This is premised on getting down to 8 conferences. But if that ever happened, I would use CCGs as the opening round.

Is this something you can get behind? Which 2 conferences bite the dust?

(01-20-2017 11:22 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  This is premised on getting down to 8 conferences. But if that ever happened, I would use CCGs as the opening round.

Is this something you can get behind? Which 2 conferences bite the dust?

Move each of the conference divisional winners in opposite brackets then seed based on rating with the 4 highest rated teams in each side of the bracket hosting.

(01-20-2017 11:22 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  This is premised on getting down to 8 conferences. But if that ever happened, I would use CCGs as the opening round.

Is this something you can get behind? Which 2 conferences bite the dust?

If this were to happen, I could see the XII and CUSA disappearing. Their members would disperse to other conferences. I picked these two conferences because the XII is a hot mess and CUSA is so spread out that it could be picked apart.

Rok: so you'd get rid of CCG and advance directly to the playoffs? Interesting idea.

Be: I agree with those conferences being endangered by realignment.

The B12 and CUSA suffer from branding issues the most, IMO.

(01-20-2017 11:22 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  This is premised on getting down to 8 conferences. But if that ever happened, I would use CCGs as the opening round.

Is this something you can get behind? Which 2 conferences bite the dust?

No.

I think this is a slow evolution, but next will be 8 team playoffs with all P5 conference champs, 1 G5 champ, and two at large schools.

Low Country: I agree that's how an 8 team playoff would work. But I'd hope the at-large pool would come from CCG losers.

(01-20-2017 12:09 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  I think this is a slow evolution, but next will be 8 team playoffs with all P5 conference champs, 1 G5 champ, and two at large schools.

Why do P5 conference champs need an autobid?

The highest ranking P5 champion will be ranked in the Top 8.

(01-20-2017 12:21 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  Low Country: I agree that's how an 8 team playoff would work. But I'd hope the at-large pool would come from CCG losers.

Independent Notre Dame is more important to the powers that be and TV interests than all of the G5 leagues combined. There HAS to be some at-large slots with no conference strings attached in any playoff system. ND isn't getting "forced" into a conference because neither the Big Ten nor SEC have ANY desire to "force" ND into the arms of the ACC (thereby adding the most valuable brand in the sport to a direct geographic competitor).

(01-20-2017 12:52 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(01-20-2017 12:21 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  Low Country: I agree that's how an 8 team playoff would work. But I'd hope the at-large pool would come from CCG losers.

Independent Notre Dame is more important to the powers that be and TV interests than all of the G5 leagues combined. There HAS to be some at-large slots with no conference strings attached in any playoff system. ND isn't getting "forced" into a conference because neither the Big Ten nor SEC have ANY desire to "force" ND into the arms of the ACC (thereby adding the most valuable brand in the sport to a direct geographic competitor).

An also room for 1 loss teams that slipped up in their conference championship game.

You're right of course about ND getting special treatment.

The Privileged 5 will never allow the G5 to have the same number of slots as them. And if two conferences bit the dust, where would those teams go? We'd see conferences grow in size significantly.

I think the model with the P5 champs and top G5 champ plus 2 at-larges is the most realistic model in terms of what could actually be agreed upon.

(01-20-2017 12:50 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-20-2017 12:09 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  I think this is a slow evolution, but next will be 8 team playoffs with all P5 conference champs, 1 G5 champ, and two at large schools.

Why do P5 conference champs need an autobid?

The highest ranking P5 champion will be ranked in the Top 8.

Why do G5 champs deserve one? If no G5 conference champion is ranked in the Top 25, should they be allowed to bump a team that actually has a chance of winning? Isn't that just a participation trophy?

Ken: winning a conference should mean something. And if you can't get to the CCG, you don't deserve an at-large bid.

there is no way the p5 is going to allow a 9-3 G5 champ into the playoffs.

the could easily happen. It's not likely that every year a G5 will be undefeated.

How about to be fair in an 8 team playoff do this:

1 automatic bid to the highest ranked G5 champion.
1 automatic bid to the highest ranked P5 champion.

1 auto bid for each group to make things equal.

(01-20-2017 03:51 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  there is no way the p5 is going to allow a 9-3 G5 champ into the playoffs.

the could easily happen. It's not likely that every year a G5 will be undefeated.

That could not easily happen.

Boise State was 11-2
Houston was 12-1
Western Michigan was 13-0

Maybe a 10-3 team once a decade if that.

DD: if they're so afraid of the G5 team, BEAT THEM!