(12-04-2016 01:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-04-2016 01:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  That's taking away a regular season game.

The money will still be there and that's all that matter really. There is no reason an FCS team should count towards a record. I know you're an FCS fan and those games are your super bowl, but from the other side it is ridiculous. At least in basketball the cupcake makes the same postseason tournaments. The FCS is another division, with less scholarships, with a different postseason, and it needs to be called that.

I have argued this for a while now. P5 schools, in particular, should not play FCS schools, or if they do, they should be exhibition games that do not count.

It's beyond ridiculous to play a championship game at the end of January. How is that even logical? Two months after the majority of games have been played? The quality would be awful.

It's also a mistake playing the games right before Finals. It's a bad, bad precedent, also not giving Army/Navy that window.

That's why you move the season back or get rid of CCG's. Or eliminate a game which would move back rivalry weekend in place for championship weekend. Get rid of those games entirely and you have 4 playoff games last night.

(12-04-2016 02:13 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  It's beyond ridiculous to play a championship game at the end of January. How is that even logical? Two months after the majority of games have been played? The quality would be awful.

It's also a mistake playing the games right before Finals. It's a bad, bad precedent, also not giving Army/Navy that window.

That's why you move the season back or get rid of CCG's. Or eliminate a game which would move back rivalry weekend in place for championship weekend. Get rid of those games entirely and you have 4 playoff games last night.

The only rational argument in here is the "finals week" argument. But...it involves 8 schools (out of 130 D1 and--what?--about 1,000 American colleges?)...and academics already take a backseat with major college sports (how many class days do March Madness Final Four teams actually attend in March/April?). And my proposal isn't' Navy/Army weekend...it's the weekend after. That might actually be AFTER finals anyway...which is a great way to blow off steam for students. :)

You aren't getting rid of the 12 regular season games...the CCGs...or the bowl sanctity. This is best, if it ever goes to 8.

Okay, so you're going to play 4 QF games the between the 24th-26th at campus sites, because no fan base is traveling three weeks in a row following their team across the country spending several thousand dollars. Nobody is busy around Xmas time either so no problems with ratings there.

Why are we even paying attention to Bowls in this case? The QF's will pretty much occupy all those slots in prime time. The losers ain't going to be traveling to bowl games a week later.

So again, why aren't we scraping the bowls all together and going to 16 teams? That's the best solution and "equality", so if we won't go all the way there, why do we have to half ass it?

P4 or no 8 team playoff. It's the only viable thing to do to fit into the current calendar with CCGs.

(12-04-2016 01:56 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-04-2016 01:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-04-2016 01:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  That's taking away a regular season game.

The money will still be there and that's all that matter really. There is no reason an FCS team should count towards a record. I know you're an FCS fan and those games are your super bowl, but from the other side it is ridiculous. At least in basketball the cupcake makes the same postseason tournaments. The FCS is another division, with less scholarships, with a different postseason, and it needs to be called that.

I have argued this for a while now. P5 schools, in particular, should not play FCS schools, or if they do, they should be exhibition games that do not count.

I don't care if Oregon St., Kansas (who often loses), Indiana, Kentucky or Duke do. But when Alabama and Florida do, its ridiculous.

USC, UCLA and Notre Dame have never played FCS schools. The Big 10 is quitting scheduling them. Texas has only rarely played them. OU has quit scheduling them. The better ACC and SEC schools need to man up and at least upgrade to Sun Belt and CUSA schools.

(12-04-2016 02:45 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(12-04-2016 02:13 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  It's beyond ridiculous to play a championship game at the end of January. How is that even logical? Two months after the majority of games have been played? The quality would be awful.

It's also a mistake playing the games right before Finals. It's a bad, bad precedent, also not giving Army/Navy that window.

That's why you move the season back or get rid of CCG's. Or eliminate a game which would move back rivalry weekend in place for championship weekend. Get rid of those games entirely and you have 4 playoff games last night.

The only rational argument in here is the "finals week" argument. But...it involves 8 schools (out of 130 D1 and--what?--about 1,000 American colleges?)...and academics already take a backseat with major college sports (how many class days do March Madness Final Four teams actually attend in March/April?). And my proposal isn't' Navy/Army weekend...it's the weekend after. That might actually be AFTER finals anyway...which is a great way to blow off steam for students. :)

You aren't getting rid of the 12 regular season games...the CCGs...or the bowl sanctity. This is best, if it ever goes to 8.

And FCS, Division II and Division III play games then. They are all less "professional" than FBS.

How about 12 with ALL conferences invited

(12-04-2016 03:22 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  How about 12 with ALL conferences invited

Well it would be nice to get those who earned it on the field in, the P5 champs. So far, Baylor in 2014, Stanford in 2015, Penn St. and Oklahoma in 2016 got left out.

I would say add best-G5 to an 8-team playoff IF said G5 was undefeated (with no judged Intent to have easy OOC sched) and/or Ranked Top 16.

Basically it'd be to give them a chance + "reward" the #1 seed. Yes, yes, people who are, like, Wisconsin or USC fans would cry foul on that in a year like this, but a playoff is not made For the 8th team in the country in reference to an 8-team playoff, or the 16th team in a 16-team playoff. It also has to do with earning and the structure of it. Giving all P5 champs auto-bids only calls for a G5 auto-bid if ranked decently high enough (16).

The At-Larges -- THAT should be purely based on ranking.

(12-04-2016 04:00 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  I would say add best-G5 to an 8-team playoff IF said G5 was undefeated (with no judged Intent to have easy OOC sched) and/or Ranked Top 16.

Basically it'd be to give them a chance + "reward" the #1 seed. Yes, yes, people who are, like, Wisconsin or USC fans would cry foul on that in a year like this, but a playoff is not made For the 8th team in the country in reference to an 8-team playoff, or the 16th team in a 16-team playoff. It also has to do with earning and the structure of it. Giving all P5 champs auto-bids only calls for a G5 auto-bid if ranked decently high enough (16).

The At-Larges -- THAT should be purely based on ranking.

I would be inclined to invite the G5 team without a required ranking. Maybe I would have a W/L requirement. 8-4 wouldn't cut it. But the G5 tend to be underrated. The top teams from lesser conferences consistently outperform expectations. With the committees emphasis on SOS and trying to ignore MOV, that puts the G5 teams at a disadvantage.

Go to 6...top 2 bye...3-6 play week of Christmas, semis on NYD, final a week later

(12-04-2016 01:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  There is no reason an FCS team should count towards a record.

They should be playing 12 FBS games. And they'll agree to that over 11 games + FCS exhibition game, every day and twice on Sunday.

Some FCS teams are worthy, but they'd have to be ranked in the Top 25... which you won't know until AFTER you play them. They should have something where you have to get approval to play a particular FCS to be a challenging opponent (destined to be a ranked team; thus, at worst, no more different than you playing someone destined to be a 3W G5 team).

I also agree on Go with the Top 6 Conference Winners. Obviously 9 out of 10 years, the 1-5 will be a P5 Conf Winner. But it always puts the top G5 conf winner in the mix.

The last week in August everyone in FBS should be allowed to host an FCS school in an exhibition game. The regular season should be 12 FBS opponents and the Power 5 need to play at least 10 games against other Power 5s. Everyone's concerns are addressed. The season isn't be lengthened per say because the teams are essentially just playing a scrimmage with an audience.

(12-04-2016 01:37 PM)Shox Wrote:  8 team playoff

5 auto bids
2 at large
Best of G5

5 auto bids
2 or 3 at large
Conditional G5 auto bid: must win its conference, have no more than 1 loss, and meet certain agreed upon rankings/ratings criteria to qualify.

Finally, the top 4 seeds play true home games in the quarterfinals before moving to neutral sites in the semi-finals onwards. This guarantees that the worst P5 champion, which often may not be a great team, will always play on the road, frequently against the #1 seed. If they're not a good team, #1 gets the next closest thing to a bye. It also preserves top 4 as the goal to shoot for. And it makes it easier to sell tickets on short notice, especially given the lesser appeal of traveling to a neutral site for just a quarterfinal game.

(11-25-2016 09:51 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  It's funny coming from an old Big 10 guy when the Rose Bowl was always the end all be all. Now we are at the point where we have to dilute everything down further. Hell, I still wish Rutgers could be in the Big East and compete for an Orange Bowl bid to face a semi-comparable ACC team, because that was always our Super Bowl in my mind. Never did I have aspirations for the Rose Bowl or national titles because the money was better spent on research grants and academic scholarships. Athletically, the Big East was still the best fit for us.

No it's not extremely difficult to win a division at 8-4 and play for a chance to be in the final 8 even when you are ranked #24.

It's diluted when we consistently throw 2 and 3 loss teams into the fray because what are we doing to the regular season if teams can get hot late in the year?

It's diluted when the entirety of OOC competition decides all of two At-Large berths and teams ranked highly enough can take weeks easy knowing they have clinched a top 8 spot prior to rivalry weekend.

Every game this weekend is a must win sans Bama, which would be in a must win next week if it did take the Iron Bowl off for whatever reason. That's why people watch these final two weekends. Even if there is still debate at 4/5, that's not the same as 2/3 like the BCS. That's about as good a compromise as you can get without making CF the same as every other major sport in the nation.

And if we go to 8, why not just eliminate the Bowls and go 16? The bowls would be a complete joke at 8, a lot more so than they are now. Go to 16 then and have 10 autobids. That's what fans want right? No subjectivity...

I cannot believe anyone is still using the "an 8-team playoff dilutes the meaning of the regular season". Good Lord. Wake up! It's already happened.

This year most every team played an 8-9 game conference season designed to crown the best team in the league. Most even go further and add an extra game at the end of the season to pit the top two teams to leave no doubt.

Yet the current playoff system essentially renders those 8-10 games meaningless. Hell, even big head to head games have been declared "just another data point". The big games no longer mean anything at all. The 50 or more conference games played by conferences in thier quest to determine a conference champion mean nothing. And that doesn't even include the 100s of games played by the 65 G5 teams who play full schedules too---even though they are effectively eliminated before the first snap of the season.

Instead, of a system where these grueling conference slates actually mean something----we have turned the CFP into ice skating or a beauty pageant where people have convinced themselves that a completely made up term like "the eye tests" really means something more than the factual results on the field.

If you are worried about the sanctity of the regular season---make sure the conference championships that make up most of every team's schedule actually means something. That's where Basketball blew it. They ruined the value of thier season when they stripped it of it's automatic NCAA bid. The regular season became nothing more than a seeding mechanism for the conference end of season tournaments. The basketball regular season became essentially meaningless. Still--at least basketball still determines more than half the final playoff field based strictly on the results on the court. All conference champs get in.

What football is doing is worse--there's not even an end of season tournament to decide who gets into the playoff. Instead, we have a meaningless conference race, then, like American Idol, we go to a panel of judges and see what Simon and J-Lo think. Here's a time saver. Don't play any games. Just ask Simon and J Lo what they think in preseason and let their top two play.

By the way, does the hypocrisy of the committee logic bother anyone. How exactly can the committee argue that head to head results are only one data point and are not definifitve proof of who is the better team--then sell tickets to a head to head matchup and claim the winner is the true national champion? I thought that was just one data point?

Eight team playoff. All P5 champs get a autobid. Make the regular season championship mean something. One autobid for the top G5 champ (that automatically brings meaning to the lost half of college football---which is huge boost to the sport), and 2 wild cards which provide access to Indy teams and allows for a deserving team like Ohio St to make the post season. Do that---and every game, every season, and every conference championship actually means something.

(12-04-2016 02:54 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Okay, so you're going to play 4 QF games the between the 24th-26th at campus sites, because no fan base is traveling three weeks in a row following their team across the country spending several thousand dollars. Nobody is busy around Xmas time either so no problems with ratings there.

Why are we even paying attention to Bowls in this case? The QF's will pretty much occupy all those slots in prime time. The losers ain't going to be traveling to bowl games a week later.

So again, why aren't we scraping the bowls all together and going to 16 teams? That's the best solution and "equality", so if we won't go all the way there, why do we have to half ass it?

P4 or no 8 team playoff. It's the only viable thing to do to fit into the current calendar with CCGs.

I'm not sure if you read the OP...but where did you get "QF games on Dec. 24-26" from? That's not what I proposed. You're right...a week before New Year's would not work. But I proposed the Friday and Saturday two weeks AFTER the CCGs.

Looking back historically, the 7th of December is the latest that the CCGs have ever been, which would put the quarterfinals at December 20th-21st. Teams would indeed have just 10-11 days to prepare for the semifinals in that scenario...but the logistical side would be covered (the bowls would be ready to host the game...teams would just need to travel there). Fans of the quarterfinal winners would surely go out of their way to travel to the semifinals (maybe not EVERY individual who just was at the quarterfinal, but many of them). Losers...sure, they aren't going to show up in droves. But, again, the "money" of these games doesn't come from ticket sales; it comes from TV revenue. Quarterfinal loser PSU vs. Louisville in the Orange Bowl will still draw lots of eyeballs and THAT makes the bowl games worth it still.

And in other years, there will be over two weeks to prepare for travel (like this year when CCG is on the early side). It's not ideal...but considering on the realities of CFB, it's the best proposal I've seen.