Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
Author Message
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,304
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #1
The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
5-1-2 and other variations of enlarged playoff formats get talked about a lot on here so I think it’s time to concentrate conversations about them into a mega thread.

Here’s my modest proposal:

Autobids for the P5 champs and the highest rated G5 plus 2 at larges.

Dump the ESPN hand selected committee for the old BCS formula to determine (one tweak though—no more coaches poll. None of them actually have time to put much thought in their votes and I don’t like the idea of coaches who have a stake in the outcome having influence in the final rankings—assemble a large group of ex coaches to be voters)

Who is the top G5 champ
Who the top 2 at larges are
Seeding for the field of 8

Use the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange Bowls as quarter final sites.

Bid out the semi final and final sites each year.

Seeds 1-3 get to pick their quarter final sites in order: 1-2-3. The remaining bowl gets the 4 v 5 match up.

Semi finals played around the 10th-14th of Jan. Final the Saturday of the weekend before the Super Bowl (Pro Bowl Weekend).
01-03-2021 04:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #2
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
I’ll bite on the mega thread. My twist to the above vanilla is a Wild Card Game on Championship Saturday between the two best teams not in a CCG; winner gets 1 of the at large spots; fans get great TV. The 2nd and final at large likely then goes to a CCG runner-up (Notre Dame this year).

Can’t argue against Muskie’s postseason format... but it does take us deep into January, doesn’t it. I still think there is a possibility of a mid-December round.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 01:33 AM by Crayton.)
01-04-2021 01:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #3
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
Akin to this topic, I wouldn’t mind if they built in a re-evaluation of “who” gets the auto-bids, much like the BCS did its last 2 years (Big East made it Mountain West did not).

Must be Top 5 in 2 of:
a) Highest ranked team
b) # of Top 25 regular season finishes
c) Average computer rank of all conference teams

This is done on a rolling 4-year average and assessed by current conference makeup. If only 4 conferences qualify (looking at you, Pac-12), the top 2 non-AQ champs qualify. No more than 5 conferences can qualify. This assessment is done before the season begins so teams/conferences know what they are playing for.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 01:45 AM by Crayton.)
01-04-2021 01:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,473
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 133
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #4
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
A 5-1-2 is probably the fairest alternative that I can see the CFP expanding to but, is it realistic.

The P5 have shown thus far that they want nothing to do with giving the G5 access. The closest the G5 has come was the BCS year Cincy was ranked 3 or 4 and ended up playing Florida during Tim Tebow's senior year for their troubles. The BCS computers showed that a G5 team could get into the top 4. So next iteration, the CFP removed the computers in favor of a selection committee. So... would a 5-3 be more realistic? With a selection committee of course because the P5 will never go back to a computer ranking format. Would there be enough outcry from fans for the powers that be to acquiesce to 5-1-2?

In the months leading up to the CFP, very little was leaked and when it came out, there was major bowl tie ins for the major conferences, 1 million per team (up to 12 teams) for the G5 conferences and the lion's share of the money going to the P5. There was also special access for ND. I don't see the major bowls getting away from tie ins to conferences and sharing the money evenly with the top G5 champ. If the P5 do give up access they'll find away to keep most of the money in the P5.

Baby steps.

What if the CFP only expands 1 slot to 5-teams (with #4 vs. #5 in a play in game), or in 2025 the P5 consolidate to a P4 and allow P4 champs only in the CFP? That would categorically eliminate the G5 from the CFP but it would give you a merit based system with in the P4/P5. Win your division, win your conference, you're in the CFP. I could see something like this gaining traction because the change would increase interest for having a merit based NC for the first time in history.

If there is a consolidation of the P5 in 2025, it will come at the same time as the CFP to be re-upped. I could easily see in the ensuing chaos of massive realignment a P4 champs only Playoff coming about.

Anything over an 8-team playoff at this point is wishful thinking.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 05:03 AM by ChrisLords.)
01-04-2021 04:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #5
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
I agree with baby steps. 4v5 is not really a baby step because if you give a TV exec that cookie they’ll want 3v6 and 2v7 and that new weekend would be filled quickly.

Now, 4v5 (or whoever the top non-division champs are) on CCG weekend when the other top teams are already playing, I could see. Maybe make the playoff Champ-Only but allow the winner of that Wild Card Game eligibility (independent Notre Dame would have to win that game).
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 08:48 AM by Crayton.)
01-04-2021 08:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,317
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 300
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #6
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 04:50 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  A 5-1-2 is probably the fairest alternative that I can see the CFP expanding to but, is it realistic.

IMO, yes it is realistic. Access isn't so much of an issue as money is what the P5 covets. Now I do think you're correct in that a 5-1-2 will in most years be a 5-3 because of whatever stipulations a put on the G5 spot (top 15 ranking?) and will be apart of the the committee selection process along with the other two wild card spots.
01-04-2021 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,473
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 133
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #7
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 08:58 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:50 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  A 5-1-2 is probably the fairest alternative that I can see the CFP expanding to but, is it realistic.

IMO, yes it is realistic. Access isn't so much of an issue as money is what the P5 covets. Now I do think you're correct in that a 5-1-2 will in most years be a 5-3 because of whatever stipulations a put on the G5 spot (top 15 ranking?) and will be apart of the the committee selection process along with the other two wild card spots.

How do the CFP bowl tie ins work? It seem to me that in order for the P4/P5 to keep most of the money that the group of 6 CFP bowls will have to have a group deal with all the P4/P5 where they're champs can go to the bowl that they are seeded. Then G5 teams and at-larges receive a pittance for their participation. Currently about $5mil, it will probably be $10 mil in 2025. I figure the 6 CFP bowls rotate around the 6 1st and 2nd round games and the Championship game is bid out every year.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 09:41 AM by ChrisLords.)
01-04-2021 09:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,622
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 570
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #8
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
I'll start by saying I'm opposed to any 8 team playoff, regardless of the format. But, keep in mind, this is coming from someone who would be happy if there were no playoff at all.

But since this thread is specifically about a format for an 8 team playoff, I'll play the game.

I don't want any autobids at all. However, I do believe conference championships should matter. Therefore I would propose that bids go to every conference champion ranked in the Top 12, determined by a special poll of AP writers, who would only vote on who they believe are the Top 15 teams. If that means 5 P5 champs and 1 or 2 G5 champs, so be it. But I'm also cool with an outcome of fewer than 5 qualifying P5 champs. The rest of the field would go to the highest ranked non-champions without regard to conference affiliation.

If schools like Notre Dame and BYU wish to remain independent, they can only qualify as at-large entries with no special treatment.

Finally, I would untether the CFP from the bowls entirely. The major bowl sites can be used for CFP games as long as they don't conflict with whatever contractual arrangements they have made with conferences for their Bowl Game. But they would be competing for the right to host CFP games with other venues that aren't part of what we now call the NY6.

I would play first round CFP games the week after CCG's at the home field of the higher seeded team (but with all revenues going into the CFP payout fund). First round losers are eligible to be selected for any bowl that will have them.

Semifinals are played on New Years Day, with the final on a weekday night in prime time about a week later.
01-04-2021 09:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,473
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 133
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #9
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 09:43 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'll start by saying I'm opposed to any 8 team playoff, regardless of the format. But, keep in mind, this is coming from someone who would be happy if there were no playoff at all.

But since this thread is specifically about a format for an 8 team playoff, I'll play the game.

I don't want any autobids at all. However, I do believe conference championships should matter. Therefore I would propose that bids go to every conference champion ranked in the Top 12, determined by a special poll of AP writers, who would only vote on who they believe are the Top 15 teams. If that means 5 P5 champs and 1 or 2 G5 champs, so be it. But I'm also cool with an outcome of fewer than 5 qualifying P5 champs. The rest of the field would go to the highest ranked non-champions without regard to conference affiliation.

If schools like Notre Dame and BYU wish to remain independent, they can only qualify as at-large entries with no special treatment.

Finally, I would untether the CFP from the bowls entirely. The major bowl sites can be used for CFP games as long as they don't conflict with whatever contractual arrangements they have made with conferences for their Bowl Game. But they would be competing for the right to host CFP games with other venues that aren't part of what we now call the NY6.

I would play first round CFP games the week after CCG's at the home field of the higher seeded team (but with all revenues going into the CFP payout fund). First round losers are eligible to be selected for any bowl that will have them.

Semifinals are played on New Years Day, with the final on a weekday night in prime time about a week later.

I like that setup. A CFP berth and a bowl. More football by the elite teams. Even better.
01-04-2021 09:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,313
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 245
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #10
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
I have personally would prefer to drop down to 2 teams in or none at all and go back to old bowl system. Those aren't happening and I despise how the bowls are losing their importance as the destinations under the current set-up, so here would be my 8 team playoff proposal to balance the old system of traditions and pageantry with the bowls combined with a bigger playoff. I'm still concerned this will make the regular season less interesting, but could accept this as at least a nod at tradition as I think change will happen anyway and this preserves something I love about the system at least.

Whole proposal (most can be altered, key part is the bowl match-ups)

1. Five champs from power 5 conferences. The champ can be replaced by a different team from same conference if champ is not in the top 20, a different team in the conference is at least 5 spots higher, and that team has a better winning percentage in conference than the one they replace (basically in the old days before conference championship games, the other team would have been declared conference champ). This is very rarely relevant, but call this the counter to conference championship games which can sometimes offer teams with no businesses winning a conference championship a chance. Examples: UCLA was in the PAC-12 championship as a 6-6 team one year. Wisconsin represented the Leaders division once with what I believe was a 4-4 conference record because Ohio State and Penn State were not eligible and they did win. This part would almost certainly not be included, but I think there is a bit too much emphasis on conference championship games themselves and would like a small counter.

2. The highest ranked group of 5 champion is in if they are ranked at least 18. This will be the case most years.

3. Independents and teams in Group of 5 conferences are in if they are in the top 8 no matter what. This is biggest for independents. The reason this provision is in there is that since independents have no automatic way to get in (winning a conference), they should not be able to be pushed out of the field of 8 teams if they are one of the best 8. Example: Let's say we have #7 Ohio State (not conference champ), #8 BYU, and #9 USC (lowest power 5 conference champ). In this case, BYU would get in over Ohio State. Ohio State had a chance to get an autobid by winning the conference and didn't (and in other years, might get the bid while ranked #17 just because they won the conference). USC gets in because they won the PAC-12 despite the lower rank.

4. I'll come back to the quarter-finals in a minute, but the semi-finals and championship are held at the same location 1 week a apart in what is deemed championship week. It will be a single destination to minimize travel and getting to it will be a big deal.

5. The quarter finals will be New Years Day and one other day around it. They will be in traditional bowls with as much traditional elements as can be maintained. Throughout the season, SEC teams will be once again be throwing sugar on the field if they think they can make the Sugar bowl and Big Ten and PAC-12 fans will have the Rose as their goal most the time (with 1 provision). The conferences can decide for themselves the specific bowls, but my thoughts would be:

Rose Bowl: Big Ten vs. PAC-12 (see note below)
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. at large
Cotton Bowl: Big 12 vs. at large
Orange Bowl: ACC vs. at large

To prevent too big or small a match-up in the Rose Bowl, the lower ranked of the Big Ten or PAC-12 champs would be moved out if a) the Big Ten and PAC-12 champs are both in the top 3 teams in the field or b) both champs are in the bottom 3 of the field. If another 2 conferences have their champs tied to the same bowl, the same rules would apply.
01-04-2021 09:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #11
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 09:56 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I have personally would prefer to drop down to 2 teams in or none at all and go back to old bowl system. Those aren't happening and I despise how the bowls are losing their importance as the destinations under the current set-up, so here would be my 8 team playoff proposal to balance the old system of traditions and pageantry with the bowls combined with a bigger playoff. I'm still concerned this will make the regular season less interesting, but could accept this as at least a nod at tradition as I think change will happen anyway and this preserves something I love about the system at least.

Whole proposal (most can be altered, key part is the bowl match-ups)

1. Five champs from power 5 conferences. The champ can be replaced by a different team from same conference if champ is not in the top 20, a different team in the conference is at least 5 spots higher, and that team has a better winning percentage in conference than the one they replace (basically in the old days before conference championship games, the other team would have been declared conference champ). This is very rarely relevant, but call this the counter to conference championship games which can sometimes offer teams with no businesses winning a conference championship a chance. Examples: UCLA was in the PAC-12 championship as a 6-6 team one year. Wisconsin represented the Leaders division once with what I believe was a 4-4 conference record because Ohio State and Penn State were not eligible and they did win. This part would almost certainly not be included, but I think there is a bit too much emphasis on conference championship games themselves and would like a small counter.

2. The highest ranked group of 5 champion is in if they are ranked at least 18. This will be the case most years.

3. Independents and teams in Group of 5 conferences are in if they are in the top 8 no matter what. This is biggest for independents. The reason this provision is in there is that since independents have no automatic way to get in (winning a conference), they should not be able to be pushed out of the field of 8 teams if they are one of the best 8. Example: Let's say we have #7 Ohio State (not conference champ), #8 BYU, and #9 USC (lowest power 5 conference champ). In this case, BYU would get in over Ohio State. Ohio State had a chance to get an autobid by winning the conference and didn't (and in other years, might get the bid while ranked #17 just because they won the conference). USC gets in because they won the PAC-12 despite the lower rank.

4. I'll come back to the quarter-finals in a minute, but the semi-finals and championship are held at the same location 1 week a apart in what is deemed championship week. It will be a single destination to minimize travel and getting to it will be a big deal.

5. The quarter finals will be New Years Day and one other day around it. They will be in traditional bowls with as much traditional elements as can be maintained. Throughout the season, SEC teams will be once again be throwing sugar on the field if they think they can make the Sugar bowl and Big Ten and PAC-12 fans will have the Rose as their goal most the time (with 1 provision). The conferences can decide for themselves the specific bowls, but my thoughts would be:

Rose Bowl: Big Ten vs. PAC-12 (see note below)
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. at large
Cotton Bowl: Big 12 vs. at large
Orange Bowl: ACC vs. at large

To prevent too big or small a match-up in the Rose Bowl, the lower ranked of the Big Ten or PAC-12 champs would be moved out if a) the Big Ten and PAC-12 champs are both in the top 3 teams in the field or b) both champs are in the bottom 3 of the field. If another 2 conferences have their champs tied to the same bowl, the same rules would apply.

Neat idea about Championship week. Could work, I think. The Top 3 proviso is precisely what I'd put for the Rose. Didn't think about bottom 3. Agree with your sentiments about bowl season.

Nice thought with the Top 20 limit on Champs. I too think it would be skipped by the P5. If this one is fantasy, might as well line it up with the G5 limit: if no non-P5 champ is Top 20, they are replaced by the highest ranked non-P5 team in the Top 20.

Likely the Top 8 rule for Indy/G5 teams is replaced by another Notre Dame rule. The primary reason is ND is the biggest grab from that bag. The other reason is that a second G5 or BYU would be stealing a bid from the #2 At-Large, maybe even ranked as high as #4. If a rule like this is added it'll be subsequent to a rule granting at-large bids to Top 5 at-larges (the first 2 BCS addendums guaranteed bids to the #3 and #4 teams).
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 10:28 AM by Crayton.)
01-04-2021 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,317
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 300
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #12
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 09:37 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 08:58 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 04:50 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  A 5-1-2 is probably the fairest alternative that I can see the CFP expanding to but, is it realistic.

IMO, yes it is realistic. Access isn't so much of an issue as money is what the P5 covets. Now I do think you're correct in that a 5-1-2 will in most years be a 5-3 because of whatever stipulations a put on the G5 spot (top 15 ranking?) and will be apart of the the committee selection process along with the other two wild card spots.

How do the CFP bowl tie ins work? It seem to me that in order for the P4/P5 to keep most of the money that the group of 6 CFP bowls will have to have a group deal with all the P4/P5 where they're champs can go to the bowl that they are seeded. Then G5 teams and at-larges receive a pittance for their participation. Currently about $5mil, it will probably be $10 mil in 2025. I figure the 6 CFP bowls rotate around the 6 1st and 2nd round games and the Championship game is bid out every year.

As ken d mentioned, I think the 1st round of an 8 team playoff would have to be at the higher seeds home. This bypasses the Bowls and their demands and revenue from these quarterfinals would be tied to the higher seeds conference affiliation. The G5 bid would rarely be in a position to host this game.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 10:26 AM by vandiver49.)
01-04-2021 10:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,317
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 300
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #13
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 09:43 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'll start by saying I'm opposed to any 8 team playoff, regardless of the format. But, keep in mind, this is coming from someone who would be happy if there were no playoff at all.

But since this thread is specifically about a format for an 8 team playoff, I'll play the game.

I don't want any autobids at all. However, I do believe conference championships should matter. Therefore I would propose that bids go to every conference champion ranked in the Top 12, determined by a special poll of AP writers, who would only vote on who they believe are the Top 15 teams. If that means 5 P5 champs and 1 or 2 G5 champs, so be it. But I'm also cool with an outcome of fewer than 5 qualifying P5 champs. The rest of the field would go to the highest ranked non-champions without regard to conference affiliation.

I don't love autobids, but that is the only way IMO to sell the expansion to the P5 conferences. Guarantees outweigh potential in this case. And it also ensures (in theory) national interest in the CFP, especially west of the Mississippi.
01-04-2021 10:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,317
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 300
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #14
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 09:56 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I have personally would prefer to drop down to 2 teams in or none at all and go back to old bowl system. Those aren't happening and I despise how the bowls are losing their importance as the destinations under the current set-up, so here would be my 8 team playoff proposal to balance the old system of traditions and pageantry with the bowls combined with a bigger playoff. I'm still concerned this will make the regular season less interesting, but could accept this as at least a nod at tradition as I think change will happen anyway and this preserves something I love about the system at least.

But isn't this what everyone wanted? Why is no one happy? /s

Quote:Rose Bowl: Big Ten vs. PAC-12 (see note below)
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. at large
Cotton Bowl: Big 12 vs. at large
Orange Bowl: ACC vs. at large

To prevent too big or small a match-up in the Rose Bowl, the lower ranked of the Big Ten or PAC-12 champs would be moved out if a) the Big Ten and PAC-12 champs are both in the top 3 teams in the field or b) both champs are in the bottom 3 of the field. If another 2 conferences have their champs tied to the same bowl, the same rules would apply.

If playoff expansion happens, catering to the whims of the Rose Bowl has to come to an end.
01-04-2021 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,783
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1159
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #15
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-03-2021 04:39 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  5-1-2 and other variations of enlarged playoff formats get talked about a lot on here so I think it’s time to concentrate conversations about them into a mega thread.

I prefer the current CFP, but if we have to go to 8, I say "no" to auto-bids for anyone. Just use a BCS type formula to rank the top 8 teams, regardless of conference.

07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 10:48 AM by quo vadis.)
01-04-2021 10:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,248
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1700
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #16
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 01:30 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I’ll bite on the mega thread. My twist to the above vanilla is a Wild Card Game on Championship Saturday between the two best teams not in a CCG; winner gets 1 of the at large spots; fans get great TV. The 2nd and final at large likely then goes to a CCG runner-up (Notre Dame this year).

Can’t argue against Muskie’s postseason format... but it does take us deep into January, doesn’t it. I still think there is a possibility of a mid-December round.

I would say if you do that, the idea would be to have it the week after the CCGs, so there isn't TV competition. And you could still do the CFP show after the CCGs. In your scenario, it has to be the week before for the wildcards.

One twist on that would be to have a game between the top 2 G5 champs instead. Of course, that could lead to a less than optimal 8th team, but it also expands access.
01-04-2021 11:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Eldonabe Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,629
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 373
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
Post: #17
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-03-2021 04:39 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  5-1-2 and other variations of enlarged playoff formats get talked about a lot on here so I think it’s time to concentrate conversations about them into a mega thread.

Here’s my modest proposal:

Autobids for the P5 champs and the highest rated G5 plus 2 at larges.

Dump the ESPN hand selected committee for the old BCS formula to determine (one tweak though—no more coaches poll. None of them actually have time to put much thought in their votes and I don’t like the idea of coaches who have a stake in the outcome having influence in the final rankings—assemble a large group of ex coaches to be voters)

Who is the top G5 champ
Who the top 2 at larges are
Seeding for the field of 8

Use the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange Bowls as quarter final sites.

Bid out the semi final and final sites each year.

Seeds 1-3 get to pick their quarter final sites in order: 1-2-3. The remaining bowl gets the 4 v 5 match up.

Semi finals played around the 10th-14th of Jan. Final the Saturday of the weekend before the Super Bowl (Pro Bowl Weekend).


NO NO NO.... to auto bids. This year is EXACTLY why auto bids should not be allowed.

The PAC-12's highest ranked team (USC) was 17 and THEY LOST in their conference championship game to #25 Oregon.

This auto bid BS is only about finding a way to get a G5 in the tournament and that is it. These auto bid proposals are merely a way to get the P5 to agree to it. Frankly if I was any of the P5 except the Pac12 - I would vote against it too (the auto bid). The current 4 team event works - you are always getting 4 of the 5 best teams in the country (IMO they pandered to ND who should not have gotten in this year).

IMO Cincy would have earned a berth in an 8 team tourney without auto bids this year. They put up a decent performance against an uninspired A&M team this year which was great, but if they lined up against Alabama in the 1-8 game instead, the odds of it being ugly are high. I still say they earned the right in that scenario but it would have likely proven the (arguing) points on a few levels against teams that should not be in this tourney.


This auto bid stuff is setting 1 if not 2 teams up annually for getting decimated in the first round game most years. I can't imagine how bad of an arse whoopin' Bama would have put on Oregon. I don't want to see that and most of the pure CBF fans don't either.

You will never get 100% concensus agreement on the 4 or 8 teams that get into a BCS tournament (no matter the system), but auto bids virtually guarantee that a team that does not deserve to be there gets the chance to.... If the top 8 are "voted in" the only one who may have an argument is #9 and maybe #10.
01-04-2021 12:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,248
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1700
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #18
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 09:43 AM)ken d Wrote:  I'll start by saying I'm opposed to any 8 team playoff, regardless of the format. But, keep in mind, this is coming from someone who would be happy if there were no playoff at all.

But since this thread is specifically about a format for an 8 team playoff, I'll play the game.

I don't want any autobids at all. However, I do believe conference championships should matter. Therefore I would propose that bids go to every conference champion ranked in the Top 12, determined by a special poll of AP writers, who would only vote on who they believe are the Top 15 teams. If that means 5 P5 champs and 1 or 2 G5 champs, so be it. But I'm also cool with an outcome of fewer than 5 qualifying P5 champs. The rest of the field would go to the highest ranked non-champions without regard to conference affiliation.

If schools like Notre Dame and BYU wish to remain independent, they can only qualify as at-large entries with no special treatment.

Finally, I would untether the CFP from the bowls entirely. The major bowl sites can be used for CFP games as long as they don't conflict with whatever contractual arrangements they have made with conferences for their Bowl Game. But they would be competing for the right to host CFP games with other venues that aren't part of what we now call the NY6.

I would play first round CFP games the week after CCG's at the home field of the higher seeded team (but with all revenues going into the CFP payout fund). First round losers are eligible to be selected for any bowl that will have them.

Semifinals are played on New Years Day, with the final on a weekday night in prime time about a week later.

The main point of expansion is to make sure all deserving teams make it. If you determine that by poll, you defeat part of the purpose.

There is also the point of getting every major conference in. Again, you defeat that purpose with a poll.

From 2001 to 2012, the ACC champ only made the top 8 3 times. They only made the top 12 6 times.

For the Pac 12, they have missed top 8 3 times and top 12 twice since 1998. The Big 10 has missed top 8 5 times and top 12 3 times. And several times those teams were right at #8 or #12. The Big 12 has twice missed top 8. The SEC even missed the top 12 once.
01-04-2021 12:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,248
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1700
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #19
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 12:00 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  
(01-03-2021 04:39 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  5-1-2 and other variations of enlarged playoff formats get talked about a lot on here so I think it’s time to concentrate conversations about them into a mega thread.

Here’s my modest proposal:

Autobids for the P5 champs and the highest rated G5 plus 2 at larges.

Dump the ESPN hand selected committee for the old BCS formula to determine (one tweak though—no more coaches poll. None of them actually have time to put much thought in their votes and I don’t like the idea of coaches who have a stake in the outcome having influence in the final rankings—assemble a large group of ex coaches to be voters)

Who is the top G5 champ
Who the top 2 at larges are
Seeding for the field of 8

Use the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange Bowls as quarter final sites.

Bid out the semi final and final sites each year.

Seeds 1-3 get to pick their quarter final sites in order: 1-2-3. The remaining bowl gets the 4 v 5 match up.

Semi finals played around the 10th-14th of Jan. Final the Saturday of the weekend before the Super Bowl (Pro Bowl Weekend).


NO NO NO.... to auto bids. This year is EXACTLY why auto bids should not be allowed.

The PAC-12's highest ranked team (USC) was 17 and THEY LOST in their conference championship game to #25 Oregon.

This auto bid BS is only about finding a way to get a G5 in the tournament and that is it. These auto bid proposals are merely a way to get the P5 to agree to it. Frankly if I was any of the P5 except the Pac12 - I would vote against it too (the auto bid). The current 4 team event works - you are always getting 4 of the 5 best teams in the country (IMO they pandered to ND who should not have gotten in this year).

IMO Cincy would have earned a berth in an 8 team tourney without auto bids this year. They put up a decent performance against an uninspired A&M team this year which was great, but if they lined up against Alabama in the 1-8 game instead, the odds of it being ugly are high. I still say they earned the right in that scenario but it would have likely proven the (arguing) points on a few levels against teams that should not be in this tourney.


This auto bid stuff is setting 1 if not 2 teams up annually for getting decimated in the first round game most years. I can't imagine how bad of an arse whoopin' Bama would have put on Oregon. I don't want to see that and most of the pure CBF fans don't either.

You will never get 100% concensus agreement on the 4 or 8 teams that get into a BCS tournament (no matter the system), but auto bids virtually guarantee that a team that does not deserve to be there gets the chance to.... If the top 8 are "voted in" the only one who may have an argument is #9 and maybe #10.

Who cares? If they don't deserve it, they will lose.

The expansion is about making sure everyone who deserves a shot gets in and that its not decided in a smoke filled room. Its not about weeding out teams. Reality is that its pretty rare that #8 teams would win it, so its not a big deal if you have a #18 Big 10 champ in place of them. And maybe that #18 Big 10 champ found their QB after starting off 1-4. They won something on the field, not just in a board room.
01-04-2021 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #20
RE: The Unauthorized, Semi-Official 5-1-2 Mega Thread
(01-04-2021 11:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 01:30 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I’ll bite on the mega thread. My twist to the above vanilla is a Wild Card Game on Championship Saturday between the two best teams not in a CCG; winner gets 1 of the at large spots; fans get great TV. The 2nd and final at large likely then goes to a CCG runner-up (Notre Dame this year).

Can’t argue against Muskie’s postseason format... but it does take us deep into January, doesn’t it. I still think there is a possibility of a mid-December round.

I would say if you do that, the idea would be to have it the week after the CCGs, so there isn't TV competition. And you could still do the CFP show after the CCGs. In your scenario, it has to be the week before for the wildcards.

One twist on that would be to have a game between the top 2 G5 champs instead. Of course, that could lead to a less than optimal 8th team, but it also expands access.

You wouldn’t have to do it the week before the wildcard. The wildcard would be between 2 non-CCG teams (A&M vs. Indiana this year). It would serve as a 6th play-in game (alongside the 5 Power CCGs). There’d still be an 8th spot for a team upset in their CCG, the type of safety net the SEC would want to keep.

I think the G5 would keep the current beauty pageant aspect of their shared bid. It keeps more teams in play in case there is an upset. Again, if you are asking 2 teams to play in mid-December you might as well ask 8.
01-04-2021 01:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.