Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
Author Message
JamesTKirk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 63
Joined: Mar 2021
Reputation: 3
I Root For: the underdog
Location:
Post: #21
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:21 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  2020 #4 Notre Dame would host #12 Coastal Carolina

That would only be the case if the automatic bids were to go to:

the highest-ranked teams that won conference championships.

It's possible that the automatic bids would instead go to :

the champions of the highest-ranked conference.

If the latter, then Oregon - not Coastal Carolina - would have been in the 2020 playoffs, since the PAC 12 is more highly ranked than the Sun Belt.

.
06-10-2021 01:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JamesTKirk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 63
Joined: Mar 2021
Reputation: 3
I Root For: the underdog
Location:
Post: #22
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:26 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 01:23 PM)JamesTKirk Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 01:08 PM)72Tiger Wrote:  This will be the P5 conference champs plus the highest rated G5 champ plus 6 at large teams from the P5 most years. Once in a blue moon, a second G5 team may make it.

If you went to 16, you could include all 10 conference champions and still have 6 at larges. No byes that way. Seems simpler and all inclusive.

I assume that "the highest rated G5 champ" would be:

The champion of the highest-rated G5 conference, rather than:

The highest-rated G5 team that won a conference championship.

.

Does anyone know which of these it would be?

.

If it would be the former of the two, then UCF apparently would have been an at-large team in 2018, because the MWC was the highest-rated conference in 2018, at least according to the Massey Composite.

.

Teams are all that matters not the specific conference. UCF would absolutely have been the team in 2018.

Sounds like the team selected would be the highest ranked team that won a conference championship, rather than the team that won the championship of the highest-ranked conference, as you understand it.

If so, then that wouldn't be quite as favorable to the AAC as it would have been if the champion of the highest-ranked conference would get an auto-bid, since it would be entirely possible for a member of any G5 conference champion to get the auto bid.

.
(This post was last modified: 06-10-2021 01:33 PM by JamesTKirk.)
06-10-2021 01:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 742
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 67
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #23
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 12:59 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Interestingly, they went with 6+6 instead of the 100% guaranteed certainty of 5+1+6 that Frank always talked about.

That surprises me---but that language is also the only way to avoid anti-trust issues. If I really wanted a guarantee for the P5 champs----I might have gone with the top 7 champs. I cant imagine any P5 champ finishing the season 8th out of 10 champs.

I was also thinking 7, with the caveat that the Top Independent can qualify as a Champ. It gives a back-door for the Irish getting a BYE and cracks the door a bit wider for that 2nd G5 team.
(This post was last modified: 06-10-2021 01:31 PM by Crayton.)
06-10-2021 01:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,068
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 451
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #24
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large

06-10-2021 01:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,305
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #25
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
I’m not a fan of the idea that the top 4 champs get the byes. If a non-champ is in the top 4, they deserve that 1st round bye.

I can’t believe I’m saying this, but it’s not fair to a 12-0 ND team to get seeded 5th on the grounds that they lack a CCG trophy.
06-10-2021 01:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 17,903
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 835
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #26
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:25 PM)stever20 Wrote:  this means Notre Dame could never get a bye.

It does. And Notre Dame AD Swarbrick is on the four-person committee that is recommending this plan!
06-10-2021 01:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
balanced_view Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,607
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 62
I Root For: Louisiana
Location:
Post: #27
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:23 PM)JamesTKirk Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 01:08 PM)72Tiger Wrote:  This will be the P5 conference champs plus the highest rated G5 champ plus 6 at large teams from the P5 most years. Once in a blue moon, a second G5 team may make it.

If you went to 16, you could include all 10 conference champions and still have 6 at larges. No byes that way. Seems simpler and all inclusive.

I assume that "the highest rated G5 champ" would be:

The champion of the highest-rated G5 conference, rather than:

The highest-rated G5 team that won a conference championship.

.

Does anyone know which of these it would be?

.

If it would be the former of the two, then UCF apparently would have been an at-large team in 2018, because the MWC was the highest-rated conference in 2018, at least according to the Massey Composite.

.

Im sure the language would say highest rated conference champion, but if a committee is deciding who is higher based on eye test, then the champ from the highest rated conference might come into play.
06-10-2021 01:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JamesTKirk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 63
Joined: Mar 2021
Reputation: 3
I Root For: the underdog
Location:
Post: #28
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
.

Any thoughts about where this would leave BYU?

Would they be better off joining a conference, since that would enable them to compete for a G5 auto-bid, or to remain as an independent and focus on competing for an at-large bid?

It seems that the conference members (UCF, for example) would have a slight advantage, since they could compete for either an auto-bid or an at-large bid.

--They could try to win their conference championship and the auto-bid, but if they end up with a 12-1 record, ranked #11 or #12, they could still get in with an at-large bid.

BYU would have only one of these pathways. The question is whether that would be enough to persuade them to join a conference, and if so, which conference would be best for them - - the AAC or the MWC?
06-10-2021 01:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoBuckeyes1047 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #29
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
In theory, this is how a 12 team playoff would've looked like the last 7 years based on what I'm seeing.

2014 - CFP Matchups
Byes
: #1 Alabama^ (12-1), #2 Oregon^ (12-1), #3 Florida St.^ (13-0), #4 Ohio St.^ (12-1)
First Round Matchups:
#9 Ole Miss (9-3) @ #8 Michigan St. (10-2)
#20 Boise St.° (11-2) @ #5 Baylor^ (11-1)
#10 Arizona (10-3) @ #7 Mississippi St. (10-2)
#11 Kansas St. (9-3) @ #6 TCU (11-1)
First 2 Teams Out: #12 Georgia Tech (10-3), #13 Georgia (9-3)

2015 - CFP Matchups
Byes:
#1 Clemson^ (13-0), #2 Alabama^ (12-1), #3 Michigan St.^ (12-1), #4 Oklahoma^ (11-1)
First Round Matchups:
#9 Florida St. (10-2) @ #8 Notre Dame (10-2)
#18 Houston° (12-1) @ #5 Iowa (12-1)
#10 North Carolina (11-2) @ #7 Ohio St. (11-1)
#11 TCU (10-2) @ #6 Stanford^ (10-2)
First 2 Teams Out: #12 Ole Miss (9-3), #13 Northwestern (10-2)

2016 - CFP Matchups
Byes:
#1 Alabama^ (13-0), #2 Clemson^ (12-1), #4 Washington^ (12-1), #5 Penn St.^ (10-2)
First Round Matchups:
#9 USC (9-3) @ #8 Wisconsin (10-3)
#15 Western Michigan° (13-0) @ #3 Ohio St. (11-1)
#10 Colorado (10-3) @ #7 Oklahoma^ (10-2)
#11 Florida St. (9-3) @ #6 Michigan (10-2)
First 2 Teams Out: #12 Oklahoma St. (9-3), #13 Louisville (9-3)

2017 - CFP Matchups
Byes:
#1 Clemson^ (12-1), #2 Oklahoma^ (12-1), #3 Georgia^ (12-1), #5 Ohio St.^ (11-2)
First Round Matchups:
#9 Penn St. (10-2) @ #8 USC^ (11-2)
#12 UCF° (12-0) @ #4 Alabama (11-1)
#10 Miami (FL) (10-2) @ #7 Auburn (10-3)
#11 Washington (10-2) @ #6 Wisconsin (12-1)
First 2 Teams Out: #13 Stanford (9-4), #14 Notre Dame (9-3)

2018 - CFP Matchups
Byes:
#1 Alabama^ (13-0), #2 Clemson^ (13-0), #4 Oklahoma^ (12-1), #6 Ohio St.^ (12-1)
First Round Matchups:
#9 Washington^ (10-3) @ #8 UCF° (12-0)
#12 Penn St. (9-3) @ #3 Notre Dame (12-0)
#10 Florida (9-3) @ #7 Michigan (10-2)
#11 LSU (9-3) @ #5 Georgia (11-2)
First 2 Teams Out: #13 Washington St. (10-2), #14 Kentucky (9-3)

2019 - CFP Matchups
Byes:
#1 LSU^ (13-0), #2 Ohio St.^ (13-0), #3 Clemson^ (13-0), #4 Oklahoma^ (12-1)
First Round Matchups:
#9 Florida (10-2) @ #8 Wisconsin (10-3)
#17 Memphis° (12-1) @ #5 Georgia (11-2)
#10 Penn St. (10-2) @ #7 Baylor (11-2)
#11 Utah (11-2) @ #6 Oregon^ (11-2)
First 2 Teams Out: #12 Auburn (9-3), #13 Alabama (10-2)

2020 - CFP Matchups
Byes:
#1 Alabama^ (11-0), #2 Clemson^ (10-1), #3 Ohio St.^ (6-0), #6 Oklahoma^ (8-2)
First Round Matchups:
#9 Georgia (7-2) @ #8 Cincinnati° (9-0)
#12 Coastal Carolina° (11-0) @ #4 Notre Dame (10-1)
#10 Iowa St. (8-3) @ #7 Florida (8-3)
#11 Indiana (6-1) @ #5 Texas A&M
First 2 Teams Out: #13 North Carolina (8-3), #14 Northwestern (6–1)
(This post was last modified: 06-10-2021 01:44 PM by GoBuckeyes1047.)
06-10-2021 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JamesTKirk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 63
Joined: Mar 2021
Reputation: 3
I Root For: the underdog
Location:
Post: #30
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:38 PM)balanced_view Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 01:23 PM)JamesTKirk Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 01:08 PM)72Tiger Wrote:  This will be the P5 conference champs plus the highest rated G5 champ plus 6 at large teams from the P5 most years. Once in a blue moon, a second G5 team may make it.

If you went to 16, you could include all 10 conference champions and still have 6 at larges. No byes that way. Seems simpler and all inclusive.

I assume that "the highest rated G5 champ" would be:

The champion of the highest-rated G5 conference, rather than:

The highest-rated G5 team that won a conference championship.

.

Does anyone know which of these it would be?

.

If it would be the former of the two, then UCF apparently would have been an at-large team in 2018, because the MWC was the highest-rated conference in 2018, at least according to the Massey Composite.

.

Im sure the language would say highest rated conference champion, but if a committee is deciding who is higher based on eye test, then the champ from the highest rated conference might come into play.

Interesting point.

That is putting an awful lot of power into the hands of the selection committee, and they could get into some major controversies.

It might be preferable to just set up a certain rule and go with it, rather than letting a committee monkey around with the selection of teams.

If they're going to get into "eye tests," what is to prevent them from excluding potential G5 at large teams on the basis of a so-called "eye test?"

That could get really messy!
06-10-2021 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
random asian guy Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 356
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 26
I Root For: VT, Georgetown
Location:
Post: #31
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
To me, the big news is that only conference champs can get byes. I was speculating they would do this so that the Rose bowl may get the Pac 12 and/or the Big Ten champs in a quarterfinal.
06-10-2021 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JamesTKirk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 63
Joined: Mar 2021
Reputation: 3
I Root For: the underdog
Location:
Post: #32
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:30 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 01:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-10-2021 12:59 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Interestingly, they went with 6+6 instead of the 100% guaranteed certainty of 5+1+6 that Frank always talked about.

That surprises me---but that language is also the only way to avoid anti-trust issues. If I really wanted a guarantee for the P5 champs----I might have gone with the top 7 champs. I cant imagine any P5 champ finishing the season 8th out of 10 champs.

I was also thinking 7, with the caveat that the Top Independent can qualify as a Champ. It gives a back-door for the Irish getting a BYE and cracks the door a bit wider for that 2nd G5 team.

Right now, it seems to appear that the only way an independent could make their way into the CFP would be via an at-large bid, but they would be competing with a bunch of good P5 teams for an at-large bid.
06-10-2021 01:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 17,598
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 736
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #33
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:25 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  This is a dream scenario for Notre Dame. And BYU. 6 at-large bids for them to take!

Notre Dame for sure, possibly BYU if they have fewer than two losses. Most of those six at large will be the runner ups will come from the SEC, B10 and possibly the other three P5 schools if it is the right brand.

The Indy’s not name Notre Dame and BYU are going to have to run the table. It will be interesting to see how not having a CCG hurts them in rankings going forward
06-10-2021 01:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 17,903
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 835
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #34
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:32 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

More details from Nicole Auerbach's Twitter:

Quote:The date of implementation of a potential new College Football Playoff format was not a part of the working group’s proposal.

12-team proposal says the first-round games would take place on campus sometime during the two-week period after conference championship games; quarters would be played on January 1, or January 2 when New Year’s Day falls on a Sunday; semifinals and championship game dates TBD.

More on the 12-team rec: Playoff bracket would follow the rankings, with no modifications made to avoid rematches of teams that may have played during the regular-season or are from the same conference. The bracket would remain in effect throughout the playoff (no re-seeding).

To reiterate what we already know: CFP will not change its format this year or next. And the expansion process will not conclude before fall 2021 because there are a lot details that still need to be worked out. Today's recommendation is a first step.

CFP working group was not tasked with deciding which bowl games should be part of format but did recommend that if traditional bowls host games, teams would be assigned to their traditional bowls for quarterfinal games with priority going to the higher-seeded team.
06-10-2021 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,924
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 287
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #35
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
Smart. That will work.
Basically you have to run the table if you are not in the AAC. And if you are in the AAC you can only suffer at most one loss.
06-10-2021 01:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
random asian guy Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 356
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 26
I Root For: VT, Georgetown
Location:
Post: #36
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 01:34 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m not a fan of the idea that the top 4 champs get the byes. If a non-champ is in the top 4, they deserve that 1st round bye.

I can’t believe I’m saying this, but it’s not fair to a 12-0 ND team to get seeded 5th on the grounds that they lack a CCG trophy.

It makes sense if you consider a CCG as a de facto play in game. If you didn’t win or play a de facto play-in game, you need play a real play-in game.
06-10-2021 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BraveKnight Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,309
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 124
I Root For: UCF
Location: Orlando
Post: #37
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
I’m a huge fan of this system. It provides all teams with a way into the playoffs, even the G5’s. I wonder if this will force BYU to join the AAC, since it seems like this system will benefit the AAC the most, with a clear playoff path for its teams most years.
06-10-2021 02:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,963
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 323
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #38
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
Very surprised by the proposal (and that so many powers that be like it). Not perfect, but I am very enthusiastic about the format. Biggest critique is the guaranteed byes to four highest ranked conference champions. However, with how ND has fared in the CFP, I don't think not being a top-4 seed will really hurt them.

I always thought playoff expansion was inevitable, but not immediately to 12 teams. I'm glad the committee saw the payout and revenue potential to networks (other than ESPN) to seize.
06-10-2021 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,305
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #39
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
I’m curious what the payout model will be. I assume your conference gets extra money for each at-large selection, but how much money?

What happens in a season like 2020, when the PAC 12 is left out? Do they not receive any playoff money or do they get the equivalent of a G5?
06-10-2021 02:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,262
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #40
RE: CFP Recommendation: 6 conf. champs + 6 at-large
(06-10-2021 12:35 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

The Big East football conference is coming back?
06-10-2021 02:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: bullet, JHS55, otown, PicksUp, SoCalBobcat78, solohawks, 21 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.