Interesting thing here is that they are saying that Bowls will be both quarter and semi final sites. I’m curious how that will work because the Rose is pretty dead set on being on NYD, seeing as there’s a big parade and all. I see two ways this could go:

The Rose is locked in as a permanent quarterfinal site, while the other 5 alternate between being semis and quarter sites

Alternatively, I can see where 2 of the 6 NY6 bowls host two games when it’s their turn to be a semi final: an exhibition on/around NYD, and then the semifinal 7-10 days later. This would be similar to the later half of the BCS era, where there would be a Rose Bowl game and then a BCS NCG in Pasadena later in January.

(06-10-2021 03:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:44 PM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  I like the guarantee of the four byes going to the top-rated conference champions. Those schools have to play an extra game (their conference title game), so they earn the bye.

I think Notre Dame is okay with this since they won't be playing a conference title game as an independent. They currently play one less game than conference champions do. Their "conference title game"/13th game could easily be a home game EACH YEAR hosting the first round. Wonder if they keep the gate receipts? AND, does NBC get to broadcast this game? What does that mean for their TV contract?

Sounds like a win-win for them all around. It would have been unfair if they didn't have to play in a conference title game and were able to be awarded a 1st round bye.

Huh - that's a good perspective if ND is essentially acknowledging that the 13th game that conference champs need to win is something that they don't need to deal with.

I can also understand the conference commissioners wanting to continue to provide higher incentives winning a conference championship. For instance, Alabama and Ohio State could have lost their respective CCGs last year and still might have ended up in the top 4. Heck, ND *did* lose their CCG and ended up in the top 4. Making the byes reserved for conference champs ensures that even the best teams aren't overlooking their CCGs.

On that basis, I'm warming up to it a bit more after my initial reaction.

That being said, there's no way that the playoff games are going to be included in any ND/NBC contract. The entire purpose of this exercise is to consolidate the whole CFP into a single massive contract driven by a negotiation with ESPN that prevents that contract from ever going to the open market.

Ya. I don't expect NBC to be a part if Notre Dame hosts.

This may not be a "Notre Dame is okay with a 13th game" thing, but more the other conferences saying "You (Notre Dame) don't have to play a conference title game, so you shouldn't get the benefit of a bye."

The funny part: THIS is the one clear path that the AAC had to the whole P6 movement becoming reality. If they win that bid every year, then they are effectively a pseudo power conference in terms of championship access.

(06-10-2021 03:59 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:53 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  5-12 seems rather pointless. Why not just take 4 At-Large + Top 4 CC?

Is this a serious question?

Because the answer is pretty obvious...





They don't need to have 68 teams in March Madness, either, but it pays really well.

USFFan

If more teams and games are more money, then why not just go to 16 teams then? It's not an extra round, the byes are eliminated for the top four seeds.

(06-10-2021 03:53 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:36 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:27 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  It's astonishing to me ND signed off on a plan where they were permanently disadvantaged.....unless

This is the most intriguing aspect of the proposal. Having CCG winners seeded 1-4 ensures geographic and conference diversity in the quarterfinal round. Maybe they were worried about too many teams from one region in the quarterfinals hurting the ratings.

The only thing that I can think of here is that they're using the bowls as quarterfinals and they're essentially maximizing some semblance of tie-ins there (e.g. the Rose Bowl would always get a top 4 Big Ten or Pac-12 champ with the higher ranked going to the Rose if both leagues are in the top 4). Maybe ND sees this as similar to the current Contract Bowl system or BCS AQ system and that's a concession on their part.

Otherwise, from a competitive standpoint, I believe that a top 4 Notre Dame (or any other school) should get a top 4 seed just as they would in the current system. Frankly, it would be even more important in the new system since a bye would now be involved.

This is where we have to seriously wait out the details. If, as Nicole Auerbach posted, the quarterfinals and semifinals will be hosted by the bowls (i.e. the NY6 bowls), that would seem to do away with the contract bowl relationships, which was the basis for the whole "Power 5." This wording also seems to leave open the prospect of one of the Autonomous 5 champs being left out (e.g. Oregon last year). That sure seems like a tough sell to me.

I said no autobids before all this news came out because a #18 ranked PAC champ sees no advantage of being creamed at #3 LSU on the road.

That event for obvious reasons isn't worth protecting.

What makes the PAC look good if that champ can finish #7 and score a first round bye as a Top 4 conference champ or at least a first round home game where due to the time difference they'd have a significant advantage over teams in the east.

But the PAC champ then would want to be in a NY6 bowl and would that also follow for the three other conference champions left out?

Let's say the 4 for the quarterfinals will be Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Rose every year. Then you could have Peach, Gator, Alamo, Fiesta for the 4 non-represented conference champions. Then the PAC champ would be at least in the Fiesta Bowl if it doesn't make the playoff. There has to be some protection to it.

This works for me.

I don't care at all about the playoff format as long as it wasn't conference champs only.

Otherwise, carry on.

(06-10-2021 04:12 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:59 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 03:53 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  5-12 seems rather pointless. Why not just take 4 At-Large + Top 4 CC?

Is this a serious question?

Because the answer is pretty obvious...





They don't need to have 68 teams in March Madness, either, but it pays really well.

USFFan

If more teams and games are more money, then why not just go to 16 teams then? It's not an extra round, the byes are eliminated for the top four seeds.

Because (and again, this has been stated a bunch of times), having 8 games on a weekend won't pay anything close to double playing 4 games on a weekend. They'll maximize their profits with 4 games (in the 4 windows) and not have games competing against themselves for viewers (and thus bidders/advertising revenues). There's a reason why none of the NY6 games are played simultaneously...

USFFan

(06-10-2021 02:25 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 01:34 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m not a fan of the idea that the top 4 champs get the byes. If a non-champ is in the top 4, they deserve that 1st round bye.

I can’t believe I’m saying this, but it’s not fair to a 12-0 ND team to get seeded 5th on the grounds that they lack a CCG trophy.

That's their choice - they were in the ACC in 2020, so clearly it CAN work for them, when it is to their advantage

No problem. Just keep ND indy and tee up the ball.

(06-10-2021 03:53 PM)usffan Wrote:  What I do think, though, is that this will accelerate the move to divisionless CCGs.

That would flip everything on its head, since the Big 12 would be the only conference that would continue to adhere to the current NCAA requirement to either play a complete round-robin or hold a championship game between two division champions.

It would also create some situations, especially with the 14/15-team conferences, in which one or both teams in a conference with the best conference W-L records might win all of their conference games by virtue of playing the fewest high quality conference teams.

In 2020, USC advanced to the PAC-12 Championship Game with a perfect 5-0 record, after beating three PAC-12 teams with losing records, one team with a .500 record, and one team with a .600 record. They didn't play any of the top teams (Oregon, Stanford, Washington, or Colorado) in the conference during the regular season.

Granted, 2020 was an anomalous season, but there were similar situations in the previous season.

For example, there was an AAC football team that beat 7 teams with sub-.500 records and finished the season with 8 wins and a trip to a bowl game.

.

Thus, even if the NCAA would permit CCGs to be played without a round-robin or between two division champions, it wouldn't necessarily prevent the conference champion from being a sub-par team.

Not in love with it, but it will do.

(06-10-2021 01:35 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 01:25 PM)stever20 Wrote:  this means Notre Dame could never get a bye.

It does. And Notre Dame AD Swarbrick is on the four-person committee that is recommending this plan!

He is the Chairman of the committee.



When asked about not having a bye, ND AD Jack Swarbrick said "I look forward to never hearing again about how we played one less game or don't have a conference championship."

https://twitter.com/CFBHeather/status/14...5240884224

(06-10-2021 04:15 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I said no autobids before all this news came out because a #18 ranked PAC champ sees no advantage of being creamed at #3 LSU on the road.

That event for obvious reasons isn't worth protecting.

What makes the PAC look good if that champ can finish #7 and score a first round bye as a Top 4 conference champ or at least a first round home game where due to the time difference they'd have a significant advantage over teams in the east.

But the PAC champ then would want to be in a NY6 bowl and would that also follow for the three other conference champions left out?

Let's say the 4 for the quarterfinals will be Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Rose every year. Then you could have Peach, Gator, Alamo, Fiesta for the 4 non-represented conference champions. Then the PAC champ would be at least in the Fiesta Bowl if it doesn't make the playoff. There has to be some protection to it.

I don't think 5-12 losers will bother with a Bowl game. These will be utter garbage games. As a matter of fact, 5-8 hosting 9-12 will essentially kill Bowl season. I don't see how these games are tenable aside from filler games between Xmas and NYD that won't even feature NFL prospects from the four first round playoff losers.

(06-10-2021 04:07 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The funny part: THIS is the one clear path that the AAC had to the whole P6 movement becoming reality. If they win that bid every year, then they are effectively a pseudo power conference in terms of championship access.

But your ranking is going to based on who you played so what is stopping a program from CUSA to load up the schedule on the premise it will get them a first round bye, recruit to it successfully and then roll through conference play to become the next Boise State?

Further with the incentivization to realign to a P4 what is to say we won't see realignment to support the new post season redesign? That would finish the AAC as we know it.

In a 5-1-2 I think the AAC could gloat but not so much in this 6-6 format.

(06-10-2021 04:01 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Interesting thing here is that they are saying that Bowls will be both quarter and semi final sites. I’m curious how that will work because the Rose is pretty dead set on being on NYD, seeing as there’s a big parade and all. I see two ways this could go:

The Rose is locked in as a permanent quarterfinal site, while the other 5 alternate between being semis and quarter sites

Alternatively, I can see where 2 of the 6 NY6 bowls host two games when it’s their turn to be a semi final: an exhibition on/around NYD, and then the semifinal 7-10 days later. This would be similar to the later half of the BCS era, where there would be a Rose Bowl game and then a BCS NCG in Pasadena later in January.

I like that idea

I would even modify it and allow two bowls to host a QF and a SF

Put the #1 and #2 teams at those bowls so if they win they don't have to travel to a different site

I'm surprised that you wouldn't give 1-4 a home game too. The Bowl season won't go away. No one really goes to the games, it's mainly TV filler for ESPN during the holidays. I like the 12 team plan but if the bowl games have the quarterfinals. Just make it a 16 team playoff. I also think all teams should have 12 teams for their conference at least for a CCG. I like the fact that on an off year say a 9-3 Northwestern team does the unthinkable and beats a 12-0 Ohio State team in the Big Ten Championship Game. That would be awesome and still makes the regular season still relevant.

(06-10-2021 04:31 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

No, Bob, most people did NOT underestimate the stupidity of thinking 4 was the optimal number...

USFFan

(06-10-2021 04:26 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 04:15 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I said no autobids before all this news came out because a #18 ranked PAC champ sees no advantage of being creamed at #3 LSU on the road.

That event for obvious reasons isn't worth protecting.

What makes the PAC look good if that champ can finish #7 and score a first round bye as a Top 4 conference champ or at least a first round home game where due to the time difference they'd have a significant advantage over teams in the east.

But the PAC champ then would want to be in a NY6 bowl and would that also follow for the three other conference champions left out?

Let's say the 4 for the quarterfinals will be Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Rose every year. Then you could have Peach, Gator, Alamo, Fiesta for the 4 non-represented conference champions. Then the PAC champ would be at least in the Fiesta Bowl if it doesn't make the playoff. There has to be some protection to it.

I don't think 5-12 losers will bother with a Bowl game. These will be utter garbage games. As a matter of fact, 5-8 hosting 9-12 will essentially kill Bowl season. I don't see how these games are tenable aside from filler games between Xmas and NYD that won't even feature NFL prospects from the four first round playoff losers.

I don't think the 5-12 losers will be in a bowl either but who knows.

What I'm saying is if the PAC champion does not qualify for the playoff then where does the champion go? It can't go to the quarterfinal bowls so their is obviously going to be non-quarterfinal bowls as part of the package.

What if the Top 6 champs are SEC, AAC, MWC, CUSA, SBC, MAC? Where do the B1G, PAC, XII and ACC champs play? They could be part of the 6 at-larges. What if they are all in the lower half of the Top 20?

They need CFP bowls for their champions. At least I believe they would want that protection in the new system. You could pit the four left out conference champions in 2 access bowls OR give each left out conference champ their own bowl against against a Top 20 team which I think would be better for the PAC than playing the MWC champion.

(06-10-2021 04:28 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 04:07 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The funny part: THIS is the one clear path that the AAC had to the whole P6 movement becoming reality. If they win that bid every year, then they are effectively a pseudo power conference in terms of championship access.

But your ranking is going to based on who you played so what is stopping a program from CUSA to load up the schedule on the premise it will get them a first round bye, recruit to it successfully and then roll through conference play to become the next Boise State?

Further with the incentivization to realign to a P4 what is to say we won't see realignment to support the new post season redesign? That would finish the AAC as we know it.

In a 5-1-2 I think the AAC could gloat but not so much in this 6-6 format.

Quo has long said this was unlikely because the powers that be would never allow for a situation where a G5 team would have an "easier" route to the playoff than a P5 team. Well, now they do. If a middle of the pack team that has little hope of winning their P5 conference (let's say WVU, for instance) and who cares more about football than anything else wants, they can truly put Quo's theory to the test and go join the AAC (in essence, return to what is the remnants of the Big East Football Conference where they had their most recent success) to try to get into the playoff more easily than they likely will as a 3rd place Big 12 team.

As we've all suspected all along, they're unlikely to walk away from the money they make just to chase playoff spots.

USFFan