Firstly ... I think the 8 team playoff is now inevitable. Not because of Big 12 tears, but because of money. Both semifinals got a 28.2+ rating. The highest EVER in cable broadcast history. Those numbers crush even Monday Night Football. Thanks to being OTA, the Super Bowl is usually in the mid to high 40's and we all know how enormous that payday is. College football can now with minimal effort DOUBLE their already enormous CFP income and do so without watering down the product.
So what does a CFP at 8 look like? I don't think it is reasonable to expect fans to be able to do back to back to back bowl games. That's a bank buster for most people. Oregon and Ohio State can swing the current two well because their fan bases are enormous. But what if it was Georgia Tech? Mississippi State? TCU? Boise State? Arizona? You'd have most of them hording under the hope they make it all the way, leading to some less than beautiful crowd shots.
Option 1) The first round is at the home stadium of the higher seeded team. Then you can continue merrily along with the existing NY6 arrangement and NCG.
Option 2) You start round one with the NY6 on a 4 game rotational grouping instead of two. Still easy. This makes more sense from the whole "bowl" perspective. It seems awkward to go to the playoff if round one isn't a bowl. That creates all kinds of statistical awkwardness. "You mean you didn't go to a bowl last year? Nah, playoffs. Huh??" From here you can have the second round at the home stadium of the higher seed. Then the NCG with the existing NY6 arrangement. This gives fans recoup time between trips and reduces the trips from 3 to 2... which is what they have now. If something crazy happens like Duke makes the semifinals ... give them the option to relocate to the nearest NFL and/or nearby other college stadiums at their sole discretion. I suspect the small schools would just bring in as many temporary stands as they could get their hands on and have the game on home turf.
Bidding seems simplified this way too. ACC, B1G, Big12, Pac-12, SEC champion autobid. Undefeated G5 autobid. If no undefeated, committee selected highest G5 autobid. Remaining slots committee selected highest at large.
Here is what I've always said:
Quarterfinals:
Rose Bowl: Big Ten vs. Pac-12
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. at-large
Fiesta Bowl: Big 12 vs. at-large
Orange Bowl: ACC vs. at-large
Essentially, it's back to the future for an 8-team playoff using the traditional bowls. I highly disagree that the bowls wouldn't be used. Would the travel blow for fan bases? Yes, but the powers that be have never cared. What they *really* care about are sponsorships, luxury suites and luxury boxes that can be sold years in advance regardless of who is playing, which is what can be done with bowls and neutral sites. Look at every pro team that wants a new stadium - the ENTIRE exercise is to add as many luxury and corporate seats as possible and they'll even reduce overall capacity to do it. You apply that same reasoning to the college football playoff - they want to be able to sell thousands of seats to AT&T, Coca-Cola, Nike and hundreds of other sponsors upfront for 6 or 12 year contracts. Those matter MUCH more than us as the plebeian traveling fans.
(01-04-2015 08:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ]Here is what I've always said:
Quarterfinals:
Rose Bowl: Big Ten vs. Pac-12
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. at-large
Fiesta Bowl: Big 12 vs. at-large
Orange Bowl: ACC vs. at-large
I could go with that. Semis? NCG?
There is a laws of diminishing returns. Don't assume that quarterfinals would do as well. As we see, the contract bowls were abismal compared to old Bcs game ratings (non-championship).
Also Frank as much as the B1G and PAC people love each other and the rose bowl, they would never sign up for the above, which puts their champions at a disadvantage compared to every other champion.
I agree with his overall premise but Frank is over-simplifying things, IMO. You sell all the suites and sponsorships because of the atmosphere in the stadium. If the stadium is only 60-70% full, the television show itself falters. At some point, people cannot afford to go to all of these bowl games, conference championship games, etc.
I think you hit the nail on the head that logistics would be the though thing of going to 8. How does the timing work? How do you deal with travel? How are the bowls incorporated. First, I think it would be have to be a seeded 1-8. Otherwise you could punish the top team if the first round is a hard PAC-10/Big 10 matchup or something.
What I would do is this- have 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5 the week after the conf championsip games at the home field of the higher seeded team. Then you have the new years six rotation as is currently with winners of the 1 v 8 and the 4 v 5 at one location and the winners of the 2 v 7 and 3 v 6 at the other. That gives time off between the first round of the playoff and the bowls for fans to make travel arrangements, and teams to heal up. The losers of the first round could have guaranteed slots in the other new years six bowls to maintain the bowl tradition. Then you do the same 10 days or so layoff between the second round of the playoffs on Jan 1st and the the championship game.
Basically it is exactly as it is now, except you have the first round the week after the championship saturday.
Is the 8 team playoff a tangible reality though? We're talking about playing, like 15 games? Is that right? Everything I've heard is that coaches aren't in favor of this because of player safety issues. With lawsuits galore, it doesn't seem like the ncaa would be in favor of such liability.
(01-04-2015 10:56 PM)jaredf29 Wrote: [ -> ]Is the 8 team playoff a tangible reality though? We're talking about playing, like 15 games? Is that right? Everything I've heard is that coaches aren't in favor of this because of player safety issues. With lawsuits galore, it doesn't seem like the ncaa would be in favor of such liability.
ND St is playing their 16th game in a week.
Another option would be to elevate the minor bowls to quarterfinals. For example, you could rotate the Holiday, Cactus, Texas, Alamo, Citrus, Russell Athletic, Music City, and Belk bowls for the four quarterfinal games in December. The usual pre-Christmas minor bowls now get moved to between the quarterfinals and semifinals.
You could even set up the New Year's Six to maintain their traditional alignments should those teams be eliminated in the first round of the playoffs.
Presuming we kept the conference title games, the quarterfinals would have looked something like this:
Music City Bowl - (4) Ohio State vs (5) Baylor
Alamo Bowl - (1) Alabama vs (8) Michigan State
Holiday Bowl - (2) Oregon vs (7) Mississippi State
Citrus Bowl - (3) Florida State vs (6) TCU
If we don't allow playoff teams to play in a bowl after being eliminated, this moves pretty much guarantees all other teams in the Top 15 make a NY6 bowl. It would also allow for four new bowls to be created in addition to all the ones we have now - Indianapolis, Little Rock, St. Louis, and Los Angeles, you're on deck. If you allow quarterfinal losers to head to the NY6, add two more (perhaps a second Las Vegas game and one in Louisville).
(01-04-2015 11:04 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2015 10:56 PM)jaredf29 Wrote: [ -> ]Is the 8 team playoff a tangible reality though? We're talking about playing, like 15 games? Is that right? Everything I've heard is that coaches aren't in favor of this because of player safety issues. With lawsuits galore, it doesn't seem like the ncaa would be in favor of such liability.
ND St is playing their 16th game in a week.
It was the coaches that have their roots in the fcs that are those opposed. I also don't want this to come off wrong but there's a talent gap from fbs and fcs and game speed differences.
(01-04-2015 08:36 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Firstly ... I think the 8 team playoff is now inevitable. Not because of Big 12 tears, but because of money. Both semifinals got a 28.2+ rating. The highest EVER in cable broadcast history. Those numbers crush even Monday Night Football. Thanks to being OTA, the Super Bowl is usually in the mid to high 40's and we all know how enormous that payday is. College football can now with minimal effort DOUBLE their already enormous CFP income and do so without watering down the product.
So what does a CFP at 8 look like? I don't think it is reasonable to expect fans to be able to do back to back to back bowl games. That's a bank buster for most people. Oregon and Ohio State can swing the current two well because their fan bases are enormous. But what if it was Georgia Tech? Mississippi State? TCU? Boise State? Arizona? You'd have most of them hording under the hope they make it all the way, leading to some less than beautiful crowd shots.
Option 1) The first round is at the home stadium of the higher seeded team. Then you can continue merrily along with the existing NY6 arrangement and NCG.
Option 2) You start round one with the NY6 on a 4 game rotational grouping instead of two. Still easy. This makes more sense from the whole "bowl" perspective. It seems awkward to go to the playoff if round one isn't a bowl. That creates all kinds of statistical awkwardness. "You mean you didn't go to a bowl last year? Nah, playoffs. Huh??" From here you can have the second round at the home stadium of the higher seed. Then the NCG with the existing NY6 arrangement. This gives fans recoup time between trips and reduces the trips from 3 to 2... which is what they have now. If something crazy happens like Duke makes the semifinals ... give them the option to relocate to the nearest NFL and/or nearby other college stadiums at their sole discretion. I suspect the small schools would just bring in as many temporary stands as they could get their hands on and have the game on home turf.
Bidding seems simplified this way too. ACC, B1G, Big12, Pac-12, SEC champion autobid. Undefeated G5 autobid. If no undefeated, committee selected highest G5 autobid. Remaining slots committee selected highest at large.
It would clearly be Syracuse and 7 chumps with games alternating between the Meadowlands, Soldier Field, and the Carrier Dome.
/thread
Easiest and fairest way to host an 8 team playoff...
Auto-Bids:
1. Champ of each P5 Conference (5)
2. Highest ranked Champ of G5 Conference (1)
At-Large Bids:
1. 2 Highest ranked teams that was not a conference champion. (2)
Under those rules, the final 8 would have looked something like this:
1. Alabama-SEC
2. Ohio State-Big Ten
3. Oregon-Pac 10
4. TCU-Big 12 (Assuming TCU would have been declared winner)
5. Florida State-ACC
6. Boise St.-Highest Ranked G5 Champ
7. Baylor (At-Large)
8. Michigan State (At-Large)
(01-04-2015 08:36 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Option 1) The first round is at the home stadium of the higher seeded team. Then you can continue merrily along with the existing NY6 arrangement and NCG.
Have to play the first round at home stadiums, IMO, or ticket sales will be spotty. If you play three rounds at neutral sites, way too many fans of the participating teams will skip round one because they're hoping to go to semifinals and finals after that. Even with the two-round setup of this year, Florida State reportedly returned 9,000 unsold Rose Bowl tickets from their allotment for the game. The number of returned tickets will be much higher if all three rounds are played at neutral sites.
And, there are not enough local ticket-buyers at most bowl sites, at $150 or more per ticket, to sustain three rounds of bowls/neutral sites if teams start sending back 9,000 or more tickets for every game.
(01-04-2015 11:15 PM)chargeradio Wrote: [ -> ]Another option would be to elevate the minor bowls to quarterfinals. For example, you could rotate the Holiday, Cactus, Texas, Alamo, Citrus, Russell Athletic, Music City, and Belk bowls for the four quarterfinal games in December. The usual pre-Christmas minor bowls now get moved to between the quarterfinals and semifinals.
You could even set up the New Year's Six to maintain their traditional alignments should those teams be eliminated in the first round of the playoffs.
Presuming we kept the conference title games, the quarterfinals would have looked something like this:
Music City Bowl - (4) Ohio State vs (5) Baylor
Alamo Bowl - (1) Alabama vs (8) Michigan State
Holiday Bowl - (2) Oregon vs (7) Mississippi State
Citrus Bowl - (3) Florida State vs (6) TCU
If we don't allow playoff teams to play in a bowl after being eliminated, this moves pretty much guarantees all other teams in the Top 15 make a NY6 bowl. It would also allow for four new bowls to be created in addition to all the ones we have now - Indianapolis, Little Rock, St. Louis, and Los Angeles, you're on deck. If you allow quarterfinal losers to head to the NY6, add two more (perhaps a second Las Vegas game and one in Louisville).
Sorry a wish I could condense this but not as mobile friendly as if like. Anyway such a consolidation doesn't help. The idea of a bowl is neutral site where people travel. Take that away and it's not a bowl: might as we'll be while game. And that's bad for the money side: bad for the way it's currently financed.
(01-04-2015 11:17 PM)jaredf29 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2015 11:04 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2015 10:56 PM)jaredf29 Wrote: [ -> ]Is the 8 team playoff a tangible reality though? We're talking about playing, like 15 games? Is that right? Everything I've heard is that coaches aren't in favor of this because of player safety issues. With lawsuits galore, it doesn't seem like the ncaa would be in favor of such liability.
ND St is playing their 16th game in a week.
It was the coaches that have their roots in the fcs that are those opposed. I also don't want this to come off wrong but there's a talent gap from fbs and fcs and game speed differences.
I was going to point point that out. Who's the number of games adds up, the smaller and slower players makes the safety issue less of an issue.
I favor 6 team play off. P5 champs + at-large
week 1
1&2 BYE
3v6 @3
4v5 @4
week 2
1v lowest ranked winner at neutral
2v highest ranked winner
week 3
ncg
(01-04-2015 10:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ]I think you hit the nail on the head that logistics would be the though thing of going to 8. How does the timing work? How do you deal with travel? How are the bowls incorporated. First, I think it would be have to be a seeded 1-8. Otherwise you could punish the top team if the first round is a hard PAC-10/Big 10 matchup or something.
What I would do is this- have 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5 the week after the conf championsip games at the home field of the higher seeded team. Then you have the new years six rotation as is currently with winners of the 1 v 8 and the 4 v 5 at one location and the winners of the 2 v 7 and 3 v 6 at the other. That gives time off between the first round of the playoff and the bowls for fans to make travel arrangements, and teams to heal up. The losers of the first round could have guaranteed slots in the other new years six bowls to maintain the bowl tradition. Then you do the same 10 days or so layoff between the second round of the playoffs on Jan 1st and the the championship game.
Basically it is exactly as it is now, except you have the first round the week after the championship saturday.
I think this is perfect as far as logistics go. Basically nothing changes. You are just snapping a 4-game fist round onto the existing structure---and because the first round losers still are eligible for bowl games, you do not subtract 4 power teams from the bowl pool (thus keeping it from seriously damaging the number of teams available for the existing bowls).
Basically, ALL the money in the this first round will go to the playoff system. The bowls will not be part of it, so even if it is pays slightly less that the current games, it will still be just as profitable since all the media, ticket money, and marketing income will flow to the playoff (no bowl middle man). Essentially, the playoff will simply be paying for the home venue for one game. The home venue will get rent, concessions, and parking. This is the least disruptive and most profitable way to add the first round.
As far the format, I would have all five P5 champs AQ. The top G5 champ would be AQ. That ends any anti-trust legal issues. Then there would be 2 wildcards. That's a format that could operate for 100 years.
(01-05-2015 02:18 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2015 10:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ]I think you hit the nail on the head that logistics would be the though thing of going to 8. How does the timing work? How do you deal with travel? How are the bowls incorporated. First, I think it would be have to be a seeded 1-8. Otherwise you could punish the top team if the first round is a hard PAC-10/Big 10 matchup or something.
What I would do is this- have 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5 the week after the conf championsip games at the home field of the higher seeded team. Then you have the new years six rotation as is currently with winners of the 1 v 8 and the 4 v 5 at one location and the winners of the 2 v 7 and 3 v 6 at the other. That gives time off between the first round of the playoff and the bowls for fans to make travel arrangements, and teams to heal up. The losers of the first round could have guaranteed slots in the other new years six bowls to maintain the bowl tradition. Then you do the same 10 days or so layoff between the second round of the playoffs on Jan 1st and the the championship game.
Basically it is exactly as it is now, except you have the first round the week after the championship saturday.
I think this is perfect as far as logistics go. Basically nothing changes. You are just snapping a 4-game fist round onto the existing structure---and because the first round losers still are eligible for bowl games, you do not subtract 4 power teams from the bowl pool (thus keeping it from seriously damaging the number of teams available for the existing bowls).
Basically, ALL the money in the this first round will go to the playoff system. The bowls will not be part of it, so even if it is pays slightly less that the current games, it will still be just as profitable since all the media, ticket money, and marketing income will flow to the playoff (no bowl middle man). Essentially, the playoff will simply be paying for the home venue for one game. The home venue will get rent, concessions, and parking. This is the least disruptive and most profitable way to add the first round.
As far the format, I would have all five P5 champs AQ. The top G5 champ would be AQ. That ends any anti-trust legal issues. Then there would be 2 wildcards. That's a format that could operate for 100 years.
1st rd playoff losers will never go to bowls. Imagine what kind of effort you would get from Alabama/Florida St if they played again- knowing their dream of a title was gone.
(01-05-2015 10:11 AM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2015 02:18 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2015 10:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ]I think you hit the nail on the head that logistics would be the though thing of going to 8. How does the timing work? How do you deal with travel? How are the bowls incorporated. First, I think it would be have to be a seeded 1-8. Otherwise you could punish the top team if the first round is a hard PAC-10/Big 10 matchup or something.
What I would do is this- have 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5 the week after the conf championsip games at the home field of the higher seeded team. Then you have the new years six rotation as is currently with winners of the 1 v 8 and the 4 v 5 at one location and the winners of the 2 v 7 and 3 v 6 at the other. That gives time off between the first round of the playoff and the bowls for fans to make travel arrangements, and teams to heal up. The losers of the first round could have guaranteed slots in the other new years six bowls to maintain the bowl tradition. Then you do the same 10 days or so layoff between the second round of the playoffs on Jan 1st and the the championship game.
Basically it is exactly as it is now, except you have the first round the week after the championship saturday.
I think this is perfect as far as logistics go. Basically nothing changes. You are just snapping a 4-game fist round onto the existing structure---and because the first round losers still are eligible for bowl games, you do not subtract 4 power teams from the bowl pool (thus keeping it from seriously damaging the number of teams available for the existing bowls).
Basically, ALL the money in the this first round will go to the playoff system. The bowls will not be part of it, so even if it is pays slightly less that the current games, it will still be just as profitable since all the media, ticket money, and marketing income will flow to the playoff (no bowl middle man). Essentially, the playoff will simply be paying for the home venue for one game. The home venue will get rent, concessions, and parking. This is the least disruptive and most profitable way to add the first round.
As far the format, I would have all five P5 champs AQ. The top G5 champ would be AQ. That ends any anti-trust legal issues. Then there would be 2 wildcards. That's a format that could operate for 100 years.
1st rd playoff losers will never go to bowls. Imagine what kind of effort you would get from Alabama/Florida St if they played again- knowing their dream of a title was gone.
Why would that be any different than the effort the conf championship game losers give in bowls? Wiscy had no reason to be up for their game after their blowout loss and loss of their coach, yet were able to pull it together for the win. Bowl games are exhibitions and a chance to set the stage for the next year. That wouldn't change with that setup.
(01-05-2015 10:27 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2015 10:11 AM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2015 02:18 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2015 10:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ]I think you hit the nail on the head that logistics would be the though thing of going to 8. How does the timing work? How do you deal with travel? How are the bowls incorporated. First, I think it would be have to be a seeded 1-8. Otherwise you could punish the top team if the first round is a hard PAC-10/Big 10 matchup or something.
What I would do is this- have 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5 the week after the conf championsip games at the home field of the higher seeded team. Then you have the new years six rotation as is currently with winners of the 1 v 8 and the 4 v 5 at one location and the winners of the 2 v 7 and 3 v 6 at the other. That gives time off between the first round of the playoff and the bowls for fans to make travel arrangements, and teams to heal up. The losers of the first round could have guaranteed slots in the other new years six bowls to maintain the bowl tradition. Then you do the same 10 days or so layoff between the second round of the playoffs on Jan 1st and the the championship game.
Basically it is exactly as it is now, except you have the first round the week after the championship saturday.
I think this is perfect as far as logistics go. Basically nothing changes. You are just snapping a 4-game fist round onto the existing structure---and because the first round losers still are eligible for bowl games, you do not subtract 4 power teams from the bowl pool (thus keeping it from seriously damaging the number of teams available for the existing bowls).
Basically, ALL the money in the this first round will go to the playoff system. The bowls will not be part of it, so even if it is pays slightly less that the current games, it will still be just as profitable since all the media, ticket money, and marketing income will flow to the playoff (no bowl middle man). Essentially, the playoff will simply be paying for the home venue for one game. The home venue will get rent, concessions, and parking. This is the least disruptive and most profitable way to add the first round.
As far the format, I would have all five P5 champs AQ. The top G5 champ would be AQ. That ends any anti-trust legal issues. Then there would be 2 wildcards. That's a format that could operate for 100 years.
1st rd playoff losers will never go to bowls. Imagine what kind of effort you would get from Alabama/Florida St if they played again- knowing their dream of a title was gone.
Why would that be any different than the effort the conf championship game losers give in bowls? Wiscy had no reason to be up for their game after their blowout loss and loss of their coach, yet were able to pull it together for the win. Bowl games are exhibitions and a chance to set the stage for the next year. That wouldn't change with that setup.
totally different animals. It's a whole lot different when you have a chance to play for a national championship.
also remember- in basketball used to be 3rd place game in the NCAA tourney. They got rid of it because the players were going thru the motions.
I agree- those ratings make it inevitable.
I don't think it "doubles" by going to eight - there is an inherent drama in a final four setting (like we saw) - and the round of 8 games won't get those ratings - but they'll be good ratings and beat the 4 bowl games they'd be replacing by a longshot.
My proposal:
The Top 4 CONFERENCE CHAMPS host a home game. Reward winning the conference.
So this year, I'll grant the cmte its rankings, and we would have:
(8) Michigan State at (1) Alabama*
*Miss St is really #8 but you can't do a conf rematch
(5) Baylor at (4) Ohio St*
*yes, Baylor still gripes, but the B12 would have had to declare a conf champ in this case
(7) Mich St at (2) Oregon
(6) TCU at (3) FSU
I would play these games third week of December - like NCAA Tourney, play one Thursday, one Friday and 2 on Saturday
The the final four would be on New Year's day