Instead of trying to find quality teams to expand my conference (and probably reducing my per team payouts), I am trying to expand the playoffs to 8. This year Baylor and TCU would have gotten in along with Michigan State and Mississippi State. Still some unhappy teams out there but no crazy expansion speculation going on.

If Baylor had beaten WV or TCU had beaten Baylor, one of those would be in and Ohio State would be out. Would we have all these B1G has to expand discussions?

An 8 team playoff has 2 huge impacts

1. ND never joins the acc in fb. No need to if there are 3 at large bids with 5 auto bids.
2. Big12 doesn't need to expand either since their champ is in and it's easier to get a 2nd team with the at large bids.

University Presidents are against 8 right now. Until they get on board, it's not going to happen.

As for the Big XII, everything depends Texas.

In any given year, there are maybe 6 teams that are at the top and deserve a shot imo. Take the top 2 as a bye....the other 4 duke it out. The other conferences will still make the B12 expand because they had to. Take 5 Conf champs plus 1 @ large
Or keep the committee and take the top 6. I think they did a decent job this year

I agree with expanding to 6, still top teams selected regardless of conference affiliation, with the top 2 seeds getting a bye to keep the RS important in the last few games.

I think 6 is a pretty ideal number. Yes, there will be controversy, but nowhere near as much if all 5 P5 champs are ranked in the Top 10 but one gets left out

Plus with 5 games 5 of the 6 major bowls get to host a playoff game each year (Rose, Sugar, Peach, Cotton, Fiesta & Orange) and will be all for it

(12-26-2014 09:10 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  An 8 team playoff has 2 huge impacts

1. ND never joins the acc in fb. No need to if there are 3 at large bids with 5 auto bids.
2. Big12 doesn't need to expand either since their champ is in and it's easier to get a 2nd team with the at large bids.

1. Currently the ACC champ is not guaranteed a playoff spot, and there are 4 at-large bids, so not sure how you figure this changes anything for Notre Dame.
2. Agreed.

texas should join the PAC 12.

Schools like Nebraska,Colorado,Missouri,Texas A&M had enough of texas.

Here is a different way to expand.

Add Mizzou state and Arky State for football only. They get $0 for tv and only play 6 football conference games each. If the big 12 adds somebody permanently later, they have 3 years to find a new football home.

They both can put their non-football in the Missouri Valley or Sunbelt for now.

Now thats different.

(12-26-2014 09:59 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  In any given year, there are maybe 6 teams that are at the top and deserve a shot imo. Take the top 2 as a bye....the other 4 duke it out. The other conferences will still make the B12 expand because they had to. Take 5 Conf champs plus 1 @ large
Or keep the committee and take the top 6. I think they did a decent job this year

They didn't expand because they had to. They expanded because they wanted to. That, and because there were still attractive expansion candidates available.

As for how many teams each year "deserve a shot", that is purely subjective as long as all conference champs aren't included. That will still be the case in a six team playoff and with an 8 team playoff. If you want to include a bye round, you need to go to 12 teams, with the top four getting the bye. That way, you can include every conference champ plus the highest ranked independent.

Personally, I am philosophically opposed to byes, if for no other reason than the fact that nobody - and I emphasize NOBODY - can fairly distinguish which teams should get one. If the polls have proven one thing over the years, it is that picking winners among the top teams is nothing more than a coin flip proposition. The underdogs win half the time.

The P5 will never tolerate a system that gives autobids to the G5. They simply won't tolerate FB being turned into basketball. The quickest way for a P5 breakaway to happen would be the G5s pushing for that...which is why they are smart enough not to when they have a good compromise system anyway

That compromise is no AQ for anyone. 6-8 of the best teams regardless of conference is the best way to go. Thatcway the next Boise has a legitimate shot at the title

(12-26-2014 01:25 PM)goofus Wrote:  Here is a different way to expand.

Add Mizzou state and Arky State for football only. They get $0 for tv and only play 6 football conference games each. If the big 12 adds somebody permanently later, they have 3 years to find a new football home.

They both can put their non-football in the Missouri Valley or Sunbelt for now.

Now thats different.

This is a clever idea. Both schools would gladly join just for 3 high-profile home games against Big XII foes. Additionally, both might eventually become solid expansion candidates after increased exposure leads to increased attendance and donations.

(12-26-2014 11:32 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree with expanding to 6, still top teams selected regardless of conference affiliation, with the top 2 seeds getting a bye to keep the RS important in the last few games.

I think 6 is a pretty ideal number. Yes, there will be controversy, but nowhere near as much if all 5 P5 champs are ranked in the Top 10 but one gets left out

Plus with 5 games 5 of the 6 major bowls get to host a playoff game each year (Rose, Sugar, Peach, Cotton, Fiesta & Orange) and will be all for it

I have been advocating 6 teams for a long time. Eight creates travel problems and ticket distribution issues.

With 6...the top two get a bye ( a just reward) the No. 3 and 4 teams get to host the games.... a nice reward. They could play the first part of December. No attendance or ticket distribution issues because of the home team venue. Very few visiting team fans would be able to make the game on such a short notice. Then the final four teams would play just as they do now.

As you say it could be the Big5 champs plus one at large or just the top 6.

IMO 6 works much better than 8. With 8 there would be masssive logistic problems....fans traveling to possibly three games on a very short notice.....getting the tickets distributed etc.

6 will never fly. For one the layoff matters. Imagine this week if say Ohio St and Florida St had played a week and a half ago, while Alabama and Oregon had been off since 12/7. That's a HUGE advantage. If(when) it expands, it goes to 8.

While expanding to 8 may be in the best interest of the Big 12, it can also be in the best interest of the other power conferences, simply because of the math involved. This year the Big 12 was left out, but next year it's quite possible that someone will be a clear-cut winner of the Big 12 with a strong resume while the teams of another conference cannibalize themselves (and yes, it could even happen to the SEC if a clear favorite doesn't emerge) to the point that it's that conference left on the outside looking in.

I would make the following estimates in 12 year period to make a 4-team playoff

1. SEC - 14 appearances in 12 years
2. ACC or ND - 9
3. BigTen - 9
4. PAC - 8
5. Big 12 - 6
6. G5 - 2

Total - 48

The Big XII has been pretty clear:
#1 Priority: get a waiver to hold a CCG at ten members.
#2 Priority: if no on #1 then seek expansion of CFP to 8 members.

#587 Priority: expand.

Think like a university president.

Playoff bids don't drive expansion.

MONEY drives expansion.

What people are missing are how much conference championship games are worth if they literally become playoff games (which is what they would be if/when there are auto-bids for the P5 conference champs). Those would effectively be playoff games where the TV revenue and ticket sales are 100% owned by each respective conference. If anything, an 8-team playoff with P5 auto-bids would give a massive financial incentive to the Big 12 to add any two random teams simply to create a conference championship game.

It's not about the playoff on-the-field (which is what fans care about). Instead, it's about the money (which is what university presidents care about). Conference championship games that are 100 % guaranteed to be playoff play-in games every year can be sold to TV networks at a *massive* price.

(12-25-2014 10:44 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  If Baylor had beaten WV or TCU had beaten Baylor, one of those would be in and Ohio State would be out. Would we have all these B1G has to expand discussions?

Whether people think the Big 12 should expand or not, here is the big problem with this thinking (which I have seen many times over the past month): the entire problem with the Big 12 is that they clearly didn't control their destiny (and that's at least partially because they don't have a conference championship game). That should worry Big 12 fans greatly. If you have to depend upon other schools losing or not playing well, then that means there's an inherent problem with the status quo because what the Big 12 champ(s) does itself is irrelevant. It's showing that the Big 12 is getting passed over when all things are equal (in this year's case, 3 other 1-loss P5 champs got the nod). The other P5 leagues are getting the benefit of the doubt if only because they're playing an extra game.

(12-26-2014 09:10 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  An 8 team playoff has 2 huge impacts

1. ND never joins the acc in fb. No need to if there are 3 at large bids with 5 auto bids.
2. Big12 doesn't need to expand either since their champ is in and it's easier to get a 2nd team with the at large bids.

I have been stalwart in most of my predictions for the future of college football. One of those stalwart positions of mine is that the Playoff wont be expanded until the whole realignment situation is fully figured out.

The heads of the SEC, Big Ten, PAC and ACC may just go full on Machiavellian and hold up the playoff expansion process until the Big 12 caves in. I don't think anyone truly believes that the Big 12 will be kept out of the four team playoff every year though. The fact that every single team in the final four won their conference championship games against the underdog team, well that goes against the odds actually. If just one of them lost, then Baylor or TCU would have been in.

So I don't think we see the playoff expanded until the realignment is finished.

(12-29-2014 04:21 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Think like a university president.

Playoff bids don't drive expansion.

MONEY drives expansion.

What people are missing are how much conference championship games are worth if they literally become playoff games (which is what they would be if/when there are auto-bids for the P5 conference champs). Those would effectively be playoff games where the TV revenue and ticket sales are 100% owned by each respective conference. If anything, an 8-team playoff with P5 auto-bids would give a massive financial incentive to the Big 12 to add any two random teams simply to create a conference championship game.

It's not about the playoff on-the-field (which is what fans care about). Instead, it's about the money (which is what university presidents care about). Conference championship games that are 100 % guaranteed to be playoff play-in games every year can be sold to TV networks at a *massive* price.

It sounds great but its a return back to power conference autobids. Autobids that proved tricky from a legal standpoint and motivated a move to the current non-autobid system we have.

Going to an 8 team playoff/8 CFP bowls is a way to give everyone a little more access and money. As we can see from this year there is a strong argument for Baylor and TCU to be included in the field. Once you get beyond those 2 you have Mississippi St and Michigan St at 10-2 and then every other P5 school has at least 3 losses.

Maybe staying at 4 for a while and encouraging schools to schedule up and conferences to realign to improve playoff prospects is the right way from a market driven perspective. I doubt there will be a move to 8 before the 12 year contract is up in 2025. They'll wait to build the data points to justify 8 schools. This year really only said 6 with 6 schools at 1 loss or less.

P5 Schools with 1 loss or less by year. Its only averaged to be about 5 on a 12 game schedule.

2014 (6)
2013 (6)
2012 (5)
2011 (4)
2010 (6)
2009 (4)
2008 (7)
2007 (2)
2006 (5)

A little more realignment to reduce down to a P4 and G4 should take care of the excess team problem, IMO