(05-22-2017 02:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  1. Most people reasonably believe that Notre Dame is the single most valuable national brand in all of college football.

2. The only other school that approaches their value as a single school is Texas.

IMO, your first point isn't nearly as true in 2017 as it was in 1997. And also IMO, I don't believe your second point was ever true (except in the minds of Longhorn fans).

To whatever extent your first point might still be true, their absence from the CFP wouldn't diminish it much.

In the abstract, that seems true, but in a concrete situation in which it would matter, yes it would diminish it tremendously.

Imagine if ND was undefeated and the consensus #1 or #2 in the polls, and was excluded from the playoffs? The playoffs would be viewed as bogus by the public and media and that's all that would be talked about, not the teams actually playing.

Knowledge of this is why we don't have a "conference champ's only" requirement already.

(05-22-2017 02:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  So, yes, ESPN absolutely cares whether ND can play in the playoff and they will pay accordingly. The P5 conferences know what's up and they'll take the money. Heck, the fact that ND actually doesn't make the playoff in actuality is a *good* thing for the P5 since they're earning ESPN money off of ND's inclusion and the chances are low that they'll actually take a playoff spot. That's a perfect win-win for all of the power players involved.

I take it you don't think very much of ESPN's business acumen.

I like the champs only concept mainly because it increases the importance of the regular season and means more decisions are determined on the field. Its not without its flaws however. There are going to be years when the best two teams are in the same conference. That said, that doesnt matter when determining the champion. The reality is, if the best 2 teams are in that conference, then the best team (the expected champion) still emerges from that conference and makes the playoff. If they dont win the championship---then maybe the best two teams were not really in that conference after all. All in all, I lean toward systems where as many decisions as possible are determined on the field of play.

(05-22-2017 02:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  1. Most people reasonably believe that Notre Dame is the single most valuable national brand in all of college football.

2. The only other school that approaches their value as a single school is Texas.

IMO, your first point isn't nearly as true in 2017 as it was in 1997. And also IMO, I don't believe your second point was ever true (except in the minds of Longhorn fans).

To whatever extent your first point might still be true, their absence from the CFP wouldn't diminish it much.

In the abstract, that seems true, but in a concrete situation in which it would matter, yes it would diminish it tremendously.

Imagine if ND was undefeated and the consensus #1 or #2 in the polls, and was excluded from the playoffs? The playoffs would be viewed as bogus by the public and media and that's all that would be talked about, not the teams actually playing.

Knowledge of this is why we don't have a "conference champ's only" requirement already.

In my estimation, if Notre Dame were to refuse to join the ACC knowing that to do so meant they would be ineligible for the playoffs, it would be even less likely that they would be able to recruit at a level that would make them a Top 4 team in the future.

So, what if, instead of being that good once in twenty years, they were only that good once in forty or fifty years? Would their exclusion from a playoff then be any more controversial than any of the frequent snubs our current and recent systems have produced? And will continue to produce?

We will always have times when the legitimacy of a national champion can be called into question as long as the participants are selected by a beauty contest.

(05-22-2017 03:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I like the champs only concept mainly because it increases the importance of the regular season and means more decisions are determined on the field. Its not without its flaws however. There are going to be years when the best two teams are in the same conference. That said, that doesnt matter when determining the champion. The reality is, if the best 2 teams are in that conference, then the best team (the expected champion) still emerges from that conference and makes the playoff. If they dont win the championship---then maybe the best two teams were not really in that conference after all. All in all, I lean toward systems where as many decisions as possible are determined on the field of play.

You can't have a conference champs only rule as long as there are fewer playoff slots than there are conference champs.

(05-22-2017 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 03:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I like the champs only concept mainly because it increases the importance of the regular season and means more decisions are determined on the field. Its not without its flaws however. There are going to be years when the best two teams are in the same conference. That said, that doesnt matter when determining the champion. The reality is, if the best 2 teams are in that conference, then the best team (the expected champion) still emerges from that conference and makes the playoff. If they dont win the championship---then maybe the best two teams were not really in that conference after all. All in all, I lean toward systems where as many decisions as possible are determined on the field of play.

You can't have a conference champs only rule as long as there are fewer playoff slots than there are conference champs.

It is precisely because of that condition that the regular season is interesting. Musical chairs in which there are as many chairs as there are players isn't a very exciting game.

(05-22-2017 03:03 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  1. Most people reasonably believe that Notre Dame is the single most valuable national brand in all of college football.

2. The only other school that approaches their value as a single school is Texas.

IMO, your first point isn't nearly as true in 2017 as it was in 1997. And also IMO, I don't believe your second point was ever true (except in the minds of Longhorn fans).

To whatever extent your first point might still be true, their absence from the CFP wouldn't diminish it much.

In the abstract, that seems true, but in a concrete situation in which it would matter, yes it would diminish it tremendously.

Imagine if ND was undefeated and the consensus #1 or #2 in the polls, and was excluded from the playoffs? The playoffs would be viewed as bogus by the public and media and that's all that would be talked about, not the teams actually playing.

Knowledge of this is why we don't have a "conference champ's only" requirement already.

We will always have times when the legitimacy of a national champion can be called into question as long as the participants are selected by a beauty contest.

A combination of Professional Wrestling, Olympic Ice Dancing, a computer poll of 12 robots, and a straight-up bank account comparison would be the ideal method for determining a sports champion.

(05-22-2017 03:03 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  1. Most people reasonably believe that Notre Dame is the single most valuable national brand in all of college football.

2. The only other school that approaches their value as a single school is Texas.

IMO, your first point isn't nearly as true in 2017 as it was in 1997. And also IMO, I don't believe your second point was ever true (except in the minds of Longhorn fans).

To whatever extent your first point might still be true, their absence from the CFP wouldn't diminish it much.

In the abstract, that seems true, but in a concrete situation in which it would matter, yes it would diminish it tremendously.

Imagine if ND was undefeated and the consensus #1 or #2 in the polls, and was excluded from the playoffs? The playoffs would be viewed as bogus by the public and media and that's all that would be talked about, not the teams actually playing.

Knowledge of this is why we don't have a "conference champ's only" requirement already.

In my estimation, if Notre Dame were to refuse to join the ACC knowing that to do so meant they would be ineligible for the playoffs, it would be even less likely that they would be able to recruit at a level that would make them a Top 4 team in the future.

That's true, but that wouldn't happen, as Notre Dame has already said that it WILL sacrifice its independence if the rules were changed such that only conference champs are eligible for the playoffs. ND is willing to suffer some disadvantage of not being in a conference, such as the "guidance" that says the CFP is supposed to give preference to conference champs, but it is not willing to be totally shut out.

So if that kind of rule was passed, Notre Dame would join the ACC so as to remain eligible for the playoffs. But as Frank notes, the other P5 do not want that to happen because that would just make the ACC stronger and not help them in any way, in fact weakening them relative to the ACC.

And it's the two most powerful conferences, the SEC and B1G, who would feel that the most, as they overlap the ACC the most.

So I don't think that is likely to happen. Smartly, ND actually added protection to its independent status by committing to join the ACC if it joins any conference at all over the next 15-20 years. That told the B1G and Big 12 that they could banish any hopes they had that they could force ND to join them, and it told the SEC that if they have to join a conference, the ACC, the conference the SEC overlaps the most, would benefit.

That agreement is kind of a "poison pill" that makes it much less likely the true heavyweights, the B1G and SEC, would try to bully ND about conference membership.

(05-22-2017 02:54 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  So, yes, ESPN absolutely cares whether ND can play in the playoff and they will pay accordingly. The P5 conferences know what's up and they'll take the money. Heck, the fact that ND actually doesn't make the playoff in actuality is a *good* thing for the P5 since they're earning ESPN money off of ND's inclusion and the chances are low that they'll actually take a playoff spot. That's a perfect win-win for all of the power players involved.

I take it you don't think very much of ESPN's business acumen.

Actually, I think quite highly of the business acumen of ESPN and its parent company of Disney in most cases. On what planet would the NFL's TV partners be OK if the Dallas Cowboys were blocked from going to the Super Bowl? On what planet would the MLB's TV partners be OK if the New York Yankees were blocked from going to the World Series? On what planet would the NBA's TV partners be OK if the Lakers were blocked from going to the NBA Finals?

That's what people are asking ESPN to be OK with in terms of Notre Dame being foreclosed from going to the CFP. ESPN and every other TV network would NOT be OK with scenario.

By the same token, here is a quote from your OP with respect to the conference champs requirement:

Quote:If one of them is outside the P5, so be it.

That's the problem here from where you're coming from because you're misplacing priorities. ESPN does NOT give a crap about such schools. The mere chance of Notre Dame in the playoff even once in the 12 year life of the initial contract means much more than elevating any non-P5 champ into the playoff.

Look, this was debated to death before the CFP was even put into place. The leagues that were most in favor of some type of conference champ rule (such as the Big Ten and Pac-12) couldn't even get a 3 conference champs plus 1 wild card spot format passed, much less required all 4 schools to be conference champs. Now, I think the playoff will eventually succumb to market forces and expand to 8 teams (in which case auto-bids for the P5 champs plus 1 spot for the top G5 champ is quite reasonable), but in terms of the 4-team playoff format itself, I can't see it changing it all. No one that actually matters wants the format that you're seeking.

(05-22-2017 03:03 PM)ken d Wrote:  We will always have times when the legitimacy of a national champion can be called into question as long as the participants are selected by a beauty contest.

Your idea doesn't eliminate the beauty contest. It just limits the beauty contest contestants to conference champions.

The NCAA basketball tournament used to exclude non-champs. They stopped that practice after a few too many seasons in which one of the top teams in the country was excluded. There was a season in which the AP #2 team was excluded and another in which the AP #3 team was excluded solely because those teams didn't win their conference autobid.

The NCAA basketball tournament also has participants selected - and crucially, seeded - by a "beauty contest".

At any rate, it's fun to discuss but the CFP isn't going to change the format as long as the playoff stays at 4 teams.

playoffs not going to 8
players are not getting paid
ur out of ur mind if u want another round of games

(05-22-2017 02:24 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  I agree with Frank. The 4-team format isn't big enough to be conference champs only. In 2013 #20 Duke was playing in the ACC championship. If Florida State gets the flu, loses a player or two, or whatever, Does ACC champ Duke get in over an 11-1 Ohio State or LSU?

An alternative would be to expand the CCG to 2 rounds. However, that brings up the B12 issue again.

I think it would have been more likely that another conference champion would have gotten the playoff spot and the ACC would have been the one left out. If FSU dropped down in the rankings due to a loss to Duke, as is likely, the top five in the final CFP rankings would have been: SEC champ Auburn (13-1), Alabama (11-1 and head to head loser to Auburn), B1G champ Michigan State (13-1), PAC champ Stanford (11-2) and B12 champ Baylor (11-1).

ND is pretty confident of its position, status quo. The "poison pill" was a smart move on ND's part and cost them absolutely nothing.

Frank and Quo are right in their combined analysis of this issue.

P4 champs only sounds great on message boards with some fans, maybe most.

But in the real world, it hasn't happened and likely will not.

Who cares about W-L when Wal-mart sells a million of your t-shirts a year?
Who cares about APR when Billy-Joe and Bobby-Sue are tuned in to the game like clockwork?
Who cares unless Mike and Mike talk incessantly about your program and you get the lion's share of ESPN coverage?

Time to rip the band-aid off and have a revolving pool of the top eight programs by revenue and fan buying power and just rotate in those top eight into the CFP each year.

Yes. If you're not the best team in your conference, you're not the best team in the nation. You should have won your conference if you want to play for the natty.

(05-22-2017 03:13 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:54 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  So, yes, ESPN absolutely cares whether ND can play in the playoff and they will pay accordingly. The P5 conferences know what's up and they'll take the money. Heck, the fact that ND actually doesn't make the playoff in actuality is a *good* thing for the P5 since they're earning ESPN money off of ND's inclusion and the chances are low that they'll actually take a playoff spot. That's a perfect win-win for all of the power players involved.

I take it you don't think very much of ESPN's business acumen.

Actually, I think quite highly of the business acumen of ESPN and its parent company of Disney in most cases. On what planet would the NFL's TV partners be OK if the Dallas Cowboys were blocked from going to the Super Bowl? On what planet would the MLB's TV partners be OK if the New York Yankees were blocked from going to the World Series? On what planet would the NBA's TV partners be OK if the Lakers were blocked from going to the NBA Finals?

That's what people are asking ESPN to be OK with in terms of Notre Dame being foreclosed from going to the CFP. ESPN and every other TV network would NOT be OK with scenario.

By the same token, here is a quote from your OP with respect to the conference champs requirement:

Quote:If one of them is outside the P5, so be it.

That's the problem here from where you're coming from because you're misplacing priorities. ESPN does NOT give a crap about such schools. The mere chance of Notre Dame in the playoff even once in the 12 year life of the initial contract means much more than elevating any non-P5 champ into the playoff.

Look, this was debated to death before the CFP was even put into place. The leagues that were most in favor of some type of conference champ rule (such as the Big Ten and Pac-12) couldn't even get a 3 conference champs plus 1 wild card spot format passed, much less required all 4 schools to be conference champs. Now, I think the playoff will eventually succumb to market forces and expand to 8 teams (in which case auto-bids for the P5 champs plus 1 spot for the top G5 champ is quite reasonable), but in terms of the 4-team playoff format itself, I can't see it changing it all. No one that actually matters wants the format that you're seeking.

I don't recall saying that I said I was seeking anything.

If ESPN "doesn't give a crap" about such schools (that is, G5 schools) in a four team playoff, then why give them an autobid in an eight team playoff either? For that matter, why not formally exclude them now if you are going to do so informally by selection committee, and just limit eligibility to the playoff to P5 schools?

(05-22-2017 02:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:11 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  ND doesn't have the power you think they have. Sure they have a say and a lot more so than the whole G5 as stated. But if anything, the current playoff contract really weakened the power they had before. If the P5 want to have an auto-bid to a playoff, there is nothing ND can do about it.

The P5 wouldn't try to do it, because they know the playoff would be viewed as illegitimate if a top 4 Irish team was left out.

Just imagine if in 2012, an unbeaten #1 ranked ND had been left out of a 4-team playoff? The playoff would have had no legitimacy, thus seriously weakening its value to TV, etc.

Plus, since Notre Dame has already said that having equal access to the national title trumps even independence for them, as Frank notes, doing that would result in Notre Dame joining the ACC as a full member, thus greatly strengthening the ACC, which neither the B1G nor SEC would want to see happen.

I doubt the playoff would be considered illegitimate. If the P5 want conference champs only then ND would have no choice but to join the ACC if they have access to the playoff.
Yes it was discussed about only having conference champs and while the current CFP made no stipulation, I think it will happen next time even if they still have a 4 team playoff.
Ohio St. getting into the playoffs last year by not even playing in CCG, put a bad taste in quite a few peoples mouths. And then only to get blanked in the semi-final game.

(05-22-2017 04:22 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-22-2017 02:11 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  ND doesn't have the power you think they have. Sure they have a say and a lot more so than the whole G5 as stated. But if anything, the current playoff contract really weakened the power they had before. If the P5 want to have an auto-bid to a playoff, there is nothing ND can do about it.

The P5 wouldn't try to do it, because they know the playoff would be viewed as illegitimate if a top 4 Irish team was left out.

Just imagine if in 2012, an unbeaten #1 ranked ND had been left out of a 4-team playoff? The playoff would have had no legitimacy, thus seriously weakening its value to TV, etc.

Plus, since Notre Dame has already said that having equal access to the national title trumps even independence for them, as Frank notes, doing that would result in Notre Dame joining the ACC as a full member, thus greatly strengthening the ACC, which neither the B1G nor SEC would want to see happen.

I doubt the playoff would be considered illegitimate. If the P5 want conference champs only then ND would have no choice but to join the ACC if they have access to the playoff.
Yes it was discussed about only having conference champs and while the current CFP made no stipulation, I think it will happen next time even if they still have a 4 team playoff.
Ohio St. getting into the playoffs last year by not even playing in CCG, put a bad taste in quite a few peoples mouths. And then only to get blanked in the semi-final game.

Ohio State making it to the playoff didn't leave a bad taste in the mouths of virtually anyone. I don't believe many people even remember the circumstances of how they made the playoff at this point.

Regardless, the entire debate is a whimsical diversion on its face. Notre Dame isn't getting shut out of the playoff any more than the Cowboys would get shut out of the NFL playoffs or the Yankees would get shut out of the MLB playoffs. It's just a complete non-starter. Plus, the "remedy" for "forcing" ND to join a conference would mean that they would end up in the ACC, which is also something that the Big Ten and SEC wouldn't want to occur. All of the incentives (financial, competitive and otherwise) state that the current system will stay in place for good reason. Pretty much no one outside of message board land and/or people with vested interests in a certain outcome is really clamoring for any change to the 4-team playoff system as it stands today. Heck, the main thing that fans want to see from a playoff is to expand it to make it larger, which is quite different than making it more restrictive. They never made being a conference champ a requirement to make it to the 2-team BCS championship, so why in the world would they suddenly change course for a 4-team CFP playoff? It's just not happening.

(05-22-2017 04:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Yes. If you're not the best team in your conference, you're not the best team in the nation. You should have won your conference if you want to play for the natty.

An unintended consequence could be realignment in the opposite direction of power conferences.

Florida and Tennessee might look for an easier path to the CFP and join the AAC.

At a minimum, Texas and Oklahoma would stay in the B12, as the path to the conference championship would be much easier than in the SEC or B1G.

(05-22-2017 03:34 PM)templefootballfan Wrote:  playoffs not going to 8
players are not getting paid
ur out of ur mind if u want another round of games

Boggles the mind after OSU was essentially non competitive and a lot of the semifinal games have been non competitive thus far. Seems like 50-50 you get a competitive game with the supposedly four best after an extended layoff.

The quality is simply not deep enough to support more than four teams in any of these first three years. The inaugural year had the best slate but it was a very talented and deep pool of highly touted QBs and marquee programs.