How exciting would it be if this is what the CFP looked like?

[UPitt '89]

- the champions of the P5 conferences
- one guaranteed G5 team
- six at-large bids, decided by committee.

Committee seeds the teams 1 thru 12.

1-4 get first round bye

5-8 host 9-12 on campus, 2nd week of December

1-4 host first round winners on campus, 3rd week of December.

Final Four works exactly as is done now... rotating among NY6 bowls. The 8 teams that lost in first 2 rounds are slotted into the other 4 NY6 bowls.



The first two rounds being home games saves travel expenses for fans and makes for some raucus settings.

Yes, the SEC might get 4 or 5 teams some years... no different than the old Big East getting 9 or 10 March Madness bids some years.

The interest would be thru the roof, and literally dozens of teams would still be alive, as long as they weren't eliminated from winning their conferences yet. Pitt, UVa, Wake, NCSU, Miami, and Clemson would still be mathematically alive for a berth. November would be exciting as hell.

 

[Pitt79]

This would be OK, has been discussed ere before, this would give most FBS teams at least a path into the tournament, but of course some would CRY that the 5th best SEC team is "really better" than the G5 entrant, and the sad part is that they'd be totally serious.

 

[pittdan77]

Still don't understand the G5 autobid. This year is a great example. You could easily have 4 or 5 P5 schools that played infinitely tougher schedules that have a better claim on a playoff spot than a school that's probably only going to play two other winning teams, this year.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

- the champions of the P5 conferences
- one guaranteed G5 team
- six at-large bids, decided by committee.

Committee seeds the teams 1 thru 12.

1-4 get first round bye

5-8 host 9-12 on campus, 2nd week of December

1-4 host first round winners on campus, 3rd week of December.

Final Four works exactly as is done now... rotating among NY6 bowls. The 8 teams that lost in first 2 rounds are slotted into the other 4 NY6 bowls.



The first two rounds being home games saves travel expenses for fans and makes for some raucus settings.

Yes, the SEC might get 4 or 5 teams some years... no different than the old Big East getting 9 or 10 March Madness bids some years.

The interest would be thru the roof, and literally dozens of teams would still be alive, as long as they weren't eliminated from winning their conferences yet. Pitt, UVa, Wake, NCSU, Miami, and Clemson would still be mathematically alive for a berth. November would be exciting as hell.

4 P4 Champs
1 G6 Champ (Big 12 most years)
3 at-large

Nobody wants to see 5 SEC teams in a 12 team playoff. Also, the new Big 12 should not get equal access. Its a conference that has:

- the "B team" from Iowa
- the "B team" from Oklahoma
- 3 teams from Kansas and West Virginia
- the B team in Ohio
- the D team in Florida
- the C, D, E, and F teams in Texas
- BYU

There's not enough "brands" in that league. The biggest is probably BYU. The other 4 leagues shouldn't be sharing money and access equally.

 

[Pitt79]

Still don't understand the G5 autobid. This year is a great example. You could easily have 4 or 5 P5 schools that played infinitely tougher schedules that have a better claim on a playoff spot than a school that's probably only going to play two other winning teams, this year.

JUST SIMPLY ONE REASON, so that every team, in every league has at least a miniscule chance to get in, JUST FOR THAT ALONE. It's not to get the 12 "Best Teams", it's to get CONFERENCE CHAMPS and a G5 CHAMP, then the wild cards can be whatever SUBJECTIVE BEST teams that FAILED and didn't win their conference, some WELFARE and a 2nd chance.

 

[pittdan77]

JUST SIMPLY ONE REASON, so that every team, in every league has at least a miniscule chance to get in, JUST FOR THAT ALONE. It's not to get the 12 "Best Teams", it's to get CONFERENCE CHAMPS and a G5 CHAMP, then the wild cards can be whatever SUBJECTIVE BEST teams that FAILED and didn't win their conference, some WELFARE and a 2nd chance.

But that doesn't really even explain how you pick the best G5, does it? You have no idea if Cincy is better than a BYU team that is actually challenging itself by playing a tough schedule, do you? For what it's worth, San Diego State has two P5 wins and plays a much tougher conference schedule (based on OOC games other conference schools have won).

"I DON'T LIKE SUBJECTIVE SEEDING BUT AM TOTALLY DOWN WITH IT FOR AN AUTOBID TO A CRUMMY CONFERENCE BECAUSE THE AP GUYS PICKED THIS EASTERN SCHOOL!"

 

[Pitt79]

But that doesn't really even explain how you pick the best G5, does it? You have no idea if Cincy is better than a BYU team that is actually challenging itself by playing a tough schedule, do you? For what it's worth, San Diego State has two P5 wins and plays a much tougher conference schedule (based on OOC games other conference schools have won).

"I DON'T LIKE SUBJECTIVE SEEDING BUT AM TOTALLY DOWN WITH IT FOR AN AUTOBID TO A CRUMMY CONFERENCE BECAUSE THE AP GUYS PICKED THIS EASTERN SCHOOL!"

Just like they pick the whole playoff now, optometrists giving an eye test, but at least it's not FBS with 130 teams and only 6-8 have a real chance EVER.

 

[Upg bobcat]

But that doesn't really even explain how you pick the best G5, does it? You have no idea if Cincy is better than a BYU team that is actually challenging itself by playing a tough schedule, do you? For what it's worth, San Diego State has two P5 wins and plays a much tougher conference schedule (based on OOC games other conference schools have won).

"I DON'T LIKE SUBJECTIVE SEEDING BUT AM TOTALLY DOWN WITH IT FOR AN AUTOBID TO A CRUMMY CONFERENCE BECAUSE THE AP GUYS PICKED THIS EASTERN SCHOOL!"

Then allow two G5 autobids, that way both a small eastern school favored by the associated press and another small school get a shot ;-)

 

[happjack]

- the champions of the P5 conferences
- one guaranteed G5 team
- six at-large bids, decided by committee.

Committee seeds the teams 1 thru 12.

1-4 get first round bye

5-8 host 9-12 on campus, 2nd week of December

1-4 host first round winners on campus, 3rd week of December.

Final Four works exactly as is done now... rotating among NY6 bowls. The 8 teams that lost in first 2 rounds are slotted into the other 4 NY6 bowls.



The first two rounds being home games saves travel expenses for fans and makes for some raucus settings.

Yes, the SEC might get 4 or 5 teams some years... no different than the old Big East getting 9 or 10 March Madness bids some years.

The interest would be thru the roof, and literally dozens of teams would still be alive, as long as they weren't eliminated from winning their conferences yet. Pitt, UVa, Wake, NCSU, Miami, and Clemson would still be mathematically alive for a berth. November would be exciting as hell.

One of the issues that doesn't always get brought up with these expanded playoff scenarios is that TV viewership on December weekends is really low, outside of fans of the teams playing and hard core gamblers are people going to tune in for these games. I have no desire to watch any college football that isn't Pitt or the playoff games when they're on January 1st, I could care less about Cincy getting crushed by a P4 team or a boring ass B1G(they all are) team playing whoever.

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

This discussion is why I am against auto-bids in a playoff format smaller than the NCAA basketball tournament. If you want 8 or 12 teams, just let a computer pick the 8 or 12 top ranked teams based on wins and strength of schedule. Cincinnati would make it in that scenario but you wouldn't have to waste a spot on 2016 Western Michigan (who was 13-0 in regular season but then inevitably lost to a three loss Wisconsin in their bowl game.) Is the AAC or new Big 12 a G5 or P5 conference? Who knows, it's a made up distinction; same for Notre Dame and BYU as we discussed before.

 

[pittdan77]

Just like they pick the whole playoff now, optometrists giving an eye test, but at least it's not FBS with 130 teams and only 6-8 have a real chance EVER.

It's like you forgot everything that was written about the CFP every week for the past however many weeks this has been discussed.

Roughly 65 of those 130 schools play schedules that show how they perform against other championship caliber competition on a fairly level surface, every week. The CFP has only ever left out conference champs when they had the same or lesser record than another P5 or ND. Then it went to strength of schedule. It isn't really all that subjective but you keep on being you.

 

[pittpsu]

It would definitely favor northern teams in the first rounds. Florida vs Michigan in December?

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Its gonna be 6/6 or maybe 5/1/6.

College Football Playoff expansion talks resume as debate continues over 8 or 12 teams

The future of the College Football Playoff is once again up for discussion as the 10 Football Bowl Subdivision commissioners and Notre Dame athletics director Jack Swarbrick are set to meet Wednesd…

www.orlandosentinel.com

 

[Pitt79]

It's like you forgot everything that was written about the CFP every week for the past however many weeks this has been discussed.

Roughly 65 of those 130 schools play schedules that show how they perform against other championship caliber competition on a fairly level surface, every week. The CFP has only ever left out conference champs when they had the same or lesser record than another P5 or ND. Then it went to strength of schedule. It isn't really all that subjective but you keep on being you.

Doesn't matter, that way sucks, I want that way to end, and the tournament to be mostly champions and not subjective best "eye test" teams. Or else break out those 65 teams and make 8 divisions and only let division champs in, even if one division has the 3 "best teams". Force them to win and give no 2nd chances based on being best.

 

[Pitt79]

It would definitely favor northern teams in the first rounds. Florida vs Michigan in December?

And they should definetely make a system where southern teams are often FORCED to go to the north and play in cold weather.

 

[Upg bobcat]

Doesn't matter, that way sucks, I want that way to end, and the tournament to be mostly champions and not subjective best "eye test" teams. Or else break out those 65 teams and make 8 divisions and only let division champs in, even if one division has the 3 "best teams". Force them to win and give no 2nd chances based on being best.

I share your view. Personally, I would be fine with 10 autobids for all conference champs (G5 and P5), and then only two subjective picks. This gives any school that is a champion the shot to be named the national champion. It also allows a small but fair chance for the independents (like ND and BYU) and another SEC school to still get a shot even though they are not a conference champion. Obviously you are going to have the same bickering over who gets picked for those two spots, but at least it is clear what any single team must do to get in (other than the independents) -- you simply win your conference. You didn't win your conference, that's your problem.

 

[CJsE]

Pay the players

 

[Pitt79]

I share your view. Personally, I would be fine with 10 autobids for all conference champs (G5 and P5), and then only two subjective picks. This gives any school that is a champion the shot to be named the national champion. It also allows a small but fair chance for the independents (like ND and BYU) and another SEC school to still get a shot even though they are not a conference champion. Obviously you are going to have the same bickering over who gets picked for those two spots, but at least it is clear what any single team must do to get in (other than the independents) -- you simply win your conference. You didn't win your conference, that's your problem.

And NO, I don't feel bad if the best team is left out because they lost a game or a conference, basically, my view is, "If you're so damn BEST, then WIN THE GAMES ON THE FIELD, and you'll get what you deserve." But if you're not BEST and you do win the games on the field, you DESERVE to be champion... The reality is, and some people can't grasp the concept, but being THE BEST TEAM has nothing to do at all with being THE CHAMPION, sometimes the champion is the best team and sometimes it's not... it's two different things.

 

[happjack]

It would definitely favor northern teams in the first rounds. Florida vs Michigan in December?

That's why on campus games aren't going to happen, the southern and western schools will do whatever they can to kept from potentially playing in places like Madison or East Lansing in December.

 

[Pitt79]

That's why on campus games aren't going to happen, the southern and western schools will do whatever they can to kept from potentially playing in places like Madison or East Lansing in December.

So why should they get their way?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Its gonna be 6/6 or maybe 5/1/6.

College Football Playoff expansion talks resume as debate continues over 8 or 12 teams

The future of the College Football Playoff is once again up for discussion as the 10 Football Bowl Subdivision commissioners and Notre Dame athletics director Jack Swarbrick are set to meet Wednesd…

www.orlandosentinel.com

Nope. ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 want 8

ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 to raise 8-team format at next CFP expansion talks: Sources

It is believed that the ACC is the league most attached to the eight-team format, though some administrators also characterized the Big Ten as “in lockstep.”

theathletic.com

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

So why should they get their way?

They shouldn't, but they will. Especially if the bowl system remains in place.

 

[happjack]

So why should they get their way?

The number of schools in the south and warm weather west out number the ones in cold weather towns.

 

[UPitt '89]

One of the issues that doesn't always get brought up with these expanded playoff scenarios is that TV viewership on December weekends is really low, outside of fans of the teams playing and hard core gamblers are people going to tune in for these games. I have no desire to watch any college football that isn't Pitt or the playoff games when they're on January 1st, I could care less about Cincy getting crushed by a P4 team or a boring ass B1G(they all are) team playing whoever.

This 12 team tournament, would be bigger than March madness.

There would be interest that isn't there now, because of how compelling this 12 team tournament would be.

With the 1st several games being at the home field of the higher seeded team, the atmosphere would be very raucous as well.

There would be bracket Mania, that would make March madness look small in comparison.

Everybody would be doing brackets, even people who don't follow college football.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

so its?
8 v 12
'Alliance' v 'SEC, ND, G5'
wow

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

so its?
8 v 12
'Alliance' v 'SEC, ND, G5'
wow

Alliance vs Everyone else

They probably meet in the middle and limit the number of SEC teams.

 

[Adrift]

- the champions of the P5 conferences
- one guaranteed G5 team
- six at-large bids, decided by committee.

Committee seeds the teams 1 thru 12.

1-4 get first round bye

5-8 host 9-12 on campus, 2nd week of December

1-4 host first round winners on campus, 3rd week of December.

Final Four works exactly as is done now... rotating among NY6 bowls. The 8 teams that lost in first 2 rounds are slotted into the other 4 NY6 bowls.



The first two rounds being home games saves travel expenses for fans and makes for some raucus settings.

Yes, the SEC might get 4 or 5 teams some years... no different than the old Big East getting 9 or 10 March Madness bids some years.

The interest would be thru the roof, and literally dozens of teams would still be alive, as long as they weren't eliminated from winning their conferences yet. Pitt, UVa, Wake, NCSU, Miami, and Clemson would still be mathematically alive for a berth. November would be exciting as hell.

How about this:

P5 champions get into playoffs - 5 teams

Now we have the G5 champions rotate each year, based on some formula, to determine the 3 additional teams. For example, if there are 5 G5 conferences, one gets a bye into the playoffs and the other four champions play a one game "play-in" game to determine who gets to go.

Done. We have an 8 team playoff of all champions arrived at by playing games. No selections allowed, no eye test allowed, all chosen because they won on the field of play. How novel.

 

[FireballZ]

One of the issues that doesn't always get brought up with these expanded playoff scenarios is that TV viewership on December weekends is really low, outside of fans of the teams playing and hard core gamblers are people going to tune in for these games. I have no desire to watch any college football that isn't Pitt or the playoff games when they're on January 1st, I could care less about Cincy getting crushed by a P4 team or a boring ass B1G(they all are) team playing whoever.

Link?

 

[Pitt79]

How about this:

P5 champions get into playoffs - 5 teams

Now we have the G5 champions rotate each year, based on some formula, to determine the 3 additional teams. For example, if there are 5 G5 conferences, one gets a bye in the playoffs and the other four champions play a one game "play-in" game to determine who gets to go.

Done. We have an 8 team playoff of all champions arrived at by playing games. No selections allowed, no eye test allowed, all chosen because they won on the field of play. How novel.

I would love that, and I don't care if Bama would crush everyone, F 'em if they don't win their conference, Being Best Team has nothing to do with being Champion, two separate, unrelated things.

 

[Mufasa94]

How about this:

P5 champions get into playoffs - 5 teams

Now we have the G5 champions rotate each year, based on some formula, to determine the 3 additional teams. For example, if there are 5 G5 conferences, one gets a bye into the playoffs and the other four champions play a one game "play-in" game to determine who gets to go.

Done. We have an 8 team playoff of all champions arrived at by playing games. No selections allowed, no eye test allowed, all chosen because they won on the field of play. How novel.

Using conference only games means you are basing rewards on the results of 67%-75% of a teams games. Why the heck should not 100% of the games matter.

Quotas are not a just system.

 

[Pitt79]

Using conference only games means you are basing rewards on the results of 67%-75% of a teams games. Why the heck should not 100% of the games matter.

Quotas are not a just system.

OBJECTIVE is more just than SUBJECTIVE

 

[Upg bobcat]

Using conference only games means you are basing rewards on the results of 67%-75% of a teams games. Why the heck should not 100% of the games matter.

Quotas are not a just system.

100% of the games don't matter under the current system, because teams often get in with one loss. Heck, you didn't need to look any further than this board to hear talk of how losing to an average MAC school, at home, isn't enough to keep you out of the playoff. The closest system to having 100% of the games truly matter was under the old days prior to the BCS and prior to the playoff, which obviously had other major flaws.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

This would be OK, has been discussed ere before, this would give most FBS teams at least a path into the tournament, but of course some would CRY that the 5th best SEC team is "really better" than the G5 entrant, and the sad part is that they'd be totally serious.

I like it alot, that proposal. And you are right, the SEC will be whining, but let's look at the SEC this year, anyone think that 5 of the best 12 teams are SEC? No, me neither.

But in doing this, giving access to all of the teams, you start to spread out the talent more, instead of concentrating it on 4-5 programs as it has been the past decade.

 

[Pitt79]

I like it alot, that proposal. And you are right, the SEC will be whining, but let's look at the SEC this year, anyone think that 5 of the best 12 teams are SEC? No, me neither.

But in doing this, giving access to all of the teams, you start to spread out the talent more, instead of concentrating it on 4-5 programs as it has been the past decade.

Yes, kids start thinking I can get to the playoffs without going to Bama, Clemson or tOSU.

 

[Mufasa94]

OBJECTIVE is more just than SUBJECTIVE

Fair is real life results > ideological fantasy

 

[Mufasa94]

100% of the games don't matter under the current system, because teams often get in with one loss.

Your example doesn’t back up your statement. 1-loss in 100% of games is better than 2 or more losses in 100% of games (when comparing apples to apples).

 

[Pitt79]

Fair is real life results > ideological fantasy

The ideological fantasy is people who support eye tests.

 

[Burgh15]

Here's what a 12-team playoff would look like at this point. Sign me up for this playoff.

1st-Round Bye
1. Georgia
2. Alabama
3. Michigan State
4. Oregon

1st Round
5. Ohio State vs. 12. Baylor (winner plays Oregon)
6. Cincinnati vs. 11. Oklahoma State (winner plays Michigan State)
7. Michigan vs. 10. Notre Dame (winner plays Alabama)
8. Oklahoma vs. 9. Wake Forest (winner plays Georgia)

 

[Upg bobcat]

Your example doesn’t back up your statement. 1-loss in 100% of games is better than 2 or more losses in 100% of games (when comparing apples to apples).

Not all wins and losses are created equal. I get that in the eyes of the current college football playoff committee, having 2 or more loss is a nonstarter and you will be excluded from playoff consideration. But for example is losing to a pair of top 10 teams really worse than losing to Western Michigan?

 

[Mufasa94]

Not all wins and losses are created equal. I get that in the eyes of the current college football playoff committee, having 2 or more loss is a nonstarter and you will be excluded from playoff consideration. But for example is losing to a pair of top 10 teams really worse than losing to Western Michigan?

My participation in this thread was in regards to the poster who wanted only conference champs to be eligible.

Your question could be valid to ponder, but additional results of games have occurred that make it unnecessary.