Ok, I've been trying to follow this back and forth, and have a comment or two...

Stammers, think about this for a second: In the College Football Playoff era, how many players have sat out the chance to win a National Championship? The only ones that come to mind didn't do it so save themselves for the draft, they got injured late in the season and couldn't return. I think there was one defensive players that this happened to recently - he tried to play hurt but he was a liability and had to be pulled. If a player has the chance to play for a NC and has any thread of competitive fire, he's going to play. The down side of not playing in the playoff: What message does that send to prospective coaches in the NFL as to your fire for the game? Could it cost you in the draft?

As for sitting out or skipping a random Bowl Game with nothing but a trophy and the SWAG to gain? Happens all the time and may be justifiable to a known high draft choice. I don't like it, but I can understand the economics of it in their situation. I hate what has happened to water-down the post season bowl season, but as a college football fan it gives me a fix on something to watch to "feed the need".

As far as expanding the field, I think I'd rather have the chance to play in a 8- or 12-team playoff and get beaten than have no chance at all (which is where we are now). It's like the Lottery, you have to be in it to win it, otherwise you will never will.

JMHO....

(07-02-2020 12:03 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 08:55 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 05:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 04:03 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 03:10 PM)Stammers Wrote:  You also have to be practical and to be a realist. What is involved when you have 68 teams instead of 16 teams in the NCAA Tournament?

BASKETBALL
- 2 extra games played over a period of 10 days, which is less strenuous than the regular season.
- A 40 game season, whereas NBA players play an 82 game season
- There are almost no injuries in basketball.
- Massive revenue from the extra 48 games

FOOTBALL 16 TEAM PLAYOFF
- Likelihood of many more injuries
- 17 game schedule for 2 teams
- 16 game schedule for 4 teams
- 15 game schedule for 8 teams
- 14 game schedule for 16 teams
- Exponentially more players opting out
- Devaluation of many top bowl games
- Possible elimination of CCG which are huge money makers
- Teams 9-16 would have little chance of winning 1 game, even less of winning 2 games
- Players opting out would weaken the stronger teams, cripple teams 9-16.

---Hardly any will opt out-----its the national playoffs
---who would care about bowl games--other than betting--they become like NIT
---CCG--doubtful for eliminations
---9-16 on chance of winning --who cares--a chance is all they want--stated our US hockey team against Russia,,,/UCF/MEMPHIS/BALBOA/NAMATH/JIMMY CHITWOOD
---again hardly any opt out

Quote:---Hardly any will opt out-----its the national playoffs

Most of the first 2 rounds will drop out, especially teams lower than a #2 seed. Also, the players that do play will NOT want to play 4 more games; no chance in hell.

Quote:---who would care about bowl games--other than betting--they become like NIT

That is a very tough question to answer (said nobody ever from any network in the history of college football). The networks make a ton of money by televising bowl game.

Quote:---CCG--doubtful for eliminations

I will need this translated in order to answer

Quote:---9-16 on chance of winning --who cares--a chance is all they want--stated our US hockey team against

A player who is going to be picked in the 1st or 2nd round is more than likely not going to risk injury and a beatdown; much more so than we see today.

Quote:Russia,,,/UCF/MEMPHIS/BALBOA/NAMATH/JIMMY CHITWOOD

In the NCAA Tournament, every team or close to every team in the top 40 of the rankings make the field. In your Russian Balboa version, the #10 team in the country doesn't make it.

Here is the breakdown by conference of what your 16 team acid trip would have looked like in 2019.

4 $SEC
3 Big Ten
2 Big 12
1 ACC
1 PAC12
1 AAC
1 MWC
1 CUSA
1 MAC
1 SUNBELT

I'm trying not to laugh, but c'mon man. Think it out a bit.

Translated---I doubt CCG are eliminated .

Who said anything about March madness----we were talking about FB playoffs. You always want to screw the little guy out of their chance. Teams like MEMPHIS/UCF/DAVIDvs GOLIATH/BALBOA vsCREED/USA hockey vs RUSSIA---you always want to leave out teams like LIL OLE MEMPHIS. Your logic is they dont have much of a chance----I say who cares---the point is "THEY WILL HAVE A CHANCE"---unlike now with ZERO chance. UCF should have been given the chance--they were screwed---then beat Auburn in a bowl----the same Auburn that had beaten the national champions Alabama that same season. Namath 18 point dogs---hockey team biggest dogs in sports history--the country that beat our dream team.NOBODY thought they had a chance.

What TIGER fan would care that MEMPHIS was a 30pt dog against Ohio St. Tiger fans would just take the points----then take the TIGERS on the ML----then beat their AZZ straight-up. I think all 9-16 teams fans would feel the same about their teams.

I still contend that FEW if any players sit in a true national playoff.

You can contend all you want. Common sense says that no players want any part of 4 more football games; especially any that are projected to go in the first 2 rounds. Henderson gave up a chance to play at home in the Liberty Bowl. Do you really think he would have wanted to play the #2 team in the country and then possibly play 3 more games?

Just to show you how badly thought out and lacking of common sense your idea is, transfer the system to basketball.

Memphis Tiger Basketball 1980-present
- 21 NCAA appearances
- 33 NCAA wins
- 2 Final Four
- 3 Elite 8
- 5 Sweet 16

Memphis Tiger Basketball Russia/Balboa/Chitwood Format 1980-present
- 10 NCAA appearances
- 22 NCAA wins
- 2 Final Four
- 2 Elite 8
- 4 Sweet 16
- ZERO NCAA appearances from 1988-2005 (18 years)

That is how fair it would be to let your once in a lifetime longshots into the College Football playoff.

You still haven't answered the question. Do you think this is fair?

4 $SEC
3 Big Ten
2 Big 12
1 ACC
1 PAC12
1 AAC
1 MWC
1 CUSA
1 MAC
1 SUNBELT

Do you think it is fair for the ACC, PAC12 and AAC to have LESS participants than the MWC, CUSA, MAC and SUNBELT?

You asked three questions----(1) YES (2) YES (3) YES=====and again we were discussing FB--not BB.

Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

AAC team either needs to get lucky and beat a P5 champion during the season...Highly unlikely because we never get that game.

Or win 40 in a row including the access bowls to force the committees hand.

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

First off, the thought behind autobids is that if the P5 is going to agree to expand, then leagues like the B12, ACC, and PAC are going to want guarantees that their champs will be there. Most proposals out there are setup this way - 5 P5 champs, 1 G5, 2 at large. I fear that this will change, but currently that is the discussion.

Second, UCF deserved to be there after going undefeated 2 straight years. They did. You can be an SEC apologist and go with the SOS argument if you want to go that route. But if you play college athletics and don't lose a game for 1 year - let alone 2 years - you deserve to play in a postseason tournament for the NC.

(07-02-2020 08:49 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

First off, the thought behind autobids is that if the P5 is going to agree to expand, then leagues like the B12, ACC, and PAC are going to want guarantees that their champs will be there. Most proposals out there are setup this way - 5 P5 champs, 1 G5, 2 at large. I fear that this will change, but currently that is the discussion.

Second, UCF deserved to be there after going undefeated 2 straight years. They did. You can be an SEC apologist and go with the SOS argument if you want to go that route. But if you play college athletics and don't lose a game for 1 year - let alone 2 years - you deserve to play in a postseason tournament for the NC.

not a national championship
it is not recognized by the ncaa

all the other divisions have a national championship recognized by the ncaa

(07-02-2020 05:00 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 12:03 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 08:55 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 05:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 04:03 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  ---Hardly any will opt out-----its the national playoffs
---who would care about bowl games--other than betting--they become like NIT
---CCG--doubtful for eliminations
---9-16 on chance of winning --who cares--a chance is all they want--stated our US hockey team against Russia,,,/UCF/MEMPHIS/BALBOA/NAMATH/JIMMY CHITWOOD
---again hardly any opt out

Quote:---Hardly any will opt out-----its the national playoffs

Most of the first 2 rounds will drop out, especially teams lower than a #2 seed. Also, the players that do play will NOT want to play 4 more games; no chance in hell.

Quote:---who would care about bowl games--other than betting--they become like NIT

That is a very tough question to answer (said nobody ever from any network in the history of college football). The networks make a ton of money by televising bowl game.

Quote:---CCG--doubtful for eliminations

I will need this translated in order to answer

Quote:---9-16 on chance of winning --who cares--a chance is all they want--stated our US hockey team against

A player who is going to be picked in the 1st or 2nd round is more than likely not going to risk injury and a beatdown; much more so than we see today.

Quote:Russia,,,/UCF/MEMPHIS/BALBOA/NAMATH/JIMMY CHITWOOD

In the NCAA Tournament, every team or close to every team in the top 40 of the rankings make the field. In your Russian Balboa version, the #10 team in the country doesn't make it.

Here is the breakdown by conference of what your 16 team acid trip would have looked like in 2019.

4 $SEC
3 Big Ten
2 Big 12
1 ACC
1 PAC12
1 AAC
1 MWC
1 CUSA
1 MAC
1 SUNBELT

I'm trying not to laugh, but c'mon man. Think it out a bit.

Translated---I doubt CCG are eliminated .

Who said anything about March madness----we were talking about FB playoffs. You always want to screw the little guy out of their chance. Teams like MEMPHIS/UCF/DAVIDvs GOLIATH/BALBOA vsCREED/USA hockey vs RUSSIA---you always want to leave out teams like LIL OLE MEMPHIS. Your logic is they dont have much of a chance----I say who cares---the point is "THEY WILL HAVE A CHANCE"---unlike now with ZERO chance. UCF should have been given the chance--they were screwed---then beat Auburn in a bowl----the same Auburn that had beaten the national champions Alabama that same season. Namath 18 point dogs---hockey team biggest dogs in sports history--the country that beat our dream team.NOBODY thought they had a chance.

What TIGER fan would care that MEMPHIS was a 30pt dog against Ohio St. Tiger fans would just take the points----then take the TIGERS on the ML----then beat their AZZ straight-up. I think all 9-16 teams fans would feel the same about their teams.

I still contend that FEW if any players sit in a true national playoff.

You can contend all you want. Common sense says that no players want any part of 4 more football games; especially any that are projected to go in the first 2 rounds. Henderson gave up a chance to play at home in the Liberty Bowl. Do you really think he would have wanted to play the #2 team in the country and then possibly play 3 more games?

Just to show you how badly thought out and lacking of common sense your idea is, transfer the system to basketball.

Memphis Tiger Basketball 1980-present
- 21 NCAA appearances
- 33 NCAA wins
- 2 Final Four
- 3 Elite 8
- 5 Sweet 16

Memphis Tiger Basketball Russia/Balboa/Chitwood Format 1980-present
- 10 NCAA appearances
- 22 NCAA wins
- 2 Final Four
- 2 Elite 8
- 4 Sweet 16
- ZERO NCAA appearances from 1988-2005 (18 years)

That is how fair it would be to let your once in a lifetime longshots into the College Football playoff.

You still haven't answered the question. Do you think this is fair?

4 $SEC
3 Big Ten
2 Big 12
1 ACC
1 PAC12
1 AAC
1 MWC
1 CUSA
1 MAC
1 SUNBELT

Do you think it is fair for the ACC, PAC12 and AAC to have LESS participants than the MWC, CUSA, MAC and SUNBELT?

You asked three questions----(1) YES (2) YES (3) YES=====and again we were discussing FB--not BB.

The basketball parallel was to try to get through to you. Right now every single participant is P5 and zero outside of that group.

Your "fair" solution is to have 5 non cartel participants, with them out numbering every single P5 conference.

Mind boggling.

(07-02-2020 09:08 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 08:49 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

First off, the thought behind autobids is that if the P5 is going to agree to expand, then leagues like the B12, ACC, and PAC are going to want guarantees that their champs will be there. Most proposals out there are setup this way - 5 P5 champs, 1 G5, 2 at large. I fear that this will change, but currently that is the discussion.

Second, UCF deserved to be there after going undefeated 2 straight years. They did. You can be an SEC apologist and go with the SOS argument if you want to go that route. But if you play college athletics and don't lose a game for 1 year - let alone 2 years - you deserve to play in a postseason tournament for the NC.

not a national championship
it is not recognized by the ncaa

all the other divisions have a national championship recognized by the ncaa

It is still technically recognized by the NCAA; however, it is stipulated... which is why UCF can accurately claim a NC in 2017. They were recognized as NC by the computer poll, so the NCAA listed them as such.

(07-02-2020 04:40 PM)former guest Wrote:  Ok, I've been trying to follow this back and forth, and have a comment or two...

Stammers, think about this for a second: In the College Football Playoff era, how many players have sat out the chance to win a National Championship? The only ones that come to mind didn't do it so save themselves for the draft, they got injured late in the season and couldn't return. I think there was one defensive players that this happened to recently - he tried to play hurt but he was a liability and had to be pulled. If a player has the chance to play for a NC and has any thread of competitive fire, he's going to play. The down side of not playing in the playoff: What message does that send to prospective coaches in the NFL as to your fire for the game? Could it cost you in the draft?

As for sitting out or skipping a random Bowl Game with nothing but a trophy and the SWAG to gain? Happens all the time and may be justifiable to a known high draft choice. I don't like it, but I can understand the economics of it in their situation. I hate what has happened to water-down the post season bowl season, but as a college football fan it gives me a fix on something to watch to "feed the need".

As far as expanding the field, I think I'd rather have the chance to play in a 8- or 12-team playoff and get beaten than have no chance at all (which is where we are now). It's like the Lottery, you have to be in it to win it, otherwise you will never will.

JMHO....

If there is an 8 team playoff, there will be a G5 participant. If there is a 12 or 16 team playoff, I can't see players wanting to risk playing in 4 games. It's too much. Also, it will devalue the bowl games and CCG's.

The main points are that if there is an expanded playoff, there will be a G5 participant, and there is zero chance that the cartel will allow all of the conferences to be represented.

(07-02-2020 09:08 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 08:49 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

First off, the thought behind autobids is that if the P5 is going to agree to expand, then leagues like the B12, ACC, and PAC are going to want guarantees that their champs will be there. Most proposals out there are setup this way - 5 P5 champs, 1 G5, 2 at large. I fear that this will change, but currently that is the discussion.

Second, UCF deserved to be there after going undefeated 2 straight years. They did. You can be an SEC apologist and go with the SOS argument if you want to go that route. But if you play college athletics and don't lose a game for 1 year - let alone 2 years - you deserve to play in a postseason tournament for the NC.

not a national championship
it is not recognized by the ncaa

all the other divisions have a national championship recognized by the ncaa

Technically there is a difference in the NCAA championships and the FBS national championship but the NCAA does recognize it, it's just not NCAA organized like others. It's in their records books & ironically they also recognized UCF after they beat Auburn when a computer program used to rank FBS schools said UCF was the natl champ. As I recall that ranking/recognition served as the basis for UCF's natl championship claim.

(07-03-2020 06:57 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 09:08 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 08:49 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

First off, the thought behind autobids is that if the P5 is going to agree to expand, then leagues like the B12, ACC, and PAC are going to want guarantees that their champs will be there. Most proposals out there are setup this way - 5 P5 champs, 1 G5, 2 at large. I fear that this will change, but currently that is the discussion.

Second, UCF deserved to be there after going undefeated 2 straight years. They did. You can be an SEC apologist and go with the SOS argument if you want to go that route. But if you play college athletics and don't lose a game for 1 year - let alone 2 years - you deserve to play in a postseason tournament for the NC.

not a national championship
it is not recognized by the ncaa

all the other divisions have a national championship recognized by the ncaa

Technically there is a difference in the NCAA championships and the FBS national championship but the NCAA does recognize it, it's just not NCAA organized like others. It's in their records books & ironically they also recognized UCF after they beat Auburn when a computer program used to rank FBS schools said UCF was the natl champ. As I recall that ranking/recognition served as the basis for UCF's natl championship claim.

Division I FBS football is the only National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) sport for which the NCAA does not sanction a yearly championship event. As such, it is sometimes unofficially referred to as a "mythical national championship".

(07-03-2020 08:32 AM)Unionman76 Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 06:57 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 09:08 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 08:49 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 05:43 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  Since the polls determine who gets the 4 playoff slots now, there's no reason to think that an expanded playoff's draw would be selected differently. I do not envision a scenario where all 5 of the P5 league champs + Notre Dame + G5 + at large would have guaranteed slots. The polls took out the "upset factor", where Alabama can lose to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, but still win the title.

I will also say that the one thing that separates the AAC from the Big 12, ACC & Pac 10 is that we haven't had a team that deserved to be in the playoffs. Clemson, Fla State, Oregon & Oklahoma have all made it to the playoffs, and have deserved to be there. There is no one currently in the AAC that can make that claim.

Folks on this board may disagree with me, but Memphis, UCF & Houston were not "title contenders", any more than Boise has ever been. Just because our leagues are better does not get us automatic access to the playoffs. What we need to press for is a better TV deal and more "access bowl" slots. That's what the "P6" campaign is about - getting the AAC champ and runner up better exposure & bowl access. Get that, and then after a few years of more money & exposure, hopefully that AAC "super team" emerges to challenge the Big 12, Pac 10 & ACC for the 4th playoff slot.

First off, the thought behind autobids is that if the P5 is going to agree to expand, then leagues like the B12, ACC, and PAC are going to want guarantees that their champs will be there. Most proposals out there are setup this way - 5 P5 champs, 1 G5, 2 at large. I fear that this will change, but currently that is the discussion.

Second, UCF deserved to be there after going undefeated 2 straight years. They did. You can be an SEC apologist and go with the SOS argument if you want to go that route. But if you play college athletics and don't lose a game for 1 year - let alone 2 years - you deserve to play in a postseason tournament for the NC.

not a national championship
it is not recognized by the ncaa

all the other divisions have a national championship recognized by the ncaa

Technically there is a difference in the NCAA championships and the FBS national championship but the NCAA does recognize it, it's just not NCAA organized like others. It's in their records books & ironically they also recognized UCF after they beat Auburn when a computer program used to rank FBS schools said UCF was the natl champ. As I recall that ranking/recognition served as the basis for UCF's natl championship claim.

Division I FBS football is the only National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) sport for which the NCAA does not sanction a yearly championship event. As such, it is sometimes unofficially referred to as a "mythical national championship".

It is never referred that way these days. That goes back to when there was not even a BCS and the polls had total control over the NC. These days, everyone calls it a NC. The NCAA does recognize it, they just don't govern it.

And who cares what the NCAA officially does anyway. They also say we only played in 1 F4 too, but we all know we played in 3.

A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conference would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conferences would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

(07-03-2020 04:29 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conferences would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

I wouldn’t and the “P5” schools would never agree to it. Meaningless butt-whipping with a lot of chance for injury. 12 now 14 works in the NFL due to parity. College football has no such parity. 8 would be great.

(07-02-2020 03:44 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 02:39 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(07-01-2020 04:40 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(06-26-2020 12:09 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Yeah, I'm fine with 8 teams with one guaranteed slot to the G5, 5 for the P5 winners, and 2 at large bids to the top 2 ranked other teams.

In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing the MWC and the AAC create an alliance. Cross-scheduling 2 OOC games each year - one home and one away. Do away with our conference champ games. And replace it with a championship game between our 2 conference regular season champs. That would be the de facto play-in game for the CFP.

What I am afraid will happen is that WHEN they go to 8 teams, they will do away with auto-bids altogether and replace it with 8 at larges. That will be the way to cook the books on the rankings and continue to exclude the G5.

Uhhh... That's what they have NOW. There are NO auto-bids into the playoff. You can argue that there is a de facto auto-bid for the SEC... and that's about it. Every other P5 conference has either been in danger of, or ACTUALLY have been left out of the playoff each year.

I am familiar, lol.
I just didn't say it very well.
I meant that we and most everyone else keep talking about autobids if it expands to 8. And I'm afraid that the power$ will jerk that football away.

Doesn’t mean it won’t change, but the only proposal/justification for eight teams that I’ve seen to date includes both auto bids and a G5. Each P5 conference champion guaranteed a spot, the highest ranked G5 and two at-large teams.

This would be a start at giving college football a true national champion. I still believe a 12 team playoff would be better (The top 4 seeds get a bye). Then there could be a possible representative from each conference but not a guarantee. As things are now no conference champion is assured a shot at the national championship, no one can see any common sense in that.

(07-03-2020 06:04 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 04:29 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conferences would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

I wouldn’t and the “P5” schools would never agree to it. Meaningless butt-whipping with a lot of chance for injury. 12 now 14 works in the NFL due to parity. College football has no such parity. 8 would be great.

Potential injuries happen everyday, as likely in practice as games. As for TV viewers, we watch in mass even the 1 vs 16 games in the MBB tourney so I'm guessing you're in the minority. Money will make the eventually decisions, and it will likely start at going to 8, then 12 & then maybe 12 or 16.

(07-03-2020 09:01 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 06:04 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 04:29 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conferences would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

I wouldn’t and the “P5” schools would never agree to it. Meaningless butt-whipping with a lot of chance for injury. 12 now 14 works in the NFL due to parity. College football has no such parity. 8 would be great.

Potential injuries happen everyday, as likely in practice as games. As for TV viewers, we watch in mass even the 1 vs 16 games in the MBB tourney so I'm guessing you're in the minority. Money will make the eventually decisions, and it will likely start at going to 8, then 12 & then maybe 12 or 16.

No, I watch those just like every other red-blooded American sports fan. College football does not equal college basketball. It’s an entirely different animal.

(07-03-2020 09:15 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:01 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 06:04 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 04:29 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conferences would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

I wouldn’t and the “P5” schools would never agree to it. Meaningless butt-whipping with a lot of chance for injury. 12 now 14 works in the NFL due to parity. College football has no such parity. 8 would be great.

Potential injuries happen everyday, as likely in practice as games. As for TV viewers, we watch in mass even the 1 vs 16 games in the MBB tourney so I'm guessing you're in the minority. Money will make the eventually decisions, and it will likely start at going to 8, then 12 & then maybe 12 or 16.

No, I watch those just like every other red-blooded American sports fan. College football does not equal college basketball. It’s an entirely different animal.

No college FB isn't college BB. College FB generates about 3x the revenues of college BB because so many more folks are watching & attending.

(07-03-2020 10:42 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:15 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:01 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 06:04 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 04:29 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  A 16 team playoff is not likely but could serve to revitalize the bowls and might actually serve to revitalize interest in D1 college FB over the regular season because all of the D1 conferences would be involved. All of the NY6 bowls & 6 more could be used to play the 1st & 2nd round games. TV and gate revenue would soar for these games. And for the schools left standing after the first two rounds, the host venues, the TV & general interest across the country would generate interest & revenue at levels we have never seen. So what if the MAC champ has no chance against AL, we'd all watch anyway to speculate if AL is really good enough to win it all. I just don't understand the opposition given that revenue drives most all D1 decisions already.

I wouldn’t and the “P5” schools would never agree to it. Meaningless butt-whipping with a lot of chance for injury. 12 now 14 works in the NFL due to parity. College football has no such parity. 8 would be great.

Potential injuries happen everyday, as likely in practice as games. As for TV viewers, we watch in mass even the 1 vs 16 games in the MBB tourney so I'm guessing you're in the minority. Money will make the eventually decisions, and it will likely start at going to 8, then 12 & then maybe 12 or 16.

No, I watch those just like every other red-blooded American sports fan. College football does not equal college basketball. It’s an entirely different animal.

No college FB isn't college BB. College FB generates about 3x the revenues of college BB because so many more folks are watching & attending.

And it’s far easier to put a group of five starters and a few backups on the court than it is to put 22 starters, go two deep and have special teams added into the mix. MAC teams are woefully unable to do that compared to SEC, Big 10 teams that say “hold my beer”.