Expand it to 16 to include all Conference champs.

1.Clemson ACC
2.Alabama SEC
3.Michigan State Big 10
4.Oklahoma Big 12
5.Stanford PAC 12
6.Houston AAC
7.San Diego State MWC
8.Western Kentucky C-USA
9.Bowling Green MAC
10.Arkansas State SBC

6 at large teams
11.Iowa Big 10
12.Ohio State Big 10
13.North Carolina ACC
14.Navy AAC
15.Oklahoma State Big 12
16.Notre Dame Independent

Others could be considered.
FSU, Northwestern, TCU, Toledo, Appalachian State

(12-06-2015 06:25 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:A conference championship alone shouldn't get a team that might have gone 6-3 in conference and 8-4 overall in by default just because they won one game.

It's pretty rare an 8-4 P5 team, then being 9-4 wins it's P5 championship game. Basically when there's the better team in that division's banned from post-season or something and they're 2nd place to go to it and still pulling a bulky upset over the other divisional champ.

But in the end, if you're Conference Champ, it means something -- not "just another game". Taking the whole regular season into account led them to it. If a 9-4 P5 conference winner who, after that was barely ranked, got into it, they'd be the lowest seed anyway facing the #1 team in the country in their house. IMO, you win a P5 conference, it's a Big Deal -- hence Guarantees now to a BCS Bowl. By your rationale, we should maybe nix that?

Say in the East division of the B1G, it was different -- and an 8-4 Iowa got to go on a tie breaker, and team upset 11-1 MSU in it -- should then 9-4 Iowa NOT be able to go to the Rose Bowl? They won the B1G. By your rationale it should be highly questioned if not yanked from the Rose Bowl.

Conference Champs matter a lot. Building up to win your Division is part of the "playoff race" -- and to win your conference post-season game is the prelim round of playoffs. It is a playoff to see who's guaranteed a BCS Bowl -- but instead, for the P5s -- I say a spot in an 8-team playoff.

For G5 Conference Winners? Kind of the same thing before the extra-added national champ bowl was put in last year: If you're the Top G5 Conf Champ of all G5 Conferences and ranked #16 or higher, come on in. One could make an argument that instead of 12 teams in BCS Bowls, there's only 8 in this playoff, so maybe ranked #12 or higher would get them in.

But IMO, I want to see an 8-team playoff to include P5 Conf Champs to play off to see who's better. Independents (ND) having a chance to get in, too if ranked high enough. So that's 5 or possibly 6. So to make the playoff have enough teams to play off each other, you'll need 2-3 more. You can add a #2 of a conference here and there of the best (highest ranked), and still even reward a Top G5 who would serve as a "reward" to the #1 in the first round to face if they're a solidly ranked team for being the best Conf Winner of all G5s.

But yes, my POV puts focus on Conf Winners, as that within itself is a "play off race"... and if you lose your Conf, even if your Conf is better than the another, you don't get any guarantees. Don't like it? Join another conference.

Winning a conference championship does NOT take the whole season into account (it only takes the conference portion into account). Also, just because a 9-4 would rarely make the playoff doesn't mean that they should.

I'm game for a modified 8-team playoff where you slot the conference champs into the NY6 bowls...and THEN seed the 4-team CFP after the NY6 bowls.

[Rose = PAC v. B1G; Sugar = SEC v. at large; Orange = ACC v. B1G/SEC/ND; Fiesta = Big 12 v. at large]

This is what 2015 would look like (coincidentally, it would perfectly fit the 1/8, 2/7, 3/6, 4/5 model]:

Orange Bowl: 1) Clemson v. 8) Ohio St.
Sugar Bowl: 2) Bama v. 7) Notre Dame
Rose Bowl: 3) Mich St v. 6) Stanford
Fiesta BowL: 4) Oklahoma v. 5) Iowa

Winners move on to the CFP FInal Four.

Non-playoff NY6 bowls -
Peach: Florida St. v. Houston
Cotton: TCU v. North Carolina

sorry, but they're never going to go unseeded in the QF.

(12-06-2015 02:15 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really with the ACC or SEC. UNC and Florida weren't getting in if they won.

But...I'm pretty sure the P5 champs get in should there be an 8-team expansion. The seeding would simply have been, for example, UNC at #7 and UF at #8...or USC at #8 if they upset Stanford. It's not ideal, but it's not a deal-breaker.

(12-06-2015 11:12 AM)miztigers55 Wrote:  As the thread title says, who would you put in if we had an eight team playoff?
Here's my choices
1) Clemson
2) Bama
3) Mich St
4) Oklahoma
5) Iowa
6) Stanford
7) Notre Dame
8) Ohio State
Just some food for thought. I think these matchups would be great fun.
And a side note-I put Notre dame ahead of Ohio State because I wanted to avoid a rematch with Clemson, and I put Iowa ahead of Stanford for the same reason.
And another question I have for y'all would be do you think that the committee should try to avoid rematches if a situation like this came up, or should the actual power rankings decide the matchups?

Is ND the G5/independent rep in this scenario? There would need to be "access"...

(12-06-2015 02:13 PM)Maize Wrote:  No real need for a 8 Team Playoff..had that last night with the ACC, SEC & B1G Title Games...

Agree completely. Giving Ohio State another shot (after losing at home vs. MSU), giving ND another shot (after losing to two playoff teams already), and giving Iowa another shot (after losing Big Ten champ game) is unnecessary.

Now other years there were certainly valid reasons to put 8 teams in (2008 is always the prime example...Big 12 fans would argue for last year too), but this year it worked out just fine. Only a faint whimper from Pac-12 fans...but it's faint.

It's too many games for kids to be playing in a season.

Teams like OU and ND would be at a huge advantage when it got down to it.

(12-06-2015 11:54 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  It's too many games for kids to be playing in a season.

Teams like OU and ND would be at a huge advantage when it got down to it.

Not really. FCS schools played 16 games. Last year, North Dakota State played a 12 game regular season, and won all their games in the playoffs.

D2 and D3 goes to 14 to 15 games.

These lower conferences have no serious issues with injuries, and these P5 schools at the FBS are throwing out scare tactics because they do not want to change the system. They were reluctant in going to the 4 team playoff system citing the same issues.

Quote:Winning a conference championship does NOT take the whole season into account (it only takes the conference portion into account). Also, just because a 9-4 would rarely make the playoff doesn't mean that they should.

True it doesn't technically, but winning an extra slot in the 8-team would be focused on those other games. The big argument that "conference championships don't mean anything, it's just another game" is that one conference can be better than another. 2nd place SEC teams historically has been better than ACC/B1G/P12 winners. That's the main reason behind it that some folks don't want Conf Champ winners getting an auto-bid.

But that goes against the concepts of all sports out there on so many different levels of them. I'm arguing against the "But our conference is better!" argument. It's not a good enough reason.

But with 8 team playoff (instead of a 5 team playoff which would be impossible for just all P5 conf winners) -- you still have potentially 3 open slots for those awesome-2nd-placers. If no big of-all-G5-confs has a big gun, which every other year at least they won't -- or if ND doesn't make the Top 8, which 2/3 years they won't -- there's going to be More than 1 open slot! Very possibly up to 3 for the 2nd-placers.

In the end, a 16 team playoff would be best. But for those who want an ACTUAL Playoff (we don't have a true one right now; just a play off game of the winners of the #1 and #2 bowls that have been there for years anyway) and also wanting to keep it Elite while also not too stringent -- 8 would good.

I can see the argument why 16 may be too much, because it'd water down winning a conf championship.

12 may be the most ideal, and would nix nay-saying about the whole Top-G5 thing (right now there's 12 teams in the 6 "New Years"/"BCS" Bowls), where the Top 4 instead just get a bye.

(12-07-2015 03:22 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  12 may be the most ideal, and would nix nay-saying about the whole Top-G5 thing (right now there's 12 teams in the 6 "New Years"/"BCS" Bowls), where the Top 4 instead just get a bye.

Here's how you could field the 12-team CFP, with automatic bids for ALL 10 FBS conference champions; and two at large wild card bids:

PLAY-IN ROUND
Saturday, December 12, 2015
NR Arkansas St. (Sun Belt) at NR W. Kentucky (CUSA)
NR Bowling Green (MAC) at NR SDSU (MWC)

PLAY-IN BOWLS
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Las Vegas Bowl: PLAY-IN WINNER v. #18 Houston (AAC)
Miami Beach Bowl: PLAY-IN WINNER v. #7 Ohio St. (at large)

NY6 QUARTERFINALS
Thursday, December 31 and Friday, January 1, 2016
Orange: #1 Clemson (ACC) v. PLAY-IN WINNER
Sugar: #2 Alabama (SEC) v. PLAY-IN WINNER
Rose: #3 Michigan St. (B1G) v. #6 Stanford (PAC)
Fiesta: #4 Oklahoma (B12) v. #5 Iowa (at large)

[NON-CFP NY6 BOWLS
PEACH: #8 Notre Dame v. #9 Florida ST.
COTTON: #10 North Carolina v. #11 TCU]

CFP SEMI-FINALS
Friday, January 8/Saturday, January 9
Neutral site(s) TBD

CFP NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!
Friday, January 15/Saturday, January 16
Glendale, Arizona

That's a Better way to lay out a 12-team playoff, IF one is going by conf-champs as the emphasis (rankings as less an emphasis).

My 12-team playoff was just assuming this:

Dec 19th: Seed #1 - #4 Bye
Dec 18th/19th: 5 vs 12, 6 vs 11, 7 vs 10, 8 vs 9

Dec 31st/Jan1: #1 vs (8-9 Winner), #2 vs (7-10 winner), #3 vs (6-11 winner), #4 vs (5-12 winner)

Jan 9: #1/8/9 vs #4/5/12, #2/7/10 vs #3/6/11

Jan 15: Champ Game

----------------

I see yours is BETTER when focusing on Conf Champs (10) + only 2 at-larges, because you'll have non-ranked teams and one Would want them to duke it out for wear & tear more than the others.

I'm more of all P5 Conf Champs (P5 conf champs superceding any at larges), while putting Top G5 Conf Champ (superceding any low-end at-large or any at-large if they're ranked high enough)

(12-08-2015 04:17 AM)toddjnsn Wrote:  ...

I see yours is BETTER when focusing on Conf Champs (10) + only 2 at-larges, because you'll have non-ranked teams and one Would want them to duke it out for wear & tear more than the others.

I'm more of all P5 Conf Champs (P5 conf champs superceding any at larges), while putting Top G5 Conf Champ (superceding any low-end at-large or any at-large if they're ranked high enough)

The other thing that the 10-champs model helps with is to get most of the Power schools into a NY6 bowl game without having to go through the Play-In process. #7 Ohio St. would be the only P5 school involved in the Play-In.

The other model that I like is what I like to call the "Plus Four" model. Basically, take the current NY6 system and play the 4-team CFP after the NY6 bowls.

Here's how 2015-16 "Plus Four" would work:

NY6 QUARTERFINALS
Thursday, December 31 and Friday, January 1, 2016
Orange: #1 Clemson (ACC) v. #7 Ohio St. (B1G/SEC/ND)
Sugar: #2 Alabama (SEC) v. #8 Notre Dame (at large)
Rose: #3 Michigan St. (B1G) v. #6 Stanford (PAC)
Fiesta: #4 Oklahoma (B12) v. #5 Iowa (at large)

[NON-CFP NY6 BOWLS
PEACH: #9 Florida ST. v. #18 Houston (G5/AAC)
COTTON: #10 North Carolina v. #11 TCU]

CFP FINAL FOUR SEMI-FINALS
Friday, January 8/Saturday, January 9
Neutral site(s) TBD

CFP NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!
Friday, January 15/Saturday, January 16
Glendale, Arizona

This system maintains the NY6 bowl system and ENSURES that all of the P5 champions play in a playoff NY6 bowl game. You just take out all the unranked/lowly-ranked G5 champs.

The down-side is that some of the bowl affiliations could allow teams outside of the top-8 to get in the playoff...or potentially force a better than quarterfinal matchup (ie, 1 v.2 or 3 v. 4). Conveniently, all P5 champs are in the top-8 and #3 Michigan St. v. #6 Stanford in the Rose Bowl would set up nicely for 2015-16.

I believe this is where we could end up if the CFP expands to 8 teams. A non-P5 would make the 8-team field if ranked in the top-8 and play in the Sugar or Fiesta Bowl.

sorry. not happening. you take this year like it's so perfect....

but lets go back a few years.... 2012
in your system
Orange #12 Florida St vs #1 Notre Dame
Sugar #2 Alabama vs #6 Stanford
Rose ur Wisconsin vs #4 Oregon
Fiesta #5 Kansas St vs #3 Florida
sorry but that's crap. #2 and #3 have to play a way tougher game than #4. Sorry, no thanks.

(12-08-2015 11:01 AM)stever20 Wrote:  sorry. not happening. you take this year like it's so perfect....

but lets go back a few years.... 2012
in your system
Orange #12 Florida St vs #1 Notre Dame
Sugar #2 Alabama vs #6 Stanford
Rose ur Wisconsin vs #4 Oregon
Fiesta #5 Kansas St vs #3 Florida
sorry but that's crap. #2 and #3 have to play a way tougher game than #4. Sorry, no thanks.

The only reason unranked Wisconsin was in the Rose Bowl was because undefeated Ohio St. was in post-season sanctions. Wisconsin came in at #3 in their Division. If you add Ohio St. (#3 in the 2012 AP Poll), it would have looked like this:

Orange: #1 Notre Dame (at large) v. #13 Florida St (ACC)
Sugar: #2 Alabama (SEC) vs #7 Stanford (at large)
Rose: #3 Ohio St. (B1G) v. #5 Oregon (PAC)
Fiesta: #4 Florida (at large) v. #6 Kansas St. (B12)

[Non-CFP]
Peach: #8 Georgia v. #10 Texas A&M
Cotton: #9 LSU v. #15 NIU (G5/MAC)

ok 2011.....
Orange #11 Va Tech vs #2 Alabama
Sugar #1 LSU vs
Rose #5 Oregon vs #10 Wisconsin
Fiesta #3 Oklahoma St vs
got 2 teams left. #4 Stanford and #6 Arkansas. Oklahoma St plays Arkansas while #1 LSU gets stuck playing in the 1st round #4 Stanford. Sorry, but that is a load of crap. No way #1/4 plays each other while 5/10 plays each other.