If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why would I want an ACC or Big 12 champ taking up a valuable spot in the #3 or #4 spot and receiving a bye when they play a much weaker schedule than the Big Ten or SEC runner-up? This folks will be why the playoff ultimately expands to 16.

(12-18-2023 09:15 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why would I want an ACC or Big 12 champ taking up a valuable spot in the #3 or #4 spot and receiving a bye when they play a much weaker schedule than the Big Ten or SEC runner-up? This folks will be why the playoff ultimately expands to 16.

Proof the Big Ten plays a hard schedule?

My guess is that they’ll figure out a way to make it more lucrative to be the at-large team in the opening round than the one-bid ACC/Big 12 even with with their bye.

(12-18-2023 09:15 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why would I want an ACC or Big 12 champ taking up a valuable spot in the #3 or #4 spot and receiving a bye when they play a much weaker schedule than the Big Ten or SEC runner-up? This folks will be why the playoff ultimately expands to 16.

Here’s the practical impediment to a 16 team playoff: every game MUST be an exclusive TV time slot. They cannot overlap and the powers that be don’t want to spread the first round over two weeks. There simply aren’t 8 exclusive TV time slots in a weekend (and they’re already dealing with NFL competition on Saturday).

As a result, there are diminishing returns with each playoff spot added. Always remember that it’s a TV event.

I’ll also reiterate that the first round bye is INSANELY underrated by fans. They’re so obsessed with the first round on-campus games that they’re forgetting that a bye is a straight up automatic first round WIN. (I really wish they’d call it an “automatic win” instead of a bye to better describe its value.)

Having that bye at stake in the Big Ten and SEC championship games is extremely important in keeping the value of those CCGs where a dime doesn’t get shared with the Big 12, ACC or anyone else. People are underestimating that aspect, too. The B1G and SEC make so much money from their CCGs that they need to retain high stakes in that game - they *cannot* be turning into the equivalent of basketball tournament games where they’re often just a seeding exercise for the NCAA Tournament.

So, I don’t agree at all. We’re going to be at a 12-team playoff for a long time (and I’m an unabashed playoff proponent that thought the playoff should have gone to at least 8 teams over 20 years ago).

(12-18-2023 11:28 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-18-2023 09:15 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why would I want an ACC or Big 12 champ taking up a valuable spot in the #3 or #4 spot and receiving a bye when they play a much weaker schedule than the Big Ten or SEC runner-up? This folks will be why the playoff ultimately expands to 16.

Here’s the practical impediment to a 16 team playoff: every game MUST be an exclusive TV time slot. They cannot overlap and the powers that be don’t want to spread the first round over two weeks. There simply aren’t 8 exclusive TV time slots in a weekend (and they’re already dealing with NFL competition on Saturday).

As a result, there are diminishing returns with each playoff spot added. Always remember that it’s a TV event.

I’ll also reiterate that the first round bye is INSANELY underrated by fans. They’re so obsessed with the first round on-campus games that they’re forgetting that a bye is a straight up automatic first round WIN. (I really wish they’d call it an “automatic win” instead of a bye to better describe its value.)

Having that bye at stake in the Big Ten and SEC championship games is extremely important in keeping the value of those CCGs where a dime doesn’t get shared with the Big 12, ACC or anyone else. People are underestimating that aspect, too. The B1G and SEC make so much money from their CCGs that they need to retain high stakes in that game - they *cannot* be turning into the equivalent of basketball tournament games where they’re often just a seeding exercise for the NCAA Tournament.

So, I don’t agree at all. We’re going to be at a 12-team playoff for a long time (and I’m an unabashed playoff proponent that thought the playoff should have gone to at least 8 teams over 20 years ago).

In this new world order, winning your conference matters. Even a defacto ACC school like Notre Dame can't get a bye as an unbeaten as long as they stay independent, much less the runner ups would have a loss.

I'd think we'd get a Auto bid for the top 4 conference champions plus top G5. Maybe have a clause saying if a G5 school is a top 4 conference champion then it opens up a extra at large spot. The money would be made in the at large spots which would be 7 if there's 5 auto large spots. Simply having a extra home first round game might be worth it for the school.

(12-19-2023 12:40 AM)46566 Wrote:  I'd think we'd get a Auto bid for the top 4 conference champions plus top G5. Maybe have a clause saying if a G5 school is a top 4 conference champion then it opens up a extra at large spot. The money would be made in the at large spots which would be 7 if there's 5 auto large spots. Simply having a extra home first round game might be worth it for the school.

No, just top 4 conf champs. If one of them is g5? Great. If not, no bye.

(12-18-2023 09:15 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why would I want an ACC or Big 12 champ taking up a valuable spot in the #3 or #4 spot and receiving a bye when they play a much weaker schedule than the Big Ten or SEC runner-up? ...

To gin up the value of the CCG.

It seems to me that the home game QF hosting is a more likely revision than the 16 team playoff.

(12-18-2023 09:15 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why would I want an ACC or Big 12 champ taking up a valuable spot in the #3 or #4 spot and receiving a bye when they play a much weaker schedule than the Big Ten or SEC runner-up? This folks will be why the playoff ultimately expands to 16.

Harder schedules my ass

The only way I see a 16 team playoff is if you have 9-16 playing in a play-in to the 1st round of the CFP, and I only see that practically happening if those teams aren't in their CCG therefore not increasing their max. games that could be played in a season.