6 Teams, Top 2 with byes
The Champions of the Top 4 strongest conferences (Massey Composite)
Top 2 At-Large (Sagarin Ratings)


SEEDING:
1. Alabama
2. Washington
3. Clemson
4. Penn State
5. Ohio State
6. Michigan


DEC 10:
Michigan @ Clemson
Ohio State @ Penn State

JAN 1-3:
SEMIFINALS

JAN 8:
NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP

It could really be that simple...

Need Neutral Sites for all Playoff Games


And Ohio State should be seeded higher than Penn St.

Alabama and Ohio St deserve the byes, in this setup.

Michigan v Clemson (Orange), Penn St v Washington (Rose)

(12-05-2016 01:04 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Alabama and Ohio St deserve the byes, in this setup.

Michigan v Clemson (Orange), Penn St v Washington (Rose)

no, in my setup, Conference Championships have the most value, and specifically the top 4 strongest conferences

According to Massey, PAC 12 is #2 and B1G is #4

Personally, for a short-team playoff, I would say that there should be a limit on the # of teams from a conference.

So for a 6-team playoff, I personally would say Limit 2 per conference *UNLESS* Top 3 were ranked from the same one, then 3, and if the Top 4 were from the same one, allow 4, etc.

This way, you would Encourage non-conference games against big dogs, and it not necessarily hurting your chances. And judging one conference being Truly better than another is usually solidified IN post-season, as ya only have usually about 2 non-conf P5 games to judge from, from each team.

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Ohio State
4. Washington
5. Penn State
6. Oklahoma [Michigan cut out; See? B12 can't b!tch anymore either]

I understand the idea of a 6-team playoff from a pure competitive perspective, but it simply doesn't work from a logistical perspective (or at least the logistics aren't any more difficult for an 8-team playoff compared to a 6-team playoff that you might as well make it into an 8-team playoff and make a lot more money in the process). I think people in Message Board Land (like us) are a lot more open to byes and 6-team playoffs because we're largely focused on merit instead of the money, whereas I believe the powers that be aren't just going to get "a little bit pregnant". They'll keep it at 4 or make it 8, but "splitting the baby" to make it 6 is unrealistic. If you're going to either (a) kill the bowl system by taking the first round out of the bowls or (b) keep the bowl system by keeping the first round in the bowls, then 8 teams is a superior option compared to 6 teams on both accounts. The bigger hurdle (which I think is a self-imposed hurdle) is adding another week to the season, which is going to happen in a 6-team playoff in the same manner as the 8-team playoff... in which case, go ahead and make more money with the 8-team playoff (along with providing P5 auto-bids).

If some of the conferences and TV wanted to expand the playoff bad enough, and just had to get over the hump of a few confs that were dead set against 8 ... they'd compromise on 6.

Granted, I just pulled that scenario out of my rear. But not impossible.

(12-05-2016 03:37 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If some of the conferences and TV wanted to expand the playoff bad enough, and just had to get over the hump of a few confs that were dead set against 8 ... they'd compromise on 6.

Granted, I just pulled that scenario out of my rear. But not impossible.

I guess that it comes down to the fact that I think the most likely way that the playoffs expand is that some or all of the P5 conferences end up wanting auto-bids to the playoff, in which case they (a) don't want to introduce the bye concept that puts more power back in the hands of the CFP committee that they've tried to reduce with auto-bids in the first place and (b) expanding to 8 is no skin off their backs in that auto-bid situation compared to a 6-team playoff. There's just no great reason (from the perspective of the powers that be) to expand the playoff unless you're providing P5 auto-bids. Virtually all of the complaints of the system up to this point is when a P5 conference champion is locked out of the top 4.

Quote:Virtually all of the complaints of the system up to this point is when a P5 conference champion is locked out of the top 4.

A 6-team playoff would do it, but since you're going to have a playoff, why 6? I can understand 12 with a 4-team bye & getting rid of any BCS/NY6-level bowls and just doing that. But I would assume 8-team playoff.

Right now, it's not really a playoff -- just a national-championship game taking the winners of the Top 2 Bowls (Top 2 Bowls existed before this 'play off) to duke it out.

Personally, I think an 8-team playoff is going to be more realistically had & wanted way more than a 6-team one. The only byes, IMO, would be within a 12-team playoff, like D1AA does.

Problem with 8-team Playoff:
- You're taking away too many teams from the BCS/NY6, while leaving just 2 "NY6" games behind doesn't seem ideal at all. It'd be a "NY4".
- ND fans would be mad when #11 B12/P12 team wins their conference one year, and #8 ND can't get in due to no auto-bids due to no Conference
- Plus, the G5 would be screaming for an auto-bid, when 8 is arguably too few for that.

Best Solution: 12 team Playoff; Top 4 get a bye

Why I think it's the best:
- It follows what D1AA does; the system works
- The whole NY6 (12 teams) is incorporated into a Playoff, which is what everyone wants anyway
- Gives room for a G5 auto-bid to keep them calm + G5 auto-bid usually at #12 seed won't be opening against #1 Alabama every year, since Alabama would get a bye. :)
- Still could limit only 3 per conference, unless 4th is in Top 6 (conference disparity)

(12-05-2016 03:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Virtually all of the complaints of the system up to this point is when a P5 conference champion is locked out of the top 4.

Fan complains, perhaps.

Presidents should and do remember not too long ago when it was just two teams picked for the NC game. Now four teams have a chance.

If they want to make it one day so that eight teams have a chance, I'm still not so sure they feel they have a right to demand that five of the spots are locked up automatically for five conferences.