(08-08-2014 05:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2014 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Ok yes IF The Big Ten decided to go fully with Fox then yes it is possible ESPN might retaliate against FOX by harming the Big 12 property or removing it entirely from the fray. The Big Ten is already under a purposeful propaganda campaign in order to spur them to start spending their money and "get into the game" when it comes to coach salaries. ESPN doesn't wish to actually harm The Big Ten, they wish to help, from their own perspective.

Should The Big Ten leave them though...oh good lord, ESPN pundits would get down right mean as they would be ordered to do.

Now were back on the same page. The Maryland decision today doesn't leave me to believe that the ACC is really any more secure than they were two years ago and an 8 digit deficit in income with regards to the SEC and Big 10 will be an interesting stimulus for further change. Especially since none of them make Texas' like money.

Today's decision was a "kiss your sister" to be sure.
Before we worry about money, the new "rules" for the P5 will take center stage. This is the new battlefield and it's going to get nasty.

(08-08-2014 05:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2014 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Ok yes IF The Big Ten decided to go fully with Fox then yes it is possible ESPN might retaliate against FOX by harming the Big 12 property or removing it entirely from the fray. The Big Ten is already under a purposeful propaganda campaign in order to spur them to start spending their money and "get into the game" when it comes to coach salaries. ESPN doesn't wish to actually harm The Big Ten, they wish to help, from their own perspective.

Should The Big Ten leave them though...oh good lord, ESPN pundits would get down right mean as they would be ordered to do.

Now were back on the same page. The Maryland decision today doesn't leave me to believe that the ACC is really any more secure than they were two years ago and an 8 digit deficit in income with regards to the SEC and Big 10 will be an interesting stimulus for further change. Especially since none of them make Texas' like money.

We shall have to see. I will need more evidence for me to believe the ACC should be worried. It was still quite a hefty exit cost. The Big 12 still geographically fits what is necessary better than the ACC does.

(08-09-2014 02:48 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2014 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Ok yes IF The Big Ten decided to go fully with Fox then yes it is possible ESPN might retaliate against FOX by harming the Big 12 property or removing it entirely from the fray. The Big Ten is already under a purposeful propaganda campaign in order to spur them to start spending their money and "get into the game" when it comes to coach salaries. ESPN doesn't wish to actually harm The Big Ten, they wish to help, from their own perspective.

Should The Big Ten leave them though...oh good lord, ESPN pundits would get down right mean as they would be ordered to do.

Now were back on the same page. The Maryland decision today doesn't leave me to believe that the ACC is really any more secure than they were two years ago and an 8 digit deficit in income with regards to the SEC and Big 10 will be an interesting stimulus for further change. Especially since none of them make Texas' like money.

We shall have to see. I will need more evidence for me to believe the ACC should be worried. It was still quite a hefty exit cost. The Big 12 still geographically fits what is necessary better than the ACC does.

H1 when there is an 8 digit difference between the ACC revenue and that of the SEC and Big 10 even 52 million is overcome in 5 years or less and given the annual TV payout of around 21 to 23 million if an ACC waits 5 years gives a 1 year notice and leaves owing 84 - 85 million in TV revenue it still will only take them about 6 or 7 years to eclipse that loss and double their income. Do the math. In the case of a school leaving for the SEC all that is entailed is ESPN bookkeeping. They pay both contracts.

Let's say that Clemson, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Louisville, and Georgia Tech all moved together to the SEC. Do you really think that Duke, Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame and B.C. are simply going to sit there with a finger up the wazoo? Their best option would be to become the finishing touch on a Big 10 with a giant research consortium. 12 schools and adios ACC. Pitt, Miami and Wake would be trying to compete with Georgia Tech and Louisville for those last two SEC spots and it would be ugly.

(08-09-2014 03:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 02:48 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2014 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Ok yes IF The Big Ten decided to go fully with Fox then yes it is possible ESPN might retaliate against FOX by harming the Big 12 property or removing it entirely from the fray. The Big Ten is already under a purposeful propaganda campaign in order to spur them to start spending their money and "get into the game" when it comes to coach salaries. ESPN doesn't wish to actually harm The Big Ten, they wish to help, from their own perspective.

Should The Big Ten leave them though...oh good lord, ESPN pundits would get down right mean as they would be ordered to do.

Now were back on the same page. The Maryland decision today doesn't leave me to believe that the ACC is really any more secure than they were two years ago and an 8 digit deficit in income with regards to the SEC and Big 10 will be an interesting stimulus for further change. Especially since none of them make Texas' like money.

We shall have to see. I will need more evidence for me to believe the ACC should be worried. It was still quite a hefty exit cost. The Big 12 still geographically fits what is necessary better than the ACC does.

H1 when there is an 8 digit difference between the ACC revenue and that of the SEC and Big 10 even 52 million is overcome in 5 years or less and given the annual TV payout of around 21 to 23 million if an ACC waits 5 years gives a 1 year notice and leaves owing 84 - 85 million in TV revenue it still will only take them about 6 or 7 years to eclipse that loss and double their income. Do the math. In the case of a school leaving for the SEC all that is entailed is ESPN bookkeeping. They pay both contracts.

Let's say that Clemson, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Louisville, and Georgia Tech all moved together to the SEC. Do you really think that Duke, Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame and B.C. are simply going to sit there with a finger up the wazoo? Their best option would be to become the finishing touch on a Big 10 with a giant research consortium. 12 schools and adios ACC. Pitt, Miami and Wake would be trying to compete with Georgia Tech and Louisville for those last two SEC spots and it would be ugly.

So 3 major conferences since the B12 and PAC would be forced into a merger to keep pace with the SEC and B1G in this scenario. Of course, if they went to 3 major conferences then schools like UL, Pitt or whoever else from the ACC that doesn't land in the B1G likely get a shot at the B12/PAC to get to 24 schools and an even split. ND might go there as well. They are pretty tight with Stanford and USC. Throw in the Texas and Notre Dame relationship and the burgeoning Catholic demographic in the west (due to the growing Hispanic pop.) and a PAC/B12 hybrid could trump the SEC or B1G in ND's eyes. ND really doesn't like the B1G as ND fans love to remind us. If they have other options they will almost certainly take one.

I think they all just say screw it in this scenario and go to 2 large conferences with the PAC primarily being absorbed by the B1G and B12 primarily absorbed by the SEC.

Heck why stop with 2 when you can merge everyone into one?!

Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

(08-09-2014 03:35 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 02:48 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2014 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Ok yes IF The Big Ten decided to go fully with Fox then yes it is possible ESPN might retaliate against FOX by harming the Big 12 property or removing it entirely from the fray. The Big Ten is already under a purposeful propaganda campaign in order to spur them to start spending their money and "get into the game" when it comes to coach salaries. ESPN doesn't wish to actually harm The Big Ten, they wish to help, from their own perspective.

Should The Big Ten leave them though...oh good lord, ESPN pundits would get down right mean as they would be ordered to do.

Now were back on the same page. The Maryland decision today doesn't leave me to believe that the ACC is really any more secure than they were two years ago and an 8 digit deficit in income with regards to the SEC and Big 10 will be an interesting stimulus for further change. Especially since none of them make Texas' like money.

We shall have to see. I will need more evidence for me to believe the ACC should be worried. It was still quite a hefty exit cost. The Big 12 still geographically fits what is necessary better than the ACC does.

H1 when there is an 8 digit difference between the ACC revenue and that of the SEC and Big 10 even 52 million is overcome in 5 years or less and given the annual TV payout of around 21 to 23 million if an ACC waits 5 years gives a 1 year notice and leaves owing 84 - 85 million in TV revenue it still will only take them about 6 or 7 years to eclipse that loss and double their income. Do the math. In the case of a school leaving for the SEC all that is entailed is ESPN bookkeeping. They pay both contracts.

Let's say that Clemson, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Louisville, and Georgia Tech all moved together to the SEC. Do you really think that Duke, Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame and B.C. are simply going to sit there with a finger up the wazoo? Their best option would be to become the finishing touch on a Big 10 with a giant research consortium. 12 schools and adios ACC. Pitt, Miami and Wake would be trying to compete with Georgia Tech and Louisville for those last two SEC spots and it would be ugly.

So 3 major conferences since the B12 and PAC would be forced into a merger to keep pace with the SEC and B1G in this scenario. Of course, if they went to 3 major conferences then schools like UL, Pitt or whoever else from the ACC that doesn't land in the B1G likely get a shot at the B12/PAC to get to 24 schools and an even split. ND might go there as well. They are pretty tight with Stanford and USC. Throw in the Texas and Notre Dame relationship and the burgeoning Catholic demographic in the west (due to the growing Hispanic pop.) and a PAC/B12 hybrid could trump the SEC or B1G in ND's eyes. ND really doesn't like the B1G as ND fans love to remind us. If they have other options they will almost certainly take one.

I think they all just say screw it in this scenario and go to 2 large conferences with the PAC primarily being absorbed by the B1G and B12 primarily absorbed by the SEC.

Which would you prefer? Actually with 3 conferences what I see is an eventual 68 schools. Two 24 school conferences and 1 20 school conference.

(08-09-2014 11:42 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:35 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 02:48 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Now were back on the same page. The Maryland decision today doesn't leave me to believe that the ACC is really any more secure than they were two years ago and an 8 digit deficit in income with regards to the SEC and Big 10 will be an interesting stimulus for further change. Especially since none of them make Texas' like money.

We shall have to see. I will need more evidence for me to believe the ACC should be worried. It was still quite a hefty exit cost. The Big 12 still geographically fits what is necessary better than the ACC does.

H1 when there is an 8 digit difference between the ACC revenue and that of the SEC and Big 10 even 52 million is overcome in 5 years or less and given the annual TV payout of around 21 to 23 million if an ACC waits 5 years gives a 1 year notice and leaves owing 84 - 85 million in TV revenue it still will only take them about 6 or 7 years to eclipse that loss and double their income. Do the math. In the case of a school leaving for the SEC all that is entailed is ESPN bookkeeping. They pay both contracts.

Let's say that Clemson, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Louisville, and Georgia Tech all moved together to the SEC. Do you really think that Duke, Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame and B.C. are simply going to sit there with a finger up the wazoo? Their best option would be to become the finishing touch on a Big 10 with a giant research consortium. 12 schools and adios ACC. Pitt, Miami and Wake would be trying to compete with Georgia Tech and Louisville for those last two SEC spots and it would be ugly.

So 3 major conferences since the B12 and PAC would be forced into a merger to keep pace with the SEC and B1G in this scenario. Of course, if they went to 3 major conferences then schools like UL, Pitt or whoever else from the ACC that doesn't land in the B1G likely get a shot at the B12/PAC to get to 24 schools and an even split. ND might go there as well. They are pretty tight with Stanford and USC. Throw in the Texas and Notre Dame relationship and the burgeoning Catholic demographic in the west (due to the growing Hispanic pop.) and a PAC/B12 hybrid could trump the SEC or B1G in ND's eyes. ND really doesn't like the B1G as ND fans love to remind us. If they have other options they will almost certainly take one.

I think they all just say screw it in this scenario and go to 2 large conferences with the PAC primarily being absorbed by the B1G and B12 primarily absorbed by the SEC.

Which would you prefer? Actually with 3 conferences what I see is an eventual 68 schools. Two 24 school conferences and 1 20 school conference.

Which schools outside the current P5 get the golden ticket in your opinion in this scenario (3 conferences of 68 total schools)? Just curious.

Anything where only conference or division/pod champs are involved in the playoff works for me. No at large schools and beauty contests. I hate the 3 conferences (or 5 like now) scenario because with the odd number of champs you are almost guaranteed to have some sort of beauty contest or at large schools (though you could have lower seeded champs play first then winner faces higher seeded champs). Consolidation to 2 conferences or 1 association would be best financially, and I think that is what will eventually happen though it might be decades from now.

(08-09-2014 08:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

(08-11-2014 02:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 08:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

(08-11-2014 02:08 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 11:42 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:35 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 02:48 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  We shall have to see. I will need more evidence for me to believe the ACC should be worried. It was still quite a hefty exit cost. The Big 12 still geographically fits what is necessary better than the ACC does.

H1 when there is an 8 digit difference between the ACC revenue and that of the SEC and Big 10 even 52 million is overcome in 5 years or less and given the annual TV payout of around 21 to 23 million if an ACC waits 5 years gives a 1 year notice and leaves owing 84 - 85 million in TV revenue it still will only take them about 6 or 7 years to eclipse that loss and double their income. Do the math. In the case of a school leaving for the SEC all that is entailed is ESPN bookkeeping. They pay both contracts.

Let's say that Clemson, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Louisville, and Georgia Tech all moved together to the SEC. Do you really think that Duke, Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame and B.C. are simply going to sit there with a finger up the wazoo? Their best option would be to become the finishing touch on a Big 10 with a giant research consortium. 12 schools and adios ACC. Pitt, Miami and Wake would be trying to compete with Georgia Tech and Louisville for those last two SEC spots and it would be ugly.

So 3 major conferences since the B12 and PAC would be forced into a merger to keep pace with the SEC and B1G in this scenario. Of course, if they went to 3 major conferences then schools like UL, Pitt or whoever else from the ACC that doesn't land in the B1G likely get a shot at the B12/PAC to get to 24 schools and an even split. ND might go there as well. They are pretty tight with Stanford and USC. Throw in the Texas and Notre Dame relationship and the burgeoning Catholic demographic in the west (due to the growing Hispanic pop.) and a PAC/B12 hybrid could trump the SEC or B1G in ND's eyes. ND really doesn't like the B1G as ND fans love to remind us. If they have other options they will almost certainly take one.

I think they all just say screw it in this scenario and go to 2 large conferences with the PAC primarily being absorbed by the B1G and B12 primarily absorbed by the SEC.

Which would you prefer? Actually with 3 conferences what I see is an eventual 68 schools. Two 24 school conferences and 1 20 school conference.

Which schools outside the current P5 get the golden ticket in your opinion in this scenario (3 conferences of 68 total schools)? Just curious.

Anything where only conference or division/pod champs are involved in the playoff works for me. No at large schools and beauty contests. I hate the 3 conferences (or 5 like now) scenario because with the odd number of champs you are almost guaranteed to have some sort of beauty contest or at large schools (though you could have lower seeded champs play first then winner faces higher seeded champs). Consolidation to 2 conferences or 1 association would be best financially, and I think that is what will eventually happen though it might be decades from now.

Connecticut, Brigham Young, and perhaps Cincinnati. With one or two drop outs from the P5 we might wind up with room for a USF or UCF but ECU would be fighting the same fight as Houston, S.M.U. and Rice. How many teams from one state is too many? In Texas and California I think that number is 4. In North Carolina it may be 3. In Florida we'll see, but no more than 4 I think.

For the other issue of number of conferences see my other comment in this page of the thread.

(08-11-2014 02:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 08:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

(08-11-2014 03:01 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 08:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

I totally agree about the beauty contest, but remember the NFL uses a sophisticated formula to break ties when one occurs. No committee just math for the 4th spot. How about it?

(08-11-2014 03:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:01 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 08:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

I totally agree about the beauty contest, but remember the NFL uses a sophisticated formula to break ties when one occurs. No committee just math for the 4th spot. How about it?

The NFL has fewer teams and schedules they are for the most part quite similar thus allowing those formulas to work. I don't think you can create a CFB analog to that system. I think were stuck with a committee for the near term.

(08-11-2014 07:41 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:01 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

I totally agree about the beauty contest, but remember the NFL uses a sophisticated formula to break ties when one occurs. No committee just math for the 4th spot. How about it?

The NFL has fewer teams and schedules they are for the most part quite similar thus allowing those formulas to work. I don't think you can create a CFB analog to that system. I think were stuck with a committee for the near term.

I agree with Van. If CFB went to an nfl system of scheduling with only p5 opponents and rotating schedules, then the tie breakers would be fair. I just can't see CFB giving up the freedom of scheduling they have any time soon. Too many top schools like 7-8 home games each year as well.

For the P5, the best solution would be #4 and #5 play to see who gets into the playoff. Champs only. JMO.

For 3 conferences I think it is hard to do unless you allow one wild card/at large school with the 3 champs. Alternately, you could also just eliminate CCGs and allow all pod/division winners into the playoff and run it just like the NFL now with 12 teams (if each conference had 4 divisions/pods). Top 4 get byes. Bottom 8 square off to move on. That would eliminate the beauty contest for three conferences and would work very well IMO.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the B12 when a school (or 2) is denied a shot at the playoff due to the B12 tie breaking process. Texas is still pissed about OU getting the nod over them in 2008 for the south division title and slot in B12 CG and eventually the NCG. It will be way worse with a playoff spot there for the taking, instead of still having to win a CCG to get in.

(08-13-2014 10:25 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 07:41 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:01 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

I totally agree about the beauty contest, but remember the NFL uses a sophisticated formula to break ties when one occurs. No committee just math for the 4th spot. How about it?

The NFL has fewer teams and schedules they are for the most part quite similar thus allowing those formulas to work. I don't think you can create a CFB analog to that system. I think were stuck with a committee for the near term.

I agree with Van. If CFB went to an nfl system of scheduling with only p5 opponents and rotating schedules, then the tie breakers would be fair. I just can't see CFB giving up the freedom of scheduling they have any time soon. Too many top schools like 7-8 home games each year as well.

For the P5, the best solution would be #4 and #5 play to see who gets into the playoff. Champs only. JMO.

For 3 conferences I think it is hard to do unless you allow one wild card/at large school with the 3 champs. Alternately, you could also just eliminate CCGs and allow all pod/division winners into the playoff and run it just like the NFL now with 12 teams (if each conference had 4 divisions/pods). Top 4 get byes. Bottom 8 square off to move on. That would eliminate the beauty contest for three conferences and would work very well IMO.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the B12 when a school (or 2) is denied a shot at the playoff due to the B12 tie breaking process. Texas is still pissed about OU getting the nod over them in 2008 for the south division title and slot in B12 CG and eventually the NCG. It will be way worse with a playoff spot there for the taking, instead of still having to win a CCG to get in.

My mind is actually shifting to the next step for the National Playoff being a six team playoff.

No way the major conferences allow a massive expansion before they get their conference tournaments. They may not even allow the six team version before getting their tournaments. The majors hate how the size of March Madness mutes their own personal tournaments.

The problem with an 8 team tournament coming AFTER these conference tournaments is that how do you send in a conference's second team if that team has already lost to the top team of that conference? What is the point? A six team tournament means that the future four power conferences each get a team in, the expanded AAC gets a team in and then you have one more at large spot for whatever situation arises. That could be an indie Texas or Notre Dame team or it could be a Cinderella undefeated team arising from one of the other conferences. A six team tournament suits all needs while not causing some of the issues an 8 team tournament will provide.

(08-13-2014 07:46 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-13-2014 10:25 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 07:41 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:01 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

I totally agree about the beauty contest, but remember the NFL uses a sophisticated formula to break ties when one occurs. No committee just math for the 4th spot. How about it?

The NFL has fewer teams and schedules they are for the most part quite similar thus allowing those formulas to work. I don't think you can create a CFB analog to that system. I think were stuck with a committee for the near term.

I agree with Van. If CFB went to an nfl system of scheduling with only p5 opponents and rotating schedules, then the tie breakers would be fair. I just can't see CFB giving up the freedom of scheduling they have any time soon. Too many top schools like 7-8 home games each year as well.

For the P5, the best solution would be #4 and #5 play to see who gets into the playoff. Champs only. JMO.

For 3 conferences I think it is hard to do unless you allow one wild card/at large school with the 3 champs. Alternately, you could also just eliminate CCGs and allow all pod/division winners into the playoff and run it just like the NFL now with 12 teams (if each conference had 4 divisions/pods). Top 4 get byes. Bottom 8 square off to move on. That would eliminate the beauty contest for three conferences and would work very well IMO.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the B12 when a school (or 2) is denied a shot at the playoff due to the B12 tie breaking process. Texas is still pissed about OU getting the nod over them in 2008 for the south division title and slot in B12 CG and eventually the NCG. It will be way worse with a playoff spot there for the taking, instead of still having to win a CCG to get in.

My mind is actually shifting to the next step for the National Playoff being a six team playoff.

No way the major conferences allow a massive expansion before they get their conference tournaments. They may not even allow the six team version before getting their tournaments. The majors hate how the size of March Madness mutes their own personal tournaments.

The problem with an 8 team tournament coming AFTER these conference tournaments is that how do you send in a conference's second team if that team has already lost to the top team of that conference? What is the point? A six team tournament means that the future four power conferences each get a team in, the expanded AAC gets a team in and then you have one more at large spot for whatever situation arises. That could be an indie Texas or Notre Dame team or it could be a Cinderella undefeated team arising from one of the other conferences. A six team tournament suits all needs while not causing some of the issues an 8 team tournament will provide.

I just always figured that an 8 team playoff would only occur if there were still 5 power conferences. In my mind seeds 5-8 would be a low rack P5, a G5 and two At Large P5's. Seeds 1 and 2 get two byes and 3 and 4 get one. The P5 still gets to keep most of the money since those 'wild card' games will either be hosted by a P5 school or be played at a P5 hosted bowl.

Now if we enter a P4 scenario then I'd fully agree with your argument for 6 teams.

(08-11-2014 03:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 03:01 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 02:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 08:30 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Or maybe besides expanding to make more money conferences will cut the dead wait so theres less mouths to feed.

Dennis Dodd's article after the O'Bannon decision hints at consolidation among the elite of the elite, so maybe that is coming, if he has good sources causing him to voice that opinion.

You need at least two distinct groupings with slightly different bylaws to avoid anti-trust issues. Three groupings would be better.

Three is a distinct possibility. I just hate it for the reasons I stated. I'd love to get the beauty contest out of college FB (or any sport for that matter) as much as possible.

I totally agree about the beauty contest, but remember the NFL uses a sophisticated formula to break ties when one occurs. No committee just math for the 4th spot. How about it?

Have a 20 or 24 best of the G5 conference and let them take on the #1 seed. That solves it.

Maybe I'm minority, but the absolute last thing I want in college is for it to become an NFL junior. I care more about the tradition, the bowls, and having national champions truly earn it over a whole season (meaning losses week 1 and 2 matter). I'll take a little drama and hurt feeling if it means these elements remain. Please, nothing bigger than this 4 team playoff and never any conference semi-finals.

(08-15-2014 10:34 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Maybe I'm minority, but the absolute last thing I want in college is for it to become an NFL junior. I care more about the tradition, the bowls, and having national champions truly earn it over a whole season (meaning losses week 1 and 2 matter). I'll take a little drama and hurt feeling if it means these elements remain. Please, nothing bigger than this 4 team playoff and never any conference semi-finals.

I understand that sentiment. If fact I was quite content with the BCS. Unfortunately far more people believe that the playoff format is the only way to crown a true champion.

(08-15-2014 12:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 10:34 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Maybe I'm minority, but the absolute last thing I want in college is for it to become an NFL junior. I care more about the tradition, the bowls, and having national champions truly earn it over a whole season (meaning losses week 1 and 2 matter). I'll take a little drama and hurt feeling if it means these elements remain. Please, nothing bigger than this 4 team playoff and never any conference semi-finals.

I understand that sentiment. If fact I was quite content with the BCS. Unfortunately far more people believe that the playoff format is the only way to crown a true champion.

Actually Vandiver the playoff is a network construct that delivers 1 more weekend of high yield commercials after the New Year. The push back was growing against the National Championship Game coming almost 10 days after the New Year's bowls. Now the networks get that extension and get a hype about the New Year's bowls utilized as the playoff. It was also a compromise with the bowl system to keep them relevant.

Most years I found no fault with the BCS and it was so much better than the true beauty pageant of the rigged AP poll results it was welcomed change when it occurred.