If the playoff expansion goes the way these people are suggesting, the AAC could add any team they want to get to 12 and have divisions, a CCG and still be heavy favorites for the G5 auto bid. Now that's funny.
If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
(06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
This. Grabbing the G5 spot all the way to CFP rejigger time would give Aresco some ammo to fight with...
There is always a catch. CFP will expand to 12 but something ridiculous will be included.
CFP expand to 12…. but P5 is breaking away from FBS and the G5 won’t be allowed to play in any CFP bowl games.
CFP expand to 12…. but they are reducing the regular season to eliminate OOC games.
(06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
(06-10-2021 07:09 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Exactly, I what real world does Aresco have power to do anything here. If the G5 could grab an auto bid to playoffs, and a Upper middle class bowl for 2nd highest ranked champion, that would be a huge step forward. The AAC would almost always if not always fill one of those 2 spots.
(06-10-2021 07:09 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Same way the G5 might get one---ask. It looks to me like they want a system thats about 50-50 split between auto-bids and "at large" bids. So, I'd push for the 16 team model as that might give you the best chance of adding autobids. One important question is "Will there even be conference specific auto-bids?". There may not be. The playoff language may be just something like "Top 6 conference champs get autobids" and then the 6 "at large bids go to the top 6 teams without autobids". In practice, the top 6 champs would generally be the P5 champs and the top G5 champ---but the language would tend to blunt any attempt for the G5 to sue the P5 over anti-trust issues.
(06-10-2021 09:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 07:09 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Same way the G5 might get one---ask. It looks to me like they want a system thats about 50-50 split between auto-bids and "at large" bids. So, I'd push for the 16 team model as that might give you the best chance of adding autobids. One important question is "Will there even be conference specific auto-bids?". There may not be. The playoff language may be just something like "Top 6 conference champs get autobids" and then the 6 "at large bids go to the top 6 teams without autobids". In practice, the top 6 champs would generally be the P5 champs and the top G5 champ---but the language would tend to blunt any attempt for the G5 to sue the P5 over anti-trust issues.
I think that if the SEC is behind the push for 12 which would benefit them the most, the others would go for 16 which would give the others more spots and keep anyone from getting byes in CFP
So here it’s how CFP would have looked like in last 5 years with an 8, 12 and 16 playoff look with all P leagues with a guarantee spot and the highest nonP with one access.
Current 4 team system
SEC 6, ACC 5, BTen 3, Big12 3; ND 2, PAC 1
Eight Team version
SEC 9, BigT 8: Big12 6, ACC 5, PAC 5, AAC 4, ND 2, MAC 1
Twelve Team version
SEC 15, BigT 14, PAC 9, Big12 8, ACC 7, AAC 4, ND 2, MAC 1
Sixteen Team version
SEC 19, BigT 18, Big12 13, PAC 11, ACC 9, AAC 4, ND 4, MAC 1, SBC 1
(06-10-2021 10:05 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 09:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 07:09 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Same way the G5 might get one---ask. It looks to me like they want a system thats about 50-50 split between auto-bids and "at large" bids. So, I'd push for the 16 team model as that might give you the best chance of adding autobids. One important question is "Will there even be conference specific auto-bids?". There may not be. The playoff language may be just something like "Top 6 conference champs get autobids" and then the 6 "at large bids go to the top 6 teams without autobids". In practice, the top 6 champs would generally be the P5 champs and the top G5 champ---but the language would tend to blunt any attempt for the G5 to sue the P5 over anti-trust issues.
I think that if the SEC is behind the push for 12 which would benefit them the most, the others would go for 16 which would give the others more spots and keep anyone from getting byes in CFP
Notre Dame too. The currrent system basically has all "at large" bids where as an expanded 8 team 5-1-2 system featuring "auto-bids" would only have 2 "at large" slots. So the "at large" bids fall from 4 to just 2 even though the playoff doubled in size. Thats a concern for the Irish (and really any indy). That, and the aforementioned pressure from the SEC is why 12 is being pushed. My question is--"If you are going to expand the playoff into an entire extra week by going to 12---why not maximize the money and access allowed by that extra added round by going to 16?". It takes the same amount of time to execute a 16 team playoff as a 12 team playoff---may as well make the most money you can off that first week of the playoff.
(06-10-2021 11:00 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 10:05 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 09:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 07:09 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (06-09-2021 09:42 PM)PirateJP Wrote: [ -> ]If they expand to 12 Aresco needs to earn his paycheck and get us an auto-bid. But we also need to get the G5 spot and win the next two seasons.
If you think about it the AAC has just as many playoff wins under this current system as the Big 12.
Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Same way the G5 might get one---ask. It looks to me like they want a system thats about 50-50 split between auto-bids and "at large" bids. So, I'd push for the 16 team model as that might give you the best chance of adding autobids. One important question is "Will there even be conference specific auto-bids?". There may not be. The playoff language may be just something like "Top 6 conference champs get autobids" and then the 6 "at large bids go to the top 6 teams without autobids". In practice, the top 6 champs would generally be the P5 champs and the top G5 champ---but the language would tend to blunt any attempt for the G5 to sue the P5 over anti-trust issues.
I think that if the SEC is behind the push for 12 which would benefit them the most, the others would go for 16 which would give the others more spots and keep anyone from getting byes in CFP
Notre Dame too. The currrent system basically has all "at large" bids where as an expanded 8 team 5-1-2 system featuring "auto-bids" would only have 2 "at large" slots. So the "at large" bids fall from 4 to just 2 even though the playoff doubled in size. Thats a concern for the Irish (and really any indy). That, and the aforementioned pressure from the SEC is why 12 is being pushed. My question is--"If you are going to expand the playoff into an entire extra week by going to 12---why not maximize the money and access allowed by that extra added round by going to 16?". It takes the same amount of time to execute a 16 team playoff as a 12 team playoff---may as well make the most money you can off that first week of the playoff.
Agreed. I find it interesting that all the talk is not expanding to 8 but 12 and maybe 16. But if you look at the post above the SEC and BigTen are not big winners expanding to 8 but if you go to 12 and 16 that changes
(06-10-2021 11:10 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 11:00 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 10:05 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 09:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 07:09 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ]Curious as to how he would do that exactly.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Same way the G5 might get one---ask. It looks to me like they want a system thats about 50-50 split between auto-bids and "at large" bids. So, I'd push for the 16 team model as that might give you the best chance of adding autobids. One important question is "Will there even be conference specific auto-bids?". There may not be. The playoff language may be just something like "Top 6 conference champs get autobids" and then the 6 "at large bids go to the top 6 teams without autobids". In practice, the top 6 champs would generally be the P5 champs and the top G5 champ---but the language would tend to blunt any attempt for the G5 to sue the P5 over anti-trust issues.
I think that if the SEC is behind the push for 12 which would benefit them the most, the others would go for 16 which would give the others more spots and keep anyone from getting byes in CFP
Notre Dame too. The currrent system basically has all "at large" bids where as an expanded 8 team 5-1-2 system featuring "auto-bids" would only have 2 "at large" slots. So the "at large" bids fall from 4 to just 2 even though the playoff doubled in size. Thats a concern for the Irish (and really any indy). That, and the aforementioned pressure from the SEC is why 12 is being pushed. My question is--"If you are going to expand the playoff into an entire extra week by going to 12---why not maximize the money and access allowed by that extra added round by going to 16?". It takes the same amount of time to execute a 16 team playoff as a 12 team playoff---may as well make the most money you can off that first week of the playoff.
Agreed. I find it interesting that all the talk is not expanding to 8 but 12 and maybe 16. But if you look at the post above the SEC and BigTen are not big winners expanding to 8 but if you go to 12 and 16 that changes
If your going for the money grab then you might as well grab as much as you can get. Don't know the structure yet but if you loose in the first round in mid December, does P5 school get another crack at a later bowl.
(06-10-2021 11:16 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 11:10 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 11:00 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 10:05 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-10-2021 09:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]Same way the G5 might get one---ask. It looks to me like they want a system thats about 50-50 split between auto-bids and "at large" bids. So, I'd push for the 16 team model as that might give you the best chance of adding autobids. One important question is "Will there even be conference specific auto-bids?". There may not be. The playoff language may be just something like "Top 6 conference champs get autobids" and then the 6 "at large bids go to the top 6 teams without autobids". In practice, the top 6 champs would generally be the P5 champs and the top G5 champ---but the language would tend to blunt any attempt for the G5 to sue the P5 over anti-trust issues.
I think that if the SEC is behind the push for 12 which would benefit them the most, the others would go for 16 which would give the others more spots and keep anyone from getting byes in CFP
Notre Dame too. The currrent system basically has all "at large" bids where as an expanded 8 team 5-1-2 system featuring "auto-bids" would only have 2 "at large" slots. So the "at large" bids fall from 4 to just 2 even though the playoff doubled in size. Thats a concern for the Irish (and really any indy). That, and the aforementioned pressure from the SEC is why 12 is being pushed. My question is--"If you are going to expand the playoff into an entire extra week by going to 12---why not maximize the money and access allowed by that extra added round by going to 16?". It takes the same amount of time to execute a 16 team playoff as a 12 team playoff---may as well make the most money you can off that first week of the playoff.
Agreed. I find it interesting that all the talk is not expanding to 8 but 12 and maybe 16. But if you look at the post above the SEC and BigTen are not big winners expanding to 8 but if you go to 12 and 16 that changes
If your going for the money grab then you might as well grab as much as you can get. Don't know the structure yet but if you loose in the first round in mid December, does P5 school get another crack at a later bowl.
Those are the details that will be interesting. Do first round losers still get a bowl---and if so---will their fans still care enough to show up after the disappointment of being bounced from the playoff in round one?
to be fair and eliminate all questions of fairness 16 teams (12 conference champs + 4 at-large)
Pat Forde
@ByPatForde
·
13m
Sources tell
@RossDellenger
and I: Expect news this afternoon from the College Football Playoff management committee. After a meeting today, a release is coming based on a recommendation for an expanded playoff.