Article CFP unanimously approves 5+7 model for new 12-team playoff

[stinger78]

Be specific. I’m curious, give me a W-L head to head for each row matchup listed.

That’s fiction, bro. Nobody knows who’s got what next year yet. It’s pure conjecture.

 

[bobongo]

Glad you and 5 others care. The 30 million other college football fans don't care. Do you care about the perceptions of Indiana, Oregon State, Arizona State or the other middling teams in other conferences or only about the SEC because the National Narrative is the SEC is a better football conference? Keep banging that drum. Only a few hard core on this board are on your train to nowhere. Now when the ACC starts winning National Titles in batches and has other teams playing for the Title then the other 30 million (that's a wild as guess by the way ) will begin to care!

On Dman's post above listing the conference teams how many of those head to head games do you think the ACC team would be favored in? 2-4 seems about right. The SEC team would be favored in the 7-9 range. Until the ACC wins the games that matter (GT vs UGA does not matter as we don't win enough to even be a blip) the perception will stay as it is that the SEC is better than the ACC in football and it's not close in the National perception. Perception is reality.

As long as you guys keep trying to convince the Board the ACC is not inferior to the SEC in football you will get pushback.

You proved about five different ways that you either don't understand a word I said or you're pointedly ignoring it.
I won't waste any more of my time conversing with you. You're on ignore. Talk to the wind.

 

[Root4GT]

You proved about five different ways that you either don't understand a word I said or you're pointedly ignoring it.
I won't waste any more of my time conversing with you. You're on ignore. Talk to the wind.

You are talking to a bubble of 5-10 people who share your view of the Grand Conspiracy theory. As long as you keep pushing your bogus theory I will push back. Until the ACC actually proves, on the field, that it's top teams (note that is more than one team every few years) can compete for a CFP Title then the ACC will rightfully be viewed Nationally as a 2nd tier football conference. You might not like or believe that but sometimes the truth is hard to accept! Enjoy your day! Expect more of the same every time you spout the grand conspiracy theory!

 

[stinger78]

Stack the ACC top to bottom level to level, and use that context for last years record. I'm going to start with Florida State, the champion. They had a great win against the No. 5 team in the SEC last year. That's the context though, it's the 5th best team. Then they had a hard fought rivalry win against Florida, one of the worst teams in that conference last year. It's not "ACC vs SEC", it's which team beat which team. Would you claim a Vandy win equals the same as a win against the mutts? You wouldn't. So let's add the context.

Matchup	Context	ACC Record
UNC @ South Carolina	#8 ACC team beats #10 SEC team 31-17	1-0
Virginia @ Tennessee	#13 ACC team loses to #6 SEC team 49-13	1-1
LSU vs Florida State	#5 SEC team loses to #1 ACC team 45-24	2-1
Texas A&M at Miami	#7 SEC team loses to #10 ACC team 48-33	3-1 (I agree this is an argument for ACC game with context)
Vandy @ Wake	Worst SEC team loses to worst ACC team 36-20	4-1 The floor is higher in the ACC
Georgia Tech at Ole Miss	#4 ACC team loses to 2nd best team in SEC west 48-23	4-2 (Game was closer than final score saids more about Georgia Tech than some people want to admit)
Mutts @ Georgia Tech	#1 SEC team beats #4 ACC team 31-23	4-3, covered the number see note below.
Clemson @ South Carolina	#6 ACC team beats #10 SEC team 16-7	5-3 rivalry game should be close
Florida State @ Florida	#1 ACC team beats #9 SEC team 24-15	6-3 rivalry game should be close
Kentucky @ Louisville	#2 ACC team loses to #8 SEC team 38-31	6-4 rivalry game should be close

The Miami win over A&M is an item to point to for ACC vs SEC. Totally agree. The other games with the context I'm not ready to pump my chest out. Florida State vs LSU I don't think is the flex some of you may think it is by how bad that teams secondary was last year. I'm also admitting this context above is with captain hindsight knowing where each of these teams ended the 2023 season. I'm also stating in this, and the other thread, follow recruiting. It's not rocket science why the ACC slipped and didn't get their crap together over the past decade. I think they could close the gap with time and urgency, but I also believe our boy Nick at ESPN has his mind made up with the conference, and it's just political theater until February roles around to decide what happens.

I'm not pumping my chest over the ACC - we as a conference should be better.

I would say that rivalry games create their own context. So then, GT-UGA, CU-USC, FSU-UF, and LU-UK are all relevant games in this discussion. Beyond that, you have FSU-LSU (top), UNC-USC (Middle), Miami-TAMU (middle), and Wake-Vandy (bottom) all as "same bucket" games. The ACC was at the very least competitive, if not slightly better top-bottom in 2023. The FSU "cop out" in the Orange Bowl robbed us of a great data point to match two top-level teams. As it is, that game is now tossed into the trash bin as useless for any analysis.

 

[Richard7125]

Good summary. Not sure why this is so difficult to grasp. The Narrative is the conference and all benefit from it. Yet,
Just since 2000, GT is 4-0 vs. Vandy, 3-0 vs. MSU, 2-0 vs. Auburn, and 1-0 vs. Kentucky, while going 0-1 vs. UT, 0-2 vs. LSU, O-3 vs. Ole Miss, and 4-19 vs. UGAg.

UGAg is its own special form of rivalry pain for GT, but other than them, GT is 10-6 against Vandy, MSU, Auburn, and Kentucky, and 10-11 adding LSU and Ole Miss.
Many of those years GT has been a pretty mediocre program, some worse, some better.

Over the same time span, Wake is 6-5 vs. Vandy, 1-0 vs. TAMU, 2-0 vs. Ole Miss, and 0-1 vs. MSU, (and 1-0 vs. Oregon, BTW).

Clemson is 15-8 vs. USCe, 1-4 vs. UGA, 2-1 vs. Kentucky, 1-1 vs. UT, 3-1 vs. TAMU, 2-3 vs. Bama, 4-2 vs. Auburn, … and 2-0 vs. OU.

This same scenario is repeated for team after team in the ACC. Maybe up by a game or two or down by a game or two, but not dominated by the SEC.

BTW, UGA is 4-8 vs. Bama.

Top to bottom, as a conference, the SEC is marginally better than the ACC most years, but only due to the top 2-3 teams. SECspeed refers to the conference as a whole, not just those 2-3 teams. That’s The Narrative at work, and it unnecessarily elevates the SEC while hurting the other conferences.

We seem to be talking past each other. This thread is about the 12 team playoff and how many spots the SEC will get. On one hand you're arguing that the SEC/Big10 will get half of the spots (ie 3 per SEC and Big10). Then you post "Top to bottom, as a conference, the SEC is marginally better than the ACC most years, but only due to the top 2-3 teams." It's only the top 3 teams (maybe 4 in some years) that are going to get the playoff spots. That's what most are saying that you're arguing with. We agree on 3 teams. You lean between 2-3 whereas others might lean between 3-4, but we have common ground on 3 teams. How this morphed into comparing whether NC State or South Carolina is better is beyond me.

 

[bobongo]

You are talking to a bubble of 5-10 people who share your view of the Grand Conspiracy theory. As long as you keep pushing your bogus theory I will push back. Until the ACC actually proves, on the field, that it's top teams (note that is more than one team every few years) can compete for a CFP Title then the ACC will rightfully be viewed Nationally as a 2nd tier football conference. You might not like or believe that but sometimes the truth is hard to accept! Enjoy your day! Expect more of the same every time you spout the grand conspiracy theory!

I'll answer you one more time. You are totally misrepresenting what I've said. You're so far out in left field you're completely out of the ballpark. I never said or even implied any of those things. The SEC is a better conference overall, and better most years (but not all). I haven't advanced any conspiracy theories at all. I will not carry on a conversation with someone who takes an all-or-nothing approach to an argument, someone who doesn't understand or doesn't care about nuance. You don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about. You're all wound up arguing with positions I have never taken. I'm done now with you, at long last.

 

[Root4GT]

I'll answer you one more time. You are totally misrepresenting what I've said. You're so far out in left field you're completely out of the ballpark. I never said or even implied any of those things. The SEC is a better conference overall, and better most years (but not all). I haven't advanced any conspiracy theories at all. I will not carry on a conversation with someone who takes an all-or-nothing approach to an argument, someone who doesn't understand or doesn't care about nuance. You don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about. You're all wound up arguing with positions I have never taken. I'm done now with you, at long last.

You are one of several. though you are more reasonable in your posts, sbut till you are one of a group who works hard to say the ACC is not a lesser football conference than the SEC.

The nuance you refer to is not relevant at the National Level which you nor the others in the group acknowledge is all that matters for the Nation perception which becomes reality until ACC teams, on the field can change that Narrative. That has not happened, well basically ever.

The ACC needs FSU, Clemson and Miami to play at the level that they have proven they can play at in the past at the same time. If that happens for a few years in a row the Narrative about ACC football wil change or those 3 teams will ditch the ACC for more money in the SEC or B1G. Hard to say which wat that would go if the 3 became football powers at the same time.

No other ACC team has ever shown they could regularly competed for the very upper tier of college football. Do you see any other ACC team besides the 3 I mentioned that can regularly be a CFP team going forward? Louisville would be the only one I see and I don't think they can on a regular basis.

 

[Gtyellowjackets]

Not saying anything anyone doesn’t know, but college athletics is screwed. Game over.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

You are talking to a bubble of 5-10 people who share your view of the Grand Conspiracy theory. As long as you keep pushing your bogus theory I will push back. Until the ACC actually proves, on the field, that it's top teams (note that is more than one team every few years) can compete for a CFP Title then the ACC will rightfully be viewed Nationally as a 2nd tier football conference. You might not like or believe that but sometimes the truth is hard to accept! Enjoy your day! Expect more of the same every time you spout the grand conspiracy theory!

Going by this metric, the ACC slots in well behind the SEC and just ahead of the B1G, based on the last 25 years....

 

[stinger78]

We seem to be talking past each other. This thread is about the 12 team playoff and how many spots the SEC will get. On one hand you're arguing that the SEC/Big10 will get half of the spots (ie 3 per SEC and Big10). Then you post "Top to bottom, as a conference, the SEC is marginally better than the ACC most years, but only due to the top 2-3 teams." It's only the top 3 teams (maybe 4 in some years) that are going to get the playoff spots. That's what most are saying that you're arguing with. We agree on 3 teams. You lean between 2-3 whereas others might lean between 3-4, but we have common ground on 3 teams. How this morphed into comparing whether NC State or South Carolina is better is beyond me.

The argument that the SEC and B1G should get more teams into the CFP is that they are significantly better conferences. I am submitting that they are not. They are marginally better many years, but rarely significantly better.

So, that leads to your question about codifying preferential treatment every year. Some years it will be the ACC and/or the B12 that “deserve” the extra slot. What do we do then? We’ve codified the setup that the Cartel gets extra slots based on The Narrative that they are just better.

That is why the notion that those two are significantly better is wrong-headed.

All just my $0.02 worth.

 

[roadkill]

The argument that the SEC and B1G should get more teams into the CFP is that they are significantly better conferences. I am submitting that they are not. They are marginally better many years, but rarely significantly better.

So, that leads to your question about codifying preferential treatment every year. Some years it will be the ACC and/or the B12 that “deserve” the extra slot. What do we do then? We’ve codified the setup that the Cartel gets extra slots based on The Narrative that they are just better.

That is why the notion that those two are significantly better is wrong-headed.

All just my $0.02 worth.

Perhaps for some, but this is not the argument I make. They don't need to be significantly better across the board to justify 3 slots each vs 2 for the ACC and B12. Just better at the top. Over the last several decades, this has been the case, at least for SEC. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, 2 guaranteed slots will result in the ACC getting more teams in the playoff than they otherwise would in many years, if we look at historical rankings.

Regarding the ACC "deserving" more than 2 slots some years, when was the last time the ACC had more than 2 teams in the top 12? Maybe never?

 

[stinger78]

Perhaps for some, but this is not the argument I make. They don't need to be significantly better across the board to justify 3 slots each vs 2 for the ACC and B12. Just better at the top. Over the last several decades, this has been the case, at least for SEC. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, 2 guaranteed slots will result in the ACC getting more teams in the playoff than they otherwise would in many years, if we look at historical rankings.

Regarding the ACC "deserving" more than 2 slots some years, when was the last time the ACC had more than 2 teams in the top 12? Maybe never?

Perhaps, but guaranteeing an equal number plus including 1-2 at-large teams would take care of that w/o codifying their superiority, which may not be the case in a significant number of years.

Still, I think that is a second best approach. I think only conference champs should get slots in a limited tournament. However, the money aspect apparently overrules that.

As for the top 12, I don’t want polls anywhere near the thing. I want conference champs only and seeding done by prior agreed criteria.

 

[roadkill]

The arguments against the 3-slot guarantees seem to assume it’s going to be cast in stone for the foreseeable future. In reality, nothing is getting codified for long.

• No playoff – about 100 years
• BCS – 14 years
• 4-team CFP – 9 years
• 12-team playoff – 2-3 years?

See a trend here? It will continue to expand as long as there’s more $$ in it. Sure, the current "Big 2" conferences will lobby for every advantage they can get. But a larger pool favors the inclusion of more ACC teams since the ACC tends to have more “good” teams than “elite” teams.

 

[stinger78]

The arguments against the 3-slot guarantees seem to assume it’s going to be cast in stone for the foreseeable future. In reality, nothing is getting codified for long.

• No playoff – about 100 years
• BCS – 14 years
• 4-team CFP – 9 years
• 12-team playoff – 2-3 years?

See a trend here? It will continue to expand as long as there’s more $$ in it. Sure, the current "Big 2" conferences will lobby for every advantage they can get. But a larger pool favors the inclusion of more ACC teams since the ACC tends to have more “good” teams than “elite” teams.

We'll see. What is done is done.

 

[forensicbuzz]

We seem to be talking past each other. This thread is about the 12 team playoff and how many spots the SEC will get. On one hand you're arguing that the SEC/Big10 will get half of the spots (ie 3 per SEC and Big10). Then you post "Top to bottom, as a conference, the SEC is marginally better than the ACC most years, but only due to the top 2-3 teams." It's only the top 3 teams (maybe 4 in some years) that are going to get the playoff spots. That's what most are saying that you're arguing with. We agree on 3 teams. You lean between 2-3 whereas others might lean between 3-4, but we have common ground on 3 teams. How this morphed into comparing whether NC State or South Carolina is better is beyond me.

That’s the point people are making that you keep ignoring. The narrative that the SEC is better top-to-bottom feeds the good loss if a top team loses a game to the lower middle SEC team. Whereas a top ACC team losing a conference game to a middling team is a bad loss. Right or not, that’s an issue.

 

[stinger78]

That’s the point people are making that you keep ignoring. The narrative that the SEC is better top-to-bottom feeds the good loss if a top team loses a game to the lower middle SEC team. Whereas a top ACC team losing a conference game to a middling team is a bad loss. Right or not, that’s an issue.

Thank you. I think I know I’m not crazy, but so few seem to grasp this simple reality that I sometimes wonder. It’s how their 9-3 teams end up ahead of our 9-3 teams. A loss to UK is deemed better than a loss to NCSU.

 

[Root4GT]

Thank you. I think I know I’m not crazy, but so few seem to grasp this simple reality that I sometimes wonder. It’s how their 9-3 teams end up ahead of our 9-3 teams. A loss to UK is deemed better than a loss to NCSU.

You might not be crazy but it does not take a rocket scientist to understand why you are out on a limb on this topic. Question. Who on this board have you convinced with your arguments on this topic that were not originally in agreement with your position? Probably the same amount of people that believe the SEC is a better football conference than the ACC have convinced folks in your camp that is a true statement. Zero is the likely answer for both cases! This reminds me of Monty Python's Knight scene!

 

[RamblinRed]

CFP to be approved for 14 teams.

College Football Playoff expected to approve expansion as FBS leaders agree on revenue distribution

The 14-team CFP would begin at the start of a new television contract in the 2026 season

www.cbssports.com

The funny part is it hasn't been decided yet how the bids will be divvied up - just that there will be 14 of them. It was also decided the revenue splits.

B1G and SEC get 29% each
ACC gets 17% (approx $13-14M per team)
B12 gets 15%
G5 gets 9%
Independents get 1% With most going to ND (approx $12M)

By agreeing on the number of teams and the revenue distribution they can now finalize an extension with ESPN.

 

[roadkill]

CFP to be approved for 14 teams.

College Football Playoff expected to approve expansion as FBS leaders agree on revenue distribution

The 14-team CFP would begin at the start of a new television contract in the 2026 season

www.cbssports.com

The funny part is it hasn't been decided yet how the bids will be divvied up - just that there will be 14 of them. It was also decided the revenue splits.

B1G and SEC get 29% each
ACC gets 17% (approx $13-14M per team)
B12 gets 15%
G5 gets 9%
Independents get 1% With most going to ND (approx $12M)

By agreeing on the number of teams and the revenue distribution they can now finalize an extension with ESPN.

That last sentence (responding to the auto-bye requests from the SEC/B1G): "Discussions pivoted after that proposed format led to a substantial outcry with fairness being immediately called into question." At least some are pushing back.

 

[stinger78]

That last sentence (responding to the auto-bye requests from the SEC/B1G): "Discussions pivoted after that proposed format led to a substantial outcry with fairness being immediately called into question." At least some are pushing back.

Good to see that I'm not the only one questioning the fairness of this thing.