(04-28-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-28-2021 10:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-28-2021 10:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(04-28-2021 09:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-28-2021 09:32 AM)usffan Wrote:  https://theathletic.com/2547804/2021/04/...iscussion/

Thought these quotes were interesting...

That's interesting. I wonder how a 12-team format would work?

I'm guessing the push for 12 is so they could include a G5 (ie. avoid an anti-trust threat) but without using up one of 3 non-P5 champ slots from 8 (one of 7 is no big deal - but one of 3 would face vocal opposition from SEC, B1G, etc).

That's actually a decent idea. I've said all along those favoring 5-1-2 could expect big pushback from the B1G and SEC, because a G5 team would be taking fully 1/3 of the available "at large" spots. Notre Dame as well, since that would limit them to competing for just two spots.

Twelve could give the G5 a spot and yet still have plenty of at-large for the more successful P5 to get more teams in.

Straight-12 would still be better, though. Eliminates anti-trust threat.

I dont have any idea what a 12 team format could be—but I wouldn’t call it “push back” against the G5—if anything, it seems more like the exclusionary dam breaking. The logistics on an 8-team format creates an easy first round that simply snaps onto the existing playoff format. Furthermore, 8 out of 130 teams is still a very exclusionary playoff compared to all the other college sports. Any 12 team format means your adding not ONE more round to the current format---but TWO additional rounds—-and that gets a lot more complex for getting the playoff to fit within the existing time window. One point has to be made---If your going to have another round—then 16 is the most efficient and lucrative format. More games, more slots, more areas of the country represented—and it doesn’t add any new issues with the time frame since your already adding a second extra round with any 12 team format. Not wanting to add an additional round was my entire logic behind the belief that the 5-1-2 8-team format would eventually win out. It solved the most problems while getting the maximum mileage out that round (unlike some 6-team expansion proposals).

I frankly just cant imagine the powers that be would ok anything beyond 8. If they do go to 12 or 16, it tells me this is not really about petty conference squabbles and G5 anti-trust concerns. Instead, a move to 12 or 16 tells us just how precarious the financial situation within FBS must be if this traditionally ultra-conservative group of presidents is willing to sign off on such radical change within the sport.

I think I disagree with the highlighted statement for the following reason...

College football in December will still almost certainly need to operate within their designated window of Saturday (and possibly Thursday night). We all know that there are, in reality, 3 game windows on a Saturday - noon, 3:30 and 7 pm. With 4 games, if you play them all on a Saturday, means at least one game where you're playing two games simultaneously, thereby cannibalizing your own TV audience by splitting them (and why I mentioned Thursday night as a fourth option that doesn't do that). So realistically, 4 games in a single weekend is the maximally profitable way to go, which is why I think 12 works where 16 doesn't.

The only way I see a 16 team playoff working is if they stagger the weeks so that there are 4 games spread out over a 2 week period.

It's funny to me that the NFL has never seemed to recognize this. They'd make a helluva lot more money if they created more bye weeks for teams and spread out their games across a longer season. You don't have to play more games to generate more time slots (and thus more revenue).

USFFan