(04-25-2021 05:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: (04-25-2021 05:28 PM)JRsec Wrote: (04-25-2021 05:20 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: I see no reason to go beyond 8.
I think a consensus favorite is the 5-2-1 formula, with a NY6 forming the quarter finals, and the championship game pushed back a week. Semi finals are in a TBD situation, but I think FTT is correct that the best solution is site provided by the highest two seeds to win the first round game (can be their home stadium or a near enough NFL stadium, so cold weather teams can play in domes).
I suspect a majority also like the qualifying game pitting the top two non-power conference teams (ND counts as power), played the week of the Army-Navy game.
Now is that on the exploration team's agenda? Don't know. But anyone with a media platform some of them might look at it would be great if you put that out as a popular idea on the forum. Doesn't mean any of the real players buy in, just that it's a fan idea.
So far there hasn't been much reason to have 4 schools. Most year's the semis have been blowouts and the final two were pretty clear cut. Expanding the playoffs will demean the regular season and having a regular season that counts sells tickets.
Thats a popular belief---but I dont think there's all that much substance to it. The truth is---we dont know what we dont know. If I remember correctly, the #1 ranked team has only won the CFP once. The fourth place team won the national championship in just the second year of the new formats existence. That means Ohio St---who wouldnt have even participated in the 2-team BCS playoff--won the national championship. Thus, looking back on the BCS era---one has to wonder how many times did a team claim a national championship that they might not have won in the CFP era? I see no reason to think the same thing is not true for the CFP era vs an 8-team version of the playoff. Once expansion occurs, I suspect it wont take long for #5, #6, #7, or #8 seeded team to win a national championship.
Well, in seven years of the CFP, the national champ has been one of the top two seeds, what would have been the BCS matchup, 5 out of 7 years. The exceptions being 2014 (Ohio State) and 2017 (Alabama).
So 2/7 is not that high a percentage, IMO. And, if we expand to 8, we'd expect diminishing returns on it happening outside the top 4. It's one thing for one top-four team to be better than another. It's another for a top 5-8 team to really be best. That's much less likely.
And one reason is, whereas 1-4 is often a guessing game as far seedings because the teams are unlikely to have played (e.g., 12-0 Clemson vs 12-0 Alabama vs 12-0 Ohio State, we don't have direct evidence of who is better so who gets seeded higher is more of a guess), with 5-8, we often have game results vs higher ranked teams. E.g., in 2019, Georgia was #5 - but we had just seen them lose big to #1 LSU in the SEC title game. Wisconsin was #8 - and they had lost to #2 Ohio State. Baylor was #7 and they had lost to #4 Oklahoma.
So that gives us a lot more certainty about how good those 5-8 teams are relative to other playoff teams compared to seeds 1 - 4.
Plus, there's a reason that JR's position is "popular" - most of the semifinal games have been blowouts or easy wins. That does not suggest we need more teams in the playoffs. All it suggests is that about 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 years, the CFP mistakenly seeds the #2 team as the #4 team, or vice-versa.
Finally, as to the G5 autobid aspect - the G5 teams have lost their last three NY6 games. Overall, G5 champs are 3-4 in NY6 games, games played against P5 that were clearly outside the playoff mix. That doesn't suggest the need for G5 involvement, at least not at the "auto" level.