(01-05-2018 02:10 PM)Phlipper33 Wrote: I like it. I'm not sure the P5 would agree to all conference champs with only 2 wild cards though.
I tend to agree. A "middle ground" play-off system that could get the P5 support is the 10-team tournament, where you only have two play-in games. Think of them as the 16-seed and 12-seed games in the NCAAB tournament. Or, just the straight up 8-team playoff, with auto bids for the P5 champs plus one G5 champ - 2 wild cards. But that limits the G5's access to the CFP to one team. Why not have the top-2 G5 champs duke it out?
Personally, I think it is essential to limit the number of wild cards allowed in the playoff, so as to maintain - and even enhance - the regular season's significance.
Round 1: Play-In
Saturday, December 9, 2017
8-seed game: Boise St.(MWC) at UCF(AAC)
6-seed "wild card" game: Auburn at Wisconsin
*or, just have the 8-seed game. Wisconsin gets the 6 seed and Auburn is left out.
Quarterfinals
Saturday, December 16, 2017
UCF (8-seed winner) at (1)Clemson(ACC)
(7)USC(PAC) at (2)Oklahoma(B12)
Wisconsin (6-seed winner) at (3)Georgia(SEC)
(5)Alabama (wild card) at (4)Ohio St.(B1G)
....
As you can see, all P5 champions (including USC) and the top wild card (Alabama) get access to the quarterfinals without having to play there way in. The top two G5 champions (UCF and Boise) and the next two at large teams (Wisconsin and Auburn). You could place rules that would allow a G5 champ similar access (no play-in) if they achieve a certain ranking (top-6?).
This also limits the number of potential teams that would play more than one extra game when compared to the current CFP system. You still avoid the situation in the current system that unintentionally advantages the non-division winner, like '17 Alabama. While they avoid the potential CCG hiccup, they must still be a top-4 champion on the road AND win a big bowl game before they reach the national championship game.