(02-21-2024 08:22 PM)Glenn360 Wrote:  a G5-only playoff is pointless, no one would pay attention, and it's a waste to fund 85 scholarships to compete at a slightly better Division 1 level.

just drop down to 63 and play for the FCS title.

I agree that a G5 playoff sounds bad, but if the only other choice is a 14-team playoff with 8-10 SEC + Big Ten teams?

I mean, it's a lose-lose situation here. Both options are far worse than the 5+7 model, in my opinion, and the 5+7 is worse than the 6+6.

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)otown Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:24 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  [twitter]

Exactly what I was saying. The Big 12 and ACC are not being hung out to dry like many on this forum fantasize about. Their institutions are too politically powerful. If there are multiple auto qualifiers per conference being discussed, all 4 power conferences will be a part of it. The G5 is being hung out to dry with 1 singular spot in all different scenarios discussed.......that is the big news here.

I think the big news is that some of The Powers That Be in college football have lost their minds and think that this sort of system is a good idea, whetehr from a fairness perspective or a fan interest perspective. Nobody is going to like a system where conferences get multiple autobids just because.

Yes Frank, it works in the Champions League, but this is 'Murica. And I'd guess that college football fandom is more 'Murican than the median American. WE like polls and rankings for some reason, and it's not going to be well recieved if the 4th place Big TEn or SEC team ranked #19 gets a spot in a 14 team playoff over a 3rd place ACC or Big 12 team ranked #14. Giving a spot to a champion and bumping an at-large is one thing. Giving a spot to a runner up or a third- or fourth-placer?

This idea doesn't pass the laugh test. If they want to dump the committee, go back to the BCS formula. If they don't want to say "we're going back to the BCS formula", then go ahead and reinvent the wheel and come up with a new formula that clones the BCS results.

Get rid of the committee. Bring back the computers. As for the SEC and BIG getting automatic bids, that’s a forgone conclusion.

Auto bids

SEC=3
BIG=3
BIG12=2
ACC= 2
G5=1
At large=3
Total= 14

Easy peasy

If the third BIG12 / ACC team is ranked higher than the third SEC/ BIG team , then thievery happens.

(02-21-2024 09:15 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)otown Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:24 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  [twitter]

Exactly what I was saying. The Big 12 and ACC are not being hung out to dry like many on this forum fantasize about. Their institutions are too politically powerful. If there are multiple auto qualifiers per conference being discussed, all 4 power conferences will be a part of it. The G5 is being hung out to dry with 1 singular spot in all different scenarios discussed.......that is the big news here.

I think the big news is that some of The Powers That Be in college football have lost their minds and think that this sort of system is a good idea, whetehr from a fairness perspective or a fan interest perspective. Nobody is going to like a system where conferences get multiple autobids just because.

Yes Frank, it works in the Champions League, but this is 'Murica. And I'd guess that college football fandom is more 'Murican than the median American. WE like polls and rankings for some reason, and it's not going to be well recieved if the 4th place Big TEn or SEC team ranked #19 gets a spot in a 14 team playoff over a 3rd place ACC or Big 12 team ranked #14. Giving a spot to a champion and bumping an at-large is one thing. Giving a spot to a runner up or a third- or fourth-placer?

This idea doesn't pass the laugh test. If they want to dump the committee, go back to the BCS formula. If they don't want to say "we're going back to the BCS formula", then go ahead and reinvent the wheel and come up with a new formula that clones the BCS results.

To be sure, I never claimed that the Big 12 and ACC wouldn’t get additional bids and I’d actually concur that they’re being a bit underrated in the terms of their power. They’re not as powerful as the Big Ten and ACC, but it would be a mistake to lump them in with the G5, too.

Think of this setup of it goes to 14 teams:

FORMAT

Add a Wild Card Round with 4 teams (playing 2 games) on Army-Navy weekend.

Everything after that stays the same as the current 12-team setup:

Divisional Round with 8 teams the next week (where the first round is scheduled now).

Quarterfinals using the bowls on or around NYD.

Semifinals and Final in the weeks thereafter in January.

AUTO-BIDS AND PLACEMENT

Top 4 conference champs get byes to the quarterfinals just as now.

#5 conference champ, the P4 CCG losers, and the next highest seed get a bye to the Divisional Round.

The bottom 4 seeds play in the Wild Card Round.

Big Ten #3 and SEC #3 get auto-bids. Notre Dame also gets an auto-bid as long as it is in the top 16 of the final rankings (similar to the top 8 protection that they got in the BCS system).

NET EFFECT

3 auto-bids each for the Big Ten and SEC, 2 auto-bids each to the Big 12 and ACC, 1 auto-bid to the top G5 champ, and 3 other at-large slots (one of which is protected for a top 16 ND team).

The Wild Card Round inherently will not have any CCG participants as they all either get byes to the Divisional or Semifinal Rounds. This eliminates any issue with a team playing the week after a CCG. It is also competitively equitable since the Wild Card teams didn’t play a CCG, so they’re now playing an equal number of games as the CCG losers and #5 (normally G5) champ that are in the Divisional Round. Finally, even Army and Navy can still participate in the playoff if they are the top G5 champ in the AAC since they wouldn’t play a playoff game until the next week in the Divisional Round. The powers that be have said outright that the Army-Navy weekend is an untapped weekend of value because that’s the last Saturday of the year where the NFL can’t play games. This is a way to fill out that valuable day with the playoff (but limit those games to only those that aren’t participating in a CCG, so we don’t have the “Teams are playing too many games” issue).

If you look at it in current Contract Bowl terms, note that the Big Ten and SEC actually do have an additional bid even above the other power leagues since they had the Rose and Sugar Bowl bids respectively AND a shared slot in the Orange Bowl. This is part of the justification for additional financial guarantees and access for the Big Ten and SEC because that’s something that they *have* in today’s system and would otherwise be giving up despite being even more powerful than when the CFP was first formed.

That’s just off the top of my head.

How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

(02-21-2024 06:42 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 06:38 PM)otown Wrote:  Last year the #4 B1G rep would be 4 loss Iowa. The year before, 6 loss Purdue!

Once again....ain't gonna happen

While I don't support 4 autobids for B1G and SEC, it's worth noting that this is before the 4 PAC schools join so that will be less likely to occur, but definitely not impossible.

It is also worth noting that Iowa only had 2 regular seasin losses in 2023 before Iowa lost in the Big Ten CCG and the bowl game. Under the new rules Iowa would not have played in the CCG.

Still with all that said, Iowa would have probably been only the 6th ranked Big Ten in 2023 if the new 18 - team lineup was already in place, behind Mich, Wash, OhSt, Ore, and PSU.

(02-21-2024 09:53 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

DOA. G5 is going to be lucky to get 1 spot. They sure as hell aren't getting 2 spots. No matter what G5 fanboys think.

(02-21-2024 09:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:53 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

DOA. G5 is going to be lucky to get 1 spot. They sure as hell aren't getting 2 spots. No matter what G5 fanboys think.

I knew somebody wouldn't like it but with all of the teams in the G5 they are worth a second one.

(02-21-2024 09:15 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)otown Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:24 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  [twitter]

Exactly what I was saying. The Big 12 and ACC are not being hung out to dry like many on this forum fantasize about. Their institutions are too politically powerful. If there are multiple auto qualifiers per conference being discussed, all 4 power conferences will be a part of it. The G5 is being hung out to dry with 1 singular spot in all different scenarios discussed.......that is the big news here.

I think the big news is that some of The Powers That Be in college football have lost their minds and think that this sort of system is a good idea, whetehr from a fairness perspective or a fan interest perspective. Nobody is going to like a system where conferences get multiple autobids just because.

Yes Frank, it works in the Champions League, but this is 'Murica. And I'd guess that college football fandom is more 'Murican than the median American. WE like polls and rankings for some reason, and it's not going to be well recieved if the 4th place Big TEn or SEC team ranked #19 gets a spot in a 14 team playoff over a 3rd place ACC or Big 12 team ranked #14. Giving a spot to a champion and bumping an at-large is one thing. Giving a spot to a runner up or a third- or fourth-placer?

This idea doesn't pass the laugh test. If they want to dump the committee, go back to the BCS formula. If they don't want to say "we're going back to the BCS formula", then go ahead and reinvent the wheel and come up with a new formula that clones the BCS results.

Here's what I'm thinking after time to reflect on the Dellinger article. Obviously conferences are pushing for multiple bids, and I'm okay reducing the committee's role, but I think something more shocking is that said Powers that be are also considering eliminating CCGs. I don't like 4 autobids, but I could live with 3 autobids for the B1G and SEC, 2 for B12 and ACC, and a G5 autobid if multiple bids actually happen.

If they actually eliminate CCGs, I say go for 16 teams at that point with the autobids mentioned above, and use the ladder bracket to keep the polls and RS relevant. 13-16 make the playoff, 9-12 host 1st weekend of December, 5-8 get a bye and host 2nd weekend of December, 1-4 get a double bye and host 3rd weekend of December (I know having the quarterfinals on New Years would likely be more profitable, but going 5 weeks without a game would be excessive assuming CCGs were actually eliminated). I know the Rose Bowl is hosting 1 semi, and guess the Sugar Bowl hosts the other semi.

Maybe you could allow the top 4 RS champs and top 4 at-large earn at least a bye if we want championships to matter too. At least with 5 at-large and 3 bids each for the B1G/SEC, I don't think the scenario you present occurs. I would also move the season start to Week 0 to give teams a 2nd bye since there's the potential teams play 15 games in 17 weeks, and up to 17 games total (although the 12 team CFP w/ CCGs already reaches that threshold). The G5 representative would also love this format as their 1st 2 games would be against 9th and 8th, this could give them extra cinderella potential.

(02-21-2024 09:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:15 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)otown Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:24 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  [twitter]

Exactly what I was saying. The Big 12 and ACC are not being hung out to dry like many on this forum fantasize about. Their institutions are too politically powerful. If there are multiple auto qualifiers per conference being discussed, all 4 power conferences will be a part of it. The G5 is being hung out to dry with 1 singular spot in all different scenarios discussed.......that is the big news here.

I think the big news is that some of The Powers That Be in college football have lost their minds and think that this sort of system is a good idea, whetehr from a fairness perspective or a fan interest perspective. Nobody is going to like a system where conferences get multiple autobids just because.

Yes Frank, it works in the Champions League, but this is 'Murica. And I'd guess that college football fandom is more 'Murican than the median American. WE like polls and rankings for some reason, and it's not going to be well recieved if the 4th place Big TEn or SEC team ranked #19 gets a spot in a 14 team playoff over a 3rd place ACC or Big 12 team ranked #14. Giving a spot to a champion and bumping an at-large is one thing. Giving a spot to a runner up or a third- or fourth-placer?

This idea doesn't pass the laugh test. If they want to dump the committee, go back to the BCS formula. If they don't want to say "we're going back to the BCS formula", then go ahead and reinvent the wheel and come up with a new formula that clones the BCS results.

To be sure, I never claimed that the Big 12 and ACC wouldn’t get additional bids and I’d actually concur that they’re being a bit underrated in the terms of their power. They’re not as powerful as the Big Ten and ACC, but it would be a mistake to lump them in with the G5, too.

Think of this setup of it goes to 14 teams:

FORMAT

Add a Wild Card Round with 4 teams (playing 2 games) on Army-Navy weekend.

Everything after that stays the same as the current 12-team setup:

Divisional Round with 8 teams the next week (where the first round is scheduled now).

Quarterfinals using the bowls on or around NYD.

Semifinals and Final in the weeks thereafter in January.

AUTO-BIDS AND PLACEMENT

Top 4 conference champs get byes to the quarterfinals just as now.

#5 conference champ, the P4 CCG losers, and the next highest seed get a bye to the Divisional Round.

The bottom 4 seeds play in the Wild Card Round.

Big Ten #3 and SEC #3 get auto-bids. Notre Dame also gets an auto-bid as long as it is in the top 16 of the final rankings (similar to the top 8 protection that they got in the BCS system).

NET EFFECT

3 auto-bids each for the Big Ten and SEC, 2 auto-bids each to the Big 12 and ACC, 1 auto-bid to the top G5 champ, and 3 other at-large slots (one of which is protected for a top 16 ND team).

The Wild Card Round inherently will not have any CCG participants as they all either get byes to the Divisional or Semifinal Rounds. This eliminates any issue with a team playing the week after a CCG. It is also competitively equitable since the Wild Card teams didn’t play a CCG, so they’re now playing an equal number of games as the CCG losers and #5 (normally G5) champ that are in the Divisional Round. Finally, even Army and Navy can still participate in the playoff if they are the top G5 champ in the AAC since they wouldn’t play a playoff game until the next week in the Divisional Round. The powers that be have said outright that the Army-Navy weekend is an untapped weekend of value because that’s the last Saturday of the year where the NFL can’t play games. This is a way to fill out that valuable day with the playoff (but limit those games to only those that aren’t participating in a CCG, so we don’t have the “Teams are playing too many games” issue).

If you look at it in current Contract Bowl terms, note that the Big Ten and SEC actually do have an additional bid even above the other power leagues since they had the Rose and Sugar Bowl bids respectively AND a shared slot in the Orange Bowl. This is part of the justification for additional financial guarantees and access for the Big Ten and SEC because that’s something that they *have* in today’s system and would otherwise be giving up despite being even more powerful than when the CFP was first formed.

That’s just off the top of my head.

Oh my gosh, Frank just came around to my idea for the WCG lol well at least the non-CCG participates portion of it, you just presented it better than I've been able to

(02-21-2024 06:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 06:16 PM)otown Wrote:  Gonna go on record and say there is no way on GODs green Earth that the SEC/B1G will wind up with 4 auto qualifiers each year. Now if universal metrics were reached, sure I can easily see either conference having 4, but doubtful it would happen every year. But automatic for 4 from each conference, not gonna happen.

I get that initial reaction—-but the SEC/Big10 hold so much leverage after the current deal expires—-they may very well have the ability to dictate terms that harsh. If they do it, I think we may see a 16 team playoff that throws everyone else a bone.

Its not the way the colleges normally operate. These presidents do end up working at other colleges. The commissioners may be bullying and unreasonable, but like the expansion of the playoff, the presidents will be conciliators. There's plenty of money for everyone. No need to be hogs. Way too much negative towards the money the top schools are getting now to generate more attention fighting too hard.

Hmm, would such a format that's AQ heavy force ND to join a conference?

(02-21-2024 07:11 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 07:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 07:00 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 06:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 06:48 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  They will keep the byes or noone will play their championship game. The champ game losers are playing an extra game currently. So you move the playoff selection to the last week of the season. The top 4 champs and the top 4 losers. Then you have the highest G5 (they also played an extra game).

You add some wildcard games around conference championship weekend.

This makes sure teams aren't sandbagging in championship games, that the championship game losers like UGA aren't going up against a rested team after losing a close one. It makes conference races meaningful. Also keeps interest for everyone else later into the season.

This is the formula March Madness uses...you have spots earned through tournaments, spots given based on a commitee, and access to the "underdog".

they aren't going to kill the CCG. Way too much money involved. There's not going to be stupid ass wild card games on CCG weekend. That divides the attention way too much- and devalues the CCG. SEC and Big Ten aren't going for that at all.

Doing away with byes will kill the championship game.

It doesn't matter when you schedule the wildcard games but they're going to consist of teams not in a championship game.

The CCG are still going to happen. And that's going to be the only games going on that weekend. The bracket gets set after that.

I don't think UGA that just barely lost to Bama us wanting to go against OSU that skipped out on a ccg. I bet they make it so at-large teams not in ccgs have to play in.

The problem is KISS. It just gets hard to explain how it all gets seeded. The CCG losers could be 5, 7, 11 and 14 seeds. And maybe that is what the Big 10 commissioner is looking at. How to make sure their CCG loser makes it in the playoffs. With 14 its surer than 12.

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:26 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 05:57 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

I'm having trouble digesting this one. I don't think the Big Ten brain trust has thought this through at all.

The CFP is not seeing a ton of interest in the first-round games as it is, with three on the third Saturday of December and one on the Friday night before.

A 14 team bracket means 6 first-round games. Fitting in 6 games, either you go up against Amazon Thursday Night football and play one game in the late-night window, plus the Friday and Saturday-noon SAturday-afternoon and Saturday primetime games. Or you cannibalize your audience hoping for some sort of synergy, maybe kicking off at 11:00, 1:00, 3:00, 5:00, 7:00, 9:00 Eastern. on two (or more?) different networks.

If Disney wins the whole bidding, I guess the plan would be:

1) Fri Night ESPN
2) 12e ABC
3) 2e ESPN
4) 4e ABC
5) 6e ESPN
6) 8e ABC
7) 10e ESPN

No. Look at the bowl season. The games get spread through the week.
F night
Sat noon
Sat 4
Sat 8
M-avoid the NFL
T 8
W 8

(02-21-2024 08:36 PM)otown Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 08:24 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

Exactly what I was saying. The Big 12 and ACC are not being hung out to dry like many on this forum fantasize about. Their institutions are too politically powerful. If there are multiple auto qualifiers per conference being discussed, all 4 power conferences will be a part of it. The G5 is being hung out to dry with 1 singular spot in all different scenarios discussed.......that is the big news here.

And if they all get two, the ACC and Big 12 would get more slots on average. So that really doesn't make sense for the Big 10 and SEC.

I think it will be a 5/7 or 5/9 in the end.

(02-21-2024 09:59 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-21-2024 09:53 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  How about a 4-4-2-2-2 distribution in a 14 team model

Sorted by autobids:

SEC (4)
B1G (4)
ACC (2)
XII (2)
G5 (2)

This way everyone knows what they are getting at the begining of the season.

DOA. G5 is going to be lucky to get 1 spot. They sure as hell aren't getting 2 spots. No matter what G5 fanboys think.

I knew somebody wouldn't like it but with all of the teams in the G5 they are worth a second one.

not really. The easiest safest bet is that they get 1 at most. More of a shot at 0 than at 2.

This was the only logical expansion that made sense to protect the P2 CCGs. SEC and B1G are automatics.

What this does is relegate the ACC and Big 12 CCGs to roll the dice games. As compensation? Two automatic bids each. In fact, it can lead to M2 consolidation at an accelerated pace.

So your format is:

Dec (1st week):
Friday night: G5 play-in game (or At-Large) for 14 seed.
SEC/B1G: Status Quo
Army Navy bumped up a week to noon kickoff

Dec (2nd week)
7+5 (P2 runner ups, ACC (2) Big 12 (2) G5 (1) 5 At-Larges)

Dec (3rd week)
Exhibitions

NYD QFs

Eliminate the CCGs in the ACC and Big 12 for two bids each, and this will be reduced to three overall once the leagues effectively merge into a 24-28 team league.

(02-21-2024 10:50 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  This was the only logical expansion that made sense to protect the P2 CCGs. SEC and B1G are automatics.

What this does is relegate the ACC and Big 12 CCGs to roll the dice games. As compensation? Two automatic bids each. In fact, it can lead to M2 consolidation at an accelerated pace.

So your format is:

Dec (1st week):
Friday night: G5 play-in game (or At-Large) for 14 seed.
SEC/B1G: Status Quo
Army Navy bumped up a week to noon kickoff

Dec (2nd week)
7+5 (P2 runner ups, ACC (2) Big 12 (2) G5 (1) 5 At-Larges)

Dec (3rd week)
Exhibitions

NYD QFs

Eliminate the CCGs in the ACC and Big 12 for two bids each, and this will be reduced to three overall once the leagues effectively merge into a 24-28 team league.

sorry but that's a big no. The tourney is going to be selected AFTER the CCG. SEC and Big Ten don't want playoff games overshadowing their CCG. That would be dumb on them financially- therefore it's DOA.

I know you hate the CCG, but whatever.

I also think it’s laughable people believe the Big 12 and ACC would still want to hold a CCG if they are guaranteed two bids as compensation. This is the only logical outcome for the M2.

(02-21-2024 10:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  sorry but that's a big no. The tourney is going to be selected AFTER the CCG. SEC and Big Ten don't want playoff games overshadowing their CCG. That would be dumb on them financially- therefore it's DOA.

I know you hate the CCG, but whatever.

The selection would be held where it is now. Conference champ games would be gonzo for all but the P2 leagues, which actually makes perfect sense in a 14-team setup.