(12-12-2018 11:13 AM)ArQ Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:00 AM)ArQ Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:31 AM)bluesox Wrote:  I think 6 is much better than 8 since it rewards 2 by giving them byes and keeps value for conference title games. I don’t really see any reason for a loser in a conference title game to be able to go to the playoffs. I would Give 5 auto bids to the big 10,sec, acc, big 12, and pac 12 with 1 open slot to have a geographic interest in the playoffs. Have a round at higher seed week after conference title games, than keep everything else as is. This probably would freeze conference realignment. However, I would force the issue on the big 12 and say auto bids only go to leagues with 12 teams. I think it’s stupid to have a conference title game with 10 teams and that would put 2 more teams in the pool.

If it is a six-team playoff, then P5 conference championship games should be re-calibrated as well. It should be the team with the best overall record vs the team with the highest CFP ranking. If it happens to be the same team, then the top two CFP ranked teams go to conference championship game. For example, Michigan and Syracuse will go to B1G and ACC conference championship games this year instead of Northwestern and Pittsburgh.

The sixth spot goes to the top CFP ranked G5 team after conference championship games.

Eight is more efficient. Six takes the same amount of time to run as an 8 team playoff. May as well go to 8 if your going to expand.

See my revision of the post. It makes all the P5 conference championship games more meaningful.

Going to 8 does the same thing as long as the P5 CCG winners get auto bids and the top G5 champ gets and autobid. The CCG's are basically a play round in such a set up.