But since that will never be a playoff game, it's not correct to compare the Muffler Bowl to the Cotton; instead treat the small bowls as an extra regular season game Thursday night on ESPNU. 

[BigHornedLurker 1893]

32 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

But since that will never be a playoff game, it's not correct to compare the Muffler Bowl to the Cotton; instead treat the small bowls as an extra regular season game Thursday night on ESPNU. 

thats a fair point

 

doing the math
- 8 team playoff you get 4+2+1= 7 playoff games 
- 16 team playoff you get 8+7= 15 playoff games 

so either 7 or 15 playoff / bowl games get playoff tieins where the players will be more inclined to not opt out , increasing the importance of bowl games 

whatever second rate teams and bowl games from there for the also rans can continue as they already do today 

as for getting sponsors in line it should be pretty simple "do you want a playoff tiein and more money, or should i give this offer to another bowl game"

Edited April 29, 2021 by BigHornedLurker

[hpslugga 4044]

19 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

superdome

20120109

satan 21 - 0 miles

and you're going to say the bcs is not the cfp.  and in this case there were no semifinals to get in the way which makes it more egregious.

Well he actually doesn't need to say the BCS isn't the CFP. He just needs to point out that neither one of those teams lost the SEC championship game. Which is true; neither did. LSU won it, Bama didn't play in it. Georgia, on the other hand, did lose it 42-10 and were punished by being sent to the Outback Bowl, which they also lost to a 3-loss Michigan State.

Edited April 30, 2021 by hpslugga

[Hagbard Celine 10763]

8 teams kills the bowls

this mess still exists because the b1g/pac rosebowl celebration of special-ness (virgil-style)

and domer not being all the way fully and permanently in a football conference

[Cardinal12 34]

On 4/28/2021 at 5:19 PM, Richard Kimball said:

Hey! I got to give you your first like, unless you meant Stanford Cardinal, which is the color, not the bird. If you meant Stanford, I'm taking back my like. 

Everyone uses Alabama as an example, but Alabama beats everybody. Nick Saban is probably the best coach in the history of college football. 

So, if we throw Alabama out, Boise State has beaten Oklahoma, Houston beat Oklahoma, UCF beat Baylor when they were conference champs, TCU beat Wisconsin when the Frogs were in the Mountain West, and in the NY6 bowls, the G5 is 3-3 against the P5. 

One of the reasons football tends to be top heavy is because the playoffs and many top tier bowls are all selected by committees, and those committees are looking as much at ratings as they are quality. That means the same teams always get the best bowls and playoff spots, and this helps them with recruiting, which further tilts the table towards them. 

If a SMU or UCF goes two rounds in the playoffs, their recruiting will jump the next year. They make the playoffs a few times, and yeah, they'll be able to compete. Coastal Carolina would have had a solid chance of beating PAC 12 champ Oregon last year. 

 

On 4/28/2021 at 8:03 PM, Huckleberry said:

Irrelevant.

If the "playoff" system leaves open the possibility that a member of the league could play a full legal schedule, go undefeated and untied, and not win the championship then it's not a real playoff. So there are only 2 valid solutions - either all conference champions get in or split the P5 away from the G5. I'd actually prefer the latter but it should be one of the two.

@Richard Kimball Nah no Stanford Cardinal here. Just like birds and can't think of usernames. Hook Em.

 

Don't disagree. My two cents is that's a fair point for sure and more football is always better. the bowl system is dead. I think that Oklahoma v. Florida sideshow was the ultimate proof of that. Think even Mullen said he didn't care. I do think the American produces a P5 competing champion like clockwork and MWC does every once and while. However, most years I struggle to see how your sun belt, conference usa, MAC winners are going to even compete with the 2nd or 3rd, maybe even 4th best team in the major conferences. I struggle to see why they would deserve an autobid that would likely leave out some P5 runner ups that would most likely lap them on the field. Which brings me too...

 

@Huckleberry Totally agree. I personally favor 12 teams, no autobids. I think splitting G5 and P5 away kinda makes sense, but only if you keep the American +Boise +BYU (maybe another team or two) with the P5. PAC is I think actually clearly worse than the American right now in talented teams. 

 

[Richard Kimball 1492]

19 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

8 teams kills the bowls

this mess still exists because the b1g/pac rosebowl celebration of special-ness (virgil-style)

and domer not being all the way fully and permanently in a football conference

Troof, but the ACC has let Notre Dame play it both ways. They're eligible for the ACC Championship game, then when they got curb stomped by Clemson, they still got in. 

When the bowls were created, it was a completely different era, one that's not coming back. They were totally exhibition games. It wasn't until around 1974 that most of the polls took bowl games into consideration. Notre Dame didn't play in bowl games from 1925 to 1970, supposedly because of finals for the fall semester. 

That's why up until the BCS, there were a ton of split championships, with, for example, Texas, Nebraska and Notre Dame all claiming a 1970 championship. 

Another issue is that for a playoff without byes, you have the choices of 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 or 64, and colleges play very uneven schedules. 

16 minutes ago, Cardinal12 said:

@Huckleberry Totally agree. I personally favor 12 teams, no autobids. I think splitting G5 and P5 away kinda makes sense, but only if you keep the American +Boise +BYU (maybe another team or two) with the P5. PAC is I think actually clearly worse than the American right now in talented teams. 

 

You just gave me a thought that would be fun. 

The P5 tells all the G5s and Independents that they're going to bring three more conferences into the playoffs (total eight teams after conference championships.)

Every team in the three accepted conferences has to meet certain guidelines, including football budget, stadium size, average attendance, etc. ONLY THREE MORE CONFERENCES.

If a team falls below in any of the criteria, they have to drop out of the conference. No independents, no at large bids. Get in a conference, win the conference championship and you're in the playoffs. Otherwise, go home. 

Ain't happening, but it would be some real hunger games stuff. 

[Cardinal12 34]

4 minutes ago, Richard Kimball said:

Every team in the three accepted conferences has to meet certain guidelines, including football budget, stadium size, average attendance, etc. ONLY THREE MORE CONFERENCES.

If a team falls below in any of the criteria, they have to drop out of the conference. No independents, no at large bids. Get in a conference, win the conference championship and you're in the playoffs. Otherwise, go home. 

 

Ain't happening, but it would be some real hunger games stuff. 

Just seeing seething ND fans would make it a worthwhile investment. 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Cardinal12

[Horn of Gabriel 1590]

1 hour ago, Cardinal12 said:

Just seeing seething ND fans would make it a worthwhile investment. 

Fuck ND.  This aint the '60's and '70's anymore.  Nobody gives a shit about ND and the only thing that has kept them quasi relevant is having their own LHN on NBC.  Their days of being the fly in the ointment of realignment and the playoffs are numbered.  Join the ACC or GTFO

[notre dame joe 172]

1 hour ago, Richard Kimball said:

When the bowls were created, it was a completely different era, one that's not coming back. They were totally exhibition games. It wasn't until around 1974 that most of the polls took bowl games into consideration. Notre Dame didn't play in bowl games from 1925 to 1970, supposedly because of finals for the fall semester. 

That's why up until the BCS, there were a ton of split championships, with, for example, Texas, Nebraska and Notre Dame all claiming a 1970 championship. 

I have never met an Irish Fan that claimed a title in 1970.  A few smirk that ND cleared the path for what I believe was Nebraska's first natty.

The loser of the bowl games usually mentions that before the mid-1970s they were considered commercial expositions that had little to do with extracurricular athletics or the national title. 

 

Now that the bowls are ingrained into college football's unique tradition, they should be separating them from the playoff, not pretending the two customs are compatible. 

 

 

 

 

[kopp0e 1135]

On 4/27/2021 at 8:09 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

It’s eventually going to grow to 16 teams. Just go ahead and do it and stop kidding yourselves. 

It will happen by 2036/ 2037, as at hat point the money from the most powerful generation (boomers) will be wiped out...
That more or less leaves needing new sources to fill the gap, adds from a 16 team CFP would be a great draw for all P4...

I gather in mid-2030's ACC contract will be reshuffled, as well, any final moves for B1G/ SEC, and any swaps in PAC/ XII...

So, we might have another "calm" of 11 years (if we make it past 2025) as is some may not know OU is ticked with Bally...

 

 

 

[HornsOverIthaca 2333]

On 4/29/2021 at 12:12 PM, Horn of Gabriel said:

You think a team gives a shit about the Gasperalla Weed Eater bowl?

That's the Gasparilla Bowl to you plebeian!  José Gaspar shall not be denied.

 

[HornsOverIthaca 2333]

On 4/30/2021 at 12:22 PM, Cardinal12 said:

Nah no Stanford Cardinal here. Just like birds and can't think of usernames. Hook Em.

Posting here is a lot like flying around and shitting on patio furniture.

[Machinator 32097]

 

[Machinator 32097]

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

On 4/24/2021 at 4:11 PM, Beau Vine said:

Fuck the bowls.

I've never understood this take.  What kind of fascist doesn't want more football?  Especially during the holiday season where it provides distraction at family gatherings and random shit to watch on week nights. 

[BurntOrange&White 39659]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I've never understood this take.  What kind of fascist doesn't want more football?  Especially during the holiday season where it provides distraction at family gatherings and random shit to watch on week nights. 

For real, you must be some pessimistic pussy to be opposed to more football.

[Beau Vine 54003]

17 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I've never understood this take.  What kind of fascist doesn't want more football?  Especially during the holiday season where it provides distraction at family gatherings and random shit to watch on week nights. 

For the 7,583rd time, here is Beau Vine's NCAA CFB Postseason Plan:

1.  All teams are allowed to play one post-season game of their choosing.

2.  That's it, that's the entire plan.  If Kansas and Texas State decide they want to play a postseason game, they can do it wherever/however they want to.  They can play in San Marcos, they can plan in Lawrence, or they can play in Waco ISD Stadium and get Sonic to sponsor it and call it the Sonic TaterTots Bowl. 

[BurntOrange&White 39659]

1 minute ago, Beau Vine said:

For the 7,583rd time, here is Beau Vine's NCAA CFB Postseason Plan:

1.  All teams are allowed to play one post-season game of their choosing.

2.  That's it, that's the entire plan.  If Kansas and Texas State decide they want to play a postseason game, they can do it wherever/however they want to.  They can play in San Marcos, they can plan in Lawrence, or they can play in Waco ISD Stadium and get Sonic to sponsor it and call it the Sonic TaterTots Bowl. 

That's too chaotic and would never work.

[formermav43 4599]

40 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I've never understood this take.  What kind of fascist doesn't want more football?  Especially during the holiday season where it provides distraction at family gatherings and random shit to watch on week nights. 

Agree. I not only like the bowls, I much prefer that to these 16 team playoff proposals. Watching two relatively evenly matched, decent 9-3 teams who don’t usually play each other is much more interesting than the prospect of a #1 Bama vs #16 MAC champion.

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

12 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Agree. I not only like the bowls, I much prefer that to these 16 team playoff proposals. Watching two relatively evenly matched, decent 9-3 teams who don’t usually play each other is much more interesting than the prospect of a #1 Bama vs #16 MAC champion.

Agreed 100%.

The "bowls don't matter; they're just exhibitions" argument has never made sense to me.  Unless it was one of the games determining the national champion, the bowls have ALWAYS been an exhibition.  I mean, if we're getting hung up on what does or doesn't matter, we're talking about sports here.  Just pure entertainment.  None of it "matters".

[BurntOrange&White 39659]

16 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Agree. I not only like the bowls, I much prefer that to these 16 team playoff proposals. Watching two relatively evenly matched, decent 9-3 teams who don’t usually play each other is much more interesting than the prospect of a #1 Bama vs #16 MAC champion.

fax!

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

38 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

For the 7,583rd time, here is Beau Vine's NCAA CFB Postseason Plan:

1.  All teams are allowed to play one post-season game of their choosing.

2.  That's it, that's the entire plan.  If Kansas and Texas State decide they want to play a postseason game, they can do it wherever/however they want to.  They can play in San Marcos, they can plan in Lawrence, or they can play in Waco ISD Stadium and get Sonic to sponsor it and call it the Sonic TaterTots Bowl. 

I haven't seen your theory before, but I don't really have an issue with it.

[BurntOrange&White 39659]

Potential matchups using my setup with the rule of no more than 2 teams per conference:

 

2014

1 Bama vs 8 Boise St

2 Oregon vs 7 Miss St

3 Florida St vs 6 TCU

4 Ohio St vs 5 Baylor

2015

1 Clemson vs 8 Houston

2 Bama vs 7 Florida St

3 Mich St vs 6 Stanford

4 Oklahoma vs 5 Iowa

2016

1 Bama vs 8 USC

2 Clemson vs 7 Western Michigan

3 Ohio St vs 6 Oklahoma

4 Washington vs 5 Penn State

2017 

1 Clemson vs 8 UCF

2 Oklahoma vs 7 USC

3 Georgia vs 6 Wisconsin

4 Bama vs 5 Ohio State

2018 

1 Bama vs 8 Washington

2 Clemson vs 7 UCF

3 Notre Dame vs 6 Ohio St

4 Oklahoma vs 5 Georgia

2019

1 LSU vs 8 Memphis

2 Ohio St vs 7 Baylor

3 Clemson vs 6 Oregon

4 Oklahoma vs 6 Georgia

2020 

1 Bama vs 8 USC

2 Clemson vs 7 Cincinnati

3 Ohio St vs 6 Oklahoma

4 Notre Dame vs 5 Texas A&M