(04-08-2020 01:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 01:06 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:29 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:50 AM)Wedge Wrote:  There's a huge difference between Notre Dame and the other independent FBS teams. Committee members and poll voters will always give a one-loss Notre Dame team consideration for an at-large place because of their strong schedules and name brand. That's not true for the other indies. The other indies, just like the teams in G5 conferences, will only be in an 8-team playoff if they are eligible for a playoff spot for which the P5 teams are not eligible. That's why they should be eligible for that spot.

I assume you mean that the independents not named Notre Dame should be eligible for the G5 slot.

I do not concur. They aren't eligible now, and the CFP is based on conference contracts and payouts. If the independents want access to the G5 AQ slot, they can join a conference.

I know that sucks for NMSU and Liberty, who are both independents not by choice, but the other independents have elected to be there. Army, BYU, UConn, and UMass have elected to become independents and could join a conference today. They simply aren't willing to make whatever concessions are necessary for that.

I don't see why conference teams should have an advantage over independents. There's nothing magical about being in a conference compared to being an independent in terms of who the best teams are.

If you're doing auto bids for P5 conference champs, then indeed there is something magical about being in a conference.

In no way shape or form would I do autobids for conference champs.

Well that’s what the proposal is according to McMurphy.

If one assume 86% of P5 responded -- the same rate as G5 -- you arrive at 56 (no reason to assume much difference)


17% of 56 would be 10 who want to stay at 4
69% of 56 would be 39 who favor going to 8 team playoff
35% of 56 would be 20 who do not want an automatic G5 slot.

This leaves one with the impression that it's close to 50-50 split among P5 whether to give an automatic G5 spot or to make them qualify. The G5 ADs are definitely above 90% in favor of an automatic spot, which is not surprising.

If I had to guess the compromise, it would be a relatively low bar for the G5 to qualify, such as a top 15 or even as low as top 20 ranking to get the P5 conferences to vote in favor. The conferences tend to only vote in favor of for something if their is a consensus among the members. Right now it's not there for P5, but it is for G5. Hence the compromise of a low threshold.

(04-08-2020 12:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:29 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:50 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:40 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:31 AM)Wedge Wrote:  I posted a comment about this awhile back. In that format, the best G5 team would have had the playoff spot in half of the CFP seasons so far, and Notre Dame would have had it in the other half. Of course that's with Brian Kelly doing well as the ND head coach; if ND's next head coach is on the Davie/Weis/Faust level, the G5 team will have that spot every time.

We can argue whether Notre Dame should be eligible for that spot, but the only honest reason for excluding the other indies from that spot is that some folks want to screw BYU and/or try to force them to join a G5 conference.

I'm not ok with Notre Dame having access to the G5 slot. They don't have access to it right now, nor do BYU or the other independents. They should only be able to get the at-large slots.

And the G5 slot should be guaranteed like the champs of the other conferences. It's distinctly possible that you could get an unranked champ if you have someone like 7-5 Iowa pull a massive upset on Ohio State in the CCG or something along those lines.

There's a huge difference between Notre Dame and the other independent FBS teams. Committee members and poll voters will always give a one-loss Notre Dame team consideration for an at-large place because of their strong schedules and name brand. That's not true for the other indies. The other indies, just like the teams in G5 conferences, will only be in an 8-team playoff if they are eligible for a playoff spot for which the P5 teams are not eligible. That's why they should be eligible for that spot.

I assume you mean that the independents not named Notre Dame should be eligible for the G5 slot.

I do not concur. They aren't eligible now, and the CFP is based on conference contracts and payouts. If the independents want access to the G5 AQ slot, they can join a conference.

I know that sucks for NMSU and Liberty, who are both independents not by choice, but the other independents have elected to be there. Army, BYU, UConn, and UMass have elected to become independents and could join a conference today. They simply aren't willing to make whatever concessions are necessary for that.

I don't see why conference teams should have an advantage over independents. There's nothing magical about being in a conference compared to being an independent in terms of who the best teams are.

Because conference teams make up the majority? The whole majority rule thing is pretty much how every vote works. For someone like Notre Dame, they can join any conference they wish. Thus, being indy is a preference. It offers advantages and disadvantages---but ultimately---its Notre Dames's choice to be indy. That said--while that is true for Notre Dame--its not necessarily the every indy's preference to be indy. For some---indy life was thrust upon them.

I don't think it would be right for ND to take a G5 spot nearly every year. I think 4 is pretty good. If if expands, it needs to be the best 6 or 8. I don't see want to see a spot only to get exploited by team x, who will can then recruit saying their team gets to playoff every year.

(04-08-2020 10:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 10:29 AM)YNot Wrote:  112 of the 130 FBS ADs responded.

They interviewed the wrong people, as ADs do not make these decisions.

ADs and coaches will always want more playoff spots, because that enhances their job security - more chances to succeed.

Depends on the school. President ultimately make the decision, but some defer to the AD, some don't.

(04-08-2020 11:37 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Half of the semi final games have basically been non competitive. Aside from some decent 2vs3 matchups, the games have been lopsided, and now we want 8 teams? A G5 would be shredded even if they somehow won a 1vs8 and get to the Semis. They don't have the depth to compete back to back to back. I don't see it passing any time soon. Maybe after 2026 or whenever the current contract expires. But it's bad for the sport to dilute the field and give conferences autobids. The P5 is punished more with the current model than the proposed one.

Let's see.
#1 seed-first round-won big 3 times, won close once, lost close once and lost big once. Won title once.
#2 seed-first round-won big 4 times, lost close twice. Won title 3 times.
#3 seed-hasn't won title.
#4 seed-won title 2 times.

So should we drop the #3 seed and add #5 to replace them?

(04-08-2020 01:56 PM)kevinwmsn Wrote:  I don't think it would be right for ND to take a G5 spot nearly every year. I think 4 is pretty good. If if expands, it needs to be the best 6 or 8. I don't see want to see a spot only to get exploited by team x, who will can then recruit saying their team gets to playoff every year.

Notre Dame is P5 in everyone's mind. They ARE an ACC member. They just don't fully participate in football. Nobody but Notre Dame and ESPN would support them having a shot at that spot.

Actually now, the indies can only get at large slots.

(04-08-2020 10:39 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  My preference would be a Straight 8 Model with objective rankings.

(04-08-2020 01:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 01:06 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:29 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:50 AM)Wedge Wrote:  There's a huge difference between Notre Dame and the other independent FBS teams. Committee members and poll voters will always give a one-loss Notre Dame team consideration for an at-large place because of their strong schedules and name brand. That's not true for the other indies. The other indies, just like the teams in G5 conferences, will only be in an 8-team playoff if they are eligible for a playoff spot for which the P5 teams are not eligible. That's why they should be eligible for that spot.

I assume you mean that the independents not named Notre Dame should be eligible for the G5 slot.

I do not concur. They aren't eligible now, and the CFP is based on conference contracts and payouts. If the independents want access to the G5 AQ slot, they can join a conference.

I know that sucks for NMSU and Liberty, who are both independents not by choice, but the other independents have elected to be there. Army, BYU, UConn, and UMass have elected to become independents and could join a conference today. They simply aren't willing to make whatever concessions are necessary for that.

I don't see why conference teams should have an advantage over independents. There's nothing magical about being in a conference compared to being an independent in terms of who the best teams are.

If you're doing auto bids for P5 conference champs, then indeed there is something magical about being in a conference.

In no way shape or form would I do autobids for conference champs.

INCORRECT ANSWER. Please try again.

I wish one of the questions asked about a 5-2-1 model vs a model of 1 G5 spot and a straight 7 Autonomous P5 spots.

SEC and B1G would probably like 7-1 model not guaranteeing a 2 loss ACC, B12, or PAC Conference Championship Game winner a spot over a one loss team.

(04-08-2020 04:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 01:56 PM)kevinwmsn Wrote:  I don't think it would be right for ND to take a G5 spot nearly every year. I think 4 is pretty good. If if expands, it needs to be the best 6 or 8. I don't see want to see a spot only to get exploited by team x, who will can then recruit saying their team gets to playoff every year.

Notre Dame is P5 in everyone's mind. They ARE an ACC member. They just don't fully participate in football. Nobody but Notre Dame and ESPN would support them having a shot at that spot.

Actually now, the indies can only get at large slots.

I personally think it is a brilliant plan.

My preference would be to follow the 1-AA procedures as set forth by the NCAA.

I don’t think more than 4 is necessary.

I think what people really want is transparent, objective criteria for picking those 4 teams like a points system anyone can follow like:

2 pts Great Win: Top 10 opponent either On the Road/Neutral Site and by more than 10 points

1.5 pts Good Win: Top 25 opponent

1 pts Win: any win over a Top 100 team

.05 pts Win: any win over a non Top 100 team

-0 pts Great Loss: Top 10 opponent either on the road/neutral site or by less than 7 points

-0.5 pts Good Loss: any loss to Top 25 team

-1 pts: Loss any loss to a Top 100 team

-1.5 pts Bad Loss: any loss to a non Top 100 team

Rewards tough wins while not severely punishing risk taking losses and doesn’t let you feast on cupcakes and expect to play for a title

(04-08-2020 05:08 PM)spenser Wrote:  I wish one of the questions asked about a 5-2-1 model vs a model of 1 G5 spot and a straight 7 Autonomous P5 spots.

SEC and B1G would probably like 7-1 model not guaranteeing a 2 loss ACC, B12, or PAC Conference Championship Game winner a spot over a one loss team.

All 5, if there is an 8 team playoff will be strongly for a guaranteed spot for the 5 champs. Why do you think they split the playoff money equally between the 5? They want the sure thing.

(04-08-2020 06:04 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don’t think more than 4 is necessary.

I think what people really want is transparent, objective criteria for picking those 4 teams like a points system anyone can follow like:

2 pts Great Win: Top 10 opponent either On the Road/Neutral Site and by more than 10 points

1.5 pts Good Win: Top 25 opponent

1 pts Win: any win over a Top 100 team

.05 pts Win: any win over a non Top 100 team

-0 pts Great Loss: Top 10 opponent either on the road/neutral site or by less than 7 points

-0.5 pts Good Loss: any loss to Top 25 team

-1 pts: Loss any loss to a Top 100 team

-1.5 pts Bad Loss: any loss to a non Top 100 team

Rewards tough wins while not severely punishing risk taking losses and doesn’t let you feast on cupcakes and expect to play for a title

There is no perfect system. That's the problem. The best system is an objective one. One where its decided on the field. There are clear objective standards for a conference champion. With all 5 in, you don't have to argue whether a 1 loss TCU, 1 loss Stanford, 1 loss Clemson and 1 loss Ohio St. are better than a 2 loss Alabama.

Notre Dame from what I've heard is a 'P5 Independent'. Meaning that the P5 conferences 'count' ND (obviously) as a P5 game...

Conferences are like divisions in the NFL. That autobid will obviously be for the G5. There are 10 FBS conferences. For it to be a true playoff everyone needs a pathway, even a shared slot. Otherwise, the p5 should just split and get it over with... Indy can go for the at large slots. That's why 8 is such a perfect number.

If you don't agree with me and feel that the G5 should be tied to rankings, then there should be no conference auto bids, and you just pick the top 8 ranked FBS.

You gotta pick one or the other... but not cherry pick aspects from both that work to your benefit.

I just want a system where my team has a chance to make the playoff, however minute that chance might be.

You have to wonder how much this recent shut down of all things athletics plays into this desire to expand the football playoff.

The TV money that the NCAA counts on in hoops was dramatically lower since it was cancelled ... this ripple effect to all school budgets, plus the uncertainty of just when things will return to normal ... I am sure AD's everywhere are dealing with very tight sphincters around making their budgets work, with seriously questionable revenue streams.

An expanded playoff in football would be an easy way to impact the bottom line for all schools feeling a pinch now.

(04-08-2020 10:29 AM)YNot Wrote:  https://watchstadium.com/college-football-playoff-expansion-athletic-directors-04-07-2020/

112 of the 130 FBS ADs responded.

88% want an expanded playoff.

72% want 8-team model (including 69% of P5 ADs)

12% want to stay at the 4-team model (17% of P5 ADs)

11% want 12 or 16-team model

5% want 6-team model

Change is coming,

The top format for the 8-team playoff is the P5 champions, highest ranked non-P5 team, and 2 at large. 66% want this model. Not suprisingly, 35% of P5 ADs do NOT want an automatic bid for the G5, unless they rank high enough to earn an at large bid.

So. It is in the self interest of A.D.'s to favor this. The more often their school gets in the more they make in bonuses and the more job security they acquire. Conference Commissioners will have more say and they answer to the Presidents who don't like disruptions and will be far less likely to be favorable.

IMO, polling the A.D.'s is as worthless as polling the Head Coaches. It's in both groups' self interest to expand them. The real decision makers not so much.

(04-08-2020 01:27 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 12:29 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:50 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-08-2020 11:40 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  I'm not ok with Notre Dame having access to the G5 slot. They don't have access to it right now, nor do BYU or the other independents. They should only be able to get the at-large slots.

And the G5 slot should be guaranteed like the champs of the other conferences. It's distinctly possible that you could get an unranked champ if you have someone like 7-5 Iowa pull a massive upset on Ohio State in the CCG or something along those lines.

There's a huge difference between Notre Dame and the other independent FBS teams. Committee members and poll voters will always give a one-loss Notre Dame team consideration for an at-large place because of their strong schedules and name brand. That's not true for the other indies. The other indies, just like the teams in G5 conferences, will only be in an 8-team playoff if they are eligible for a playoff spot for which the P5 teams are not eligible. That's why they should be eligible for that spot.

I assume you mean that the independents not named Notre Dame should be eligible for the G5 slot.

I do not concur. They aren't eligible now, and the CFP is based on conference contracts and payouts. If the independents want access to the G5 AQ slot, they can join a conference.

I know that sucks for NMSU and Liberty, who are both independents not by choice, but the other independents have elected to be there. Army, BYU, UConn, and UMass have elected to become independents and could join a conference today. They simply aren't willing to make whatever concessions are necessary for that.

I don't see why conference teams should have an advantage over independents. There's nothing magical about being in a conference compared to being an independent in terms of who the best teams are.

Because conference teams make up the majority? The whole majority rule thing is pretty much how every vote works. For someone like Notre Dame, they can join any conference they wish. Thus, being indy is a preference. It offers advantages and disadvantages---but ultimately---its Notre Dames's choice to be indy. That said--while that is true for Notre Dame--its not necessarily the every indy's preference to be indy. For some---indy life was thrust upon them.

Let me clarify: When i asked "I don't see why ... " I was talking in the abstract, philosophically. I understand that oftentimes majorities push through things that favor themselves just because it ... favors them and they have the power to do it, and conferences certainly have all the power in football.

But that doesn't make it a good idea.