Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: Which playoff format do you predict for 2026-27 season? YOU MAY VOTE FOR MORE THAN ONE OPTION
4 teams (no change in playoff system)
6 or 8 team playoff (at-large teams)
8 team playoff (2 at-large teams)
10 or 12 team playoff (at-large teams)
10 team playoff (4 at-large teams)
12 team playoff (6 at-large teams)
14 or16 team playoff (at-large teams)
14 team playoff (6/7 at-large teams)
16 team playoff (8/9 at-large teams)
Other (something else, no playoff, no idea)
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
SI: "CFP expansion moves closer to 2026." Which playoff system do you predict?
Author Message
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 44
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #1
Exclamation SI: "CFP expansion moves closer to 2026." Which playoff system do you predict?
.

"As each day passes, expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026, the first year of what would be the CFP’s new multi-media rights deal."

https://www.si.com/college/2022/01/11/co...e-on-model

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The deadlock in the CFP committee, due to the requirement for a unanimous decision simply means that the first year of CFP expansion will be delayed until the 2026 (2026-27) season.

However, that's not so far off (just 3 1/2 years from now), and the years of poor TV ratings seem likely to provide the needed incentive for an agreement.

.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2022 03:18 AM by Milwaukee.)
01-11-2022 05:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 44
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #2
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
.

With more time to reflect, perhaps the idea of a 16 team playoff (8 conference champions and 8 at-large teams) can be reconsidered.

Since none of the 12-team playoff proposals could be agreed on, it may be that the only way all parties will be satisfied will be with a 16-team playoff.

.
01-11-2022 06:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,333
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #3
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 06:23 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  .

With more time to reflect, perhaps the idea of a 16 team playoff (8 conference champions and 8 at-large teams) can be reconsidered.

Since none of the 12-team playoff proposals could be agreed on, it may be that the only way all parties will be satisfied will be with a 16-team playoff.

.

8 and 8 sounds good but removes the bye for the Top 4 champions.

I said 6+6 because it was already the most thought out model. In 2026-27 they don't need the ACC to agree to the new format and it will pass I think.
01-11-2022 07:01 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Blue_Trombone Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,579
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 237
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location:
Post: #4
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
What I want? 16 Team Playoff, all conferences get autobids.

What will happen? 10 Team Playoff, 5 autobids/5 at-larges
01-11-2022 07:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BKTopper Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,411
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 74
I Root For: WKU
Location: Who knows these days
Post: #5
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
It will never be a true championship, with conference champions and G5 representation. I say it remains an Invitational, but maybe a slightly expanded one, say 6 teams. 4 from SEC, 2 from the alliance.

I voted no change though.
01-11-2022 07:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
curtis0620 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,703
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 31
I Root For: Pitt
Location:
Post: #6
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
24 teams all 10 conference champs
01-11-2022 08:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,191
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 72
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #7
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
The next expansion should be to 5 teams. Select the 3 best conference champions and 2 at large teams. The 3 best conference champions get a 1st round bye.
01-11-2022 08:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,137
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 842
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #8
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.
01-11-2022 08:46 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Blue_Trombone Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,579
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 237
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location:
Post: #9
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

A 16 team playoff with 10 autobids and a 12 team playoff with 6 autobids have the same amount of at-large teams (6)
01-11-2022 09:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CarlSmithCenter Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 648
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Ball So Hard U
Location:
Post: #10
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 09:08 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

A 16 team playoff with 10 autobids and a 12 team playoff with 6 autobids have the same amount of at-large teams (6)

A 16 team tournament with 10 autobids is ridiculous. Take the top 6 ranked champions, or the P5 champs and the top ranked G5 champion and then have 6 at large teams. In no world do the MAC, CUSA, Sun Belt, or MWC champions deserve an automatic bid to the CFP simply for winning their moribund leagues.
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2022 09:26 AM by CarlSmithCenter.)
01-11-2022 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,845
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 634
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #11
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

Is it fair to say the only one against 5+1+6 was the AAC?

If so, that is likely the future model as next time, it won't require unanimous agreement to change.

Instead the AAC will be presented the plan and asked if they would like to sign on
01-11-2022 09:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,137
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 842
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #12
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 09:54 AM)solohawks Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

Is it fair to say the only one against 5+1+6 was the AAC?

If so, that is likely the future model as next time, it won't require unanimous agreement to change.

Instead the AAC will be presented the plan and asked if they would like to sign on

I don't think it's necessarily fair to state that about the AAC (and believe me that I'm not an Aresco stan) as MWC commissioner Craig Thompson, who was on the CFP proposal committee, essentially stated last week that he spent the last 2 years fighting against any form of P5 auto-bids.

Now, if all of the P5 plus ND are on board with 5+1+6, then I'd find it hard to see how the G5 would reject it. They have little choice if *all* of the entities that have real market power agree upon a particular system.

However, what I think is happening is that it isn't the case that all of the P5 plus ND are on board with 5+1+6. The ACC reportedly wants an 8-team playoff with 5+1+2 (with the only reason that I can see is that they think that a smaller playoff with fewer at-large bids can pressure ND to join their league). The Big Ten wants P5 auto-bids but seems to be indifferent as to whether it's an 8-team or 12-team playoff provided that there's some protection for the Rose Bowl. The Pac-12 seems to be open to everything (although they'll need some protection for the Rose Bowl, too). The SEC, Big 12 and ND are the ones that proposed 6+6, so they're clearly fine with that proposal. I don't think any of them are against 5+1+6 per se (as it would either be net positive or neutral for all of those parties), but they probably feel that they already had this debate over P5 auto-bids over the past 2 years in their committee meetings and see the current discussion as impeding the progress that they had made previously.

My impression from all of the reports from the past couple of months (and this was reiterated in a few places yesterday - see Stewart Mandel's latest column as an example) that it's really the ACC that's holding everything up with the most intractable demands. That continues to boggle my mind (as the ACC stands to gain a lot with either a 5+1+6 or 6+6 system), but it is what it is.
01-11-2022 10:10 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 44
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #13
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 10:10 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  My impression...it's really the ACC that's holding everything up with the most intractable demands. That continues to boggle my mind (as the ACC stands to gain a lot with either a 5+1+6 or 6+6 system), but it is what it is.

True, but the point of the SI article is that the CFP expansion's "earliest year moves closer to 2026."

So, at this point, it really doesn't matter which conference is holding it up, Frank.

What matters most now is what's going to happen for 2026.

For 2026, a unanimous vote is not going to be necessary, and at that point, no single conference can stand in the way - - nobody has veto power, any more then.

So the question for this thread is - - what kind of playoff system do you think we will have for 2026, when a unanimous vote is not required?

And, since you seem to have access to some sources that the rest of us may not have - - not only would it be interesting to know which type of playoff system you think we'll eventually have, but why - - based on your own unique insights?

Frankly (pun not intended), I don't think that any of us can be sure what's going to happen - - but that's ok - - it's what message boards exist for! 04-cheers

.
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2022 10:23 AM by Milwaukee.)
01-11-2022 10:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CarlSmithCenter Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 648
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Ball So Hard U
Location:
Post: #14
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 09:08 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

A 16 team playoff with 10 autobids and a 12 team playoff with 6 autobids have the same amount of at-large teams (6)

A 16 team tournament with 10 autobids is ridiculous. Take the top 6 ranked champions of the P5 and the top ranked G5 champion and then have 6 at large teams. In no world do the MAC, CUSA, Sun Belt, or MWC champions deserve an automatic bid to the CFP simply for winning their moribund leagues.
01-11-2022 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 44
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #15
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 10:27 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 09:08 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

A 16 team playoff with 10 autobids and a 12 team playoff with 6 autobids have the same amount of at-large teams (6)

A 16 team tournament with 10 autobids is ridiculous. Take the top 6 ranked champions of the P5 and the top ranked G5 champion and then have 6 at large teams. In no world do the MAC, CUSA, Sun Belt, or MWC champions deserve an automatic bid to the CFP simply for winning their moribund leagues.

"A 16 team tournament with 10 autobids is ridiculous."

Yo, man, there will be four years to hash this out, so there's no need to drop the "r" bomb on anyone at this point... 03-rotfl

But, seriously, none of the options is "ridiculous." There are intelligent people who are in favor of every single option in the poll, and other options not listed, and they can all provide rational justifications for their views.

Here's one possible justification for a "10+6" playoff proposal:

Basically, every conference has said they would be ok with 6 at large teams, and there would be various problems if not at least 7 auto-bids for conference champs, so probably the raw minimum would probably be 13 playoff teams.

Once we accept the idea of a minimum of 13, 16 seems to make more sense, as does the "Sweet 16" of the NCAA tournament.

At that point, the question is simply how many conference champions should have a shot. The argument for allowing all 10 an auto-bid would be that it would make the regular season games in every FBS conference more meaningful.

Not saying that's the only reasonable option, but simply that it isn't a "ridiculous" option. 04-cheers

.
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2022 10:50 AM by Milwaukee.)
01-11-2022 10:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 11,275
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 504
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #16
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 10:22 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 10:10 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  My impression...it's really the ACC that's holding everything up with the most intractable demands. That continues to boggle my mind (as the ACC stands to gain a lot with either a 5+1+6 or 6+6 system), but it is what it is.

True, but the point of the SI article is that the CFP expansion's "earliest year moves closer to 2026."

So, at this point, it really doesn't matter which conference is holding it up, Frank.

What matters most now is what's going to happen for 2026.

For 2026, a unanimous vote is not going to be necessary, and at that point, no single conference can stand in the way - - nobody has veto power, any more then.

It kind of does. Realistically, you're not going to see a playoff sytem happen without the SEC, or the B1G, or the PAC or ACC. They're not going to exclude the Big 12 or Notre Dame.

The G5 conferences--strike that, everybody else-- will be invited to sign whatever agreement is hammered out between the SEC and the Big Ten.
01-11-2022 10:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 9,043
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 374
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #17
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
I like top four champs get a bye and make New Year’s bowls, 8 wild cards play on campus. Semis would be the day of the current title game and final on MLK like Seagull said.

Get ‘er done!
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2022 11:08 AM by esayem.)
01-11-2022 11:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,845
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 634
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #18
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 2026-27 CFP.
The calendar probably wont allow for this...

But what if you had a play in round with the bottom 4 ranked conference champions play the bottom 4 at large teams in a play in round in a 10+6 model

This would allow you to whittle down the field to the desired 12

Using this year as an example:
Auto Bids:
#1 Alabama
#2 Michigan
#4 Cincinnati
#7 Baylor
#11 Utah
#12 Pittsburgh
#23 Louisiana
UR UTSA
UR Utah Sate
UR Northern Illinois

At Large Bids
#3 Georgia
#5 Notre Dame
#6 Ohio State
#8 Ole Miss
#9 Oklahoma State
#10 Michigan State

Playoff Week 1 (EXTRA PLAY IN ROUND)
#16 Northern Illinois v. #6 Ohio State
#15 Utah State v. #8 Ole Miss
#14 UTSA v. #9 Oklahoma State
#13 Louisiana v. #10 Michigan State

Playoff Week 2 (6+6 Proposed Week 1)
#9 Oklahoma State v. #8 Ole Miss
#10 Michigan State v. #6 Ohio State
#11 Utah v. #5 Notre Dame
#12 Pitt v. #3 Georgia

Playoff Week 3 (6+6 Proposed Week 2)
#8 Ole Miss v. #1 Alabama
#7 Baylor v. #2 Michigan
#6 Ohio State v. #3 Georgia
#5 Notre Dame v. #4 Cincinnati

Playoff Week 4 (6+6 Semis)
#4 Cincinnati v #1 Alabama
#3 Georgia v #2 Michigan

Playoff Week 5 (6+6 Championship Game)
#1 v. #2
01-11-2022 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,072
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 41
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #19
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 10:27 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 09:08 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

A 16 team playoff with 10 autobids and a 12 team playoff with 6 autobids have the same amount of at-large teams (6)

A 16 team tournament with 10 autobids is ridiculous. Take the top 6 ranked champions of the P5 and the top ranked G5 champion and then have 6 at large teams. In no world do the MAC, CUSA, Sun Belt, or MWC champions deserve an automatic bid to the CFP simply for winning their moribund leagues.

Then I guess the PAC doesn’t either as they have a loosing record to the MWC this year and the PAC-12 champ lost to the MWC runner up.

Btw automatic bids to all conference champs works well in basketball. If you go 16 you have 10 autobids.

For now the 6 + 6 is a reasonable compromise.
01-11-2022 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,333
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #20
RE: SI: "expansion’s earliest year moves closer to 2026". Predictions for 20...
(01-11-2022 10:27 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 09:08 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  
(01-11-2022 08:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I think we’ll still end up with some form of the 12-team playoff (5+1+6 or 6+6), which makes it asinine that the powers that be can’t get their crap together and pass it prior to 2026.

As for a 16-team playoff, I strongly believe that the P5 don’t want anything to do with that system. Remember that the P5 have extremely valuable CCGs to protect. In the cases of the SEC and Big Ten, those CCGs are worth as much or more than their Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl tie-ins… and that’s money that they don’t have to share with anyone else.

A top 4 bye in a 12-team playoff preserves and probably enhance the value of this CCGs. An 8-team playoff is also small enough where no CCG loser can count on an at-large bid any more than today’s system. In contrast, providing absolutely no incentive to a CCG winner compared to an at-large bid beyond seeding in a 16-team playoff would turn them into the football equivalents of P5 basketball conference tournament championships (fun but very watered down in value).

Everyone needs to remember that the P5 still make a whole lot more money off of their regular season and CCG contracts than they do from the postseason. Anything that takes a single dime away from those contracts won’t get passed.

A 16 team playoff with 10 autobids and a 12 team playoff with 6 autobids have the same amount of at-large teams (6)

A 16 team tournament with 10 autobids is ridiculous. Take the top 6 ranked champions of the P5 and the top ranked G5 champion and then have 6 at large teams. In no world do the MAC, CUSA, Sun Belt, or MWC champions deserve an automatic bid to the CFP simply for winning their moribund leagues.

Why not make it 12 automatics accommodating WAC and ASun revivals?

Why not give everyone a trophy?
01-11-2022 12:01 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2022 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, © 2002-2022 MyBB Group.