I like a 12 team playoff - auto qualify P5 conference champs, top 4 get bye. Fill the rest of the spots with the next highest ranked, max 3 teams per conference.
Looking at your link it appears that a Uga fan might be more enthusiastic than a GT fan. Going back to the 2015 season (using their projections btw) Uga gets in the playoffs in a few years when they did not make the top 4 whereas it doesn't show us as getting in even once in a 12 team field. I get that past performance is no indicator etc. and we are all hoping for different results from the program going forward than we we have had over the last 5 or 6 years but, as i said, if I were a Uga fan (i'm not) I would be very excited about this change.I do not like awarding byes based on rankings,, but twelve is better than four. Here is a cool look from CBS Sports:
College Football Playoff expansion: How a 12-team field would have looked in each of last seven seasonsHere's a glimpse at how the brackets would have looked over the years if the CFP had started with 12 teams in 2014www.cbssports.com
Are you sure we would have been in in 09 and 14? It would have been contingent on a selection committee picking us each year. Just eyeballing if we would have been on t
Under the proposal for a 12-team format, the four highest-ranked conference champions would be seeded 1-4 and receive a first-round bye. Teams 5-12 would play each other in the first round on the home field of the higher-ranked team. The quarterfinals and semifinals would be played in bowl games and the national championship game would remain at a neutral site.
Also under this proposal: Even if Notre Dame is the No. 1 team in the country, it cannot receive a bye or be seeded higher than No. 5. The selection committee's top 25 is different from the seeding because the top four seeds go to the highest-ranked conference champions.
That is the wrong ranking for 2014. They would use the CFP rankings. GT was 12th, but Boise State would have been selected over GT since they were the highest ranked G5 team.Under this model, the 09 squad would be 7 seed
14 would be a 10
I 100% disagree with this assertion. I think exactly the opposite. I think this further emboldens ND boosters to apply pressure to the school to stay independent. As it sits now, they have to be one of the Top4 teams to make the playoffs. That's tough year-in/year-out. However, if we move to a Top12 with 6 conference champions and 6 at-large bids, that elevates their chances to be in the Playoffs tremendously. Don't underestimate ND boosters' desire to stay independent in football. There is VERY strong support for that and a tremendous push against it.
If it's the Top6+2 or even Top10+2, I think ND joins the ACC. If it's the Top6+6, no way.
Looks like he is trying to mix the playoff formats and bowl tie in formulas with past performance standards for bowl qualification. It’s an if and but thing based on previous play and a 6 win bowl qualifier ? It ignores the format that rotates which bowl gets what playoff game year to year, I think he is saying The Rose and Sugar will end up with less meaningful games, maybe ?How are there three unranked teams that were ranked in the top 12 or were a conference champion? I think McMurphy is smoking crack.
I had to read that a couple of times to see his point. He is saying the Rose & Sugar bowls would be stuck bad matchups if the CFP play-in games were on campus at the higher ranked team's stadium. If you look back at the 12 teams that would have been in the CFP, those two bowls would have been suck with some duds in the years they were not hosting final or semi-final CFP games.How are there three unranked teams that were ranked in the top 12 or were a conference champion? I think McMurphy is smoking crack.
You're forgetting that ND boosters don't want to be in a football conference, they have a lucrative NBC contract that could be renewed if they so chose, their "extra" game in the playoff is akin to a conference championship (with the guarantee that they're already in the Playoff, so they already get that payoff too), and ND's schedule, although tough, isn't unbearable and they play who they want to play. This is a no-lose proposition for ND. They're jumping for joy over this because, I guarantee, they were getting serious pressure to join a conference. This way, they can have their cake and eat it too. No way would ND EVER join a conference if this were adopted.whats harder, being one of the top 4 teams in the country via playing an independent schedule that merits rank or being the top team in the ACC ? A conference championship is automatic playoffs. If you aren’t in a conference you have no automatic bid and you will play an extra game in the playoffs because independents can’t be in the top 4 seeded teams. u have to play the first round even If you are undefeated, if you are independent. Right now 2021 schedule includes Stanford, Wisconsin, Cincinnat, North Carolina, Va Tech, University of Southern California (USC). I’m not sure this is even a top 4 worthy schedule right now But there are a lot more risk to being ranked in the top 4 with this schedule than playing an ACC schedule.
Join the ACC, and slide by via playing BC, Wake Forest, Louisville, Fla State and Syracuse, get your Bona fi des via playing Michigan and Georgia OOC (whoever, Michigan State, Stanford) and Clemson in the Conf Championship game. I’m pretty sure this is one of the easier yet qualifying slates ND has played in a while, Hell if the ACC drops the divisional format ND would probably avoid Clemson, Va Tech and NC until the championship game as a reward for joining, by including Duke, Pitt, or Ga Tech on their schedule .
I don’t see how it’s not advantageous for ND and The ACC. I understand ND is associated with the Michigans, Ohio States and Wisconsin’s of the world but they can have their cake and eat it too. Why would they ? Money. They will ensure perpetual playoffs, top 8 teams (likely top 4) by doing nothing more than playing a conference schedule, even if they lose the Championship game they will be in the top 12 by keeping Michigan, Stanford (whoever) on the schedule and they will definitely keep most of their current corporate partnerships plus share conference revenue which will surely increase.
I think being in the ACC both softens ND schedule AND increases the chance of a real top 4 finish, which means a bye, win once and you are in the championship game - every year. I don’t think ND has that expectation even of themselves, currently.
So the idea is that on years where the Rose Bowl isn't a quarterfinal bowl, which would only happen one out of three years, they would stick to their tie-ins with the Pac12 and Big10 and select the next teams from each conference? There are plenty of solutions for the Rose Bowl, the first of which would be to eliminate the tie-in for conferences. They could drop the conference tie-in and select from the next best teams after the playoff. The Rose Bowl has had tie-ins with those conferences for a long time, but not from the beginning of the game.I had to read that a couple of times to see his point. He is saying the Rose & Sugar bowls would be stuck bad matchups if the CFP play-in games were on campus at the higher ranked team's stadium. If you look back at the 12 teams that would have been in the CFP, those two bowls would have been suck with some duds in the years they were not hosting final or semi-final CFP games.
For me the bowl games immediately became less important when the CFP began. When the Rose Bowl is in the CFP does anyone really think of it as the Rose Bowl? It's the playoffs. In the years when it's not in the CFP no one really cares who plays on Jan 1st in Pasadena.So the idea is that on years where the Rose Bowl isn't a quarterfinal bowl, which would only happen one out of three years, they would stick to their tie-ins with the Pac12 and Big10 and select the next teams from each conference? There are plenty of solutions for the Rose Bowl, the first of which would be to eliminate the tie-in for conferences. They could drop the conference tie-in and select from the next best teams after the playoff. The Rose Bowl has had tie-ins with those conferences for a long time, but not from the beginning of the game.
If a 12 team playoff is used, and the Rose Bowl takes a fifth place team from the Big10 who has four losses and isn't ranked, that isn't the fault of the playoff. That is clearly a decision made by the Rose Bowl.
Also just wanna point out that with this system GT would have been in the playoffs in 1990, 1998, 2009, and 2014. So, we would realistically be moving from making the playoffs maybe once a generation to probably once a decade.
Might be, but now, there's a bit of a break after conference championships right? They could require that CFP games start 2 weeks after the latest conference championship or something.It would be possible for a 5-12 team to play 17 games, the same number as the newly expanded NFL regular season.
Is that too many? Seems like a lot of games to me.
Might lead to more cupcake games, or at least move them to later in the season.I really love this proposal- it heightens the regular season but balances the conference champs well. However, although more football games are great, is 17 too much (12 reg season, 1 conf champ, 1st round, quarters, semis, final) for a college season? I don’t think it’s a negative but wonder how players/coaches/schools would approach that many games