IRVING, Texas -- The inaugural game of the College Football Playoff's four-team tournament is still more than 19 months away, but Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds says it's merely a step in the right direction.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...am-playoff

Time is moving fast. In a few years we will have a true college football playoff.

I would prefer to have 8 conference champs which would make it a 16 team team playoff.

8 conference Championship games - 16 teams

Seeded 1st round - 8 teams

Semi- final round - 4 teams

Championship game - 2 teams

All my gripes would end.

Uhhh... there are more than 8 conferences.

(05-30-2013 01:57 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Uhhh... there are more than 8 conferences.

Yes, there are more than 8 conferences. So it still comes down to a selection committee. Therefore, you would see the following:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC
7. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

The assumption is that the highest ranked CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC Champion would be selected for the 7th and 8th seeds.

(05-30-2013 02:03 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 01:57 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Uhhh... there are more than 8 conferences.

Yes, there are more than 8 conferences. So it still comes down to a selection committee. Therefore, you would see the following:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC
7. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

The assumption is that the highest ranked CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC Champion would be selected for the 7th and 8th seeds.

Gotcha. The way it read was that there would be 8 conference championship games (16 teams) and those 8 would be in the national title playoff.

I will say it once more that 8 is a great improvement but 16 is the ultimate number needed for a true champion to be named.

(05-30-2013 02:05 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 02:03 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 01:57 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Uhhh... there are more than 8 conferences.

Yes, there are more than 8 conferences. So it still comes down to a selection committee. Therefore, you would see the following:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC
7. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

The assumption is that the highest ranked CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC Champion would be selected for the 7th and 8th seeds.

Gotcha. The way it read was that there would be 8 conference championship games (16 teams) and those 8 would be in the national title playoff.

I will say it once more that 8 is a great improvement but 16 is the ultimate number needed for a true champion to be named.

I agree. I am just postulating a way for the SBC to be involved in the Championship race sooner than later.

(05-30-2013 02:03 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 01:57 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Uhhh... there are more than 8 conferences.

Yes, there are more than 8 conferences. So it still comes down to a selection committee. Therefore, you would see the following:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC
7. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

The assumption is that the highest ranked CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC Champion would be selected for the 7th and 8th seeds.

Do you "really" think the AAC is better than the MWC?....

I can guarantee that if that's the format they use, that sixth spot will most certainly go to the MWC.

AAC is on the same level as CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC. No way they get perfered treatment. Its how it will be for the no Big 5 BCS bowl spot. Plus MWC will be better than AAC.

(05-30-2013 02:16 PM)slycat Wrote:  AAC is on the same level as CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC. No way they get perfered treatment. Its how it will be for the no Big 5 BCS bowl spot. Plus MWC will be better than AAC.

This.

This:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
7. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

And not neccessarily in this order.

But the Cartel would never go for it, they'd want something more like this:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. Cartel/Notre Dame - at large
7. Cartel/Notre Dame - at large
8. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

By the way, I'm an All American now, so don't give me any crap.

(05-30-2013 03:02 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  But the Cartel would never go for it, they'd want something more like this:

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. Cartel/Notre Dame - at large
7. Cartel/Notre Dame - at large
8. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

By the way, I'm an All American now, so don't give me any crap.

I think you mean the cartel wants
1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big 12
4. ACC
5. SEC
6. SEC
7. SEC
8. Maybe someone else who kinda could be worthy if the put fans in the stadium.

(05-30-2013 02:16 PM)slycat Wrote:  AAC is on the same level as CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC. No way they get perfered treatment. Its how it will be for the no Big 5 BCS bowl spot. Plus MWC will be better than AAC.

We have not seen the new AAC in action, so I used Alphabetical order. To avoid bickering, how about this arrangement?

1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
7. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

(05-30-2013 03:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 02:16 PM)slycat Wrote:  AAC is on the same level as CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC. No way they get perfered treatment. Its how it will be for the no Big 5 BCS bowl spot. Plus MWC will be better than AAC.

We have not seen the new AAC in action, so I used Alphabetical order. To avoid bickering, how about this arrangement?
1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
7. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

Like I said, that's wishful thinking. I think the Mavericks fan has it closer to what's going to happen (i.e ).

(05-30-2013 03:22 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 03:08 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(05-30-2013 02:16 PM)slycat Wrote:  AAC is on the same level as CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC. No way they get perfered treatment. Its how it will be for the no Big 5 BCS bowl spot. Plus MWC will be better than AAC.

We have not seen the new AAC in action, so I used Alphabetical order. To avoid bickering, how about this arrangement?
1. SEC
2. PAC 12
3. Big TEN
4. Big 12
5. ACC
6. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
7. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC
8. AAC/CUSA/MAC/MWC/SBC

Like I said, that's wishful thinking. I think the Mavericks fan has it closer to what's going to happen (i.e ).

Just a thought but the could take the top team from each of the lower tier conferences and treat 6,7 and 8 like a play in game in the basketball tournament.

Why not use a system similar to how they determine the number of teams from a given league ( conference) get into the UEFA champions league? Its convoluted, caters to the big teams, and gives the little guy a little hope.

I actually like the 8 conference idea with the opening round the conference championship game. Then home field goes to higher seeded team, the finals played at a predetermined ( most likely neutral) site.

8 x 16 teams = 128. Sounds good to me.
Money can be dispersed like the basketball tournament where conferences get more for each round a team progresses past.

That system will solidify the conferences, could increase payouts, and actually be almost fair. I can think of a few cons, but would like it from our perspective.

(05-30-2013 08:51 PM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  Why not use a system similar to how they determine the number of teams from a given league ( conference) get into the UEFA champions league? Its convoluted, caters to the big teams, and gives the little guy a little hope.

I actually like the 8 conference idea with the opening round the conference championship game. Then home field goes to higher seeded team, the finals played at a predetermined ( most likely neutral) site.

8 x 16 teams = 128. Sounds good to me.
Money can be dispersed like the basketball tournament where conferences get more for each round a team progresses past.

That system will solidify the conferences, could increase payouts, and actually be almost fair. I can think of a few cons, but would like it from our perspective.

That my friend, makes to much sense.