Personally, I think there will be an 8-team playoff (to much $$$ involved). As far as format, I would have the quarterfinals at the home of the higher seed, and there would be NO auto-bids. Winning your conference should mean nothing if you go 2-2 in non-conference and 10-3 overall. The best eight teams (P5 or not) should be in?

I cannot foresee any circumstance in which there will not be an 8-team playoff. It is definitely going to happen, the only variable is time.

The 4-team playoff is essentially the "plus one model" and it will not work over the long term because of the way the system is structured.

If you are someone who would like to see an expanded playoff field, root for the SEC or the Big Ten to be shut out of this year's playoffs. That will quickly lead to an overhaul of the system.

As for format, my answer would be simple: league champions of the P5 conferences and three wildcard berths to be decided by a selection committee.

The reason I prefer that over some sort of ranking system is I think college football desperately needs more transparency and simplicity than it currently has. People need to know that if School A wins power Conference X, that school will participate in the national playoff.

Basically, I just don't trust the voters and I would like to minimize the damage they often do to the process. Also, I don't think things like this should be decided by a committee. Instead of having Jeff Long and Barry Alvarez determine for the masses who is elite and who isn't, I would much prefer that it be decided on the actual playing field.

I still remember Lee Corso predicting that Oklahoma would beat Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl by 50 points. His reasoning was ridiculous and I knew that was going to be a close game. I did not know that Boise was going to win that game but I knew that his biases were rooted in old attitudes and I worry that we are choosing championship tournament participants based largely on many of the same attitudes.

I expect we finish the 12 year cycle at four but 8 happens eventually.
I'd go 1-8 but that won't happen, the top 5 leagues (unless Big 12 collapses) will get an auto bid, only question is will there be a slot reserved for top G5.

(10-25-2015 11:25 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I expect we finish the 12 year cycle at four but 8 happens eventually.

I'd go 1-8 but that won't happen, the top 5 leagues (unless Big 12 collapses) will get an auto bid, only question is will there be a slot reserved for top G5.

Would not be surprised to see P5 champions, best Go5 champion OR Independent, and two wild cards, maximum two schools from any one conference.

16 would not be a bad number either.

Temple, Navy, Toledo, Memphis, Boise State and Appalachian State would be good enough.

Michigan Vs Appalachian State in a playoff field might sell tickets.

There will be a six team playoff. Four major conference champions, one "wild card" or "At Large" spot and then one spot for an expanded 20 team AAC conference champion.

I have been saying that for awhile now and this year is simply proving how solid the idea is. Just look at how many G5 teams are in the top 25 that would be part of that conference. You have Houston, Memphis and Temple right now. We had Boise State and BYU in the rankings earlier in the year. It wouldn't be a fake Cinderella. Houston, Memphis and Temple are all proving they deserve to be there.

The eight team wont be chosen because of the much greater chance of having intraconference rematch games played in the national tournament that were already played out within a division within a single conference. That's bad, having Alabama and LSU end up going 1-1 against each other with one of them being declared champion and the other as runner up was no good.

(10-26-2015 12:26 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  There will be a six team playoff. Four major conference champions, one "wild card" or "At Large" spot and then one spot for an expanded 20 team AAC conference champion.

I have been saying that for awhile now and this year is simply proving how solid the idea is. Just look at how many G5 teams are in the top 25 that would be part of that conference. You have Houston, Memphis and Temple right now. We had Boise State and BYU in the rankings earlier in the year. It wouldn't be a fake Cinderella. Houston, Memphis and Temple are all proving they deserve to be there.

The eight team wont be chosen because of the much greater chance of having intraconference rematch games played in the national tournament that were already played out within a division within a single conference. That's bad, having Alabama and LSU end up going 1-1 against each other with one of them being declared champion and the other as runner up was no good.

You can mandate that the lower ranked school from the same division has to be placed in the opposite side of the quarterfinal bracket, so they can only meet be winning through to the Championship game.

(10-26-2015 12:26 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  There will be a six team playoff. Four major conference champions, one "wild card" or "At Large" spot and then one spot for an expanded 20 team AAC conference champion.

I have been saying that for awhile now and this year is simply proving how solid the idea is. Just look at how many G5 teams are in the top 25 that would be part of that conference. You have Houston, Memphis and Temple right now. We had Boise State and BYU in the rankings earlier in the year. It wouldn't be a fake Cinderella. Houston, Memphis and Temple are all proving they deserve to be there.

The eight team wont be chosen because of the much greater chance of having intraconference rematch games played in the national tournament that were already played out within a division within a single conference. That's bad, having Alabama and LSU end up going 1-1 against each other with one of them being declared champion and the other as runner up was no good.

Toledo is also ranked. Marshall is gaining ground towards the top 25. Navy also recieving votes. Before week one, you had UCF, Cincinnati and East Carolina in the top 50. Western Kentucky, and even Northern Illinois got a boast when they lost a close game to Ohio State. Appalachian State should be getting closer as well when they keep winning.
Too bad Portland State are not getting the votes. The way Washington State is playing? Portland State should get the nod like North Dakota State got last year.

(10-26-2015 12:54 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 12:26 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  There will be a six team playoff. Four major conference champions, one "wild card" or "At Large" spot and then one spot for an expanded 20 team AAC conference champion.

I have been saying that for awhile now and this year is simply proving how solid the idea is. Just look at how many G5 teams are in the top 25 that would be part of that conference. You have Houston, Memphis and Temple right now. We had Boise State and BYU in the rankings earlier in the year. It wouldn't be a fake Cinderella. Houston, Memphis and Temple are all proving they deserve to be there.

The eight team wont be chosen because of the much greater chance of having intraconference rematch games played in the national tournament that were already played out within a division within a single conference. That's bad, having Alabama and LSU end up going 1-1 against each other with one of them being declared champion and the other as runner up was no good.

Toledo is also ranked. Marshall is gaining ground towards the top 25. Navy also recieving votes. Before week one, you had UCF, Cincinnati and East Carolina in the top 50. Western Kentucky, and even Northern Illinois got a boast when they lost a close game to Ohio State. Appalachian State should be getting closer as well when they keep winning.
Too bad Portland State are not getting the votes. The way Washington State is playing? Portland State should get the nod like North Dakota State got last year.

What nod did North Dakota State get last year?

Do we give Portland State consideration for a hypothetical playoff even though they lost to a 4-4 North Dakota team?

Eight teams, no auto bids. These bowls rotate hosting the quarterfinals:

Holiday Bowl
Alamo Bowl
Cactus Bowl
Citrus Bowl
Music City Bowl
Pinstripe Bowl

No the next thing that is being added is a play-in game. #4 vs. #5 the week after the CCG.

I think 8 unseeded is the best model, but I suspect there will be autobids.

Autobids basically completely devalues your OOC schedule and also means meaningless conference games at the end of the year for teams that clinch their division before completing the entirety of conference play. So Auburn/Bama is potentially a preseason game if either team clinches the West prior to going into that game.

A couple of P5 commissioners (one is the Pac-12) has stated, there will be no expansion to 8 teams unless there is an auto bid for the P5 conference champion. So with that, there won't be anymore expansion of the playoffs.

Eight Teams first round the week after conference championships. First round played on campus for the top 4 teams. Top 8 teams make it. The first round losers still eligible for other bowl games.

I believe there will be an 8-team playoff at some point - it's just a matter of when that occurs. As I've said before on this topic, less is more.

QUARTERFINALS
Rose Bowl: Big Ten champ vs. Pac-12 champ
Sugar Bowl: SEC champ vs. at-large (or top G5 champ)
Orange Bowl: ACC champ vs. at-large (or top G5 champ)
Fiesta (or Cotton) Bowl: Big 12 champ vs. at-large (or top G5 champ)

Orange and Fiesta are on New Years Eve and Rose and Sugar are on New Years Day (just like now). Auto-bids are provided to the 5 power conference champs, the top G5 conference champ and 2 other at-larges. The auto-bids are a critical factor of getting the power conferences to move to an 8-team playoff - what we're finding is that the powers that be don't like hearing "The Big 12 (or Pac-12 or any other power conference) is going to be shut out of the playoff!" when a top team loses constantly on ESPN and talk radio. That has been bad press (and I'd say largely unfair bad press) for a power league when they don't happen to have one dominant team that can be in the top 4. They want to remove that doubt entirely (and, in the process, significantly increase the values of their respective conference championship games, as well, since they become de facto playoff games).

The quarterfinals are semi-seeded in order to preserve the traditional bowl tie-ins. (There's also the notion that a conference champ should still be rewarded by playing in their "home" bowl, similar to how division champs in the NFL and MLB get home-field advantage even if a wild card team has a better record.) The teams are then re-seeded in straight 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 matchups for the the semifinals, which would be played 7 to 10 days later. The national championship game would be played one week before the Super Bowl (which avoids all head-to-head competition with the NFL since the NFL always has a bye that weekend).

My personal preference would be that the *semifinals* would be played at the higher seeds' home stadiums (as opposed to the first round that many people suggest) since (a) I firmly believe that the preservation of the bowl system is critical because that is the contractual vehicle through which the power conferences legally preserve and maintain their power, (b) I have an allergic reaction to the thought that middle tier non-playoff power conference teams get to go to places like Pasadena and Miami over the holidays while an elite power conference champ's reward is to spend the middle of December in a place like Tuscaloosa and © the home sites for the semifinals remove the issues of fans traveling to too many different games, provide an extra incentive to get into the top 4 during the regular season (so there's still a "national horse race" aspect with the weekly rankings beyond the auto-bids) and keeps the holiday tradition of the elite bowls.

Granted, the home sites for semifinals are more of my personal wish. My guess is that the powers that be would still want neutral sites for those games in order to maximize revenue.

Regardless, the most critical points are an 8-team playoff with (a) the first round using the traditional bowls with semi-seeded traditional tie-ins and autobids for all P5 champs and the top G5 champ, (b) the semifinals with a re-seeded bracket and © the national championship game played one week before the Super Bowl. Most importantly, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE ABOUT THE COLLEGE FOOTBALL SCHEDULE CHANGES. (Same 12-game regular season, same conference championship game schedule, same bowl schedule, etc.)

Also, I think that it's a misnomer to believe that a 5-team or 6-team playoff is somehow "easier" to implement than an 8-team playoff. It's only easier in the strict *competitive* sense if you're just looking at how many teams "deserve" to be in the playoff. However, it's not easier to actually *implement* because that still requires an extra round of games to played compared to now. This is not like basketball or baseball where an extra play-in game can easily be fit into the existing schedule. For football, each additional round is a massive change that can upend the entire system. Taking away from the #6 team from the holiday bowl pool because they lost an early-December play-in game is a BIG deal to the powers that be that are cashing $40 million per year from the top tier bowls. My whole theory is that *no one* is being taken away from the existing bowl schedule structure - adding two more weeks of games in January is simply going to cause a lot less heartburn than trying to shoehorn the first round in December.

(10-26-2015 09:39 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I believe there will be an 8-team playoff at some point - it's just a matter of when that occurs. As I've said before on this topic, less is more.

QUARTERFINALS
Rose Bowl: Big Ten champ vs. Pac-12 champ
Sugar Bowl: SEC champ vs. at-large (or top G5 champ)
Orange Bowl: ACC champ vs. at-large (or top G5 champ)
Fiesta (or Cotton) Bowl: Big 12 champ vs. at-large (or top G5 champ)

Orange and Fiesta are on New Years Eve and Rose and Sugar are on New Years Day (just like now). Auto-bids are provided to the 5 power conference champs, the top G5 conference champ and 2 other at-larges. The auto-bids are a critical factor of getting the power conferences to move to an 8-team playoff - what we're finding is that the powers that be don't like hearing "The Big 12 (or Pac-12 or any other power conference) is going to be shut out of the playoff!" when a top team loses constantly on ESPN and talk radio. That has been bad press (and I'd say largely unfair bad press) for a power league when they don't happen to have one dominant team that can be in the top 4. They want to remove that doubt entirely (and, in the process, significantly increase the values of their respective conference championship games, as well, since they become de facto playoff games).

The quarterfinals are semi-seeded in order to preserve the traditional bowl tie-ins. (There's also the notion that a conference champ should still be rewarded by playing in their "home" bowl, similar to how division champs in the NFL and MLB get home-field advantage even if a wild card team has a better record.) The teams are then re-seeded in straight 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 matchups for the the semifinals, which would be played 7 to 10 days later. The national championship game would be played one week before the Super Bowl (which avoids all head-to-head competition with the NFL since the NFL always has a bye that weekend).

My personal preference would be that the *semifinals* would be played at the higher seeds' home stadiums (as opposed to the first round that many people suggest) since (a) I firmly believe that the preservation of the bowl system is critical because that is the contractual vehicle through which the power conferences legally preserve and maintain their power, (b) I have an allergic reaction to the thought that middle tier non-playoff power conference teams get to go to places like Pasadena and Miami over the holidays while an elite power conference champ's reward is to spend the middle of December in a place like Tuscaloosa and © the home sites for the semifinals remove the issues of fans traveling to too many different games, provide an extra incentive to get into the top 4 during the regular season (so there's still a "national horse race" aspect with the weekly rankings beyond the auto-bids) and keeps the holiday tradition of the elite bowls.

Granted, the home sites for semifinals are more of my personal wish. My guess is that the powers that be would still want neutral sites for those games in order to maximize revenue.

Regardless, the most critical points are an 8-team playoff with (a) the first round using the traditional bowls with semi-seeded traditional tie-ins and autobids for all P5 champs and the top G5 champ, (b) the semifinals with a re-seeded bracket and © the national championship game played one week before the Super Bowl. Most importantly, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE ABOUT THE COLLEGE FOOTBALL SCHEDULE CHANGES. (Same 12-game regular season, same conference championship game schedule, same bowl schedule, etc.)

I agree. It will be something like this. Having the first round at home sites is what the Big 12 suggested for this round and makes the most sense. That would avoid extending the season, eliminate the problem of stale play from 4-6 weeks without a game, eliminate the need for 3 neutral site rounds and avoid the conflict with the NFL playoffs in January. But the bowls are too powerful so it won't happen. It will be 3 rounds at neutral sites with the first round NYD. Semi-finals at home sites in mid-January are simply not logistically feasible. Weather can be a problem and some northern stadiums get winterized and shut down.

(10-26-2015 09:54 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Also, I think that it's a misnomer to believe that a 5-team or 6-team playoff is somehow "easier" to implement than an 8-team playoff. It's only easier in the strict *competitive* sense if you're just looking at how many teams "deserve" to be in the playoff. However, it's not easier to actually *implement* because that still requires an extra round of games to played compared to now. This is not like basketball or baseball where an extra play-in game can easily be fit into the existing schedule. For football, each additional round is a massive change that can upend the entire system. Taking away from the #6 team from the holiday bowl pool because they lost an early-December play-in game is a BIG deal to the powers that be that are cashing $40 million per year from the top tier bowls. My whole theory is that *no one* is being taken away from the existing bowl schedule structure - adding two more weeks of games in January is simply going to cause a lot less heartburn than trying to shoehorn the first round in December.

And it also increases the importance of minor differences in ranking. In a 6 team playoff, spots #1 and #2 are very important.

(10-26-2015 06:57 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Autobids basically completely devalues your OOC schedule and also means meaningless conference games at the end of the year for teams that clinch their division before completing the entirety of conference play. So Auburn/Bama is potentially a preseason game if either team clinches the West prior to going into that game.

Why does it devalue ooc? 2-3 teams still get in as wild cards.

It encourages teams to take risks more than the current system.