Jump to content

12 Team College Football Playoff On The Way

Hiphopopotamos

By Hiphopopotamos
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Vertigo

Vertigo 20492

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

top 4 get a week off, next 8 hack it out to get knocked out in week 2

This was my thought. There is a lot of incentive to get those byes. Plus the first week will make for some really entertaining games before the winners are fed to the wood chipper. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 24013

Posted
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Eight made the most sense, worked out to include highest ranked conference champions, and doesn't water down regular season or make the playoffs too long for the student athletes.

So of course, the presidents chose 12.

All they care about is money.  

But for some reason its fine for FCS teams to have a 24 team playoff, Div II to have a 28 team playoff, etc... Is the argument that if you attend a shitty school that nobody has heard of, nobody cares about the student athlete? Or is it possible that these scholars manage just fine with a playoff in place.

Edited by Blotto
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fattyflattie

fattyflattie 4640

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

They will and they will never shut up about it.

Yep. I’m guessing Looch’s micropeen is rock hard about now.  But think this fucks them worse. Backfiring your way into 4 by a very talented team losing in the SECCG is easier than making it thru several game tournament.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 39068

Posted
Posted

This is what I've been saying for years.  Not 8 and not 16.  12, so you maintain the integrity of the late-season rivalry games.  11-0 Bama can't rest people against Auburn since a loss costs them a bye.  Etc.

It's so obvious that even the NCAA saw it.  Still surprised, but happy with it.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 22131

Posted
Posted

I'll take it, but would have preferred 8. The bye seems like too big an advantage to me in college football, the top 4 are already going to be really good, and their opponents will have to go through an extra game of fatigue and possible injury. I'm guessing a team outside the top 4 might win it all once a decade, and that super optimistic. The chances would go up a lot I think without the bye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTbear

LTbear 4213

Posted
Posted
Just now, 'stache said:

I'll take it, but would have preferred 8. The bye seems like too big an advantage to me in college football, the top 4 are already going to be really good, and their opponents will have to go through an extra game of fatigue and possible injury. I'm guessing a team outside the top 4 might win it all once a decade, and that super optimistic. The chances would go up a lot I think without the bye.

As is, the new Big XII champ would get a bye many, if not most, years. So I'll take it. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pimphand

Pimphand 6369

Posted
Posted

They should bring the BCS back and pick out the top 8 teams but that would be far too logical for this merry moron brigade.

The BCS sucked when it could only pick 2 teams but nobody would really give a shit at the 8/9 split because more likely than not that team would have gotten stomped by the #1 team

If you take the first year of the BCS as an example...

8 team
Tennessee vs Florida
Florida State vs Arizona
Kansas State vs Texas A&M
Ohio State vs UCLA
 

12 team
Tennessee vs Florida / Wisconsin winner
Florida State vs Arizona / Tulane winner
Kansas State vs Texas A&M / Nebraska winner
Ohio State vs UCLA / Virginia winner

I just don't see the value add by adding the 4 additional games and adding a week to the resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 39068

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I'll take it, but would have preferred 8. The bye seems like too big an advantage to me in college football, the top 4 are already going to be really good, and their opponents will have to go through an extra game of fatigue and possible injury.

And this is the counter argument to people saying this makes the regular season meaningless.

No, it doesn't.  Those byes are worth gold.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pimphand

Pimphand 6369

Posted
Posted

1999
Florida State vs Michigan / Michigan State winner
Virginia Tech vs Wisconsin / Florida winner
Nebraska vs Kansas State / Penn State winner
Alabama vs Tennssee / Marshall winner

2000
Oklahoma vs Nebraska / Kansas State winner
Florida State vs Florida / Oregon winner
Miami vs Oregon State / Notre Dame winner
Washington vs Virginia Tech / Texas winner

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 34627

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

2008:

1. Oklahoma

2. Florida

3. USC

4. Utah

5. Texas

6. Alabama

7. Texas Tech

8. Penn State

9. Boise State

10. Ohio State

11. TCU

12. Cincinnati

(12) Cincinnati @ (5) Texas

(11) TCU @ (6) Alabama

(10) Ohio State @ (7) Texas Tech

(9) Boise State @ (8) Penn State

Cincy/Texas winner vs. (4) Utah 

TCU/Alabama winner vs. (3) USC

Ohio State/TCU winner vs. (2) Florida

Boise State/Penn State winner vs. (1) Oklahoma

That would have been awesome. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 5
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 22131

Posted
Posted

Are conferences still going to do away with divisions and have their top two teams play for the conference championship game? Wouldn't most years involve both teams making the playoffs and possibly rematches? That could get awkward. A bunch of CCG's could be solely about getting the bye or higher seed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pimphand

Pimphand 6369

Posted
Posted

2001
Miami vs Illinois / Stanford winner
Nebraska vs Texas / Maryland winner
Colorado vs Tennessee / Oklahoma winner
Oregon vs Florida / Washington State winner

2002
Miami vs Kansas State / Notre Dame winner
Ohio State vs Oklahoma / Texas winner
Georgia vs Washington State / Michigan winner
USC vs Iowa / Penn State winner

2003
Oklahoma vs Tennessee / Miami winner
LSU vs Florida State / Kansas State winner
USC vs Texas / Miami (OH) winner
Michigan vs Ohio State / Georgia winner

2004
USC vs Virginia Tech / Boise State winner
Oklahoma va Georgia / Louisville winner
Auburn vs Utah / LSU winner
Texas vs California / Iowa winner

2005
USC vs Georgia / Miami winner
Texas vs Auburn / LSU winner
Penn State vs Oregon / Virginia Tech winner
Ohio State vs Notre Dame / West Virginia winner

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 44226

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Pimphand said:

2001
Miami vs Illinois / Stanford winner
Nebraska vs Texas / Maryland winner
Colorado vs Tennessee / Oklahoma winner
Oregon vs Florida / Washington State winner

2002
Miami vs Kansas State / Notre Dame winner
Ohio State vs Oklahoma / Texas winner
Georgia vs Washington State / Michigan winner
USC vs Iowa / Penn State winner

2003
Oklahoma vs Tennessee / Miami winner
LSU vs Florida State / Kansas State winner
USC vs Texas / Miami (OH) winner
Michigan vs Ohio State / Georgia winner

2004
USC vs Virginia Tech / Boise State winner
Oklahoma va Georgia / Louisville winner
Auburn vs Utah / LSU winner
Texas vs California / Iowa winner

2005
USC vs Georgia / Miami winner
Texas vs Auburn / LSU winner
Penn State vs Oregon / Virginia Tech winner
Ohio State vs Notre Dame / West Virginia winner

It sucks so hard we only got one NC out of that run... 

The closest we've got since 2009 to making a theoretical 12 team was in 2018 at #14 in the CFP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Had Enough

Had Enough 2111

Posted
Posted

Keep chasing the “perfect” model cause you won’t ever get it. It’ll never be better than the Horns 2005 season.

Home games and byes awarded to teams based on fallible methodologies doesn’t ultimately improve the product. Endurance is now more a big deal. The power conferences will get those byes and home games. If they don’t, they’ll figure out a way to get them in the future. There is a strong likelihood that more teams creates more discontent with the scheduling and seeding process.

College football is the ultimate fans game for active participants. In my opinion, this choice shifts that in favor of non-active Tv participants. There will likely be decisions to be made for many as time and money have more constraints now. The cost runs up the more corporate it becomes.

If you are not an NFL fan and don’t attend college games live, you ought to become an NFL fan. It provides entertainment and is a higher quality product of on the field performance. This is probably the final step in the conversion to NFL-lite. Actually, I guess the finalization of the super conferences is the final step.

It will be an individual program decision, but I don’t think this will result in stronger non-con scheduling. Two losses will get you in often. Three losses will be a much more rare invite. And rest assured the SEC 3 or 4 loss teams will not stand idly by while a lesser two loss team gets an invite. With a pending 9 game conference schedule in a tough conference, there really is no point in scheduling anyone worth a shit in non-con when it comes to making the playoff. You don’t want to risk an extra loss. You really don’t want to face a team a second time after you beat them first. You risk more injury and emotional ups and downs, which makes you susceptible to another loss.

Just get on to the super conferences and be done with it. 64 teams, 4 or 8 divisions, 4 or 8 playoff spots. Schedule free as you choose because only division games matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trojan Man

Trojan Man 429

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

The remaining AAC schools have to feel like they just won the lottery.

Every team outside of the Big 10/SEC should feel that way.  Six champion autobids is the best case scenario playoff format for them.  They'll be able to legitimately sell playoff access to recruits and coaches and their fans.  It's a good move for the health of the sport because it won't feel like the Big 10 and the SEC are playing in a totally different league than everyone else, which means the left out fanbases will still have a reason to keep watching and believing their team can maybe have a dream season.  At that point they're shifting their blame for falling short of dream seasons on their team instead of the system.  If your team doesn't make the playoff and you blame your school for making shitty hires or not prioritizing winning or whatever that can be fixed and you'll keep watching.  If you blame the system having it out for you and fucking you over you're more likely to just throw your hands up and walk away because it feels like nothing can be done to overcome it.

My one complaint is they plan on only playing first round games at campus and the rest at bowls.  Every game but the title game should be a home game for the higher seeded team.  I suspect this will change after a few years when the teams that always get a top 4 seed start bitching about how they never get to host a playoff home game like the lower seeds.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28928

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, GringoSalado said:

I continue to not understand 12 over 8. If we already had 8, would anybody be advocating for 12? I doubt it, but I'm a dumbass.

I mean, the NCAA basketball tournament stopped after they expanded from 8 teams to 16, right? Okay, fine, but then they stopped after expanding from 16 to 32 teams, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
orange dream

orange dream 1295

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

Waiting for someone to post what the 12 team playoff would have been every year since the BCS started. 

Sorry for the longcat but you asked for it... only since 2014 though

College Football Playoff expansion -- 12-team historic simulations, storylines and more (espn.com)

full article in spoiler

 

Spoiler

College Football Playoff expansion: 12-team historic simulations, storylines and more

2:11 PM CT
  • connelly_bill.png&h=80&w=80&scale=crop
    Bill ConnellyESPN Staff Writer

To see how a new development might affect the future, take a look at how it would have affected the past. That's a go-to of mine -- see: how larger playoffs would have worked in 2020 or how a much bigger, earlier playoff would have affected things -- and with the long-awaited news that we will be moving toward a 12-team playoff in 2026, we have a reason to dip into that well once more.

I had never really paid much attention to a 12-team format until it arose as an option last summer. An eight-teamer -- six conference champions with two at-large bids -- had long seemed like an inclusive, interesting and logical next step. But as it turns out, a 12-teamer works quite well in terms of political calibration.

A 12-team playoff, with six spots guaranteed for conference champions, not only offers playoff paths to at least one team from the Group of Five conferences; it also assures that as the balance of power shifts within the Power Five -- with the Big Ten and SEC acquiring more and more money and influence at the expense of the Big 12, Pac-12 and ACC -- the winners of each of those conferences will have a place at the table in most seasons. It assures that college football's national title race is actually inclusive for just about the first time ever.

But it also assures that the most powerful conferences and teams benefit massively from extra at-large bids. And the news that quarterfinal games would take place in bowl games (presumably the four New Year's Six bowls that don't host semifinals in a given year) instead of home fields conveniently allows the most influential bowls to remain relevant. We lose home-field atmospheres, but a game like the Rose Bowl, with its influence weakened and wobbly after the Big Ten kneecapped the Pac-12, is still assured a marquee spot in the lineup long-term. (Who knows, maybe it begins to host the Big Ten Championship in the future, too.)

To best learn about what a 12-teamer changes, however, let's hop in the simulation machine.

Below are how each of the past eight College Football Playoffs would have taken shape with 12 teams instead of four. I used the playoff committee's rankings as they existed -- there's a distinct possibility that the committee considers teams differently with a 12-team cutoff instead of four, but we won't know what the changes are for a while. I also worked under the aforementioned assumption that the quarterfinals will take place in four New Year's Six bowls, with the semifinals taking place in the same bowls that hosted the four-team semis. I simulated each playoff using my SP+ rankings, and I'm including each playoff team's odds of reaching the semifinals below, as well as the most likely champions each season. (Why semifinal odds? Because I want to see what might have changed compared to the four-team playoff that we actually got.)

 

How many times would Ohio State reached the CFP under a 12-team model? Photo by John Cordes/Icon Sportswire

2014

First round

  • 9 Ole Miss (9-3) at 8 Michigan State (10-2)

  • 12 Boise State (11-2) at 5 Baylor (11-1)

  • 11 Kansas State (9-3) at 6 TCU (11-1)

  • 10 Arizona (10-3) at 7 Mississippi State (10-2)

Top-ranked snubs: Georgia Tech (10-3), Georgia (9-3)

Quarterfinals

  • Orange Bowl: 1 Alabama (12-1) vs. Michigan State-Ole Miss winner

  • Cotton Bowl: 4 Ohio State (12-1) vs. Baylor-BSU winner

  • Peach Bowl: 3 Florida State (13-0) vs. TCU-KSU winner

  • Fiesta Bowl: 2 Oregon (12-1) vs. Mississippi State-Arizona winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 1 Alabama 75%

  • 3 Florida State 66%

  • 2 Oregon 60%

  • 4 Ohio State 59%

  • 7 Mississippi State 37%

  • 5 Baylor 37%

  • 6 TCU 27%

  • 8 Michigan State 18%

  • 9 Ole Miss 8%

  • 11 Kansas State 7%

  • 12 Boise State 4%

  • 10 Arizona 3%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 17%
Most likely champions: Alabama (37%), Florida State (19%), Ohio State (11%)

Originally, the big controversy from this season came when Ohio State usurped Baylor and TCU for the No. 4 spot. In this example, the Buckeyes merely steal a bye. Baylor draws a solid but unspectacular Boise State, while TCU hosts a three-loss Kansas State team it beat by three touchdowns earlier that season. They both likely win and advance to intriguing Ohio State-Baylor and FSU-TCU quarterfinals.

2015

First round

  • 9 Florida State (10-2) at 8 Notre Dame (10-2)

  • 12 Houston (12-1) at 5 Iowa (12-1)

  • 11 TCU (10-2) at 6 Stanford (11-2)

  • 10 North Carolina (11-2) at 7 Ohio State (11-1)

Top-ranked snubs: Ole Miss (9-3), Northwestern (10-2)

Quarterfinals

  • Peach Bowl: 1 Clemson (13-0) vs. Notre Dame-FSU winner

  • Rose Bowl: 4 Oklahoma (11-1) vs. Iowa-Houston winner

  • Fiesta Bowl: 3 Michigan State (12-1) vs. Stanford-TCU winner

  • Sugar Bowl: 2 Alabama (12-1) vs. Ohio State-UNC winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 4 Oklahoma 80%

  • 2 Alabama 54%

  • 1 Clemson 53%

  • 6 Stanford 42%

  • 7 Ohio State 39%

  • 3 Michigan State 37%

  • 8 Notre Dame 26%

  • 9 Florida State 22%

  • 11 TCU 21%

  • 5 Iowa 14%

  • 10 North Carolina 8%

  • 12 Houston 7%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 9%
Most likely champions: Alabama (25%), Ohio State (18%), Oklahoma (16%)

This draw gives out two consequential mulligans. The first one goes to Ohio State, which was quite possibly deeper and more talented than 2014's title team but slogged through a miserable 17-14 defeat to Michigan State. Instead of costing the Buckeyes a bid, it costs them a bye, and they likely beat UNC and get a shot at a flawed Bama in the quarterfinals.

The second mulligan goes to a Stanford team that began the season with the infamous "body clocks" loss to Northwestern before catching fire. In this reality, it gets the 6-seed and has an excellent chance of getting through TCU and Michigan State and into the semifinals.

2016

First round

  • 9 USC (9-3) at 8 Wisconsin (10-3)

  • 12 Western Michigan (13-0) at 5 Ohio State (11-1)

  • 11 Florida State (9-3) at 6 Michigan (10-2)

  • 10 Colorado (10-3) at 7 Oklahoma (10-2)

Top-ranked snubs: Oklahoma State (9-3), Louisville (9-3)

Quarterfinals

  • Sugar Bowl: 1 Alabama (13-0) vs. Wisconsin-USC winner

  • Cotton Bowl: 4 Penn State (11-2) vs. Ohio State-WMU winner

  • Rose Bowl: 3 Washington (12-1) vs. Michigan-FSU winner

  • Orange Bowl: 2 Clemson (12-1) vs. Oklahoma-Colorado winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 1 Alabama 74%

  • 2 Clemson 59%

  • 3 Washington 56%

  • 4 Penn State 47%

  • 5 Ohio State 45%

  • 7 Oklahoma 40%

  • 6 Michigan 25%

  • 11 Florida State 19%

  • 9 USC 19%

  • 12 WMU 8%

  • 8 Wisconsin 7%

  • 10 Colorado 1%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 11%
Most likely champions: Alabama (34%), Clemson (19%), Washington (13%)

Ohio State, which earned the No. 3 seed in real life, draws the No. 5 only because it didn't win the Big Ten. Instead, Penn State -- which beat the Buckeyes in the regular season but lost twice -- gets a bye ... and probably plays Ohio State again in the Cotton Bowl quarterfinals.

Note the chaos potential of the odds above, by the way. Six teams have between a 40-59% chance of reaching the final four, and there's only an 11% chance of the top four seeds getting there.

2017

First round

  • 9 Penn State (10-2) at 8 USC (11-2)

  • 12 UCF (12-0) at 5 Alabama (11-1)

  • 11 Washington (10-2) at 6 Wisconsin (12-1)

  • 10 Miami (10-2) at 7 Auburn (10-3)

Top-ranked snubs: Stanford (9-4), Notre Dame (9-3)

Quarterfinals

  • Peach Bowl: 1 Clemson vs. USC-PSU winner

  • Fiesta Bowl: 4 Ohio State vs. Alabama-UCF winner

  • Orange Bowl: 3 Georgia vs. Wisconsin-Washington winner

  • Cotton Bowl: 2 Oklahoma vs. Auburn-Miami winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 1 Clemson 58%

  • 2 Oklahoma 56%

  • 3 Georgia 54%

  • 5 Alabama 51%

  • 4 Ohio State 48%

  • 7 Auburn 34%

  • 6 Wisconsin 33%

  • 9 Penn State 30%

  • 11 Washington 14%

  • 8 USC 12%

  • 10 Miami 9%

  • 12 UCF 2%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 9%
Most likely champions: Alabama (23%), Ohio State (18%), Georgia (12%)

Maximum chaos potential. Alabama's late-year loss to Auburn knocked the Crimson Tide from the SEC championship game, but when Georgia defeated Auburn in Atlanta, Bama sneaked into the four-team playoff and then won the whole thing. The Tide obviously get in here, too, but as the No. 5 seed. And with no true standout teams, eight teams have at least a 30% chance of reaching the semis and all are under 60%.

Also: Self-proclaimed national champion UCF no longer complains about getting left out of the Playoff. Instead ... it has to beat Bama and Ohio State to get to the semis. Ouch.

2018

First round

  • 9 Washington (10-3) at 8 UCF (12-0)

  • 12 Penn State (9-3) at 5 Notre Dame (12-0)

  • 11 LSU (9-3) at 6 Georgia (11-2)

  • 10 Florida (9-3) at 7 Michigan (10-2)

Top-ranked snubs: Washington State (10-2), Kentucky (9-3)

Quarterfinals

  • Peach Bowl: 1 Alabama (13-0) vs. UCF-Washington winner

  • Rose Bowl: 4 Ohio State (12-1) vs. Notre Dame-PSU winner

  • Fiesta Bowl: 3 Oklahoma (12-1) vs. Georgia-LSU winner

  • Sugar Bowl: 2 Clemson (13-0) vs. Michigan-Florida winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 1 Alabama 85%

  • 2 Clemson 66%

  • 4 Ohio State 59%

  • 6 Georgia 50%

  • 3 Oklahoma 38%

  • 5 Notre Dame 25%

  • 7 Michigan 17%

  • 10 Florida 16%

  • 12 Penn State 16%

  • 11 LSU 13%

  • 9 Washington 9%

  • 8 UCF 6%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 13%
Most likely champions: Alabama (45%), Georgia (17%), Clemson (16%)

Beginning in 2018, the teams at the top of the pack began to get more dominant. This was Nick Saban's best Bama team to date, and Clemson was playing otherworldly ball at the end of the season. They stand out as favorites, and while the other two quarterfinals could be competitive, the chaos potential is minimized this year.

Two other notes:

UCF becomes the first Group of 5 team to host a first-round game, but even if the Knights win ... they get Bama again in the next round. Double ouch.

Unbeaten Notre Dame draws only the No. 5 seed because the Irish aren't conference champions. Their odds of reaching the semifinals are far lower than those of the top four seeds, but as athletic director Jack Swarbrick pointed out recently, they would have to play a conference title game to earn one of those top four seeds. That brings obvious risk as well.

2019

First round

  • 9 Florida (10-2) at 8 Wisconsin (10-3)

  • 12 Memphis (12-1) at 5 Georgia (11-2)

  • 11 Utah (11-2) at 6 Oregon (11-2)

  • 10 Penn State (10-2) at 7 Baylor (11-2)

Top-ranked snubs: Auburn (9-3), Alabama (10-2)

Quarterfinals

  • Sugar Bowl: 1 LSU (13-0) vs. Wisconsin-Florida winner

  • Cotton Bowl: 4 Oklahoma (12-1) vs. Georgia-Memphis winner

  • Orange Bowl: 3 Clemson (13-0) vs. Oregon-Utah winner

  • Rose Bowl: 2 Ohio State (13-0) vs. Baylor-PSU winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 2 Ohio State 78%

  • 1 LSU 74%

  • 3 Clemson 70%

  • 4 Oklahoma 46%

  • 5 Georgia 44%

  • 6 Oregon 16%

  • 9 Florida 15%

  • 10 Penn State 15%

  • 11 Utah 14%

  • 8 Wisconsin 11%

  • 12 Memphis 10%

  • 7 Baylor 7%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 19%
Most likely champions: Ohio State (36%), LSU (28%), Clemson (14%)

There is great potential for a new crop of rivalry games in a 12-team era. With a possible Oklahoma-Georgia Cotton Bowl matchup, this might have been the third consecutive year that saw the Sooners and Dawgs face off, after the 2017 semis and 2018 quarterfinals. Meanwhile, Alabama and Ohio State might have played each other five years in a row -- the 2014 quarterfinals, 2015 semis, 2016 semis, 2017 quarters and 2018 semis. Yes, we probably still get our fair share of Bama-Clemson battles, but that isn't the only defining matchup.

Also: Using the CFP rankings as they were originally drawn up, a two-loss Alabama team gets left out of these playoffs in favor of Utah and Penn State. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the committee doesn't rank the Tide 13th if 12 is the new cutoff.

2020

First round

  • 9 Georgia (7-2) at 8 Cincinnati (9-0)

  • 12 Coastal Carolina (11-0) at 5 Notre Dame (10-1)

  • 11 Indiana (6-1) at 6 Texas A&M (8-1)

  • 10 Iowa State (8-3) at 7 Florida (8-3)

Top-ranked snubs: North Carolina (8-3), Northwestern (6-2)

Quarterfinals

  • Peach Bowl: 1 Alabama (11-0) vs. Cincinnati-Georgia winner

  • Fiesta Bowl: 4 Oklahoma (8-2) vs. Notre Dame-Coastal winner

  • Cotton Bowl: 3 Ohio State (6-0) vs. A&M-Indiana winner

  • Orange Bowl: 2 Clemson (10-1) vs. Florida-ISU winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 1 Alabama 78%

  • 4 Oklahoma 74%

  • 3 Ohio State 73%

  • 2 Clemson 61%

  • 7 Florida 29%

  • 6 Texas A&M 23%

  • 5 Notre Dame 18%

  • 9 Georgia 14%

  • 10 Iowa State 10%

  • 8 Cincinnati 9%

  • 12 Coastal Carolina 8%

  • 11 Indiana 5%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 25%
Most likely champions: Alabama (42%), Ohio State (18%), Clemson (14%)

The "top six conference champions" rule wreaks havoc in 2020. With unranked Oregon beating USC, that means conference champion No. 6 is now the Sun Belt's Coastal Carolina. Meanwhile, Oklahoma's Big 12 title game win over Iowa State gives the Sooners a bye and sends the Cyclones to Gainesville for Round 1. That's all undercard, however. The top four teams are the most dominant set of four yet, though Clemson gets a tricky draw in potentially facing a Florida team that doesn't have Kyle Pitts et al opting out in the quarterfinals.

And yes, Alabama likely still wins it all.

2021

First round

  • 9 Oklahoma State (11-2) at 8 Ole Miss (10-2)

  • 12 Pittsburgh (11-2) at 5 Georgia (13-0)

  • 11 Utah (10-3) at 6 Notre Dame (11-1)

  • 10 Michigan State (10-2) at 7 Ohio State (10-2)

Top-ranked snubs: BYU (10-2), Oregon (10-3)

Quarterfinals

  • Sugar Bowl: 1 Alabama (12-1) vs. Ole Miss-Oklahoma State winner

  • Cotton Bowl: 4 Baylor (11-2) vs. Georgia-Pitt winner

  • Rose Bowl: 2 Michigan (12-1) vs. Ohio State-Michigan State winner

  • Orange Bowl: 3 Cincinnati (13-0) vs. Notre Dame-Utah winner

Semifinal odds, per SP+

  • 1 Alabama 72%

  • 5 Georgia 70%

  • 3 Cincinnati 61%

  • 7 Ohio State 56%

  • 2 Michigan 41%

  • 6 Notre Dame 25%

  • 4 Baylor 21%

  • 9 Oklahoma State 15%

  • 11 Utah 15%

  • 8 Ole Miss 13%

  • 12 Pitt 9%

  • 10 Michigan State 3%

Odds of top 4 all advancing: 4%
Most likely champions: Georgia (32%), Ohio State (22%), Alabama (18%)

Wow, has a lot changed with this one. In reality, we had Michigan winning the Big Ten and keeping Ohio State out of the CFP, then we got a Bama-Georgia final. In this alternate reality, Michigan makes its third CFP and ends up getting a bye in what amounts to a Big Ten regional and facing the winner of Ohio State-Michigan State (probably the Buckeyes) in a Rose Bowl semifinal. Meanwhile, perhaps even more consequentially, Georgia doesn't get a top-four seed (conference champs only) and likely ends up facing Alabama in the semifinals. That drastically reduces both teams' title odds and offers Ohio State a lifeline for avenging the Michigan loss and making a playoff run.

Here are some thoughts about what these simulations tell us.

This is a massive change

In the first eight years of the four-team playoff, only two teams that ended up ranked worse than 10th in SP+ made the field -- one of those two, 2020 Notre Dame, fell out of the top 10 only after playing in the CFP -- and 25 of 32 teams finished the year in the top five. This club was too exclusive and hasn't really benefited college football in terms of inclusiveness.

We're extremely inclusive now.

EDITOR'S PICKS

Again, it's conceivable that the thought processes behind how the committee ranks teams will change. But based solely on the 2014-20 rankings that already exist, a 12-team field would have brought in 10 teams that ranked worse than 20th in SP+. And although that group does include five of the obligatory Group of 5 teams -- or, as we'll evidently now refer to them, "sixth conference champions" -- it also includes a 2016 Colorado team that finished the year 53rd and a 2014 Arizona team that finished 46th.

This is a true tournament now, for better or worse, and quite a bit of the FBS will get to experience it. In this eight-year simulation, 41 teams -- about 32% of FBS' membership -- reach at least one playoff.

Simulated CFP appearances by team
8: Ohio State
7: Alabama
6: Clemson, Oklahoma
5: Georgia
4: Notre Dame, Penn State
3: Baylor, Florida, Florida State, Michigan, Michigan State, Washington, Wisconsin
2: Cincinnati, LSU, Ole Miss, Oregon, TCU, UCF, USC, Utah
1: Arizona, Auburn, Boise State, Coastal Carolina, Colorado, Houston, Indiana, Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas State, Memphis, Miami, Mississippi State, North Carolina, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Stanford, Texas A&M, Western Michigan

To be sure, this structure still benefits the top dogs most of all. Ohio State now reaches the CFP in every single season, Clemson and Oklahoma rip off streaks of six straight playoffs from 2015-20, and although Alabama misses the 2019 CFP based on the committee's original rankings, again, I doubt that happens if there's a 12-team cutoff.

At the same time, teams like Penn State, Washington and Wisconsin each make half or nearly half of the playoffs and have decent odds of doing damage when they get there, and a conference that doesn't have a clear dominant force at the moment -- the Pac-12 -- sees more than half its membership make at least one appearance.

Simulated CFP appearances by conference
Big Ten: 23
SEC: 22
Big 12: 14
ACC: 13* (including Notre Dame's 2020 appearance)
Pac-12: 12
AAC: 6
Independents: 3 (all Notre Dame)
MAC: 1
MWC: 1
Sun Belt: 1
Conference USA: 0

Again, the top dogs benefit the most. While expansion to 12 teams finally offers genuine inclusion to all of the FBS, it also means that an average of 5.6 SEC and Big Ten teams make the playoff field each year. If revenue ends up distributed by the number of playoff teams your conference has, the richest conferences continue to expand their lead on the field.

The favorites remain the favorites, but the shifting odds are noteworthy

In a 12-team tournament, you're introducing genuine randomness to the proceedings. Using the SP+ projections above, here are the average odds of reaching the semifinals for each seed, 1-12:

1-seed: 71%
2-seed: 60%
3-seed: 57%
4-seed: 54%
5-seed: 38%
6-seed: 30%
7-seed: 32%
8-seed: 13%
9-seed: 16%
10-seed: 8%
11-seed: 13%
12-seed: 8%

There's some noise in there, but you see a clear hierarchy, and to be sure, the top four seeds have the best odds of reaching the semis, as you would expect. But those odds aren't anywhere near 100%. Even in 2019-20, when the balance of power coagulated significantly at the top, teams such as 2019 LSU and 2020 Alabama had semifinal odds only in the 70-80% range. They still have to beat one extra very good team to get there, and the more good teams you play, the more tempted fate might be to throw you a curveball.

Are conference title games pointless now?

One of the immediate concerns expressed in the aftermath of the original 12-team rumor was that you're basically rendering the conference championship game pointless. Both teams are still going to make the field, right?

Not necessarily. In this simulation, only 18 of 37 power conference title-game losers made it -- and even in the SEC and Big Ten, the runners-up made it only nine of 16 times.

A lot of this, of course, is the product of a bad divisional structure. The SEC championship game losers that didn't make it, for instance, were the flawed Missouri and Florida teams that won the SEC East from 2014 to 2016. If or when conferences move to ditch divisions (and the Pac-12 already has), (A) it would greatly increase the odds that the conference's best teams have a chance at the conference title, which I've always considered an obviously good thing, but (B) it would indeed lessen the importance of the conference title game in a universe with a 12-team playoff. The winner still gets a valuable bye, but the stakes aren't quite as high.

Yes, we could have a three-loss national champion now

But it's unlikely.

When the subject of playoff expansion comes up, those opposed to the idea are all but guaranteed to bring up something to the effect of "Now some 9-3 team could win the national title! The sanctity of the regular season is dead!" There's no denying that in a 12-team playoff era, we'd be handing out a lot more mulligans.

In the eight years above, 16 three-loss teams make the field of 12, about two per year. We could now have a national champion with some wacky, NFL-like 14-3 record. But within that three-loss group, only 2017 Auburn (34%) and 2020 Florida (29%) end up with a greater than 20% chance of reaching even the semifinals, and almost none would have odds higher than about 3-4% of winning the title. A Cinderella run of sorts would be possible but extremely unlikely. As is the case in every college sport.

The Auburn conundrum

In an average season, Auburn plays in the nation's best division (the SEC West), draws permanent rival Georgia in cross-division play, and schedules at least one extremely high-quality nonconference opponent each year: Oregon in 2019, Washington in 2018, Clemson in 2017, etc.

The reward for that high-level scheduling: one CFP bid in eight years, per the simulation above. The Tigers made it with three losses in 2017 and narrowly missed out in 2019. The rankings above basically make it so that any power-conference team is guaranteed to make the field with one loss and has excellent odds with two losses. If we see a change in how the committee ranks teams moving forward -- there's no guarantee we will, but there's obviously a chance -- it could be in terms of how much teams are forgiven for quality losses.

A changing opt-out universe

 

When Florida played Oklahoma in the Cotton Bowl at the end of 2020, the Gators did so without all-world tight end Kyle Pitts, receivers Kadarius Toney and Trevon Grimes, and defensive back Marco Wilson -- four of probably their five or six best players. They had all opted out to begin preparation for the NFL draft. When Pitt won the ACC in 2021, the Panthers played in the Fiesta Bowl without star quarterback Kenny Pickett. They almost certainly don't opt out in a universe with a 12-team playoff.

To the extent that the goal of playoff expansion is to simply create as many meaningful games and as much entertaining content as possible, then throwing a big party is a pretty effective way of making sure as many teams as possible remain engaged in the season for as long as possible. You can find quite a few coaches pushing for an even bigger playoff in private, and that is part of why. (Well, that and their agents being able to say "He has made the playoff X consecutive years!" to their employers.)

This is undeniably a good thing from a consumption standpoint. Hopefully it's a good thing for the athletes themselves, too.

 

 

Edited by orange dream
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uncle Nate

Uncle Nate 2097

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

I can never believe it when I find someone who actually buys this BS argument. 

That's the damn argument university presidents and conference commissioners gave for decades as to why they wouldn't go to a playoff.  I was simply trying to "address" their long-running "concern" that they spouted for years.  Not saying that was my argument (because look at basketball, baseball, etc.)  So when they went from 4 to 12, it didn't make sense based on what they've told us in the past.

One thing I didn't throw in that I should have included is that the additional round will make it cost-prohibitive for fans, namely the current students and recent grads, to go to all the games should their team advance.  Hopefully they will not try and use the bowls for this until the final 4 so that it would be somewhat reasonable for people to attend the early rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BERT

BERT 4498

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Uncle Nate said:

Eight made the most sense, worked out to include highest ranked conference champions, and doesn't water down regular season or make the playoffs too long for the student athletes.

So of course, the presidents chose 12.

All they care about is money.  

Excuse Me What GIF

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Auto Driller

Auto Driller 2566

Posted
Posted

After so many years of total ass backwards decision making from the college football powers that be, it’s pretty surprising to see them make such an obviously good decision. It’s worth pointing out that they didn’t really come up with anything new, though. They just implemented essentially the same playoff system that every other sport has with the small distinction that rankings are still the most important factor. 

First round home playoff games are going to be epic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...