UCF May Force The Issue

[Shmitty 112]

An undefeated UCF for the 2nd year in a row may force the issue with re: expanding the playoffs.  Stumbled upon this post yesterday and think this may become bigger by the week if UCF manages to keep winning, get's left out of the playoffs after going undefeated 2 years in a row, forcing congressional involvement.   This may be what's needed to force an expansion of the playoff or a breakdown of the P5/G5 rigged barrier (read antitrust).   

 

https://www.cougarboard.com/board/message.html?id=20556384

 

Joel Klatt on Seattle radio: the P5 commissioners are panicked about UCF

He says they are worried that if UCF goes undefeated again but gets left out of the CFP then the commissioners will have to “sit in front of congress.” 

Interesting to me—I would never have guessed it could get to that level this soon but Klatt seemed pretty confident that there’s a lot of concern for this among the power conferences.

[Valmy77 13,273]

I have no problem with this.

['stache 21,864]

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

[NowThis 931]

good , let it happen.

[Shmitty 112]

Just now, 'stache said:

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

Or, just keep them all in the same division and get rid of the whole P5/G5 distinction.  It's ruining the sport.  You want NFL-lite?  

[sushihorn 3,233]

I don't want the politicians involved.  They'll find some way to screw it up.  Just remember that CONgress is the opposite of PROgress.

[Steamboat1874 4,086]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

How is an eight team playoff not feasible?

It is so simple it is stupid not to have it.

[TrashMaster G 17,598]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

'Splain, please.

[Gene Parmesan 4,014]

I just love that CFB has managed to screw up something for so long that every other sport at any level manages to understand how it should work.  Every other sport not named gymnastics that is.

[ApocalypseTexas 299]

Expanding to 8 is simple it can be done to find out why its not done just follow the money. 

[ztejas 43,534]

5 P5 champions and 3 at large bids. Why is this so hard?

20 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

G5 teams beat P5 teams all the time. The worst 10 P5 teams in the country are not comparable to the best 10 G5 teams. 

[Rimbo 26,095]

19 minutes ago, sushihorn said:

I don't want the politicians involved.  They'll find some way to screw it up.  Just remember that CONgress is the opposite of PROgress.

Actually, the prefix "con" means "together." So, "Congress" means "moving together." That they're moving backwards and sideways is immaterial.

[Red Five 40,894]

There are like 60-something teams that know before the start of every season that they can go undefeated and will have no shot at a championship. That is insane.

['stache 21,864]

30 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

How is an eight team playoff not feasible?

It is so simple it is stupid not to have it.

 

30 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

'Splain, please.

 

1.  The most logical system is win your conference and you make the playoffs.  But there are currently 10 FBS conferences and six "independent' teams.  At minimum, two conferences would be left out and bitch.  Independents would need special treatment and could displace a conference champion.  The simplest thing to do is drop two of C-USA, Sunbelt, MAC, and force independents to join a conference.  We've learned through realignment that this won't happen.

2.  The SEC would also bitch at the "win your conference" requirement.  They'll find a way to get an exception for themselves anytime they miss out on their conference championship.  

3.  Even if you could get to eight conferences, seeding would be inequitable.  If UCF goes undefeated but is seeded eighth below one or two loss SEC or Big 12 champs, they'll bitch.  Pro leagues are all on even playing fields in obtaining talent, and come seeding time there will have been several common opponents to use straight record for seeding purposes.  That doesn't work with 100+ teams and three conferences that are still demonstrably weaker than the top 5. 

4.  For the same reason, wild cards don't work.  SEC would always get a wildcard.  The G-5 participants would never get a wildcard.  Bitching would ensue.  

There are too many teams, too few common opponents, and a clear disparity between P-5 and G-5 schedules.  If you could cull it to the G-5 conferences with three wildcards, it might work.  It at least avoids the argument that UCF has played a much easier schedule that anyone in G-5.

Edited October 9, 2018 by 'stache

[UTEX_ME 4,766]

yes, expand please. 

[Vic Mackey 47,145]

So stupid for it to not be 8 teams minimum. Look at the other classifications of college football and then explain with a straight face why D1 only has a shitty 4 team playoff? One that does not even represent all of the 5 major conferences. And last year, 2 of them were not represented. You win your conference in D1, that should mean something. And no, not some glorified scrimmage (non playoff bowl game).

Shorten the season back to 10 games. And have a 12-16 team playoff. Most of the non conference games are bullshit anyways and a waste of time.

[SwanderedTalent 5,761]

1 minute ago, Vic Mackey said:

So stupid for it to not be 8 teams minimum. Look at the other classifications of college football and then explain with a straight face why D1 only has a shitty 4 team playoff? One that does not even represent all of the 5 major conferences. And last year, 2 of them were not represented. You win your conference in D1, that should mean something. And no, not some glorified scrimmage (non playoff bowl game).

Shorten the season back to 10 games. And have a 12-16 team playoff. Most of the non conference games are bullshit anyways and a waste of time.

i'd rather not take an NFL fan's opinion on how to improve college football

['stache 21,864]

2 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

So stupid for it to not be 8 teams minimum. Look at the other classifications of college football and then explain with a straight face why D1 only has a shitty 4 team playoff? One that does not even represent all of the 5 major conferences. And last year, 2 of them were not represented. You win your conference in D1, that should mean something. And no, not some glorified scrimmage (non playoff bowl game).

Shorten the season back to 10 games. And have a 12-16 team playoff. Most of the non conference games are bullshit anyways and a waste of time.

Another point I should have made is that a broader playoff needs a shorter regular season.  That won't ever happen.

Edited October 9, 2018 by 'stache

[Valmy77 13,273]

40 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  

Sure. If they are going to be in the same division they should have a chance to win, just like in basketball and baseball. But I think it is more feasible to increase the playoff than to create an entirely new division. You disagree but I just think the politics are too messy. Those schools are in this division because they want to be in a major conference some day. They are not going to go away without a tooth and nail battle to the end.

[Fico 1,791]

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

 

1.  The most logical system is win your conference and you make the playoffs.  But there are currently 10 FBS conferences and six "independent' teams.  At minimum, two conferences would be left out and bitch.  Independents would need special treatment and could displace a conference champion.  The simplest thing to do is drop two of C-USA, Sunbelt, MAC, and force independents to join a conference.  We've learned through realignment that this won't happen.

2.  The SEC would also bitch at the "win your conference" requirement.  They'll find a way to get an exception for themselves anytime they miss out on their conference championship.  

3.  Even if you could get to eight conferences, seeding would be inequitable.  If UCF goes undefeated but is seeded eighth below one or two loss SEC or Big 12 champs, they'll bitch.  Pro leagues are all on even playing fields in obtaining talent, and come seeding time there will have been several common opponents to use straight record for seeding purposes.  That doesn't work with 90+ teams and three conferences that are still demonstrably weaker than the top 5. 

4.  For the same reason, wild cards don't work.  SEC would always get a wildcard.  The G-5 participants would never get a wildcard.  Bitching would ensue.  

There are too many teams, too few common opponents, and a clear disparity between P-5 and G-5 schedules.  If you could cull it to the G-5 conferences with three wildcards, it might work.  It at least avoids the argument that UCF has played a much easier schedule that anyone in G-5.

Except it works at literally every other level of football.  Most of which all have a significantly greater # of teams competing.

 

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

Another point I should have made is that a broader playoff needs a shorter regular season.  That won't ever happen.

Umm, why not?

Edited October 9, 2018 by Fico

[Valmy77 13,273]

Just now, 'stache said:

Another point I should have made is that a broader playoff needs a shorter regular season.  That won't ever happen.

Agreed. If we had only installed the eight team playoff back when I first came up with it in 1993 things would be so much better.

['stache 21,864]

Just now, Fico said:

Except it works at literally every other level of football.  Most of which all have a significantly great # of teams competing.

 

Umm, why not?

[Fico 1,791]

Just now, 'stache said:

That is exactly why it would work.... There is significantly more money in televised playoff games, as opposed to ALA against directional university. 

[TrashMaster G 17,598]

11 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

 

1.  The most logical system is win your conference and you make the playoffs.  But there are currently 10 FBS conferences and six "independent' teams.  At minimum, two conferences would be left out and bitch.  Independents would need special treatment and could displace a conference champion.  The simplest thing to do is drop two of C-USA, Sunbelt, MAC, and force independents to join a conference.  We've learned through realignment that this won't happen.

2.  The SEC would also bitch at the "win your conference" requirement.  They'll find a way to get an exception for themselves anytime they miss out on their conference championship.  

3.  Even if you could get to eight conferences, seeding would be inequitable.  If UCF goes undefeated but is seeded eighth below one or two loss SEC or Big 12 champs, they'll bitch.  Pro leagues are all on even playing fields in obtaining talent, and come seeding time there will have been several common opponents to use straight record for seeding purposes.  That doesn't work with 100+ teams and three conferences that are still demonstrably weaker than the top 5. 

4.  For the same reason, wild cards don't work.  SEC would always get a wildcard.  The G-5 participants would never get a wildcard.  Bitching would ensue.  

There are too many teams, too few common opponents, and a clear disparity between P-5 and G-5 schedules.  If you could cull it to the G-5 conferences with three wildcards, it might work.  It at least avoids the argument that UCF has played a much easier schedule that anyone in G-5.

There is NOTHING there that leads to a conclusion that an eight-team playoff is not feasible.  It only supports the conclusion that people will still bitch.  Well, duh.  People bitch at the first four teams left out of the basketball tournament, too.  So what?

Expand to 8-teams.  Guarantee a spot to non-P5 school ranked in the Top 10 (or 15 or whatever).  Done.

People will still bitch, but Congress will stay out.

[El Squared 1,813]

29 minutes ago, ApocalyseTexas said:

Expanding to 8 is simple it can be done to find out why its not done just follow the money. 

And the control....P5 teams don't want to lose to G5 teams in a playoff situation.

They want the club as small as possible.

['stache 21,864]

They let this shit get out of hand for too long without working together for a workable plan.  Eight conferences with ten teams each having geographic ties to one another would have worked.  Each conference plays a nine game round robin, leaving room for 3 out of conference matchups.  Then the 8 round robin champs face off in a playoff.  Perfecto.  But dumbass conferences had to expand because "TV markets" and cable models and rivalries be damned, break em up if you can squeeze a few bucks out of ESPN.  The latest round of realignment ensured the system has become fucked beyond repair.

[DigglerontheHoof 21,236]

cfb is fucked up enough, without getting a bunch more greedy, out-of-touch cunts like Congress involved. 

[Valmy77 13,273]

1 minute ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

cfb is fucked up enough, without getting a bunch more greedy, out-of-touch cunts like Congress involved. 

Don't worry. That is just a nuclear option. It will never come to that.

[JBJ 3,665]

The problem specifically with UCF is that their non-conf SOS is ranked #125: SC State, UNC, FAU.  (FAU is the best team of that bunch.)

They won't play a ranked team all year and their toughest opponents are Temple and Cincy.

I wouldn't mind seeing an undefeated G5 team in the playoff, but that's a schedule that half of P5 teams would have have a good shot to go undefeated at - a group that would include teams like Purdue and Virginia, who would be happy just to make a bowl.  

And I'd be righteously pissed if they took the spot from my team.

[0xdeadbeef 1,652]

16 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

 

1.  The most logical system is win your conference and you make the playoffs.  

Stop. Right there you're wrong on Step 1.  The most logical system in win a P5 conference you're in, and then have 3 at-large teams.

 

That picks 'Bama when they don't win their division, and has room for who ever is having a magic season, be it UCF/Boise/Houston/ND, whoever.

[Valmy77 13,273]

4 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The problem specifically with UCF is that their non-conf SOS is ranked #125: SC State, UNC, FAU.  (FAU is the best team of that bunch.)

They won't play a ranked team all year and their toughest opponents are Temple and Cincy.

I wouldn't mind seeing an undefeated G5 team in the playoff, but that's a schedule that half of P5 teams would have have a good shot to go undefeated at - a group that would include teams like Purdue and Virginia, who would be happy just to make a bowl.  

And I'd be righteously pissed if they took the spot from my team.

I wouldn't. It would just mean my team should have won their fucking conference.

[sushihorn 3,233]

5 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The problem specifically with UCF is that their non-conf SOS is ranked #125: SC State, UNC, FAU.  (FAU is the best team of that bunch.)

They won't play a ranked team all year and their toughest opponents are Temple and Cincy.

I wouldn't mind seeing an undefeated G5 team in the playoff, but that's a schedule that half of P5 teams would have have a good shot to go undefeated at - a group that would include teams like Purdue and Virginia, who would be happy just to make a bowl.  

And I'd be righteously pissed if they took the spot from my team.

Exactly.  Even assuming the cause is correct, UCF is beyond flawed as the messenger.

[Valmy77 13,273]

Just now, sushihorn said:

Exactly.  Even assuming the cause is correct, UCF is beyond flawed as the messenger.

They beat Auburn in the Peach Bowl last year to finish undefeated. How are they flawed? Ridiculous garbage. They have already proved they belong.

[Red Five 40,894]

When they got the chance they beat a top ten Auburn team in their bowl game.

[sushihorn 3,233]

1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

They beat Auburn in the Peach Bowl last year to finish undefeated. How are they flawed? Ridiculous garbage. They have already proved they belong.

SOS is putrid

[tokamak 6,441]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

They let this shit get out of hand for too long without working together for a workable plan.  Eight conferences with ten teams each having geographic ties to one another would have worked.  Each conference plays a nine game round robin, leaving room for 3 out of conference matchups.  Then the 8 round robin champs face off in a playoff.  Perfecto.  But dumbass conferences had to expand because "TV markets" and cable models and rivalries be damned, break em up if you can squeeze a few bucks out of ESPN.  The latest round of realignment ensured the system has become fucked beyond repair.

I've been on board with this exact plan for years now, with the addition of soccer-style promotion and relegation between 1-AA (or whatever it's called) and the big leagues. If UTSA thinks that they belong in the same football competition as Alabama, fine, let them earn their way in. Last place in each of your conferences gets kicked down to 1-AA. You'd end up with some intense end-of-season relegation games.

 

I actually don't think the first part of this plan (pro/rel will never, ever happen) is as far off as you think. If we're trending toward 4 16-team superconferences in the long run, each split into two divisions, that's basically a reasonable facsimile of your idea. Conference championships are your quarterfinals or whatever. The question remains of what to do with the leftovers however.

[Hmbre97 6,331]

13 minutes ago, Fico said:

That is exactly why it would work.... There is significantly more money in televised playoff games, as opposed to ALA against directional university. 

Not for the networks but for the teams themselves. If you take 2 games away (assume a home and away), teams are losing all the revenue they make on their home game plus whatever they get paid for the away game. 

[fellside 1,114]

1. Reduce the season back to 11 games.

2. Require every conference to play 9 conference games.

3. Conference Championship week is moved up one week.

4. Elite 8 of CFB takes place either the week after Conference Championship or 2 weeks after.

5. Literally everything else stays the same.

6. Profit

[WBT 20,666]

make college football regional again

[fellside 1,114]

8 team playoff really solves almost everything.  Teams with frustrating early season losses still have something to play for.  It's still important to schedule tough non-conference opponents to get an at large bid.  No conference has to bitch and moan about being left out.

On the other side, it's even more money for ESPN/Fox or whoever.  Ratings for the conference championship games go up because every single one is a play-in game.  Four more playoff games for ratings.  Talking heads can still argue all season long about who deserves at large bids.

No one loses except the SEC's hope to have half the playoffs come from their own conference.

[Katfid54 8,635]

18 minutes ago, JBJ said:

They won't play a ranked team all year and their toughest opponents are Temple and Cincy.

Cincy is ranked. So is USF (who they play the week after playing Cincy).

[po elvis 2,076]

8 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

They beat Auburn in the Peach Bowl last year to finish undefeated. How are they flawed? Ridiculous garbage. They have already proved they belong.

playing one team in a bowl game that might not match up as well against you or might not give a shit about the game (some players are now skipping bowl games to save themself for the NFL) says nothing about what kind of team you have. you have to play a schedule full of teams that are at a certain level. teams of different skill sets that can test your team in different ways each week.

[sushihorn 3,233]

1 minute ago, po elvis said:

playing one team in a bowl game that might not match up as well against you or might not give a shit about the game (some players are now skipping bowl games to save themself for the NFL) says nothing about what kind of team you have. you have to play a schedule full of teams that are at a certain level. teams of different skill sets that can test your team in different ways each week.

Yes sir.  And the problem with giving in to UCF would be to validate a model I don't think any of us support: play a mediocre conference schedule supplemented by total crap non-conf and hope to sail through to the playoffs.  Teams in weaker conferences need some pressure to force them to upgrade their OOC scheduling.

[Katfid54 8,635]

2 minutes ago, sushihorn said:

play a mediocre conference schedule supplemented by total crap non-conf and hope to sail through to the playoffs. 

 

[JBJ 3,665]

16 minutes ago, Hmbre97 said:

Not for the networks but for the teams themselves. If you take 2 games away (assume a home and away), teams are losing all the revenue they make on their home game plus whatever they get paid for the away game. 

Right. For the G5, it'd be 3 big showings vs 61 or 122 minor showings.  That exchange is terrible for them.

Pro-reg makes the most sense if you look at football in isolation.  But you have to find a way to separate football from the other conference sports and media deals (the biggest problem), and make it regional (not as big a problem, but would make certain regions harder than others).

[conVINCEd 21,469]

1 minute ago, po elvis said:

playing one team in a bowl game that might not match up as well against you or might not give a shit about the game (some players are now skipping bowl games to save themself for the NFL) says nothing about what kind of team you have. you have to play a schedule full of teams that are at a certain level. teams of different skill sets that can test your team in different ways each week.

Agree with everything you said here, but I’m fine with giving the G5 one spot every year to get the deal done.  They’ll get the 8 seed almost every year and will get destroyed in the first round.  2 wildcards is enough to accommodate deserving non-conference champs/ND.  On second thought, I’d probably make it the highest rated non-P5 team, but I could see the Domers raising a little hell over being grouped with the G5 schools.

[Bert Orange 1,120]

I guess I’m in the minority that our Big 12 conference is short teams and could benefit from some Florida recruiting?  If they won, they deserve to be there. If they don’t/can’t then we shouldnt be worried about having them?

Edited October 9, 2018 by Bert Orange

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

An eight team playoff IS very feasable but the also very feasable 16 team playoff would be better.

Only morons and the sec sec sec think 8 team is not feasable.

The smaller schools have done 16 team playoffs for decades.

Texas State has two REAL national championships in REAL playoffs.

16 teams with the first round at the home stadium of the higher seeded team. Rest of the games at bowl games.

The TV money would be STUPENDOUS.

[MrPhlegm 3,413]

How is an eight team playoff not feasible?

It is so simple it is stupid not to have it.

'stache is Jeff Fischer's 'stache.

 

[Hagbard Celine 10,923]

1. No conference, fuck off.  That includes Domer.

2. The Rose Bowl.  You can still call yourselves the grand daddy.

3. b1g & pac, tell the Rose Bowl Committee to fuck off.