The playoff needs to stay at 4 teams but the commitee needs to drop the idea of selecting the 4 best teams and instead select the 4 teams that most deserve a shot at playing for a national title.

In general, that means an increased emphasis on picking the 4 best conference champions. Independents or conference runner-ups coud still be considered, but only if they are 2 less losses than the 4th best conference champ.

I don't think the major conferences want to see what happened in basketball happen in football. March Madness is great for fans, but the conference tournaments and conference championships are meaningless in basketball.

I'd rather see the playoffs be conference champs only, with the P5 becoming P4, and adding in conference semi-final games to essentially have an 8 team playoff.

I also hate to see the major bowls get away from traditional lineups. This year the B1G champ, OSU, and the PAC 12 champ, USC, will be playing each other . . . in the COTTON BOWL? No way. That's the Rose Bowl.

Let's get back to B1G vs. PAC in the Rose Bowl and have the SEC vs ACC in the Sugar/Cotton/Orange Bowl (take your pick, SEC and ACC), with the winners playing in the championship game a week later.

Sorry Big 12 but you're toast.

(12-05-2017 01:55 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I don't think the major conferences want to see what happened in basketball happen in football. March Madness is great for fans, but the conference tournaments and conference championships are meaningless in basketball.

I'd rather see the playoffs be conference champs only, with the P5 becoming P4, and adding in conference semi-final games to essentially have an 8 team playoff.

I also hate to see the major bowls get away from traditional lineups. This year the B1G champ, OSU, and the PAC 12 champ, USC, will be playing each other . . . in the COTTON BOWL? No way. That's the Rose Bowl.

Let's get back to B1G vs. PAC in the Rose Bowl and have the SEC vs ACC in the Sugar/Cotton/Orange Bowl (take your pick, SEC and ACC), with the winners playing in the championship game a week later.

Sorry Big 12 but you're toast.

I think that after the XII GOR runs out, that's exactly what you'll see. The big 4 (WVU, KS, OU, and TX) will realign into other conferences leaving 4 power conferences who's champions will play for the national title.

Until that happens, everyone will just grin & bear it.

(12-05-2017 01:55 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I don't think the major conferences want to see what happened in basketball happen in football. March Madness is great for fans, but the conference tournaments and conference championships are meaningless in basketball.

Actually, the conference tournaments are fun, and often make the difference in whether a bubble team makes the big dance. Just ask the tens of thousands who attend the Big East, ACC, and yes, even B1G and SEC conference tournaments whether they are useless or not. And just on entertainment value, they can be great. E.g., as a Georgetown fan, some of the most memorable games i can recall seeing are Big East tournament games.

And for many conferences, the "one bid leagues", they are totally decisive.

(12-05-2017 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 01:55 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I don't think the major conferences want to see what happened in basketball happen in football. March Madness is great for fans, but the conference tournaments and conference championships are meaningless in basketball.

Actually, the conference tournaments are fun, and often make the difference in whether a bubble team makes the big dance. Just ask the tens of thousands who attend the Big East, ACC, and yes, even B1G and SEC conference tournaments whether they are useless or not. And just on entertainment value, they can be great. E.g., as a Georgetown fan, some of the most memorable games i can recall seeing are Big East tournament games.

And for many conferences, the "one bid leagues", they are totally decisive.

They mean a lot if you're on the bubble, or if you're in a one-bid league and it's your only shot.

But they don't mean much to the top 25-30 teams, who at most are playing for a seed line--lose a quarterfinal and you may drop from a 4 to a 5, get red hot and maybe you get a 3 seed in very friendly territory.

And that extends to the regular season as a whole. If Duke or KEntucky or Villanova has a horrendous night in February and loses to the #8 team in their league, it doesn't effect their season much. Even if they spin out and go into the conference tournament on a 4-game losing streak, it's probably "just" a matter of going from a 1 seed to a 4 seed. (OF course going from a 1 seed to a 4 seed is a minor calamity, and has a good chance of leading to an early tournament exit. But you're still IN the tournament.)

Not enough weeks in the season for a semi round in each P5. Unless you go to 7 conf games and 3 OOC games, but what of the teams that do not qualify? End their season two weeks short until a possible Bowl game? Can't go more than 11 games max in that case.

(12-04-2017 12:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 11:24 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Consider another possible outcome where Alabama never lost to Auburn, but lost to UGA in the conference final. Pretty darn sure both UGA and Bama are showing up in the bracket again.

There was a way the Big Ten could have found their way into the playoff. Blame Wisconsin falling short. And really, given how beatable Ohio State is, they should have gotten it done.

I thought the B1G title game went as badly for the B1G as it could possibly have gone. Had Wisconsin won the game, then they'd have made the playoffs. Also, had Ohio State did what they did three years ago, blown Wisconsin out, then Ohio State probably gets in over Alabama.

The worst outcome was what happened - Ohio State wins, but unimpressively.

Totally agreed. From every touching point, this was about as bad as it could get for the Big Ten. I think time is going to keep that 12-1 division champ Wisconsin vs. 11-1 nothing Alabama wound open, too. That Wisconsin was already ranked, played an extra game, and botched it for themselves when they already were the last remaining undefeated major.

(12-05-2017 08:42 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 01:55 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I don't think the major conferences want to see what happened in basketball happen in football. March Madness is great for fans, but the conference tournaments and conference championships are meaningless in basketball.

Actually, the conference tournaments are fun, and often make the difference in whether a bubble team makes the big dance. Just ask the tens of thousands who attend the Big East, ACC, and yes, even B1G and SEC conference tournaments whether they are useless or not. And just on entertainment value, they can be great. E.g., as a Georgetown fan, some of the most memorable games i can recall seeing are Big East tournament games.

And for many conferences, the "one bid leagues", they are totally decisive.

They mean a lot if you're on the bubble, or if you're in a one-bid league and it's your only shot.

But they don't mean much to the top 25-30 teams, who at most are playing for a seed line--lose a quarterfinal and you may drop from a 4 to a 5, get red hot and maybe you get a 3 seed in very friendly territory.

And that extends to the regular season as a whole. If Duke or KEntucky or Villanova has a horrendous night in February and loses to the #8 team in their league, it doesn't effect their season much. Even if they spin out and go into the conference tournament on a 4-game losing streak, it's probably "just" a matter of going from a 1 seed to a 4 seed. (OF course going from a 1 seed to a 4 seed is a minor calamity, and has a good chance of leading to an early tournament exit. But you're still IN the tournament.)

Well seeding does matter, as we see coaches complain about it all the time, and yes, even for the top 30 teams that are IN no matter what they do in their conference tournament, an upset loss in the conference tournament can cost them a seeding line, a pretty big deal.

So it seems pretty clear that the conference tournaments have entertainment value for the fans and important implications for the big dance.

And, in the case of tournaments that have longstanding traditions of their own, like the ACC and Big East, the conference teams consider them to be a valuable prize in their own right.

(12-05-2017 09:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Not enough weeks in the season for a semi round in each P5. Unless you go to 7 conf games and 3 OOC games, but what of the teams that do not qualify? End their season two weeks short until a possible Bowl game? Can't go more than 11 games max in that case.

Why not have the conference semis in Week 14? The only other game played then is Army-Navy.

(12-05-2017 09:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 08:42 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 08:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 01:55 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I don't think the major conferences want to see what happened in basketball happen in football. March Madness is great for fans, but the conference tournaments and conference championships are meaningless in basketball.

Actually, the conference tournaments are fun, and often make the difference in whether a bubble team makes the big dance. Just ask the tens of thousands who attend the Big East, ACC, and yes, even B1G and SEC conference tournaments whether they are useless or not. And just on entertainment value, they can be great. E.g., as a Georgetown fan, some of the most memorable games i can recall seeing are Big East tournament games.

And for many conferences, the "one bid leagues", they are totally decisive.

They mean a lot if you're on the bubble, or if you're in a one-bid league and it's your only shot.

But they don't mean much to the top 25-30 teams, who at most are playing for a seed line--lose a quarterfinal and you may drop from a 4 to a 5, get red hot and maybe you get a 3 seed in very friendly territory.

And that extends to the regular season as a whole. If Duke or KEntucky or Villanova has a horrendous night in February and loses to the #8 team in their league, it doesn't effect their season much. Even if they spin out and go into the conference tournament on a 4-game losing streak, it's probably "just" a matter of going from a 1 seed to a 4 seed. (OF course going from a 1 seed to a 4 seed is a minor calamity, and has a good chance of leading to an early tournament exit. But you're still IN the tournament.)

Well seeding does matter, as we see coaches complain about it all the time,

Coaches will complain about most anything. Michigan STate's D'Antonio is complaining that Michigan is going to a better bowl than him.

Quote:.and yes, even for the top 30 teams that are IN no matter what they do in their conference tournament, an upset loss in the conference tournament can cost them a seeding line, a pretty big deal.

So it seems pretty clear that the conference tournaments have entertainment value for the fans and important implications for the big dance.

And, in the case of tournaments that have longstanding traditions of their own, like the ACC and Big East, the conference teams consider them to be a valuable prize in their own right.

The reality is that a No. 1 vs No. 2 Duke vs Kentucky matchup doesn't have post-season implications, which limits how much of an event it is. Ratings for the college basketball regular season have declined relative to other sporting events over the last 30 years. And, in the opinion of the power-brokers of college sports, a big reason is that the regular season and even the conference tournaments don't matter that much.

This is less true for the core fanbases--Big East and ACC and Indiana and KEntucky fans will tune in religiously. But the wider audience, that will really only tune in for Auburn-Alabama or USC-UCLA or OSU-Michigan or Clemson-FSU if "something is on the line", doesn't.

Go big.

B1G-PAC and SEC-ACC mergers then expand each mega conference and divide into five or six divisions. Divide up the Big 12 and Notre Dame plus some callups to fill in the gaps.

Division winners and wild cards play in a tournament to see who plays in the B1G-PAC championship at the Rose Bowl and the SEC-ACC championship at the Sugar or Orange Bowl. B1G-PAC and SEC-ACC quarterfinals first weekend in December at top seeds' home fields. Semi-finals second weekend in December at pre-determined venues.

Rose and Sugar/Orange bowl winners play in the College Football National Championship.

This year, the B1G-PAC and SEC-ACC tournament participants would be as follows:

B1G-PAC
(1)Oklahoma (South Div)[11-1]
(2)Wisconsin (North Div)[12-0]
(3)Ohio St. (East Div)[10-2]
(4)Penn St. (Wild Card)[10-2]
(5)USC (Pacific Div)[10-2]
(6)Stanford (West Card)[9-3]
(7)Washington (Wild Card)[10-2]
(8)Michigan St. (Wild Card)[9-3]

Semifinals in Indianapolis and Santa Clara. Championship at the Rose Bowl.

SEC-ACC
(1)Clemson (Atlantic Div) [11-1]
(2)Auburn (South Div)[10-2]
(3)Alabama (Wild Card)[11-1]
(4)Georgia (East Div)[11-1]
(5)Miami (Coastal Div)[10-1]
(6)TCU (West Div)[10-2]
(7)UCF (Wild Card)[11-0]
(8)Notre Dame (Wild Card)[9-3]

Semifinals in Atlanta and Arlington. Championship at the Sugar or Orange Bowl.