Jump to content

Why the 12-team CFP is Perfect and the Problem is Megaconferences


Huckleberry

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

tl;dr

The 12 team playoff is awesome. The problem is the consolidation into oversized conferences purely for money. If they had instituted the 12-team playoff 25 years ago the money would be absurd at this point and college football wouldn't have these stupid megaconferences. Get off my lawn.

agreed.  min of 8 was the answer 25 years ago but the Bowls(particularly Rose) had too much money and influence vs. TV money.  the conferences, specifically SEC, decided we will make you irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

If we just change the top 4 rule to top 8, does that mitigate the mega conference thing?

Not really because part of the issue is how many teams who finished 3rd or eventually 4th in their conference will still make it. That's what makes it feel like less of a true championship playoff.

Current guarantees:
#1 Oregon versus winner of #9 Tennessee @ #8 Ohio St.
#4 Arizona St. versus winner of #12 Clemson at #5 Texas
#2 Georgia versus winner of #10 Indiana at #7 Notre Dame
#3 Boise St. versus winner of #11 SMU at #6 Penn St.

Changed guarantees:

#1 Oregon versus winner of #9 Tennessee @ #8 Arizona St.
#4 Penn St. versus winner of #12 Clemson at #5 Notre Dame
#2 Georgia versus winner of #10 Indiana at #7 Boise St.
#3 Texas versus winner of #11 SMU at #6 Ohio St.

That's better but still not as great as it could have been. Using the 2009 conferences and assuming all teams are just as good, here is the result:

Current guarantees:
#1 Oregon (Pac-12 Champ) versus winner of #9 Boise St. (WAC Champ) @ #8 Indiana
#4 Penn St. (Big Ten Champ) versus winner of #12 Arizona St. at #5 Notre Dame
#2 Georgia (SEC Champ) versus winner of #10 SMU (C-USA Champ) at #7 Tennessee
#3 Texas (Big 12 Champ) versus winner of #11 Alabama at #6 Ohio St.

Changed guarantees: No changes needed

Now obviously the season doesn't play out the same because schedules are so different (Ohio St. is probably Big Ten champ instead of Penn St., for example) but the interregionality is what makes it better with more conferences leading to more discussion and more excitement all season long. And teams like Indiana will have more losses if they had to play nearly everyone in their conference so they almost certainly wouldn't have been #8 with old conference alignments. Also note that the garbage ACC is left out completely (because SMU is C-USA).

Edited by Huckleberry
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thought exercise, but Doc Brown and the DeLorean aren’t walking through the door anytime soon.

I think the problem is scheduling. A 10 game conference schedule wouldn’t allow any Big Ten or SEC teams to hide behind an easy schedule. It would also eliminate the need for many of the tiebreaker scenarios.

More conference games, fix the seeding, and we’d have a terrific product with more competitive games. 

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

What's going to happen after a death blow court decision against the NCAA makes that organization go the way of the Dodo bird? There will be two or three mega conferences that will have to govern themselves. I would think they would have to have a "commissioner" or some kind of board to make decisions.

This is the way so called "college" football is headed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the context of modifications to the playoff structure, possibly the most influential postseason game this year was last night when the brethren falcon-punched deon

reminder that i am not a byu 'hater' but i take every opportunity to make them uncomfortable given their namesake ordered the murder of my ancestors, but i digress....

thus it gives me no joy to say the brethren have the biggest gripe about being left out

let's see how asu plays - hopefully they are shite and we win convincingly

but so far, byu belonged over indiana, smu & tennessee

so with the 20/20 hindsight @Huckleberry how does byu get in over those 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

tl;dr

The 12 team playoff is awesome. The problem is the consolidation into oversized conferences purely for money. If they had instituted the 12-team playoff 25 years ago the money would be absurd at this point and college football wouldn't have these stupid megaconferences. Get off my lawn.

I mean of course if you still had the Big East and Pac10/12 you would have better conference champions so the system would be nowhere near as borked as it was this year. Hell if you just had it last year when FSU went 12-0 and Washington, Alabama, Texas, & Michigan were all around you'd have had a better draw.

They just need to scrap conference champion preference and guarantees entirely. They didn't have them in the BCS or the 4 team rendition including them in this run is what fucked Oregon and to a lesser extent Georgia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

24.  Top 8 get byes.  Many more bowls filled by playoff games.

or seed it more like 16 but the bottom 8 have play-in games. So 24 and 23 play and are in the #1 draw for the sweet 16. And 9/10 winner plays 8. 

That would never work, it would have to be more teams hosting first couple of rounds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its interesting that ESPN both

A. Teamed with the NFL to put a game featuring the leagues biggest star Mahomes on Saturday directly in competition with the playoff games on TNT

B. Have their top cfb talking head Herbstreit shit all over the new playoff system repeatedly

It looks like ESPN is so invested in the mega conference system, in particular the SEC that they want the playoff to fail so the conference can set up its own postseason tournament 

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

17 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Interesting thought exercise, but Doc Brown and the DeLorean aren’t walking through the door anytime soon.

I think the problem is scheduling. A 10 game conference schedule wouldn’t allow any Big Ten or SEC teams to hide behind an easy schedule. It would also eliminate the need for many of the tiebreaker scenarios.

More conference games, fix the seeding, and we’d have a terrific product with more competitive games. 

There are 18 big 10 teams and all but 3 are shitty.  There could still be Indianas squeaking through even if they played 10 other teams.  The conference is just too big.   Also, playing 2 more conference games takes away $3 million in budget from G5 and FCS teams.  Many would drop sports.  Nobody here gives a shit about that, but it does pay for college for hundreds of kids a year.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

tl;dr

The 12 team playoff is awesome. The problem is the consolidation into oversized conferences purely for money. If they had instituted the 12-team playoff 25 years ago the money would be absurd at this point and college football wouldn't have these stupid megaconferences. Get off my lawn.

Yup.

I think this was already posted but the current format was designed with five power conferences in mind prior to the latest realignment round. This format makes a whole lot more sense in that world for the first round byes.

In that world, the byes are likely Oregon, Ohio St, Texas, and Georgia. Megaconferences allowed Arizona State and Boise State to get first round byes instead of Ohio State and Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Yup.

I think this was already posted but the current format was designed with five power conferences in mind prior to the latest realignment round. This format makes a whole lot more sense in that world for the first round byes.

In that world, the byes are likely Oregon, Ohio St, Texas, and Georgia. Megaconferences allowed Arizona State and Boise State to get first round byes instead of Ohio State and Texas.

There will be “in-depth discussions” about not guaranteeing conference champs the top 4

seeds in 2025, sources said. Top 5 conference champs still would get in playoff but rankings would determine seeds, sources said. This would require unanimous approval by all stake holders to change in 2025 but conference commissioners “open to getting (the seeding) right,” source said

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

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think a bye is a good reward for conference champs and would be fine with reseeding them after the first round, which should be more accurately called the play-in round.

Fuck byes.

 

go to 16 teams, top 8 seeds host, higher seeds host the following round. The viewership of CCG's won't allow for them to go away. 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think a bye is a good reward for conference champs and would be fine with reseeding them after the first round, which should be more accurately called the play-in round.

Fuck byes...go to 16 teams, top 8 seeds host, higher seeds host the following round.


Using the CFP Rankings from week before CCGs.

Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only thoughts which are the same as a lot of people:

1. If you are going to use rankings to see who is in the playoffs, then seed the damn teams how they are ranked. Makes ZERO sense to have Boise and Arizona State #3 and #4 this year.
2. Don't give the 1-4 seeds byes, just do a regular ol  1 v 12, 2 v 11, etc etc the first week. Keep those first-round games as home games for the higher seeds. LOVE that idea although this year really sucked. (Except Texas winning of course)
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dignan said:

My only thoughts which are the same as a lot of people:

1. If you are going to use rankings to see who is in the playoffs, then seed the damn teams how they are ranked. Makes ZERO sense to have Boise and Arizona State #3 and #4 this year.
2. Don't give the 1-4 seeds byes, just do a regular ol  1 v 12, 2 v 11, etc etc the first week. Keep those first-round games as home games for the higher seeds. LOVE that idea although this year really sucked. (Except Texas winning of course)
 

And what do you do when there are 6 teams left after your first round? Byes after that round?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mediocrity ran a lot deeper this year than it usually does. Hard to tell if this is how things are going to be under NIL and portal transfers or if it's just a weird year like 2007 was. I don't think the first round of a 12 team playoff is usually going to be this noncompetitive, though, and I don't like overcorrecting based on a sample size of 1.

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

21 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

tl;dr

The 12 team playoff is awesome. The problem is the consolidation into oversized conferences purely for money. If they had instituted the 12-team playoff 25 years ago the money would be absurd at this point and college football wouldn't have these stupid megaconferences. Get off my lawn.

While the megaconferences present a problem with the playoff, it's a tradeoff I will gladly make for better regular season games.

We played mostly the bottom half of the SEC, but our schedule this year was still the most compelling it has been since before Nebraska and A&M bailed on the Big 12. We also got more regular season games between helmet schools across the country.

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

the megaconferences are like the airlines and railroads

capitalism forces them towards consolidation and oligarchy

80% of the us population lives in the eastern and central time zones

the mountain and west time zone schools had to get in to 4-time-zone conferences to max out their tv revenue

what happens from here is anybody's guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dignan said:

My only thoughts which are the same as a lot of people:

1. If you are going to use rankings to see who is in the playoffs, then seed the damn teams how they are ranked. Makes ZERO sense to have Boise and Arizona State #3 and #4 this year.
2. Don't give the 1-4 seeds byes, just do a regular ol  1 v 12, 2 v 11, etc etc the first week. Keep those first-round games as home games for the higher seeds. LOVE that idea although this year really sucked. (Except Texas winning of course)
 

hahaha. I am drunk. I meant 16 teams as earlier mentioned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 teams is too goddamn many, what you're proposing is having 2 teams guaranteed playing an extra half a seasons worth of games. There aren't 16 good teams a year. Fucking 12 is too many did anyone really need to see SMU Indiana Tennessee and Clemson get trounced? 8 teams no byes neutral sites thats it.

Edited by Michael Knight
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

16 teams is too goddamn many, what you're proposing is having 2 teams guaranteed playing an extra half a seasons worth of games. There aren't 16 good teams a year. Fucking 12 is too many did anyone really need to see SMU Indiana Tennessee and Clemson get trounced? 8 teams no byes neutral sites thats it.

Yeah 8 teams isn't happening anymore. Just get 8 teams out of your head. The BB's aren't going back into the box. I was pro 8 team as well but they decided to 12 team it....

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

16 teams is too goddamn many, what you're proposing is having 2 teams guaranteed playing an extra half a seasons worth of games. Fucking 12 is too many did anyone really need to see SMU Indiana Tennessee and Clemson get trounced? 8 teams no byes neutral sites thats it.

Was thinking about this the other day and the huge advantages teams like Texas currently get from this system. 

Non-playoff bowl games feature a ton of opt-outs with some teams half-assing it out there. They are not nearly as useful or competitive as they used to be.  Texas is about to play their 2nd postseason game against complete squads that are playing at their highest level. It's huge for returning Texas players to get that kind of experience in multiple games that other teams completely miss out on. It's gonna make the gap between the top 5-6 programs and the rest of CFB even wider. 

 

 

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

39 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Was thinking about this the other day and the huge advantages teams like Texas currently get from this system. 

Non-playoff bowl games feature a ton of opt-outs with some teams half-assing it out there. They are not nearly as useful or competitive as they used to be.  Texas is about to play their 2nd postseason game against complete squads that are playing at their highest level. It's huge for returning Texas players to get that kind of experience in multiple games that other teams completely miss out on. It's gonna make the gap between the top 5-6 programs and the rest of CFB even wider. 

 

 

Not to mention the fact that recruits are going to want that extra exposure against top level competition with the national spotlight on them. That will make the funnel effect even stronger to Texas. 

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

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

There will be “in-depth discussions” about not guaranteeing conference champs the top 4

seeds in 2025, sources said. Top 5 conference champs still would get in playoff but rankings would determine seeds, sources said. This would require unanimous approval by all stake holders to change in 2025 but conference commissioners “open to getting (the seeding) right,” source said

A non-conference champion getting a bye will immediately destroy the value of conference championship games.

If Boise State or (God forbid) ASU wins their matchup this discussion disappears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, satyanash said:

A non-conference champion getting a bye will immediately destroy the value of conference championship games.

If Boise State or (God forbid) ASU wins their matchup this discussion disappears.

Neither of those upsets will happen. CCGs are about to be what they are - worthless - with this change. Boise and ASU have zero business as 3 and 4 seeds. It will not be this way next year, even if Moose and Rocco have got to visit that pederast Yormark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Neither of those upsets will happen. CCGs are about to be what they are - worthless - with this change. Boise and ASU have zero business as 3 and 4 seeds. It will not be this way next year, even if Moose and Rocco have got to visit that pederast Yormark. 

Rex, the football gods don’t like arrogant confidence.  It will be your fault.😖

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nbmishoid said:

Great analysis. The real problem with mega conferences is that, like entropy, this is a one way phenomenon.  Outside of a societal collapse, what universities will vote for less money?  This is truly not going back.

The part I'll never understand is why TV revenue isn't just distributed to schools based on appearances and rating. Install a floor if needed to prevent some schools from going into the red during down years but let Michigan, Texas, Alabama, etc. make a ton of money, and everyone else makes good money. USC shouldn't have to join a conference with Rutgers and Maryland to make more money, and Purdue shouldn't be making twice as much as KState, FSU, and Clemson. 

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 4
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.



×
×
  • Create New...