(06-19-2021 05:44 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(06-19-2021 05:00 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-19-2021 04:53 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The Pac-12 is not going to opt out. Where do you guys dream this up?

There is strong movement to do away with divisions among the Pac-12 ADs. As is they play 9 of 11 schools anyway. Half the CCGs are repeat games as is for the Pac-12, and every CCG is a repeat for the Big 12. Heck most NFL playoff games are repeats. But that doesn't turn off any fans. (Well those with OCD maybe)

What is likely to happen is the Pac-12 and B1G will set it up so that they have the inside track to be in the Rose Bowl semi-final. The SEC (and maybe B12) may do similar with the Sugar Bowl. Those will be fixed on New Years. The Citrus (ESPN home), Fiesta, Cotton (Jerry Jones) and Peach will rotate between New Years and the Semi-Final game. CCG will be up for bid.

The suggestion came from the idea that the PAC would try and play hardball to force P5 auto bids.

The PAC and the Big 10 weren't apart of the working group. Will they sign off on something that doesn't 100% guarantee them special status.

The PAC would have been left out of the playoff if it had been in place this past year. While this past year was special do they want to risk something like that again? Hence their new push for auto bids for P5

The Big 10 has been conspicuously quiet in this new development.

If they want auto bids for P5 as opposed to a merit based 6 best Champions, I could see them threatening to go back to a PAC-Big 10 Rose Bowl once the current agreement expires to try and get what they want

The Pac 12 this year would not have offered one of the top six league champs and, as such, would not have garnered an automatic bid. True. But league champion Oregon could still have been extended an at-large invite. So we can't assume Oregon (or any P5 champion in the future that is not one of the top six ranked DI-A champs) would have not participated in the playoff had been in place this past year.

Can we please dispense with the whole "ZOMG, the Pac-12 champ would have been ranked behind two champs" thing?

1 - the weird COVID season resulted in a Pac-12 that only played 4-5 games before the conference championship game.

2 - Oregon shouldn't have even BEEN IN the championship game, but Washington wasn't able to play because of COVID.

3 - If a full season had been played and an undefeated USC had played a 1-loss Washington, they undoubtedly would have been ranked considerably ahead of both undefeated Cincinnati AND undefeated Coastal Carolina.

In a normal season, you'd have to go back to 2012 when Wisconsin won the B1G to find a case in a normal season where a P5 champ wasn't among the top 5, and if they'd done away with divisions the B1G championship game Michigan would have gone instead of Wisconsin and that wouldn't have been the case.

It's kind of laughable that the Pac-12 is doing this. Part of the reason for expanding the playoff is to bring the Pac-12 back into the CFP conversation. I suspect that the reason for the top 6 instead of the autobids is to ensure there's no antitrust complications. Furthermore, I don't see the B1G walking away from an expanded CFP, so the Pac-12 would be in danger of trying to go this alone.

Then again, it's the outgoing commissioner. This is a trial balloon, and if it doesn't work the Pac-12 can dismiss Scott's statement easily.

USFFan