Barry Alvarez ‘not happy’ about CFP ‘not following criteria,’ says Jim Delaney wants expansion.

Get em Barry, get em!

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2019/...nsion.html

Barry is right 8 can be easily done.

If they move to 8 where does it leave the G5? Should they have a second access bowl to make the conference championship games a defacto play-in? Its one way ESPN could attract more viewers for those games if an access bowl was on the line for more conferences.

Someone should remind Barry that the B1G was a lock for the playoff until Ohio State tripped over its own **** and lost to Purdue.

Six is the next step not eight.
Six give five conference champs and one at large that will always be P5.
Not officially locking out the G5 but strength of schedule does that.
Conference championship game is like the first round four are eliminated .
Top two get bye week first round on campus two games.
Eight with a G5 spot why would the P5 gift the G5 a spot.
The Access bowl and CFP welfare check are enough in the rulers of college footballs opinion.

(04-17-2019 06:44 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Barry Alvarez ‘not happy’ about CFP ‘not following criteria,’ says Jim Delaney wants expansion.

Get em Barry, get em!

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2019/...nsion.html

I don't recall any criteria about letting an inferior Big 10 champ into the playoff. Seems like he believed it when he was on the committee.

If Delany wants 8, we will get there. Big 10 was the biggest holdup.

But its not as easy as he says. You have to either put the bowls at risk by having quarterfinals in December or put attendance in the semi-finals at risk as you try to do 3 games in a row and manouver around the NFL playoffs.

Eight is the answer. 5 spots for the P-5 champions, 2 at large, and 1 spot for the top rated G-5.

(04-17-2019 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  But its not as easy as he says. You have to either put the bowls at risk by having quarterfinals in December or put attendance in the semi-finals at risk as you try to do 3 games in a row and manouver around the NFL playoffs.

Exactly.

The devil is in the details.

You need the conferences, the bowls, and the networks to all be on board with the plan. And you can bet they'll ALL be looking out for THEIR best interests.

It can be done, but it won't be a snap of the finger.

(04-17-2019 08:45 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Eight is the answer. 5 spots for the P-5 champions, 2 at large, and 1 spot for the top rated G-5.

This x100000000000......with the stipulation we erase divisions and do it like the Big 12 so we don’t have 7-5 PITT playing for a spot in the playoff.

(04-17-2019 09:04 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 08:45 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Eight is the answer. 5 spots for the P-5 champions, 2 at large, and 1 spot for the top rated G-5.

This x100000000000......with the stipulation we erase divisions and do it like the Big 12 so we don’t have 7-5 PITT playing for a spot in the playoff.

Better someone who won their division than a 6-3 2nd place team who squeaks by the 9-0 regular season champ in the title game.

(04-17-2019 06:44 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Barry Alvarez ‘not happy’ about CFP ‘not following criteria,’ says Jim Delaney wants expansion.

Well, Barry wrongly claims the B1G has missed the last three playoffs. They've missed the last two. The B1G made the first three playoffs - Ohio State in 2014, Michigan State in 2015, and Ohio State in 2016.

And it shouldn't be a surprise to him that the B1G has gotten left out on occasion, because in a four-team playoff it is inevitable that some P5 conference gets left out every year.

Finally, if he thinks the CFP has been biased against the B1G in terms of applying criteria, he should speak up and say when they have gotten screwed? I don't think they have. In 2017, Alabama was a better candidate than Ohio State, and last year, Oklahoma was a better candidate as well.

(04-17-2019 09:18 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 09:04 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 08:45 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Eight is the answer. 5 spots for the P-5 champions, 2 at large, and 1 spot for the top rated G-5.

This x100000000000......with the stipulation we erase divisions and do it like the Big 12 so we don’t have 7-5 PITT playing for a spot in the playoff.

Better someone who won their division than a 6-3 2nd place team who squeaks by the 9-0 regular season champ in the title game.

Nah......us in the playoff would have been an embarrassment to the game.

(04-17-2019 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  But its not as easy as he says. You have to either put the bowls at risk by having quarterfinals in December or put attendance in the semi-finals at risk as you try to do 3 games in a row and manouver around the NFL playoffs.

The biggest issue is TV. If ESPN or Fox or anyone else was offering to double the CFP TV money to get an 8-team playoff, it would have happened already. Money makes it easy to deal with every other issue. The schedule will work itself out, they'll play the first round at the higher seeds' home stadiums so that the TV cameras don't have to hide tens of thousands of empty seats at neutral sites, etc.

And if the TV money on offer isn't much more than the current money, there won't be an expanded playoff, just as March Madness didn't expand to 96 teams, even though the coaches wanted it, because CBS and Turner were not interested enough to significantly increase the huge amount they already pay to the NCAA.

(04-17-2019 07:35 AM)CoastalVANDAL Wrote:  Six is the next step not eight.
Six give five conference champs and one at large that will always be P5.
Not officially locking out the G5 but strength of schedule does that.
Conference championship game is like the first round four are eliminated .
Top two get bye week first round on campus two games.
Eight with a G5 spot why would the P5 gift the G5 a spot.
The Access bowl and CFP welfare check are enough in the rulers of college footballs opinion.

So it could be as successful as March Madness.

(04-17-2019 08:45 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Eight is the answer. 5 spots for the P-5 champions, 2 at large, and 1 spot for the top rated G-5.

Replace the G5 autobid with a third at-large and you might get there. But somebody should really take Alvarez to school. His ignorance of history (the last five years of it, anyway) is appalling. And how does he propose to have an 8 team playoff with the top four teams getting byes? Do the math, Barry.

No Autobids. Just take the top 8 teams.

Why should a 7-5 Pitt (for example, not to pick on Pitt), get an autobid from winning ACC, when a 12-0 UCF, Houston, etc. for example, ranked at #9 or 10 get left out.

If you're going to have autobids, you have to have autobids for everyone. Otherwise, just take the top 6, 8, or 12 teams and make a playoff bracket.

(04-17-2019 09:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 06:44 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Barry Alvarez ‘not happy’ about CFP ‘not following criteria,’ says Jim Delaney wants expansion.

Well, Barry wrongly claims the B1G has missed the last three playoffs. They've missed the last two. The B1G made the first three playoffs - Ohio State in 2014, Michigan State in 2015, and Ohio State in 2016.

And it shouldn't be a surprise to him that the B1G has gotten left out on occasion, because in a four-team playoff it is inevitable that some P5 conference gets left out every year.

Finally, if he thinks the CFP has been biased against the B1G in terms of applying criteria, he should speak up and say when they have gotten screwed? I don't think they have. In 2017, Alabama was a better candidate than Ohio State, and last year, Oklahoma was a better candidate as well.

He's referring to the Big 10 champ missing 3 times in a row. Penn St. was the Big 10 champ in 2016.

(04-17-2019 10:46 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  But its not as easy as he says. You have to either put the bowls at risk by having quarterfinals in December or put attendance in the semi-finals at risk as you try to do 3 games in a row and manouver around the NFL playoffs.

The biggest issue is TV. If ESPN or Fox or anyone else was offering to double the CFP TV money to get an 8-team playoff, it would have happened already. Money makes it easy to deal with every other issue. The schedule will work itself out, they'll play the first round at the higher seeds' home stadiums so that the TV cameras don't have to hide tens of thousands of empty seats at neutral sites, etc.

And if the TV money on offer isn't much more than the current money, there won't be an expanded playoff, just as March Madness didn't expand to 96 teams, even though the coaches wanted it, because CBS and Turner were not interested enough to significantly increase the huge amount they already pay to the NCAA.

I'm fine with the bowls taking the hit by having the quarterfinals at home sites in December. But a lot of people aren't. The losers aren't going to be enthused about going to a bowl game. You would almost have to have the losers play each other.

I can see an expansion to 6 eventually

But as much as some P5s might want auto bids to make sure they aren’t left out, it will probably need to be best teams like it is now because otherwise you open yourselves up to some real legal issues

(04-17-2019 08:48 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  But its not as easy as he says. You have to either put the bowls at risk by having quarterfinals in December or put attendance in the semi-finals at risk as you try to do 3 games in a row and manouver around the NFL playoffs.

Exactly.

The devil is in the details.

You need the conferences, the bowls, and the networks to all be on board with the plan. And you can bet they'll ALL be looking out for THEIR best interests.

It can be done, but it won't be a snap of the finger.

Why should I - or anyone besides the bowls themselves - care about the bowls? Get the CFP just right, then let the bowls take whatever's left (they will, and they'll be happy to get it).

(04-17-2019 09:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-17-2019 06:44 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Barry Alvarez ‘not happy’ about CFP ‘not following criteria,’ says Jim Delaney wants expansion.

Well, Barry wrongly claims the B1G has missed the last three playoffs. They've missed the last two. The B1G made the first three playoffs - Ohio State in 2014, Michigan State in 2015, and Ohio State in 2016...

I'm sure he meant the B1G Champ has missed the last 3 (true). And I know we've had this debate many times, but I'm sorry -- NO TEAM WHICH CANNOT WIN ITS OWN CONFERENCE, MUCH LESS ITS OWN DIVISION, DESERVES TO BE IN THE PLAYOFFS. I'm just not interested in how "sure" people are that some runner-up "was definitely one of the top 4 teams'... they had their chance, they blew it, they should have to wait until next year.