(09-01-2022 11:33 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  10+6 would be the most fair and most ideal.
8+8 while not guaranteeing everyone an AQ bid would still be a great setup.
6+6 is good enough and I would accept it.
5+1+6 is a no go for me but it's better that nothing in the short term I reckon.

16 is by far the largest it needs to be.

Completely agree. This makes it even better for us if SMU and Memphis do leave the AAC, as they're the only two teams that really have any clout over the SB. If we could somehow even get an 8 +8 model, Id be thrilled. The odds of the SB champ being in the top 3 G5 champions most years is pretty good.

(09-01-2022 10:54 AM)bcp_jmu Wrote:  I'd say most I'm FCS agree that 24 is too damn many... Unless you're on the bubble then you are all for it, and get beat 55-3

I think it used to make sense. Once so many great programs moved up and once it became NDSU then everyone else, and later NDSU then JMU then everyone else it did become pretty unnecessary.

FBS it doesn't currently make sense to go that big. Most years there might not even be four with a legit shot to win it all, but in any sport I do like formats where everyone gets a shot at an AQ no matter how long their odds to do anything with it, so 10+6 would be ideal imo. I'd especially like to see the champs seeded 1-10, that would make sense and would also make for more attractive matchups than Central Michigan vs Alabama and WKU vs Georgia.

Any expansion is a plus, and any guarantee for the G5 is as well. 5+1+6 would seem like a failure for the G5 to reach any kind of compromise or successful negotiation though. 6+6 would be solid, 8+8 or especially 10+6 would really be great. If a new format leads to more parity to the extent that teams left out could've been legit championship contenders then they can talk about adopting the FCS model or something. For now, bigger than 16 is totally unnecessary.

(09-01-2022 01:25 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  I'd especially like to see the champs seeded 1-10, that would make sense and would also make for more attractive matchups than Central Michigan vs Alabama and WKU vs Georgia.

I'd expect they will seed the bracket regardless of size. The traditional way of seeding would match the strongest and weakest teams though, which is what results in blowout games. A far more interesting approach would be to have weaker teams play each other first, but there's little chance of that happening unless the high seeds get bye rounds.

16 is the sweet spot and it should include all conference champions. Having 6 at larges essentially gives all the P5 conference runner ups an extra slot in the playoff and that is probably necessary when these mega conferences can’t even play everyone in their own conference during the season.

16 provides 4 strong weeks of playoffs with no byes for anyone and a level playing field to determine the champ.

(09-01-2022 01:42 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  16 is the sweet spot and it should include all conference champions. Having 6 at larges essentially gives all the P5 conference runner ups an extra slot in the playoff and that is probably necessary when these mega conferences can’t even play everyone in their own conference during the season.

16 provides 4 strong weeks of playoffs with no byes for anyone and a level playing field to determine the champ.

You are describing an idealistic setup, which I think is very unlikely to be adopted. 6+6 seems closest to passing in the near term, though 8+8 has an outside shot. 10+6 is a hail mary.

SEC and B1G will be looking for far more than 1 runner up slot, in any scenario. And they will likely get it.

(09-01-2022 01:52 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:42 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  16 is the sweet spot and it should include all conference champions. Having 6 at larges essentially gives all the P5 conference runner ups an extra slot in the playoff and that is probably necessary when these mega conferences can’t even play everyone in their own conference during the season.

16 provides 4 strong weeks of playoffs with no byes for anyone and a level playing field to determine the champ.

You are describing an idealistic setup, which I think is very unlikely to be adopted. 6+6 seems closest to passing in the near term, though 8+8 has an outside shot. 10+6 is a hail mary.

SEC and B1G will be looking for far more than 1 runner up slot, in any scenario. And they will likely get it.

Idealistic??

Has zero to do with idealism. It’s all about the Benny’s… From the article I linked on page 1:

Remember, the Alliance scuttled Playoff expansion a year ago to curb SEC power, using the facade of player safety, the academic calendar and the unknown of a 12-team format as a shield. A year later, after the Big Ten expanded in response to the SEC moving to 16 teams, the Big Ten, ACC and Pac-12 all jumped on Playoff expansion. Now.
Not at the end of the current deal after the 2025 season — but as soon as next season.
Not the 12-team format that was originally agreed upon before it was scuttled on the way to being rubber-stamped — but a 16-team format.
Why, you ask? Straight cash.
Or more to the point: an estimated $1.2 billion annually for 11 postseason games.


We are going to 16.

16 teams would be a 15 game playoff, 12 teams would be an 11 game playoff.

(09-01-2022 01:34 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:25 PM)KickItToScotty Wrote:  I'd especially like to see the champs seeded 1-10, that would make sense and would also make for more attractive matchups than Central Michigan vs Alabama and WKU vs Georgia.

I'd expect they will seed the bracket regardless of size. The traditional way of seeding would match the strongest and weakest teams though, which is what results in blowout games. A far more interesting approach would be to have weaker teams play each other first, but there's little chance of that happening unless the high seeds get bye rounds.

Right, but I was just talking about how I'd like to see the conference champs seeded 1-10 and then the at large 11-16 if 10+6 ever happened, or just however they're expanded while including autobids. The more I thought about it though, I was probably actually thinking totally backwards there.

Seed them straight by CFP rankings and you'll probably get the best G5's around the 10-12 range with a solid chance at a W. Although the worst champ will have to face #1, the bottom champ is probably gonna get smoked whether they're 16 or 10. If you go and make the top G5 a 5 or 6 though then they're going to play the top or second at-large and probably get smoked. So yeah, I take back what I said and am now saying the exact opposite My bad.

(09-01-2022 04:59 PM)MOTIAW Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:52 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:42 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  16 is the sweet spot and it should include all conference champions. Having 6 at larges essentially gives all the P5 conference runner ups an extra slot in the playoff and that is probably necessary when these mega conferences can’t even play everyone in their own conference during the season.

16 provides 4 strong weeks of playoffs with no byes for anyone and a level playing field to determine the champ.

You are describing an idealistic setup, which I think is very unlikely to be adopted. 6+6 seems closest to passing in the near term, though 8+8 has an outside shot. 10+6 is a hail mary.

SEC and B1G will be looking for far more than 1 runner up slot, in any scenario. And they will likely get it.

Idealistic??

Has zero to do with idealism. It’s all about the Benny’s… From the article I linked on page 1:

Remember, the Alliance scuttled Playoff expansion a year ago to curb SEC power, using the facade of player safety, the academic calendar and the unknown of a 12-team format as a shield. A year later, after the Big Ten expanded in response to the SEC moving to 16 teams, the Big Ten, ACC and Pac-12 all jumped on Playoff expansion. Now.
Not at the end of the current deal after the 2025 season — but as soon as next season.
Not the 12-team format that was originally agreed upon before it was scuttled on the way to being rubber-stamped — but a 16-team format.
Why, you ask? Straight cash.
Or more to the point: an estimated $1.2 billion annually for 11 postseason games.


We are going to 16.

Not ruling out 16.

I just think 10+6 format, while it seems most fair to us, will likely be seen as a nonstarter with the SEC and B1G. My theory is Aresco tossed that out so he can "negotiate" back down to 8+8. Would love to be wrong. Buzz in the press leading up to this was that 6+6 seemed to have the most momentum.

I honestly think that 6+6 would be the best model.

Taking top 6 Conferences, regardless of who they are gives everyone and “equal” shot. Technically it could be 3 or 4 of the current G5, and 2 of the current A5. But we all know in most years it will be P5+1G5.
But if you structure it as top 6 it gets rid of all anti-trust, etc.
It would also get rid of the P5/G5 nomenclature. And would put the emphasis on the individual leagues to get the best teams/inventory to get better TV contracts, and best competition to put themselves in position to take as many of the 6 at large spots as possible.

The top 4 teams getting byes gives them rest, as well as allowing 5-12 to give more competitive games in the first round. Far better than seeing 1 vs 16 in a first round blow out.

It’s really the best of all worlds IMO.

(09-02-2022 08:43 AM)ThunderDent Wrote:  I honestly think that 6+6 would be the best model.

Taking top 6 Conferences, regardless of who they are gives everyone and “equal” shot. Technically it could be 3 or 4 of the current G5, and 2 of the current A5. But we all know in most years it will be P5+1G5.
But if you structure it as top 6 it gets rid of all anti-trust, etc.
It would also get rid of the P5/G5 nomenclature. And would put the emphasis on the individual leagues to get the best teams/inventory to get better TV contracts, and best competition to put themselves in position to take as many of the 6 at large spots as possible.

The top 4 teams getting byes gives them rest, as well as allowing 5-12 to give more competitive games in the first round. Far better than seeing 1 vs 16 in a first round blow out.

It’s really the best of all worlds IMO.

I feel ya my Herd Brotha, but you really think they want everyone to have equal footing?! Maybe once the Big 2 split off and leave the rest of us behind