Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
SEC
B1G
Big 12
ACC
PAC
G5
ESPN
Nobody
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Post Reply 
Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
Author Message
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #1
Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
I have proposed this for a 12 team playoff:

Sat Nov 19 (Rivalry Week)
Thu Nov 24 - Sat Nov 26 - Conference Championships - 10 games
Sat Dec 3 - First playoff round hosted by seeds #5-#8
Sat Dec 31 - Quarterfinals at Peach, Cotton, Fiesta and Citrus Bowls
Sun Jan 1 - NFL
Mon Jan 2 - Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls with existing conference tie-ins
Mon Jan 9-10 - Semifinals rotate among Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl sites
Mon Jan 16 - National Championship at site determined by bid

No autobids. Every conference champion ranked* in the Top 25 gets a spot. The four highest ranked champs get a bye to the quarterfinals played at New Years. The remaining champions plus at large teams are seeded #5-#12, with #5-8 hosting the first round games the week after CCGs.

* No selection committee. To be eligible for the playoff, a team must be ranked in the Top 25 in both the AP and Coaches' Poll. Using those polls, plus the Massey Composite, Sagarin, and one other computer ranking TBD, each eligible school throws out its best rank and its worst and averages the middle three rankings. Then all are seeded for the playoff (or excluded) based on those averages.

Who do you think would oppose this, and why?
05-02-2021 08:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,691
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 494
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #2
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s will oppose a system granting the G5 multiple bids for being ranked #24 & #25.

For two, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For three, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For four, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.

If you revise to 6 unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2021 12:36 PM by IWokeUpLikeThis.)
05-02-2021 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,173
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1271
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #3
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 08:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  I have proposed this for a 12 team playoff:

Sat Nov 19 (Rivalry Week)
Thu Nov 24 - Sat Nov 26 - Conference Championships - 10 games
Sat Dec 3 - First playoff round hosted by seeds #5-#8
Sat Dec 31 - Quarterfinals at Peach, Cotton, Fiesta and Citrus Bowls
Sun Jan 1 - NFL
Mon Jan 2 - Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls with existing conference tie-ins
Mon Jan 9-10 - Semifinals rotate among Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl sites
Mon Jan 16 - National Championship at site determined by bid

No autobids. Every conference champion ranked* in the Top 25 gets a spot. The four highest ranked champs get a bye to the quarterfinals played at New Years. The remaining champions plus at large teams are seeded #5-#12, with #5-8 hosting the first round games the week after CCGs.

* No selection committee. To be eligible for the playoff, a team must be ranked in the Top 25 in both the AP and Coaches' Poll. Using those polls, plus the Massey Composite, Sagarin, and one other computer ranking TBD, each eligible school throws out its best rank and its worst and averages the middle three rankings. Then all are seeded for the playoff (or excluded) based on those averages.

Who do you think would oppose this, and why?

I think the P5 would oppose it. If there are nine conference champs in the top 25 plus Notre Dame, then there are only 3 at-large bids.

You're not going to get the SEC to like seeing say #9 Florida missing out on the playoffs because #23 MAC champ Akron is getting in.
05-02-2021 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #4
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.
05-02-2021 12:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,691
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 494
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #5
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

Ok, I see what you did now. I’d move 3 QF games to NYD and have them be Rose/Orange/Sugar. Leave 1 QF for NYE (Cotton/Peach/Fiesta), then shift the other 2 to Jan 9/10 SF.

I don’t see them giving Rose/Orange/Sugar a SF *in addition* to NYD bowls.

And every P5 will want 100% guarantees for a 12-team field, 99% won’t cut it.
05-02-2021 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DFW HOYA Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,400
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 103
I Root For: The Hoyas
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #6
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
The Cotton Bowl (aka: the Jerry Bowl) would oppose this.
05-02-2021 01:01 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #7
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 12:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

Ok, I see what you did now. I’d move 3 QF games to NYD and have them be Rose/Orange/Sugar. Leave 1 QF for NYE (Cotton/Peach/Fiesta), then shift the other 2 to Jan 9/10 SF.

I don’t see them giving Rose/Orange/Sugar a SF *in addition* to NYD bowls.

And every P5 will want 100% guarantees for a 12-team field, 99% won’t cut it.

So you think the Rose and Sugar would prefer to only have one date, and have that one be lower in the CFP pecking order than two other bowls? And, BTW, I would be OK with adding the Championship game to the rotation so the Rose, Sugar and Orange all get a second game every year if that's the price to get them all on board.

And, FWIW, the P5 aren't guaranteed a spot in the playoff now - just an NY6 spot. My proposal gives them that by virtue of their guaranteed spot in the Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls. The only difference is that it's now an NY7 with the addition of the Citrus Bowl as a Q-final site.
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2021 01:09 PM by ken d.)
05-02-2021 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,691
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 494
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #8
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 01:03 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:48 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

Ok, I see what you did now. I’d move 3 QF games to NYD and have them be Rose/Orange/Sugar. Leave 1 QF for NYE (Cotton/Peach/Fiesta), then shift the other 2 to Jan 9/10 SF.

I don’t see them giving Rose/Orange/Sugar a SF *in addition* to NYD bowls.

And every P5 will want 100% guarantees for a 12-team field, 99% won’t cut it.

So you think the Rose and Sugar would prefer to only have one date, and have that one be lower in the CFP pecking order than two other bowls? And, BTW, I would be OK with adding the Championship game to the rotation so the Rose, Sugar and Orange all get a second game every year if that's the price to get them all on board.

And, FWIW, the P5 aren't guaranteed a spot in the playoff now - just an NY6 spot. My proposal gives them that by virtue of their guaranteed spot in the Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls. The only difference is that it's now an NY7 with the addition of the Citrus Bowl as a Q-final site.

Rose, yes. They have to 100% be included in the CFP *and* NYD.

Orange and Sugar, you’re probably right on. Their focus will be on obtaining the highest quality bowl game (SF).
05-02-2021 01:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 3,357
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 180
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #9
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

If you're looking for power conference champions that have been unranked in either the BCS or CFP rankings:
2012: Wisconsin (Big Ten)
2010: Connecticut (Big East)
2000: Purdue (Big Ten)
1999: Stanford (Pac-10)
05-02-2021 02:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 27,010
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 3150
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 08:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  I have proposed this for a 12 team playoff:

Sat Nov 19 (Rivalry Week)
Thu Nov 24 - Sat Nov 26 - Conference Championships - 10 games
Sat Dec 3 - First playoff round hosted by seeds #5-#8
Sat Dec 31 - Quarterfinals at Peach, Cotton, Fiesta and Citrus Bowls
Sun Jan 1 - NFL
Mon Jan 2 - Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls with existing conference tie-ins
Mon Jan 9-10 - Semifinals rotate among Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl sites
Mon Jan 16 - National Championship at site determined by bid

No autobids. Every conference champion ranked* in the Top 25 gets a spot. The four highest ranked champs get a bye to the quarterfinals played at New Years. The remaining champions plus at large teams are seeded #5-#12, with #5-8 hosting the first round games the week after CCGs.

* No selection committee. To be eligible for the playoff, a team must be ranked in the Top 25 in both the AP and Coaches' Poll. Using those polls, plus the Massey Composite, Sagarin, and one other computer ranking TBD, each eligible school throws out its best rank and its worst and averages the middle three rankings. Then all are seeded for the playoff (or excluded) based on those averages.

Who do you think would oppose this, and why?

I'm not a fan off computer rankings or polls but will concede that taking an average of a team's 3 best of the 5 rankings might be acceptable over a politically charged committee.

That said if we must expand to 8, and our aim is to have the best possible teams in the mix, then let them select the top 8 by that standard and that standard only.

Once the networks pony up sweetly for moving to 8, then we can discuss 12, if it is even necessary, and only if we get another pay bump to do so.

I'm perfectly fine staying at 4 because most of those semi final games have not been compelling and no system is perfect. If a Central Florida is undefeated they will get into an 8 team mix as there are very few undefeated teams anymore, but they should be required to schedule 3 P5 teams for consideration and for the top G5 schools there should be a special pressure upon the P5 to schedule them, instead of avoid them.

The issue right now is not prejudice, but rather strength of schedule, which is a strong component in any ranking system. Special consideration should be there where conference schedules are weak, but if you are in a weak conference those OOC games need to be against middle to the top P5 schools and not the cellar dwellers in the P5 if you are going to get serious consideration.

I despise the idea of guaranteeing champs from smaller conferences a bid because it will encourage the same shenanigans that go on for getting a seat at the NCAA basketball tourney. As John Houseman would say, "You've got to earn it!"

I don't know that they want to, but if ESPN is behind this number of 12 schools in a playoff it is merely because they don't want to have two pay bumps and want to skip 8 to get there. I say squeeze the Mouse, because the Mouse has been squeezing the hell out of the traditions of College Football for 20 years plus now!
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2021 03:45 PM by JRsec.)
05-02-2021 03:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #11
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 02:19 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

If you're looking for power conference champions that have been unranked in either the BCS or CFP rankings:
2012: Wisconsin (Big Ten)
2010: Connecticut (Big East)
2000: Purdue (Big Ten)
1999: Stanford (Pac-10)

In 2012, unbeaten Ohio State was ranked #3 in the AP poll, but was ineligible due to NCAA sanctions (as was Penn State). A situation like that would not be due to any flaw in the selection system going forward. The B1G couldn't complain.

In 1999, Stanford was ranked #22, and unranked in the BCS only because they stopped ranking at #15. Similarly, Purdue was #14 in the AP in 2000, and would surely have been in a BCS Top 25 if there had been one.

As for UConn, we're talking about the P5 here, so they don't count.
05-02-2021 05:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #12
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 03:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I'm perfectly fine staying at 4 because most of those semi final games have not been compelling and no system is perfect. If a Central Florida is undefeated they will get into an 8 team mix as there are very few undefeated teams anymore, but they should be required to schedule 3 P5 teams for consideration and for the top G5 schools there should be a special pressure upon the P5 to schedule them, instead of avoid them.

The issue right now is not prejudice, but rather strength of schedule, which is a strong component in any ranking system. Special consideration should be there where conference schedules are weak, but if you are in a weak conference those OOC games need to be against middle to the top P5 schools and not the cellar dwellers in the P5 if you are going to get serious consideration.

I despise the idea of guaranteeing champs from smaller conferences a bid because it will encourage the same shenanigans that go on for getting a seat at the NCAA basketball tourney. As John Houseman would say, "You've got to earn it!"

I don't know that they want to, but if ESPN is behind this number of 12 schools in a playoff it is merely because they don't want to have two pay bumps and want to skip 8 to get there. I say squeeze the Mouse, because the Mouse has been squeezing the hell out of the traditions of College Football for 20 years plus now!

Requiring G5 schools to schedule 3 middle to top P5 schools sounds reasonable in theory, but impossible in practice. Nobody knows which G5 teams will be contenders when the schedules are made, nor would we know which the middle to top P5 teams will be before any games are played. So it's hard to enforce that one.

I agree we shouldn't guarantee bids for the champs from G5 conferences. That's why I didn't include any in this scenario. But for the same reasons, we shouldn't guarantee a bid for P5 champs either. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. They should have to earn it as well. And, historically, they nearly always have earned it.

What I didn't include in the poll options are the NY6 bowls, because frankly, with a 12 team playoff what they want no longer matters much. Today, in a 4 team CFP world, ESPN and the conferences need those bowls to make the money work. But with 12, including the top 8 teams playing on or about New Year's, it's more about the media partner (whether that's ESPN or somebody else) allowing the bowls to be a part of it rather than needing them. If the Rose Bowl doesn't want to be part of it, let them compete head to head for an audience with a CFP quarterfinal with a matchup of the fourth place B1G team and the third place PAC 12 team. I know which one I'm watching.

As always, there will be a clash between tradition and money, and I know which side I'm betting on.
05-02-2021 05:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 27,010
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 3150
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 05:32 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 03:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I'm perfectly fine staying at 4 because most of those semi final games have not been compelling and no system is perfect. If a Central Florida is undefeated they will get into an 8 team mix as there are very few undefeated teams anymore, but they should be required to schedule 3 P5 teams for consideration and for the top G5 schools there should be a special pressure upon the P5 to schedule them, instead of avoid them.

The issue right now is not prejudice, but rather strength of schedule, which is a strong component in any ranking system. Special consideration should be there where conference schedules are weak, but if you are in a weak conference those OOC games need to be against middle to the top P5 schools and not the cellar dwellers in the P5 if you are going to get serious consideration.

I despise the idea of guaranteeing champs from smaller conferences a bid because it will encourage the same shenanigans that go on for getting a seat at the NCAA basketball tourney. As John Houseman would say, "You've got to earn it!"

I don't know that they want to, but if ESPN is behind this number of 12 schools in a playoff it is merely because they don't want to have two pay bumps and want to skip 8 to get there. I say squeeze the Mouse, because the Mouse has been squeezing the hell out of the traditions of College Football for 20 years plus now!

[b1. ]Requiring G5 schools to schedule 3 middle to top P5 schools sounds reasonable in theory, but impossible in practice. Nobody knows which G5 teams will be contenders when the schedules are made, nor would we know which the middle to top P5 teams will be before any games are played. So it's hard to enforce that one.
[/b]
I agree we shouldn't guarantee bids for the champs from G5 conferences. That's why I didn't include any in this scenario. 2. But for the same reasons, we shouldn't guarantee a bid for P5 champs either. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. They should have to earn it as well. And, historically, they nearly always have earned it.

What I didn't include in the poll options are the NY6 bowls, because frankly, with a 12 team playoff what they want no longer matters much. Today, in a 4 team CFP world, ESPN and the conferences need those bowls to make the money work. But with 12, including the top 8 teams playing on or about New Year's, it's more about the media partner (whether that's ESPN or somebody else) allowing the bowls to be a part of it rather than needing them. If the Rose Bowl doesn't want to be part of it, let them compete head to head for an audience with a CFP quarterfinal with a matchup of the fourth place B1G team and the third place PAC 12 team. I know which one I'm watching.

As always, there will be a clash between tradition and money, and I know which side I'm betting on.

1. A reasonable assumption is easily made. Look at the 7 most invested G5's or even 10 most and there are your annual contenders. College of Charleston stands out to me as an exception to the rule. Brigham Young, Boise State, Central Florida, Houston, and Tulane have all been close at one time or another and South Florida and East Carolina invest enough, as does San Diego State to make a run.

There's not much reason for the others to do so. And the same is true for the P5 middlers and contenders. As they said in Casablanca, "Round up the usual suspects" because most years the same teams appear in the top 30 or so in the rankings.

If they are going to want a slot then they need to be able to win a few games against larger better invested institutions.

Realistically thus far they have either lost to some P conference's #3 or barely beaten them. Such performances hardly engender a claim to play someone's number 1. Have 3 P wins and a be the champion of your conference and I seriously doubt they would be left out. Now if those 3 P games are against Kansas, Vanderbilt and Wake Forest what have you proven? Beat a South Carolina, Virginia Tech, and Indiana and that's a different matter, even though these three are not annual contenders it proves you have the size and strength to lineup and beat 3 competitively sized P5 opponents.

2. I didn't say the P5 had to be champs in your scenario.

3. I agree pretty much with the rest, but, I don't agree in jumping to 12 and strongly suggest anyone who does is going to leave too much on the plate by not staging the move. Money may win, but don't give them anything they didn't pay for!
05-02-2021 05:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #14
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 05:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. A reasonable assumption is easily made. Look at the 7 most invested G5's or even 10 most and there are your annual contenders. College of Charleston stands out to me as an exception to the rule. Brigham Young, Boise State, Central Florida, Houston, and Tulane have all been close at one time or another and South Florida and East Carolina invest enough, as does San Diego State to make a run.


3. I agree pretty much with the rest, but, I don't agree in jumping to 12 and strongly suggest anyone who does is going to leave too much on the plate by not staging the move. Money may win, but don't give them anything they didn't pay for!

I agree. I'm not a fan of moving to 12, nor am I trying to promote it. As for the "usual suspects", a more reasonable approach for me is to find a way to incorporate those schools into existing power conferences and then exclude everyone else with impunity. That may sound cold hearted, but I believe it reflects reality.
05-02-2021 06:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 3,357
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 180
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #15
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 05:11 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 02:19 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

If you're looking for power conference champions that have been unranked in either the BCS or CFP rankings:
2012: Wisconsin (Big Ten)
2010: Connecticut (Big East)
2000: Purdue (Big Ten)
1999: Stanford (Pac-10)

In 2012, unbeaten Ohio State was ranked #3 in the AP poll, but was ineligible due to NCAA sanctions (as was Penn State). A situation like that would not be due to any flaw in the selection system going forward. The B1G couldn't complain.

In 1999, Stanford was ranked #22, and unranked in the BCS only because they stopped ranking at #15. Similarly, Purdue was #14 in the AP in 2000, and would surely have been in a BCS Top 25 if there had been one.

As for UConn, we're talking about the P5 here, so they don't count.

Yes, I know the Big East was perceived as the weakest P6 conference of the BCS era, but the conference as a whole did outperform other power conferences in football, even with its post-2003 lineup. By average Sagarin rating, Big East football was the 2nd best conference in 2000, 2006, and 2009.
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2021 07:03 PM by Nerdlinger.)
05-02-2021 07:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #16
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 07:02 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 05:11 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 02:19 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:41 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I selected everyone.

For one, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

For two, the Rose Bowl is never being relocated to Jan 9/10, especially 2 of every 3 years. The Rose Bowl has to follow the Tournament of Roses Parade on NYD every year — NFL Sundays the only exception.

For three, the Rose/Orange/Sugar aren’t going to take being relegated below the Citrus in *any year, let alone one of three.


If you revise to unconditional autobids and ensure all 6 NY6 bowls are incorporated into the QF/SF annually without moving the Rose off NYD, this proposal should be good to go.

The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl are all on New Year's Day, just like always. They aren't relegated below anyone - in fact they get a second bite at the apple as Semifinals every two out of three years.

Do you really think the SEC and B1G are afraid they won't have a champion ranked in the Top 25? Has that ever happened? On average, those conferences will get three teams per year each that have a chance to be National Champion. For that matter, when was the last time any P5 conference champion was unranked? IIRC, even Wake Forest was ranked (#11 in BCS) when they beat Georgia Tech for the ACC title.

If you're looking for power conference champions that have been unranked in either the BCS or CFP rankings:
2012: Wisconsin (Big Ten)
2010: Connecticut (Big East)
2000: Purdue (Big Ten)
1999: Stanford (Pac-10)

In 2012, unbeaten Ohio State was ranked #3 in the AP poll, but was ineligible due to NCAA sanctions (as was Penn State). A situation like that would not be due to any flaw in the selection system going forward. The B1G couldn't complain.

In 1999, Stanford was ranked #22, and unranked in the BCS only because they stopped ranking at #15. Similarly, Purdue was #14 in the AP in 2000, and would surely have been in a BCS Top 25 if there had been one.

As for UConn, we're talking about the P5 here, so they don't count.

Yes, I know the Big East was perceived as the weakest P6 conference of the BCS era, but the conference as a whole did outperform other power conferences in football, even with its post-2003 lineup. By average Sagarin rating, Big East football was the 2nd best conference in 2000, 2006, and 2009.

I wasn't commenting on the strength of the Big East. I was commenting on the fact that it is no longer one of the P5, and this is only about those five conferences going forward.
05-02-2021 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,057
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 263
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 12:14 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  For one, all P5s will oppose a system granting the G5 multiple bids for being ranked #24 & #25.

For two, all P5s plus the G5 will oppose no autobids right off the bat. Autobids are non-negotiables, even if the champion is unranked 7-6. The point is to keep as many fan bases engaged for as long as possible.

The only system where Go5 schools might get two bids is a 5-(2->1)-2 play-in system where they play each other for a single spot. There is no space for a play-in game in a 12 team playoff: the play-in game is effectively a one game first round instead of a four game first round.

And in addition to all P5's plus the Go5 opposing no autobids, the media partners will oppose no autobids, because part of the increase in media value that is paying for the whole circus is the increase in the value of CCGs when they become true "win and your in" championship qualifiers.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2021 11:41 PM by BruceMcF.)
05-04-2021 11:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,511
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 202
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #18
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-02-2021 08:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  No autobids. Every conference champion ranked* in the Top 25 gets a spot.

I'm not a doctor or anything, but isn't a spot for conference champions an auto-bid?

Also This:
Sat Dec 31 - Quarterfinals at Peach, Cotton, Fiesta and Citrus Bowls
Mon Jan 2 - Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls with existing conference tie-ins
Mon Jan 9-10 - Semifinals rotate among Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl sites

There are 4 quarters and 2 semis. I don't understand adding in the citrus bowl and making the Rose/Sugar/Orange rotate in/out. Wouldn't it be easier to rotate the 4 quarters and 2 semis between all 6 NY6 bowls and not have any meaningless bowls on that Jan 2nd slot?
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2021 07:30 AM by CoastalJuan.)
05-05-2021 07:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,277
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 633
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #19
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
(05-05-2021 07:25 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(05-02-2021 08:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  No autobids. Every conference champion ranked* in the Top 25 gets a spot.

I'm not a doctor or anything, but isn't a spot for conference champions an auto-bid?

Also This:
Sat Dec 31 - Quarterfinals at Peach, Cotton, Fiesta and Citrus Bowls
Mon Jan 2 - Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowls with existing conference tie-ins
Mon Jan 9-10 - Semifinals rotate among Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl sites

There are 4 quarters and 2 semis. I don't understand adding in the citrus bowl and making the Rose/Sugar/Orange rotate in/out. Wouldn't it be easier to rotate the 4 quarters and 2 semis between all 6 NY6 bowls and not have any meaningless bowls on that Jan 2nd slot?

No, it isn't the same as an autobid. The latter would be when the champion gets a bid even though they are unranked.
05-07-2021 09:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rube Dali Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 724
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 20
I Root For: UST, BSU, Minn
Location: Maplewood, MN
Post: #20
RE: Poll: Who would oppose this playoff format?
I voted for the P5 and G5, but ESPN would love it for all the controversy it would generate.
05-07-2021 09:56 AM
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.