(12-12-2018 11:48 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:18 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:45 AM)ken d Wrote:  The P5 conferences would be losers in this scenario. They would lose their lucrative conference championship games in exchange for having to risk injury against first round body bag opponents.

Yeah, I don't think 10 autobids would really work for FBS.

Alabama/Northern Illinois would be a bloodbath.

They never seem to worry about scheduling those games in regular season, in the case of the SEC in November.

Regular season is one thing, but no one except die hards are going to tune in to watch that.

I'm all for having G5 teams in the playoff (and even guaranteeing at least one), but not on an autobid basis.

For the 8-team playoff, how about 1 G5 auto-bid and they have to be ranked in the top 20?

Most teams end up in a bloodbath against Alabama this year.

Fine with me. Personally, I'd even go a step further and just make it "highest rated G5".

5+1+2 has seemed like the most ideal solution for a while now. This year we'd get:

Alabama
Clemson
Oklahoma
Ohio State
Washington

UCF

Notre Dame
UGA

Inevitably, the issue in expanding the CFP is ensuring that the P5 does not lose value in any of the following: losing potential home games during the season, losing value in its conference championship games, nor does it "lock out" any of the P5 conferences. Additionally, it must give flexibility towards Notre Dame, who will not join a conference, but still provides tremendous value on a national scale if they are in the conversation. From a national perspective, there simply is just not enough push from networks or advertisers "demanding" that all of the G5 Champions are included, so that is definitely not a requirement. Finally, I do not think an autobid from the G5 is required either because the last think the committee (or the audience) would want is a 9-3/8-4 top-ranked G5 team that is being forced on the playoff (just like a 9-4 Northwestern would have ultimately hurt the playoff as well). Ultimately, I think a committee can continue with the present ranking format and resist providing auto-bids, whether to conference champions or a G5 representative.

This year, under the final rankings, we could have seen:

Alabama v. UCF
Clemson v. Michigan
Notre Dame v. Ohio State
Oklahoma v. Georgia

However, what would have been interesting had the committee bumped Washington (PAC Champion) over UCF (Top G5) at #8. That certainly would have been an interesting conversation.

I imagine some of the resistance to an 8-team CFP would be because of the potential for a P4 scenario in a few years when the Big 12 GoR expires. In that case, the remaining power conferences could arrange for de facto autobids to a 4-team CFP for their champs, and going to 8 teams would be unnecessary.

However, an 8-team playoff could actually work for a P4 scenario without dropping CCGs. Perhaps if CCGs and divisions were deregulated, each P4 conference could hold two "championship semifinals" between their top 4 teams, with the winners automatically advancing to the CFP. So the P4 conferences effectively get a double CCG payout on top of the increased CFP payout, even though no conference champions are actually crowned. This would also necessitate only one extra week of games, an easier sell than the two extra needed for an 8-team CFP plus a 2-round conference championship.

File this under "Least surprising development ever".

A flawed system that uses opinion as the sole justification for leaving out two of the five voting conferences every year is up for reconsideration? I am stunned... just stunned!

Eight might hold for a while. It still isn't ideal but it takes a long time for the powerbrokers to get to the obvious solution.

Eight is another step in the right direction.

(12-12-2018 11:48 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:18 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:45 AM)ken d Wrote:  The P5 conferences would be losers in this scenario. They would lose their lucrative conference championship games in exchange for having to risk injury against first round body bag opponents.

Yeah, I don't think 10 autobids would really work for FBS.

Alabama/Northern Illinois would be a bloodbath.

They never seem to worry about scheduling those games in regular season, in the case of the SEC in November.

Regular season is one thing, but no one except die hards are going to tune in to watch that.

I'm all for having G5 teams in the playoff (and even guaranteeing at least one), but not on an autobid basis.

For the 8-team playoff, how about 1 G5 auto-bid and they have to be ranked in the top 20?

Most teams end up in a bloodbath against Alabama this year.

I would say top 12 ish for the G5.

(12-12-2018 01:03 PM)leofrog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:48 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:18 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Yeah, I don't think 10 autobids would really work for FBS.

Alabama/Northern Illinois would be a bloodbath.

They never seem to worry about scheduling those games in regular season, in the case of the SEC in November.

Regular season is one thing, but no one except die hards are going to tune in to watch that.

I'm all for having G5 teams in the playoff (and even guaranteeing at least one), but not on an autobid basis.

For the 8-team playoff, how about 1 G5 auto-bid and they have to be ranked in the top 20?

Most teams end up in a bloodbath against Alabama this year.

I would say top 12 ish for the G5.

15 and that's my final offer.

(12-12-2018 01:44 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 01:03 PM)leofrog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:48 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:18 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  They never seem to worry about scheduling those games in regular season, in the case of the SEC in November.

Regular season is one thing, but no one except die hards are going to tune in to watch that.

I'm all for having G5 teams in the playoff (and even guaranteeing at least one), but not on an autobid basis.

For the 8-team playoff, how about 1 G5 auto-bid and they have to be ranked in the top 20?

Most teams end up in a bloodbath against Alabama this year.

I would say top 12 ish for the G5.

15 and that's my final offer.

Only 12, 15, or whatever if they aren’t unbeaten. I don’t want the selection committee to exclude an unbeaten. Wayyyy too easy to rank em where they miss the cut

I’ve had an idea for a few months to seed the first four teams BEFORE conference championship games, then replace the CCG with another conference game allowing the next best teams in the league a chance to move-up in the rankings. A showcase game, if you will. Then after that week, seed the last four teams.

Conferences still get an extra game with either a Showcase Game or a CCG.

For instance:

This year Alabama, Clamson, ND, and UGA would be in.

The SEC showcase game would be UF vs. LSU rematch for a possible playoff spot.


I haven’t worked out the kinks, but it’s a way to reward the top four teams after the regular season while still earning the conference some more dough.

If this requires eliminating conference championship games, then they're not serious. It's just a pipe dream. Fodder for message boards and for clickbait articles that CFB sportswriters write to fill the time between now and the semifinal games.

Each P5 school makes an extra $2 million each year, at least, just because their conference has a CCG; for the Big Ten and SEC the CCG probably gives them at least $3 million per school per year. So, if we're serious, then we forget about telling them to throw their CCGs in the dumpster, and propose a schedule for an 8-team playoff that starts a week or two after the CCG week.

just get rid of the stupid conference championship game (they are stupid) and move it to 16 already.

Would rather go back to 2 (or none) than expand but think we get 8 eventually.

Five years after that, we'll be wondering why ratings are down for most the regular season and why its less exciting.

(12-12-2018 02:52 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Would rather go back to 2 (or none) than expand but think we get 8 eventually.

Five years after that, we'll be wondering why ratings are down for most the regular season and why its less exciting.

Fans of a few teams like Alabama, Clemson, or Ohio State might think that. I think most other fans would realize their team has a better chance to play for it all so games will mean more.

(12-12-2018 11:13 AM)ArQ Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:00 AM)ArQ Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:31 AM)bluesox Wrote:  I think 6 is much better than 8 since it rewards 2 by giving them byes and keeps value for conference title games. I don’t really see any reason for a loser in a conference title game to be able to go to the playoffs. I would Give 5 auto bids to the big 10,sec, acc, big 12, and pac 12 with 1 open slot to have a geographic interest in the playoffs. Have a round at higher seed week after conference title games, than keep everything else as is. This probably would freeze conference realignment. However, I would force the issue on the big 12 and say auto bids only go to leagues with 12 teams. I think it’s stupid to have a conference title game with 10 teams and that would put 2 more teams in the pool.

If it is a six-team playoff, then P5 conference championship games should be re-calibrated as well. It should be the team with the best overall record vs the team with the highest CFP ranking. If it happens to be the same team, then the top two CFP ranked teams go to conference championship game. For example, Michigan and Syracuse will go to B1G and ACC conference championship games this year instead of Northwestern and Pittsburgh.

The sixth spot goes to the top CFP ranked G5 team after conference championship games.

Eight is more efficient. Six takes the same amount of time to run as an 8 team playoff. May as well go to 8 if your going to expand.

See my revision of the post. It makes all the P5 conference championship games more meaningful.

Going to 8 does the same thing as long as the P5 CCG winners get auto bids and the top G5 champ gets and autobid. The CCG's are basically a play round in such a set up.

(12-12-2018 12:06 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  File this under "Least surprising development ever".

A flawed system that uses opinion as the sole justification for leaving out two of the five voting conferences every year is up for reconsideration? I am stunned... just stunned!

Eight might hold for a while. It still isn't ideal but it takes a long time for the powerbrokers to get to the obvious solution.

Eight is another step in the right direction.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

How we can design a system that ignores an entire conference season and replaces it with the judgement of a dozen ice skating judges is just inexplicable. If you want to destroy the sanctity of the regular season---the best way is to create a playoff system that ignores it.

(12-12-2018 03:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 12:06 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  File this under "Least surprising development ever".

A flawed system that uses opinion as the sole justification for leaving out two of the five voting conferences every year is up for reconsideration? I am stunned... just stunned!

Eight might hold for a while. It still isn't ideal but it takes a long time for the powerbrokers to get to the obvious solution.

Eight is another step in the right direction.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

How we can design a system that ignores an entire conference season and replaces it with the judgement of a dozen ice skating judges is just inexplicable. If you want to destroy the sanctity of the regular season---thats the way to do it.

Precisely.

(12-12-2018 02:52 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Would rather go back to 2 (or none) than expand but think we get 8 eventually.

Five years after that, we'll be wondering why ratings are down for most the regular season and why its less exciting.

attendance and ratings have suffered so much since they expanded the FCS playoffs...

haha jk, its football, regular season football is still amazing, and playoffs are an unreal experience. Attendance actually drops during the postseason due to the thanksgiving holiday. I suspect that wont be a problem at the FBS level.

Maybe take a minute to learn a bit about the playoff systems that exist outside of the FBS.

(12-12-2018 01:50 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 01:44 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 01:03 PM)leofrog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:48 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 11:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Regular season is one thing, but no one except die hards are going to tune in to watch that.

I'm all for having G5 teams in the playoff (and even guaranteeing at least one), but not on an autobid basis.

For the 8-team playoff, how about 1 G5 auto-bid and they have to be ranked in the top 20?

Most teams end up in a bloodbath against Alabama this year.

I would say top 12 ish for the G5.

15 and that's my final offer.

Only 12, 15, or whatever if they aren’t unbeaten. I don’t want the selection committee to exclude an unbeaten. Wayyyy too easy to rank em where they miss the cut

Again, what does being unbeaten have anything to do with being one of the best? Most years, an undefeated team should be in an 8 team playoff, but there are those years like Marshall had several seasons ago where they didn’t beat anyone below 75-80. That is not a resume that should get rewarded.

(12-12-2018 03:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 12:06 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  File this under "Least surprising development ever".

A flawed system that uses opinion as the sole justification for leaving out two of the five voting conferences every year is up for reconsideration? I am stunned... just stunned!

Eight might hold for a while. It still isn't ideal but it takes a long time for the powerbrokers to get to the obvious solution.

Eight is another step in the right direction.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

How we can design a system that ignores an entire conference season and replaces it with the judgement of a dozen ice skating judges is just inexplicable. If you want to destroy the sanctity of the regular season---the best way is to create a playoff system that ignores it.

So what on UCF’s resume says they are 1 of the top 4 teams this year?

Top 6 conference representatives. Two at-large bids.

So based on this year, the 8 team playoff should be:

Alabama
Clemson
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Georgia
Ohio State
Washington (Michigan is #7 but #9 UW is a P5 champ)
Central Florida

#1 Alabama vs #8 UCF
#2 Clemson vs #7 Washington
#3 Notre Dame vs #6 Ohio State
#4 Oklahoma vs #5 Georgia

Not bad. Not bad.