(11-24-2019 04:53 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 04:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 04:12 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 01:39 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 10:46 AM)westwolf Wrote:  The problem with division-less is that you could have ties between or among teams which have not met in the season. Granted that matters only in the top 2 or 3 spots. I remember when Iowa and Ohio St were both undefeated in Big 10 play before divisions, and OSU was picked for the Rose Bowl. Big howl in Iowa. At least with divisions that doesn't arise in this era of overtime.

Yes. It no longer gets decided on the field. It gets decided by obscure tiebreaks or beauty contests. Its one thing when obscure tiebreaks decide the last wildcard in the NFL. Its something else when it decides who plays for a conference championship.

In these 14 team conferences, it would not be totally out of the realm of possibility to have three 8-0 teams. In the SEC, Georgia would not play LSU or Alabama every year. If LSU and Alabama didn't play every year, you could have that. In the Big 10 imagine Michigan or Ohio St., Wisconsin and Penn St.

Wait, are we talking about conference titles or the 4 playoff spots? This sure sounds like the current CFP process...

USFFan

If the two teams with the best conference record play for the championship and the champion moves onto the CFP, how is that a problem? Tie breakers or not it is decided on the field and without a committee determining the entrants. Each conference can decide on their own tiebreakers. The team they put fort is still their champion won on the field within their own rules.

Not arguing with you at all. I'm arguing that the people who are complaining about things being decided by "obscure tiebreaks or beauty contests" seem to be less bothered by the fact that that is exclusively how the four participants in the CFP are decided.

USFFan

Yeah, everybody in the FBS agreed to this format. The funny thing is that they go out of their way to weight the selection away from weaker schedules, and not all conferences are of equal strength and that seems to be the bigger bone of contention.

I still wouldn't be surprised to see 3 twenty member conferences emerge some day and when it does the media revenue will be more or less equalized and that will help competitiveness to a certain extent. If we do I think the conference CCG's will serve as the AQ and 1 at large will be selected. That keeps many more fan bases energized through the end of the season and is why the NFL as a business model loves wild card slots. It keeps butts in the seats a lot longer when a dominant team has the conference title wrapped up with 3 weeks to go. And college football is a business.

With that one wild card slot up for grabs it would affect multiple teams in each conference through the last weekend of play and that's simply good for the game. 20 member conferences gives advertisers a reason to pay higher rates to reach that audience not only with national advertising but regional advertising as well. The reduction in conferences from 5 to 3 will save all of the conference salaries x 2 plus add back the sale of their corporate buildings to their former members. Officiating would be easier to organize and pay at a rate to discourage gambling influences which have a huge back door for interference right now. I simply see conference consolidation and the streamlining of officiating as being something that will be good for the game. And that wild card will bring hope to many who otherwise might loose interest halfway through the season.

BTW: If you want a fair inclusion of the top G5 just form a 4th conference of 20 with an AQ and move to a CFP of 8 schools four of which are AQ conference champs and 4 or at large who play the first round against one of the AQ's at their home field. After the first round you move to neutral sites. That would guarantee that a current P5 wild card would play at the home of the what is likely to be a current G5 school's home stadium. That gives much more access and hope than the present system does.