(06-12-2021 06:52 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 02:08 PM)BCSvsBS Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 02:03 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Correct----its now similar to their shot at making the access bowl under the current system......which, by the way, has been substantially lower than the chances that the AAC champ will get to the access bowl

That's not it.

The most important factor, by far, in the committee's selection of teams for the access bowl has been: Having the fewest losses. That won't change no matter how many teams are in the playoff.

Trying to collect every non-P5 team with a shot at the playoff and putting them all in the same conference would be counterproductive. More good teams in the same conference means more good teams taking more losses. It would greatly increase the possibility of the conference champ having more losses than the champs of other conferences and watching the champ of some other conference snag that playoff spot -- unless a conference has some conspiracy where one team is designated the playoff contender for that year and the other good teams (or, ahem, the referees) just let the designated team win. But I wouldn't count on that conspiracy happening very often.

So you're saying it's ok for the "Power Conferences" to scream strength for schedule but, not for the American Conference. I see what you did there. Hypocritical much?

It took it to mean that this is how the committee operates.

Seriously, if the AAC's champ has the same number of losses as another G5 league's champ, the AAC champ would get the Access Bowl/CFP bid. But that's as far as strength of schedule will take an AAC team with the way the committee operates.

If, say, the Sun Belt champion has the fewest losses among all the G5 champs, that SB champ is in.

That's it, except in unusual circumstances.

However you look at the relative conference strength, it's not a good reason for a playoff-contending team to switch conferences.

Two ways of looking at it:

(A) Every G5 champ has the same chance to be selected if they have fewer losses than the other G5 champs.

-or-

(B) The AAC is far better at football than CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC, thus its difficult schedules make its champ always most deserving of selection, even if other champs have one fewer loss.

If it's (A), then switching conferences doesn't give a 13-0 or 12-1 team a better chance of being selected for the playoff. No reason to go through the upheaval of switching, pay all the money needed to switch, etc.

If it's (B), if an AAC schedule is far more difficult to get through, then, in theory, a team that is 12-1 in any other G5 conference might only be 10-3 or worse in the AAC. But no 3-loss G5 team has been selected for the access bowl or a BCS bowl, ever. So, if the AAC is that much more difficult, any team with legit playoff ambitions will conclude that it's better to be 12-1 where you are and take your chances against any other team with the same number of losses.

Sure, it's theoretically possible that a Boise or BYU will be so dominant that they would consistently crush all competition in any conference, and thus would be best off in the best possible conference. But, as far as I can see, no one here thinks the current AAC members would be dominated by Boise or BYU. So we don't have to consider that possibility here.