What conference really wants to see their Conference Championship nullified in the National Playoff during a Semifinal round?

Very good chance that IF the Committee puts in two teams from the same conference that they pit them against each other in the Semifinal in order to insure that it is not a Championship game with two teams from the same conference.

I realize you folks here think of that as sacrilege or something but it is a National game, not a regional one. We may watch some SEC games during the season to see some great games but when it comes to the National Championship, we want to see how your best fares against those outside of the conference.

(10-07-2014 12:58 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  What conference really wants to see their Conference Championship nullified in the National Playoff during a Semifinal round?

Very good chance that IF the Committee puts in two teams from the same conference that they pit them against each other in the Semifinal in order to insure that it is not a Championship game with two teams from the same conference.

I realize you folks here think of that as sacrilege or something but it is a National game, not a regional one. We may watch some SEC games during the season to see some great games but when it comes to the National Championship, we want to see how your best fares against those outside of the conference.

Bingo.

(10-07-2014 01:45 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 12:58 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  What conference really wants to see their Conference Championship nullified in the National Playoff during a Semifinal round?

Very good chance that IF the Committee puts in two teams from the same conference that they pit them against each other in the Semifinal in order to insure that it is not a Championship game with two teams from the same conference.

I realize you folks here think of that as sacrilege or something but it is a National game, not a regional one. We may watch some SEC games during the season to see some great games but when it comes to the National Championship, we want to see how your best fares against those outside of the conference.

Bingo.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. What we are really talking about is what to do if the best teams happen to be from the same conference. Like in 2006 when people were clamoring for a UM/tOSU rematch. It was a wise move to go with UF because the Wolverines had eliminated themselves by losing.

Similarly in 2011, even if 'Bama was the 2nd (or 1st depending on your POV) best team in the nation, they should have been eliminated by the loss to LSU as well as not playing in the CCG. OKST, should have been the Bayou Bengals opponent. Unless a conference champion has 2 losses or more, I really don't think there is a legitimate justification for getting multiples teams from one conference into the CFP, AP rankings be damned.

(10-07-2014 07:05 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 01:45 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 12:58 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  What conference really wants to see their Conference Championship nullified in the National Playoff during a Semifinal round?

Very good chance that IF the Committee puts in two teams from the same conference that they pit them against each other in the Semifinal in order to insure that it is not a Championship game with two teams from the same conference.

I realize you folks here think of that as sacrilege or something but it is a National game, not a regional one. We may watch some SEC games during the season to see some great games but when it comes to the National Championship, we want to see how your best fares against those outside of the conference.

Bingo.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. What we are really talking about is what to do if the best teams happen to be from the same conference. Like in 2006 when people were clamoring for a UM/tOSU rematch. It was a wise move to go with UF because the Wolverines had eliminated themselves by losing.

Similarly in 2011, even if 'Bama was the 2nd (or 1st depending on your POV) best team in the nation, they should have been eliminated by the loss to LSU as well as not playing in the CCG. OKST, should have been the Bayou Bengals opponent. Unless a conference champion has 2 losses or more, I really don't think there is a legitimate justification for getting multiples teams from one conference into the CFP, AP rankings be damned.

I absolutely agree that the rule is applied across the board. I would say the same thing for any other conference including the Big Ten. Should some day in the future they get their crap together, that doesn't mean they deserve two teams in the National Playoff either. Whomever sets themselves apart at the very end, they deserve to represent the entire conference against the rest of the country.

(10-07-2014 07:05 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 01:45 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 12:58 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  What conference really wants to see their Conference Championship nullified in the National Playoff during a Semifinal round?

Very good chance that IF the Committee puts in two teams from the same conference that they pit them against each other in the Semifinal in order to insure that it is not a Championship game with two teams from the same conference.

I realize you folks here think of that as sacrilege or something but it is a National game, not a regional one. We may watch some SEC games during the season to see some great games but when it comes to the National Championship, we want to see how your best fares against those outside of the conference.

Bingo.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. What we are really talking about is what to do if the best teams happen to be from the same conference. Like in 2006 when people were clamoring for a UM/tOSU rematch. It was a wise move to go with UF because the Wolverines had eliminated themselves by losing.

Similarly in 2011, even if 'Bama was the 2nd (or 1st depending on your POV) best team in the nation, they should have been eliminated by the loss to LSU as well as not playing in the CCG. OKST, should have been the Bayou Bengals opponent. Unless a conference champion has 2 losses or more, I really don't think there is a legitimate justification for getting multiples teams from one conference into the CFP, AP rankings be damned.

I also think that in addition to taking conference interests in consideration, the interests of specific teams should also be considered. In 2011, even though it was a close game, LSU should have earned the right to have eliminated Alabama with their win in the regular season. I realize it runs counter to playoff experiences in many sports, but while I don't object to having two teams from the same conference in the playoffs, where a conference champion has beaten another conference foe (either in the regular season or a CCG), I think they should be protected from "double jeopardy" as it were.

If there's another scenario (say LSU wins the West (in the process giving Alabama their only loss), and beats Florida in the SEC CCG, but there's a one-loss South Carolina who either hasn't played or has even beaten LSU in the regular season but who lost to Florida and thus missed the CCG), I don't mind seeing 2 teams from the same conference (in this case LSU and South Carolina, but not Alabama regardless of how they fared against South Carolina or their poll standing) in the playoff.

(10-08-2014 01:43 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 07:05 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 01:45 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 12:58 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  What conference really wants to see their Conference Championship nullified in the National Playoff during a Semifinal round?

Very good chance that IF the Committee puts in two teams from the same conference that they pit them against each other in the Semifinal in order to insure that it is not a Championship game with two teams from the same conference.

I realize you folks here think of that as sacrilege or something but it is a National game, not a regional one. We may watch some SEC games during the season to see some great games but when it comes to the National Championship, we want to see how your best fares against those outside of the conference.

Bingo.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. What we are really talking about is what to do if the best teams happen to be from the same conference. Like in 2006 when people were clamoring for a UM/tOSU rematch. It was a wise move to go with UF because the Wolverines had eliminated themselves by losing.

Similarly in 2011, even if 'Bama was the 2nd (or 1st depending on your POV) best team in the nation, they should have been eliminated by the loss to LSU as well as not playing in the CCG. OKST, should have been the Bayou Bengals opponent. Unless a conference champion has 2 losses or more, I really don't think there is a legitimate justification for getting multiples teams from one conference into the CFP, AP rankings be damned.

I also think that in addition to taking conference interests in consideration, the interests of specific teams should also be considered. In 2011, even though it was a close game, LSU should have earned the right to have eliminated Alabama with their win in the regular season. I realize it runs counter to playoff experiences in many sports, but while I don't object to having two teams from the same conference in the playoffs, where a conference champion has beaten another conference foe (either in the regular season or a CCG), I think they should be protected from "double jeopardy" as it were.

If there's another scenario (say LSU wins the West (in the process giving Alabama their only loss), and beats Florida in the SEC CCG, but there's a one-loss South Carolina who either hasn't played or has even beaten LSU in the regular season but who lost to Florida and thus missed the CCG), I don't mind seeing 2 teams from the same conference (in this case LSU and South Carolina, but not Alabama regardless of how they fared against South Carolina or their poll standing) in the playoff.

The conference championship removes all reason for having two teams from a conference in the National Playoff. Each team in it has won their division in fair fashion. They have proved themselves to some degree to be better than every other team in their division even if only arguably so. In that game, one of the division champs proves themselves to be better than the other.

Why does a team that doesn't even make it to the conference championship deserve a shot to win the National Championship? If folks want to say the SEC Championship means more than the National Championship because of this, then so be it, that is a fair argument to make. That doesn't mean that regular season games and conference championship games need to be made worthless on the National level.

It is even more sad and selfish that some folks actually think that is fair. The point of the National Playoff is for teams to show they are the best in the Nation against teams from other conferences that they don't normally play or choose to play during the regular season.

The rest of the country would rather not watch an SEC rematch game. Pick your best team and get behind them as they attempt to embarrass the rest of the country in the Playoff. What is so terrible or hard to understand about that?

I know you get that Phog but this is the SEC board so I am also talking to our friends here despite me quoting you. It is generally just SEC folks that seem to think they should have more than 1 team in the Playoff.

I think getting 2 teams in the playoff will be difficult. It's not impossible, but it is difficult. Theoretically it's possible to have the 4 best teams in one conference even, but the committee is going to tend to favor multiple conference under the logic that, "That team may be #2, but they already showed they aren't #1." I think practically, you'll only see 2nd teams from one conference in under the following:
1. If there is a team that looks truly like the dominant team in the country, but loses one close game (either in the CCG or an in-division school).
2. A 1-loss very strong runner-up up against a 2 and 3 loss conference champs who look much less impressive.

I don't think there currently is a team that fits #1 this year, but it's not impossible one develops (and if it does it will be in the SEC West). For #2, that's possible, but I still very much lean to 4 winners for the year.

As for an expanded playoff, I'll keep proclaiming this even though they'll probably try it eventually, expanding to any point with automatic bids would be the worst thing college football could do. There's almost 130 teams and by nature, college sports are regional (you care about the teams nearby/in conference much more than others). College football is national though because every week really does have high stakes. Oregon, Oklahoma, and Alabama lost last week in the first week of October and that actually really matters (not just kind of matters like in most sports). In the previous 2 team playoff, that would mean they all likely lost control of their own destiny. In the 4 team era, the stakes are a little lower, but only Alabama can feel completely confident it will make the playoff now by winning out. Those games mattered not just to those 3 fanbases, but to all the other competing who knew they needed looses from them.

The second you start giving automatic bids, is the same time those games start to matter only to fans of those conferences and to mega college fans like us here.

(10-09-2014 11:50 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  As for an expanded playoff, I'll keep proclaiming this even though they'll probably try it eventually, expanding to any point with automatic bids would be the worst thing college football could do. There's almost 130 teams and by nature, college sports are regional (you care about the teams nearby/in conference much more than others). College football is national though because every week really does have high stakes. Oregon, Oklahoma, and Alabama lost last week in the first week of October and that actually really matters (not just kind of matters like in most sports). In the previous 2 team playoff, that would mean they all likely lost control of their own destiny. In the 4 team era, the stakes are a little lower, but only Alabama can feel completely confident it will make the playoff now by winning out. Those games mattered not just to those 3 fanbases, but to all the other competing who knew they needed looses from them.

The second you start giving automatic bids, is the same time those games start to matter only to fans of those conferences and to mega college fans like us here.

The problem with college football is that there are almost 130 teams at the FBS level. There is a huge disparity among teams - and yet they play at the same level. Most of the Sun Belt and MAC conferences have no business playing at the same level as the SEC, Big 12, or PAC 12. AND, the SEC, Big 12, and PAC 12 have no business scheduling multiple home games against the weaker competition to pad schedules (not to mention the lowly FCS opponents).

The best thing in the world for college football would be to create a FBS Tier 1 and FBS Tier 2 system. You could keep the existing system for the CFP and NY6 bowl systems (ie, G5/Tier 2 bid into an NY6 bowl game). But this way, you could drive the FCS schools to only play FBS Tier 2 (the best teams in college football have no business playing FCS opponents)...ultimately, this would lead to the FBS Tier 1 teams playing each other more frequently in out-of-conference games. Better matchups, better football.

And, it doesn't always have to be Ohio St. v. Alabama or Oregon v. LSU type games. But, instead of the following week 1 lineup:

Minnesota v. FCS E. Illinois
Utah v. FCS Idaho St.
Arizona St. v. FCS Weber St.
Michigan St. v. FCS Jacksonville St.
Pitt v. FCS Delaware
Georgia Tech v. FCS Wofford
Kentucky v. FCS UT Martin
Maryland v. FCS James Madison
Illinois v. FCS Youngstown St.
TCU v. FCS Samford
Oregon v. FCS South Dakota
Kansas St. v. FCS SF Austin
Duke v. FCS Elon
North Carolina v. FCS Liberty
Stanford v. FCS UC Davis
Indiana v. FCS Indiana St.

....you could see...

Minnesota v. Utah
Arizona St. v. Michigan St.
Pitt v. Kentucky
Georgia Tech v. Illinois
Maryland v. TCU
Oregon v. Kansas St.
Duke v. Stanford
North Carolina v. Indiana

That would be great for college football!

(10-27-2014 02:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 11:50 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  As for an expanded playoff, I'll keep proclaiming this even though they'll probably try it eventually, expanding to any point with automatic bids would be the worst thing college football could do. There's almost 130 teams and by nature, college sports are regional (you care about the teams nearby/in conference much more than others). College football is national though because every week really does have high stakes. Oregon, Oklahoma, and Alabama lost last week in the first week of October and that actually really matters (not just kind of matters like in most sports). In the previous 2 team playoff, that would mean they all likely lost control of their own destiny. In the 4 team era, the stakes are a little lower, but only Alabama can feel completely confident it will make the playoff now by winning out. Those games mattered not just to those 3 fanbases, but to all the other competing who knew they needed looses from them.

The second you start giving automatic bids, is the same time those games start to matter only to fans of those conferences and to mega college fans like us here.

The problem with college football is that there are almost 130 teams at the FBS level. There is a huge disparity among teams - and yet they play at the same level. Most of the Sun Belt and MAC conferences have no business playing at the same level as the SEC, Big 12, or PAC 12. AND, the SEC, Big 12, and PAC 12 have no business scheduling multiple home games against the weaker competition to pad schedules (not to mention the lowly FCS opponents).

The best thing in the world for college football would be to create a FBS Tier 1 and FBS Tier 2 system. You could keep the existing system for the CFP and NY6 bowl systems (ie, G5/Tier 2 bid into an NY6 bowl game). But this way, you could drive the FCS schools to only play FBS Tier 2 (the best teams in college football have no business playing FCS opponents)...ultimately, this would lead to the FBS Tier 1 teams playing each other more frequently in out-of-conference games. Better matchups, better football.

And, it doesn't always have to be Ohio St. v. Alabama or Oregon v. LSU type games. But, instead of the following week 1 lineup:

Minnesota v. FCS E. Illinois
Utah v. FCS Idaho St.
Arizona St. v. FCS Weber St.
Michigan St. v. FCS Jacksonville St.
Pitt v. FCS Delaware
Georgia Tech v. FCS Wofford
Kentucky v. FCS UT Martin
Maryland v. FCS James Madison
Illinois v. FCS Youngstown St.
TCU v. FCS Samford
Oregon v. FCS South Dakota
Kansas St. v. FCS SF Austin
Duke v. FCS Elon
North Carolina v. FCS Liberty
Stanford v. FCS UC Davis
Indiana v. FCS Indiana St.

....you could see...

Minnesota v. Utah
Arizona St. v. Michigan St.
Pitt v. Kentucky
Georgia Tech v. Illinois
Maryland v. TCU
Oregon v. Kansas St.
Duke v. Stanford
North Carolina v. Indiana

That would be great for college football!

To get those types of inter conference match-ups the risk has to be mitigated, which is why an automatic berth in the CFP is important. It's also why JR champions conference tourneys as a means to keeps regions engaged throughout the year as well as creates meaningful games to replace the hype lost for regular season match ups due to guaranteed access to the postseason.

(10-27-2014 03:36 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-27-2014 02:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 11:50 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  As for an expanded playoff, I'll keep proclaiming this even though they'll probably try it eventually, expanding to any point with automatic bids would be the worst thing college football could do. There's almost 130 teams and by nature, college sports are regional (you care about the teams nearby/in conference much more than others). College football is national though because every week really does have high stakes. Oregon, Oklahoma, and Alabama lost last week in the first week of October and that actually really matters (not just kind of matters like in most sports). In the previous 2 team playoff, that would mean they all likely lost control of their own destiny. In the 4 team era, the stakes are a little lower, but only Alabama can feel completely confident it will make the playoff now by winning out. Those games mattered not just to those 3 fanbases, but to all the other competing who knew they needed looses from them.

The second you start giving automatic bids, is the same time those games start to matter only to fans of those conferences and to mega college fans like us here.

The problem with college football is that there are almost 130 teams at the FBS level. There is a huge disparity among teams - and yet they play at the same level. Most of the Sun Belt and MAC conferences have no business playing at the same level as the SEC, Big 12, or PAC 12. AND, the SEC, Big 12, and PAC 12 have no business scheduling multiple home games against the weaker competition to pad schedules (not to mention the lowly FCS opponents).

The best thing in the world for college football would be to create a FBS Tier 1 and FBS Tier 2 system. You could keep the existing system for the CFP and NY6 bowl systems (ie, G5/Tier 2 bid into an NY6 bowl game). But this way, you could drive the FCS schools to only play FBS Tier 2 (the best teams in college football have no business playing FCS opponents)...ultimately, this would lead to the FBS Tier 1 teams playing each other more frequently in out-of-conference games. Better matchups, better football.

And, it doesn't always have to be Ohio St. v. Alabama or Oregon v. LSU type games. But, instead of the following week 1 lineup:

Minnesota v. FCS E. Illinois
Utah v. FCS Idaho St.
Arizona St. v. FCS Weber St.
Michigan St. v. FCS Jacksonville St.
Pitt v. FCS Delaware
Georgia Tech v. FCS Wofford
Kentucky v. FCS UT Martin
Maryland v. FCS James Madison
Illinois v. FCS Youngstown St.
TCU v. FCS Samford
Oregon v. FCS South Dakota
Kansas St. v. FCS SF Austin
Duke v. FCS Elon
North Carolina v. FCS Liberty
Stanford v. FCS UC Davis
Indiana v. FCS Indiana St.

....you could see...

Minnesota v. Utah
Arizona St. v. Michigan St.
Pitt v. Kentucky
Georgia Tech v. Illinois
Maryland v. TCU
Oregon v. Kansas St.
Duke v. Stanford
North Carolina v. Indiana

That would be great for college football!

To get those types of inter conference match-ups the risk has to be mitigated, which is why an automatic berth in the CFP is important. It's also why JR champions conference tourneys as a means to keeps regions engaged throughout the year as well as creates meaningful games to replace the hype lost for regular season match ups due to guaranteed access to the postseason.

Exactly. I agree that it's important to ensure that playoffs don't expand to the point to make the regular season meaningless (as has largely happened in basketball), but by having conference champions have an automatic bid (plus a very limited at-large pool) will allow for teams to schedule attractive out-of-conference matchups and keep a broader part of the country engaged in the process.

(10-28-2014 11:02 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  

(10-27-2014 03:36 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-27-2014 02:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 11:50 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  As for an expanded playoff, I'll keep proclaiming this even though they'll probably try it eventually, expanding to any point with automatic bids would be the worst thing college football could do. There's almost 130 teams and by nature, college sports are regional (you care about the teams nearby/in conference much more than others). College football is national though because every week really does have high stakes. Oregon, Oklahoma, and Alabama lost last week in the first week of October and that actually really matters (not just kind of matters like in most sports). In the previous 2 team playoff, that would mean they all likely lost control of their own destiny. In the 4 team era, the stakes are a little lower, but only Alabama can feel completely confident it will make the playoff now by winning out. Those games mattered not just to those 3 fanbases, but to all the other competing who knew they needed looses from them.

The second you start giving automatic bids, is the same time those games start to matter only to fans of those conferences and to mega college fans like us here.

The problem with college football is that there are almost 130 teams at the FBS level. There is a huge disparity among teams - and yet they play at the same level. Most of the Sun Belt and MAC conferences have no business playing at the same level as the SEC, Big 12, or PAC 12. AND, the SEC, Big 12, and PAC 12 have no business scheduling multiple home games against the weaker competition to pad schedules (not to mention the lowly FCS opponents).

The best thing in the world for college football would be to create a FBS Tier 1 and FBS Tier 2 system. You could keep the existing system for the CFP and NY6 bowl systems (ie, G5/Tier 2 bid into an NY6 bowl game). But this way, you could drive the FCS schools to only play FBS Tier 2 (the best teams in college football have no business playing FCS opponents)...ultimately, this would lead to the FBS Tier 1 teams playing each other more frequently in out-of-conference games. Better matchups, better football.

And, it doesn't always have to be Ohio St. v. Alabama or Oregon v. LSU type games. But, instead of the following week 1 lineup:

Minnesota v. FCS E. Illinois
Utah v. FCS Idaho St.
Arizona St. v. FCS Weber St.
Michigan St. v. FCS Jacksonville St.
Pitt v. FCS Delaware
Georgia Tech v. FCS Wofford
Kentucky v. FCS UT Martin
Maryland v. FCS James Madison
Illinois v. FCS Youngstown St.
TCU v. FCS Samford
Oregon v. FCS South Dakota
Kansas St. v. FCS SF Austin
Duke v. FCS Elon
North Carolina v. FCS Liberty
Stanford v. FCS UC Davis
Indiana v. FCS Indiana St.

....you could see...

Minnesota v. Utah
Arizona St. v. Michigan St.
Pitt v. Kentucky
Georgia Tech v. Illinois
Maryland v. TCU
Oregon v. Kansas St.
Duke v. Stanford
North Carolina v. Indiana

That would be great for college football!

To get those types of inter conference match-ups the risk has to be mitigated, which is why an automatic berth in the CFP is important. It's also why JR champions conference tourneys as a means to keeps regions engaged throughout the year as well as creates meaningful games to replace the hype lost for regular season match ups due to guaranteed access to the postseason.

Exactly. I agree that it's important to ensure that playoffs don't expand to the point to make the regular season meaningless (as has largely happened in basketball), but by having conference champions have an automatic bid (plus a very limited at-large pool) will allow for teams to schedule attractive out-of-conference matchups and keep a broader part of the country engaged in the process.

Actually Phog, what a four champions model does is free all conferences to schedule as they please. If you have important non conference games then you adjust your required number of conference games to accomplish it. For instance Florida/Florida State, Clemson/South Carolina, Kentucky/Louisville, Georgia/Georgia Tech, etc. If not for those games a four champions model could permit 12 conference games and it would not be a detriment to anyone. You win your conference and you are in. There is no beauty pageant to have to build an easy resume to win. An all P5 schedule becomes very likely, especially with expanded internal conference playoffs. The money generated and shared inside the conference would cover the money made on rent to kill games.

But an expansion to 8 for the national playoff (as long as there is a beauty contest for the 3 at large spots) will only keep things as they are.