The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Don’t hold your breath. 11-1 in that division will earn them a bid just about every year until he retires.

The biggest thing the new proposal does is open the door that next group to get a piece of the action, which includes Cincinnati.

But make no mistake this also helps the Auburn, Texas A&M, Florida, Penn State, Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma State, and every other program stuck behind the elite programs who have monopolized their playoff spots.

I don’t think this helps the perennial power conference bottom feeder or the bottom rung G5 schools as those within each conference that have the resources to win will continue to do so.

(06-13-2021 10:19 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Don’t hold your breath. 11-1 in that division will earn them a bid just about every year until he retires.

I didn't say BID, I said BYE. And I was somewhat referring to 2019 when they didn't win their conference (LSU and Burrow did), I believe Bama finished 11-2 and I seem to recall Saban doing a lot of belly aching that his team still belonged in the CFP over other teams (Oklahoma) because of their schedule.

(06-14-2021 07:04 AM)UCBearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  The biggest thing the new proposal does is open the door that next group to get a piece of the action, which includes Cincinnati.

But make no mistake this also helps the Auburn, Texas A&M, Florida, Penn State, Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma State, and every other program stuck behind the elite programs who have monopolized their playoff spots.

I don’t think this helps the perennial power conference bottom feeder or the bottom rung G5 schools as those within each conference that have the resources to win will continue to do so.

Bolded, I agree. If Indiana soon regresses to the norm, Purdue, Illinois and Kentucky struggle and Louisville doesn't regain their form from a few years ago, UC coaches can continue to win recruiting battles by selling the fact that the expressway to the CFP runs through Cincinnati; not Bloomington, West Lafayette, Urbana, Lexington or the 'Ville. At least as long as this coaching staff remains intact.

I'm trying to figure out the losers from this system.

The obvious loser is the bowl system. And some conferences lose their benefits from prestigious bowl tie-ins (Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl).

But it also paradoxically might help the conference who has benefited the most from a prestigious bowl tie-in, the PAC. The PAC has only gotten 2 CFP playoff appearances. It's become a de-facto P4, not P5.

But under this new system, the PAC is practically guaranteed a playoff spot AND is likely to get at-large bids. If this had been in place over the past 10 years, the PAC would have gotten 9 auto-bids (only missed it in crazy 2020) and 9 at-large bids (Utah in 2019, Washington in 2017, Washington and Colorado in 2016, Arizona in 2014, Stanford in 2013, Stanford in 2012, Stanford and USC in 2011)

(06-14-2021 08:49 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out the losers from this system.

The obvious loser is the bowl system. And some conferences lose their benefits from prestigious bowl tie-ins (Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl).

But it also paradoxically might help the conference who has benefited the most from a prestigious bowl tie-in, the PAC. The PAC has only gotten 2 CFP playoff appearances. It's become a de-facto P4, not P5.

But under this new system, the PAC is practically guaranteed a playoff spot AND is likely to get at-large bids. If this had been in place over the past 10 years, the PAC would have gotten 9 auto-bids (only missed it in crazy 2020) and 9 at-large bids (Utah in 2019, Washington in 2017, Washington and Colorado in 2016, Arizona in 2014, Stanford in 2013, Stanford in 2012, Stanford and USC in 2011)

Agreed...there really is no loser in this new system outside of the minor bowls that are being dumped for time. I mean, one could argue that the G5 only getting potentially 1/21 of the payout is far worse (if they do a game-credit payout), but hey, it is what it is to get a chance at the ship.

(06-14-2021 08:49 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out the losers from this system.

The obvious loser is the bowl system. And some conferences lose their benefits from prestigious bowl tie-ins (Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl).

But it also paradoxically might help the conference who has benefited the most from a prestigious bowl tie-in, the PAC. The PAC has only gotten 2 CFP playoff appearances. It's become a de-facto P4, not P5.

But under this new system, the PAC is practically guaranteed a playoff spot AND is likely to get at-large bids. If this had been in place over the past 10 years, the PAC would have gotten 9 auto-bids (only missed it in crazy 2020) and 9 at-large bids (Utah in 2019, Washington in 2017, Washington and Colorado in 2016, Arizona in 2014, Stanford in 2013, Stanford in 2012, Stanford and USC in 2011)

it's been mentioned before, but the bottom feeders are losers, but i would also extend that to middle of the pack p5s. Nothing is written in stone and teams can elevate themselves with the right hire and set of circumstances, but teams that have been average for a while are likely going to lose out even more similar to the bottom feeders.

i don't know if this is an obvious loser, but are CCG losers also a loser? They drop in the rankings due to a loss in a game during a week where few are playing. The risk of being leapfrogged increases if you lose the CCG and possibly losing an at-large berth. Related to this, potential winners might be "third-best" teams, or teams that can sneak into the top 12 after all of the fall out from Championship week.

(06-14-2021 10:12 AM)eroc Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 08:49 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out the losers from this system.

The obvious loser is the bowl system. And some conferences lose their benefits from prestigious bowl tie-ins (Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl).

But it also paradoxically might help the conference who has benefited the most from a prestigious bowl tie-in, the PAC. The PAC has only gotten 2 CFP playoff appearances. It's become a de-facto P4, not P5.

But under this new system, the PAC is practically guaranteed a playoff spot AND is likely to get at-large bids. If this had been in place over the past 10 years, the PAC would have gotten 9 auto-bids (only missed it in crazy 2020) and 9 at-large bids (Utah in 2019, Washington in 2017, Washington and Colorado in 2016, Arizona in 2014, Stanford in 2013, Stanford in 2012, Stanford and USC in 2011)

it's been mentioned before, but the bottom feeders are losers, but i would also extend that to middle of the pack p5s. Nothing is written in stone and teams can elevate themselves with the right hire and set of circumstances, but teams that have been average for a while are likely going to lose out even more similar to the bottom feeders.

i don't know if this is an obvious loser, but are CCG losers also a loser? They drop in the rankings due to a loss in a game during a week where few are playing. The risk of being leapfrogged increases if you lose the CCG and possibly losing an at-large berth. Related to this, potential winners might be "third-best" teams, or teams that can sneak into the top 12 after all of the fall out from Championship week.

I'd still argue that CCGs are extremely important because they are the only way to guarantee a shot.

I agree though...the mid-to-low P5s are going to lose their one recruiting feather that they held over the top G5 teams now that there is access for all to the championship.

(06-14-2021 10:41 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 10:12 AM)eroc Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 08:49 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out the losers from this system.

The obvious loser is the bowl system. And some conferences lose their benefits from prestigious bowl tie-ins (Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl).

But it also paradoxically might help the conference who has benefited the most from a prestigious bowl tie-in, the PAC. The PAC has only gotten 2 CFP playoff appearances. It's become a de-facto P4, not P5.

But under this new system, the PAC is practically guaranteed a playoff spot AND is likely to get at-large bids. If this had been in place over the past 10 years, the PAC would have gotten 9 auto-bids (only missed it in crazy 2020) and 9 at-large bids (Utah in 2019, Washington in 2017, Washington and Colorado in 2016, Arizona in 2014, Stanford in 2013, Stanford in 2012, Stanford and USC in 2011)

it's been mentioned before, but the bottom feeders are losers, but i would also extend that to middle of the pack p5s. Nothing is written in stone and teams can elevate themselves with the right hire and set of circumstances, but teams that have been average for a while are likely going to lose out even more similar to the bottom feeders.

i don't know if this is an obvious loser, but are CCG losers also a loser? They drop in the rankings due to a loss in a game during a week where few are playing. The risk of being leapfrogged increases if you lose the CCG and possibly losing an at-large berth. Related to this, potential winners might be "third-best" teams, or teams that can sneak into the top 12 after all of the fall out from Championship week.

I'd still argue that CCGs are extremely important because they are the only way to guarantee a shot.

I agree though...the mid-to-low P5s are going to lose their one recruiting feather that they held over the top G5 teams now that there is access for all to the championship.

We're not disagreeing on this. i just think that there is way more risk losing now then before.

The Big 10 and SEC championship games become competitions for a bye in the playoff. Most years, all 4 of those teams will be in the playoff.

So they're not quite as meaningful as they used to be.

(06-14-2021 11:01 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The Big 10 and SEC championship games become competitions for a bye in the playoff. Most years, all 4 of those teams will be in the playoff.

So they're not quite as meaningful as they used to be.

Ehhhh...how many years would the Big Ten West Champ be a shoe-in for the playoff? I feel like they are almost always in the mid-teens when they play, whether it is Wisconsin, Iowa, or Northwestern.

(06-14-2021 11:19 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 11:01 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The Big 10 and SEC championship games become competitions for a bye in the playoff. Most years, all 4 of those teams will be in the playoff.

So they're not quite as meaningful as they used to be.

Ehhhh...how many years would the Big Ten West Champ be a shoe-in for the playoff? I feel like they are almost always in the mid-teens when they play, whether it is Wisconsin, Iowa, or Northwestern.

Agreed. Indiana might have had a case last year but they couldn't be in the CCG since they were in OSU's division. The SEC championship game rarely features a non-elite program. In the CFP era, the B10 has pretty much been a one trick pony.

(06-14-2021 12:16 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 11:19 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(06-14-2021 11:01 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The Big 10 and SEC championship games become competitions for a bye in the playoff. Most years, all 4 of those teams will be in the playoff.

So they're not quite as meaningful as they used to be.

Ehhhh...how many years would the Big Ten West Champ be a shoe-in for the playoff? I feel like they are almost always in the mid-teens when they play, whether it is Wisconsin, Iowa, or Northwestern.

Agreed. Indiana might have had a case last year but they couldn't be in the CCG since they were in OSU's division. The SEC championship game rarely features a non-elite program. In the CFP era, the B10 has pretty much been a one trick pony.

With top 12 I think the Big10 will we a 2 (or more) bid conference most years. That said it’s likely it comes from the Eastern Division if the West flounders as it has a lot of years. With share the Eastern Division includinf OSU, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, etc... I think those teams will pick up any slack if the Western Division struggles.

The only bad thing about this is that it doesn't force ND to join a conference, which I think an 8 team playoff would have. Other than that, this is a resounding win for UC. Think about it: this system literally would have had an SEC team coming North in Winter to play AT UC last year and would have had a second G5 in over the PAC champ.

This new format means that for the foreseeable future, UC will be realistically competing for a playoff spot every single year. It means that our recruiting will take a step up. It means that we have a realistic shot at keeping Fickell around long term.

16 teams is too much. Nobody wants to see some 3 loss Miami of Ohio team that wins an upset in the MACCG fed up to Alabama to be clubbed like a baby seal. That's not fairness; that's bad television. And screw being fair. Every one of us would have gladly embraced being in the P5 had the B12 had the common sense to invite us, and we would have never looked back at the ones we left behind.

(06-15-2021 10:28 AM)Bearcat 1985 Wrote:  The only bad thing about this is that it doesn't force ND to join a conference, which I think an 8 team playoff would have. Other than that, this is a resounding win for UC. Think about it: this system literally would have had an SEC team coming North in Winter to play AT UC last year and would have had a second G5 in over the PAC champ.

This new format means that for the foreseeable future, UC will be realistically competing for a playoff spot every single year. It means that our recruiting will take a step up. It means that we have a realistic shot at keeping Fickell around long term.

16 teams is too much. Nobody wants to see some 3 loss Miami of Ohio team that wins an upset in the MACCG fed up to Alabama to be clubbed like a baby seal. That's not fairness; that's bad television. And screw being fair. Every one of us would have gladly embraced being in the P5 had the B12 had the common sense to invite us, and we would have never looked back at the ones we left behind.

We would have beaten Georgia if Hudson hadn't been ejected, and we definitely would have beaten them if the game was at Nippert instead of in their backyard. We still need higher-level talent and more depth to compete with the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world, but we have a better sales pitch to big-time recruits with an expanded playoff.

Think about the players who are usually in the bottom half of Alabama's recruiting class... my pitch to them would be, do you want to be stuck behind the other three 4- and 5-star guys who are upperclassman for 2 years? Or do you want to come to Cincinnati and make the 2-deep right away, with a chance of being a starter as a true freshman.

I think the upcoming draft is also going to be huge for our recruiting. If Ridder, Gardner, Whyle, and Myjai all go in the first two rounds, it's going to raise the eye brows of a lot of high school talent. Imagine if Ridder has a Heisman-finalist type of season and goes in the top 10, with either Myjai or Sauce joining him in the top half of the first round. I'm certain the level of recruits committing to UC would increase noticeably.

(06-15-2021 11:26 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(06-15-2021 10:28 AM)Bearcat 1985 Wrote:  The only bad thing about this is that it doesn't force ND to join a conference, which I think an 8 team playoff would have. Other than that, this is a resounding win for UC. Think about it: this system literally would have had an SEC team coming North in Winter to play AT UC last year and would have had a second G5 in over the PAC champ.

This new format means that for the foreseeable future, UC will be realistically competing for a playoff spot every single year. It means that our recruiting will take a step up. It means that we have a realistic shot at keeping Fickell around long term.

16 teams is too much. Nobody wants to see some 3 loss Miami of Ohio team that wins an upset in the MACCG fed up to Alabama to be clubbed like a baby seal. That's not fairness; that's bad television. And screw being fair. Every one of us would have gladly embraced being in the P5 had the B12 had the common sense to invite us, and we would have never looked back at the ones we left behind.

We would have beaten Georgia if Hudson hadn't been ejected, and we definitely would have beaten them if the game was at Nippert instead of in their backyard. We still need higher-level talent and more depth to compete with the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world, but we have a better sales pitch to big-time recruits with an expanded playoff.

Think about the players who are usually in the bottom half of Alabama's recruiting class... my pitch to them would be, do you want to be stuck behind the other three 4- and 5-star guys who are upperclassman for 2 years? Or do you want to come to Cincinnati and make the 2-deep right away, with a chance of being a starter as a true freshman.

I think the upcoming draft is also going to be huge for our recruiting. If Ridder, Gardner, Whyle, and Myjai all go in the first two rounds, it's going to raise the eye brows of a lot of high school talent. Imagine if Ridder has a Heisman-finalist type of season and goes in the top 10, with either Myjai or Sauce joining him in the top half of the first round. I'm certain the level of recruits committing to UC would increase noticeably.

I mean, that's a tough sell...they see guys stuck behind guys who play for one season then end up as 1st or 2nd day Draft Picks at Alabama all the time...if they're at Alabama, their goal isn't to play for a National Championship, it is to play in the NFL, and we're going to war with a super soaker in that argument at the moment.

With that being said, I think we now have more than enough ammo to beat out essentially every team BUT those upper echelons ones for recruits...this is going to be fun, and you can tell from the interviews and notes about Fickell this past week or so that he knows it too.

(06-15-2021 10:28 AM)Bearcat 1985 Wrote:  The only bad thing about this is that it doesn't force ND to join a conference, which I think an 8 team playoff would have. Other than that, this is a resounding win for UC. Think about it: this system literally would have had an SEC team coming North in Winter to play AT UC last year and would have had a second G5 in over the PAC champ.

This new format means that for the foreseeable future, UC will be realistically competing for a playoff spot every single year. It means that our recruiting will take a step up. It means that we have a realistic shot at keeping Fickell around long term.

16 teams is too much. Nobody wants to see some 3 loss Miami of Ohio team that wins an upset in the MACCG fed up to Alabama to be clubbed like a baby seal. That's not fairness; that's bad television. And screw being fair. Every one of us would have gladly embraced being in the P5 had the B12 had the common sense to invite us, and we would have never looked back at the ones we left behind.

If your goal is to win a national championship, there is certainly a clearer path getting to the playoff at UC than a school like Michigan State. What a stunning turn of events since Coach Fick was courted by that school.

It's been a fun process watching CLF build our program. The team has gotten better each year, and on paper, we have our best roster ever in 2021. With the expanded playoff, I could realistically see Fickell's process playing out like this over time (including previous seasons to show the progress):

2017: Rebuild the culture from the Tuberville dumpster fire and begin recruiting the right guys.

2018: Vastly improved team that won 11 games and a bowl game. Recruiting in Ohio has been established.

2019: Make it to the conference championship game. Even better recruiting. Another P5 bowl victory.

2020: Win the conference championship game and make the NY6 bowl. Best recruiting class ever.

2021: Win conference again and either win NY6 bowl or make the CFP. Another strong recruiting class.

2022: Build off 2021 momentum in recruiting and start inching recruiting rankings towards the top 25. Win another conference championship, or have a 10-win season worst-case after losing a lot of upperclassmen, but having young guys ready to step in.

2023: Win the conference and make the first 12-team CFP. Recruiting continues to trend upwards.

2024: Make the CFP again and win a game. Secure first top-25 recruiting class in school history.

2025 and beyond: Multiple top 25 recruiting classes and CFP appearances. Eventually, we have the depth of talent where a special QB could take us to the CFP semifinals. Do that, and recruiting trends upwards again. Rinse and repeat...

(06-15-2021 11:29 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(06-15-2021 11:26 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(06-15-2021 10:28 AM)Bearcat 1985 Wrote:  The only bad thing about this is that it doesn't force ND to join a conference, which I think an 8 team playoff would have. Other than that, this is a resounding win for UC. Think about it: this system literally would have had an SEC team coming North in Winter to play AT UC last year and would have had a second G5 in over the PAC champ.

This new format means that for the foreseeable future, UC will be realistically competing for a playoff spot every single year. It means that our recruiting will take a step up. It means that we have a realistic shot at keeping Fickell around long term.

16 teams is too much. Nobody wants to see some 3 loss Miami of Ohio team that wins an upset in the MACCG fed up to Alabama to be clubbed like a baby seal. That's not fairness; that's bad television. And screw being fair. Every one of us would have gladly embraced being in the P5 had the B12 had the common sense to invite us, and we would have never looked back at the ones we left behind.

We would have beaten Georgia if Hudson hadn't been ejected, and we definitely would have beaten them if the game was at Nippert instead of in their backyard. We still need higher-level talent and more depth to compete with the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world, but we have a better sales pitch to big-time recruits with an expanded playoff.

Think about the players who are usually in the bottom half of Alabama's recruiting class... my pitch to them would be, do you want to be stuck behind the other three 4- and 5-star guys who are upperclassman for 2 years? Or do you want to come to Cincinnati and make the 2-deep right away, with a chance of being a starter as a true freshman.

I think the upcoming draft is also going to be huge for our recruiting. If Ridder, Gardner, Whyle, and Myjai all go in the first two rounds, it's going to raise the eye brows of a lot of high school talent. Imagine if Ridder has a Heisman-finalist type of season and goes in the top 10, with either Myjai or Sauce joining him in the top half of the first round. I'm certain the level of recruits committing to UC would increase noticeably.

I mean, that's a tough sell...they see guys stuck behind guys who play for one season then end up as 1st or 2nd day Draft Picks at Alabama all the time...if they're at Alabama, their goal isn't to play for a National Championship, it is to play in the NFL, and we're going to war with a super soaker in that argument at the moment.

With that being said, I think we now have more than enough ammo to beat out essentially every team BUT those upper echelons ones for recruits...this is going to be fun, and you can tell from the interviews and notes about Fickell this past week or so that he knows it too.

Unless (until) the rules change, Alabama, Clemson and OSU can only take so many kids each season. There is plenty of talent that can compete with them and we'd only need to siphon off 3-4 of those kids all around each class to compete. I mean hell, Georgia has top 5 recruiting classes every season and we ran just fine with them.

(06-15-2021 11:56 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  It's been a fun process watching CLF build our program. The team has gotten better each year, and on paper, we have our best roster ever in 2021. With the expanded playoff, I could realistically see Fickell's process playing out like this over time (including previous seasons to show the progress):

2017: Rebuild the culture from the Tuberville dumpster fire and begin recruiting the right guys.

2018: Vastly improved team that won 11 games and a bowl game. Recruiting in Ohio has been established.

2019: Make it to the conference championship game. Even better recruiting. Another P5 bowl victory.

2020: Win the conference championship game and make the NY6 bowl. Best recruiting class ever.

2021: Win conference again and either win NY6 bowl or make the CFP. Another strong recruiting class.

2022: Build off 2021 momentum in recruiting and start inching recruiting rankings towards the top 25. Win another conference championship, or have a 10-win season worst-case after losing a lot of upperclassmen, but having young guys ready to step in.

2023: Win the conference and make the first 12-team CFP. Recruiting continues to trend upwards.

2024: Make the CFP again and win a game. Secure first top-25 recruiting class in school history.

2025 and beyond: Multiple top 25 recruiting classes and CFP appearances. Eventually, we have the depth of talent where a special QB could take us to the CFP semifinals. Do that, and recruiting trends upwards again. Rinse and repeat...

I think 2022 is a going to be a rough one for us with all of the losses we're going to sustain. I could see it being more of an 8-5/9-4 season truthfully, although, the schedule does seem tasty in the OOC (Indiana at home and a VERY winnable game at Arkansas).

I mean, here are our losses after this season (* denotes likely draft entrant):

Offense:
Desmond Ridder, Alec Pierce, Josh Whyle*, Leonard Taylor, Michael Young, Jerome Ford*, Vincent McConnell, and Cole Smith
Essentially, we are likely going to be replacing every skill position player and our most tenured OLman, though the rest of the OL should be more than solid in 2022

Defense:
Myjai Sanders, Curtis Brooks, Marcus Brown, Malik Vann, Darrian Beavers, Joel Dublanko, Coby Bryant, Ja'von Hicks, Brian Cook, and Ahmad Gardner*
For those taking notes, that's at least 3/4 DL, 2/3 LBs and our entire base defensive backfield....yeeeesh.