Realignment talk not going away

[bullet 1600]

CFP standings week 14.  Boise is rated ahead of Clemson.  Clemson, who lost to UGA 34-3, is rated ahead of Alabama and Ole Miss who beat Georgia.

Tulane with the same record is rated ahead of BYU and Iowa St. who play in the Big 12, and of course 3 loss Kansas St. who beat Tulane.

This may cool the desire for adding more strong teams.  Maybe the SEC would be more interested in North Carolina and less interested in FSU or Clemson.  Or maybe think going beyond 16 is a bad idea.

Or it may also push the SEC to try to get the Big 10 to take their balls and leave.

[TKthunder2 5010]

1 hour ago, bullet said:

Or it may also push the SEC to try to get the Big 10 to take their balls and leave.

The SEC and Big Ten, at a minimum, will not let this setup continue into 2026-7.

The original contract for the CFP expires. Everyone can walk away after next year which means it does NOT require unanimous agreement like it did this last go around. The SEC/B1G can/will bully the rest of the league for better or worse.

Major issues that will need to be addressed:

The SEC 3 loss teams getting passed over by 2 loss Clemson will not go unnoticed (Ole Miss and Bama beat UGA who beat Clemson like a drum).

ND and Miami ranked higher than UGA (who has the toughest SOS and far better wins AND losses) will not go unnoticed.

The setup where Miami and Boise State get a bye and the REAL argument that the 5 seed‘s path (ASU, Boise) to the NCG could be better than the 1 seed (UGA/TN winner) will not stand.

The debate over 2 loss SEC teams versus 1 loss Indiana did not sit well with the Big Ten.

At a minimum I think you’ll see the autobid be relegated to access bids only and no longer tied to byes. They’ll also move second round games from the bowls to home stadiums of the top 4 seeds.

Maybe there will be another push for 14 teams with more autobids (SEC/B1G get 4, B12/ACC get 2, 1 for G6, 1 at large to allow room for ND) and guaranteed byes for the SEC/B1G champs.

If the SEC and B1G don’t get their way, this will open the door for more realignment.

1 hour ago, bullet said:

This may cool the desire for adding more strong teams.  Maybe the SEC would be more interested in North Carolina and less interested in FSU or Clemson.  Or maybe think going beyond 16 is a bad idea.

This is all true within the current setup. But if it is going to get blown up, taking away FSU/Clemson/Miami from the ACC will relegate them just like it did with the Big12. You take those 3 (and ND if you can) into the B1G/SEC and you have 13 of the top 15 teams (currently it’s 10).

Right now 1 loss SMU it between the SEC 2 and 3 loss teams, but you consolidate even more within the two conferences and I’m not going to be surprised to see a 1 loss B12/ACC team after a 3 loss SEC/B1G. The system will be setup so the 2 ACC/B12 teams plus the G6 highest conference champ will make it in, but 1 loss non conference champs not in the SEC/B1G will be on the bubble with 3 loss teams (and those with 2 losses need not apply for at large spots, unless you’re ND).

[hornian 5230]

13 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

They’ll also move second round games from the bowls to home stadiums of the top 4 seeds.

Yes Please. 

[Al_4_ISU 12513]

13 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

The SEC and Big Ten, at a minimum, will not let this setup continue into 2026-7.

The original contract for the CFP expires. Everyone can walk away after next year which means it does NOT require unanimous agreement like it did this last go around. The SEC/B1G can/will bully the rest of the league for better or worse.

Major issues that will need to be addressed:

The SEC 3 loss teams getting passed over by 2 loss Clemson will not go unnoticed (Ole Miss and Bama beat UGA who beat Clemson like a drum).

ND and Miami ranked higher than UGA (who has the toughest SOS and far better wins AND losses) will not go unnoticed.

The setup where Miami and Boise State get a bye and the REAL argument that the 5 seed‘s path (ASU, Boise) to the NCG could be better than the 1 seed (UGA/TN winner) will not stand.

The debate over 2 loss SEC teams versus 1 loss Indiana did not sit well with the Big Ten.

At a minimum I think you’ll see the autobid be relegated to access bids only and no longer tied to byes. They’ll also move second round games from the bowls to home stadiums of the top 4 seeds.

Maybe there will be another push for 14 teams with more autobids (SEC/B1G get 4, B12/ACC get 2, 1 for G6, 1 at large to allow room for ND) and guaranteed byes for the SEC/B1G champs.

If the SEC and B1G don’t get their way, this will open the door for more realignment.

This is all true within the current setup. But if it is going to get blown up, taking away FSU/Clemson/Miami from the ACC will relegate them just like it did with the Big12. You take those 3 (and ND if you can) into the B1G/SEC and you have 13 of the top 15 teams (currently it’s 10).

Right now 1 loss SMU it between the SEC 2 and 3 loss teams, but you consolidate even more within the two conferences and I’m not going to be surprised to see a 1 loss B12/ACC team after a 3 loss SEC/B1G. The system will be setup so the 2 ACC/B12 teams plus the G6 highest conference champ will make it in, but 1 loss non conference champs not in the SEC/B1G will be on the bubble with 3 loss teams (and those with 2 losses need not apply for at large spots, unless you’re ND).

I think it’s gonna be the 14 with 4 SEC/Big 10 bids, 2 Big 12/ACC, 1 G5, 1 at large, but there will be no bye for being a conference champion.  The byes will go on seeding, and the top 4 seeds will always be from some combo of SEC and Big 10 teams.  Bye teams will host on campus games and keep the gate.

[Drew 2551]

But why would the ACC/Big 12 get 2 auto bids?  Do they deserve them?  The big 12 doesn't this year...maybe some years they would.

 

[Al_4_ISU 12513]

No one really deserves autobids, but it’s clear the Big 10 and SEC want them, ergo it will happen when the playoff expands, which seems inevitable.  The Big 12 and ACC bring enough viewers to the product to get something, but not enough for equal footing.

If you think any of this is motivated by what’s earned on the field of play, I’m not sure what to say.

By preserving some access to the schools outside the SEC and Big 10, you keep all their fans watching your product without having to share anything with them.

[statsman 5486]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

 

If you think any of this is motivated by what’s earned on the field of play, I’m not sure what to say.

In the four team playoff, since 2014, the SEC teams are 13-6. The B1G is 5-5. The Big XII (mostly OU) was 1-6. The ACC was 6-5. The PAC was 2-3. ND was 0-2. 
 
I think the SEC and B1G have an argument for more teams. 

[TKthunder2 5010]

7 hours ago, Drew said:

But why would the ACC/Big 12 get 2 auto bids?  Do they deserve them?  The big 12 doesn't this year...maybe some years they would.

 

Because it minimizes the committee as much as possible and its the price for the getting 4 each.

This is a great deal for the Big 12 and Big Ten. It’s so-so for the ACC, but if they lose FSU/Clemson it becomes a great deal for them, and with that real possibility on the horizon they should take it. The G6 and ND just want access so I assume they will be fine with the setup as well.

Honestly I think the SEC is the one giving up the most here. While they would benefit from this arrangement this year, they’ve consistently said that they wish every spot was at large, so locking them in with only 4 bids is likely not what they want (though I assume they are banking on getting that at large spot in years when ND is down).

I’d hope the conference would get to pick its 4 teams from their conference standings and NOT include OOC games, then the committee could use total body of work INCLUDING OOC games to pick the line at large team (that would be a nice little fuck you to ND).