FC/OT: SEC & B1G pushing for 14-16 team playoff with auto qualifiers…

[NewEra 2014]

Talk of eliminating Con. Champ Game. Automatic bid for 1st and 2nd place for playoffs.
3rd would play 6th, 4th would play 5th., this would eliminate teams dogging it at end of
season.
By setting up a proposed 4 - Big 10, 4 - SEC playoff seeding, Penn State could play a team like LSU or Oklahoma,
instead of a MAC team without losing conference seeding.
The remaining playoff teams would be 2 Big 12, 2 ACC, 1 Gp. of 5, and you guessed it most likely ND.
Just my opinion ND should join a conference, or share their money with everyone on their schedule.

I'm not hating this proposal so far. I'd rather see #3 - #6 in the BIG and SEC have to play an extra game to qualify for the playoffs, rather than having #1 and #2 play the extra game. The conference championship games are one of the biggest flaws in the current system, IMO.

Having 4 AQ's from the BIG and SEC also feels right to me. You are now talking about the #3 team from the Big 12 or ACC potentially having a gripe; however, they still have a chance to qualify as an at-large team. I also like keeping the automatic bid for a G5 team and having one at-large team left.

 

[psuro]

More practically speaking this puts another game or two up against the NFL - which is a losing effort. Would like to see a few other fixes before expanding - namely:

- Re-seeding after round 1.
- Get rid of conference championship game, move everything up a week.
- Byes go to four top ranked teams - that is it.

Think we implement some of these changes we get a much better overall product, noting for Penn State fans, it was a pretty good time.

If I recall correctly, the CFP has nothing to do with CCGs.

If you can convince the conferences and the championship game venues that they don't need the revenue, and you can convince the networks they don't need the content or the TV Ad revenue - you might get your wish.

 

[Midnighter]

If I recall correctly, the CFP has nothing to do with CCGs.

If you can convince the conferences and the championship game venues that they don't need the revenue, and you can convince the networks they don't need the content or the TV Ad revenue - you might get your wish.

They don’t, but my point with the CCG’s was tied more to scheduling than anything else. Get rid of them and you can move everything else up a week to avoid NFL conflicts.

 

[LB99]

They don’t, but my point with the CCG’s was tied more to scheduling than anything else. Get rid of them and you can move everything else up a week to avoid NFL conflicts.

I agree. The season lingered too long with the CCGs and then bye weeks, etc. It became a problem for the portal then also. Too many moving parts. However, it was the first year, they will tweak it and it will be a better version in the future. This was still a far superior product than the old playoff though.

 

[Nitt1300]

Coming soon: 132 team playoff

 

[PSUSignore]

Don't know why it's so difficult to realize this is professional football. I don't recall many complaints about the W-L records of teams in the NFL playoffs. You win your division or qualify as a wildcard.
Ohio State took the natty with 2 losses. If this playoff format continues, eventually someone will win it with 3. It has become a tournament. The team that "peaks" at the right moment will make a strong statement. The dominant regular season team may stumble for a variety of reasons.....matchup or untimely injuries etc. How often does the team with the best record during the regular season win the World Series? 8 wild card teams have won the World Series and 6 wild card teams have won the Super Bowl.
How many WS would the Yankees have won under the current MBL playoff format? Certainly not 27.
The SEC and Big Ten are driving the bus and the destination is $$$$. Isn't that the name of every endeavor?

I have no issues with an end of season tournament similar to the NFL. The problem here is college isn't doing that. They are still wanting to use the subjective crap to identify teams to participate in the tournament. If they would just grant a playoff spot to every conference champ, P4 and G5 alike, throw in a couple of wild cards, then play a tournament to determine a champion on the field I'd be A-OK with that plan. But no, they still insist on gatekeeping the tournament to keep out the small schools and give preferential treatment to their golden goose programs, of which PSU is one, to create a sham of a tournament bracket anyway. Either do a tournament with a bunch of teams based on objective criteria, or do a small tournament based on subjectivity where you invite only those that look like they really are the best in the country. A 12 team invitational pulls in more teams than should be there, it's only being done for money and not for the sake of properly identifying a champion. The reality is a subjectively based tourney should only have 6-8 teams tops, but they are just adding in more big name programs from the Big 10 and SEC to line their pockets. This hybrid solution is stupid, especially when you consider it takes away from one of the key tenets that has made CFB great, the huge importance of the regular season and requiring teams to win almost every game to even get a shot at a title. If you are going to waive that, then go all the way to do a proper tournament inviting all conference champs to the party.

 

[Marshall2323]

I have no issues with an end of season tournament similar to the NFL. The problem here is college isn't doing that. They are still wanting to use the subjective crap to identify teams to participate in the tournament. If they would just grant a playoff spot to every conference champ, P4 and G5 alike, throw in a couple of wild cards, then play a tournament to determine a champion on the field I'd be A-OK with that plan. But no, they still insist on gatekeeping the tournament to keep out the small schools and give preferential treatment to their golden goose programs, of which PSU is one, to create a sham of a tournament bracket anyway. Either do a tournament with a bunch of teams based on objective criteria, or do a small tournament based on subjectivity where you invite only those that look like they really are the best in the country. A 12 team invitational pulls in more teams than should be there, it's only being done for money and not for the sake of properly identifying a champion. The reality is a subjectively based tourney should only have 6-8 teams tops, but they are just adding in more big name programs from the Big 10 and SEC to line their pockets. This hybrid solution is stupid, especially when you consider it takes away from one of the key tenets that has made CFB great, the huge importance of the regular season and requiring teams to win almost every game to even get a shot at a title. If you are going to waive that, then go all the way to do a proper tournament inviting all conference champs to the party.

Only being done for money....bingo. You don't have to like it, but how else do you sell it to the networks and the conferences? As far as the non P4 I don't see where they should have a significant seat at the table. Boise was as good as it gets. How many teams rated below them do you want to give a bid? Until all of "college" football is divided into 4, 5 or 6 divisions we will continue to see "subjective crap" as a way to determine playoff bids. I personally think Alabama, Ole Miss or South Carolina would have been tougher outs than Boise.
No format will please every fan. I certainly prefer this over the 4 team process. There is a part of me that feels that if you have 12,14,or 16 teams the last 5,6,8 are in it just for the dance. I find it hard to imagine, whatever the original number on any given year, only 4-6 teams are really contenders.
So yes, it is all about the money. It's college football only in name. It's been that way for longer than we think. This is minor league football. The players are very fortunate, because it pays them sooooooo much better than other minor league sports. But of course that takes us back to the revenue it generates.
Big 10 and SEC conferences hold all the cards. It would be an incredible act of ineptitude for those commissioners to agree to any format that doesn't recognize their current position of dominance in the sport.
At the end of the day.....at this stage of my life.....I am a fan. I want to watch games. As many games as possible. More game are better than less games.

 

[NewEra 2014]

Only being done for money....bingo. You don't have to like it, but how else do you sell it to the networks and the conferences? As far as the non P4 I don't see where they should have a significant seat at the table. Boise was as good as it gets. How many teams rated below them do you want to give a bid? Until all of "college" football is divided into 4, 5 or 6 divisions we will continue to see "subjective crap" as a way to determine playoff bids. I personally think Alabama, Ole Miss or South Carolina would have been tougher outs than Boise.
No format will please every fan. I certainly prefer this over the 4 team process. There is a part of me that feels that if you have 12,14,or 16 teams the last 5,6,8 are in it just for the dance. I find it hard to imagine, whatever the original number on any given year, only 4-6 teams are really contenders.
So yes, it is all about the money. It's college football only in name. It's been that way for longer than we think. This is minor league football. The players are very fortunate, because it pays them sooooooo much better than other minor league sports. But of course that takes us back to the revenue it generates.
Big 10 and SEC conferences hold all the cards. It would be an incredible act of ineptitude for those commissioners to agree to any format that doesn't recognize their current position of dominance in the sport.
At the end of the day.....at this stage of my life.....I am a fan. I want to watch games. As many games as possible. More game are better than less games.

In addition, expanding the playoff made dozens of games in November relevant that otherwise would have meant nothing. Each fanbase goes into a season defining what a successful season would look like. For many programs that don't have a shot at a championship, they will define a playoff berth as success. I think that is very good for the sport.

 

[PSUSignore]

In addition, expanding the playoff made dozens of games in November relevant that otherwise would have meant nothing. Each fanbase goes into a season defining what a successful season would look like. For many programs that don't have a shot at a championship, they will define a playoff berth as success. I think that is very good for the sport.

Everyone likes to say this but never talks about the flipside... so that December Boise St vs UNLV game now means something, awesome. How many people actually cared? But now the historically massive matchups like PSU-OSU, OSU-UM games don't mean squat as the losers get into the playoff anyway. In some cases it's now actually favorable to lose those games, at least until they change the way seeding works. So would you rather have an increase in value for some historically meaningless games or maintain the importance for some massively impactful games? Give me the latter all day long.

 

[NewEra 2014]

Everyone likes to say this but never talks about the flipside... so that December Boise St vs UNLV game now means something, awesome. How many people actually cared? But now the historically massive matchups like PSU-OSU, OSU-UM games don't mean squat as the losers get into the playoff anyway. In some cases it's now actually favorable to lose those games, at least until they change the way seeding works. So would you rather have an increase in value for some historically meaningless games or maintain the importance for some massively impactful games? Give me the latter all day long.

I have to disagree with you here. The more often that CFB can spread relevant games throughout the country, the better for the long-term health of the sport. In addition, if a team's fans perceive that the team is "in the hunt" for making the playoffs, the fans are not only going to watch their team's games. They will also watch other games that may have an impact on their team's chances for making the playoff.

I, for one, was getting tired of our season being over once we lost to tOSU in late October or early November.

 

[WSTLion87]

Why are college football commissioners and conferences still catering to Notre Dame? I would love to see a scheduling agreement between the SEC and B1G that completely blocks Notre Dame out of anything relevant. The ACC Is on life support and not if but when they fold it's bye-bye scheduling agreement with ACC for ND. Then what? They shouldn't be allowed to be independent any longer. Enough is enough!

 

[PSUSignore]

I have to disagree with you here. The more often that CFB can spread relevant games throughout the country, the better for the long-term health of the sport. In addition, if a team's fans perceive that the team is "in the hunt" for making the playoffs, the fans are not only going to watch their team's games. They will also watch other games that may have an impact on their team's chances for making the playoff.

I, for one, was getting tired of our season being over once we lost to tOSU in late October or early November.

Agree to disagree as a fan of one of the teams that has historically played a couple of hugely impactful games every season. My blood pressure barely rose during the OSU-PSU or OU-PSU games this season as a loss in those games meant nothing, and actually benefitted PSU's playoff seed. PSU had one game all season with the tension, excitement and importance of some of those huge matchups of the past, the game against ND in the playoffs. That's it.

 

[LB99]

Agree to disagree as a fan of one of the teams that has historically played a couple of hugely impactful games every season. My blood pressure barely rose during the OSU-PSU or OU-PSU games this season as a loss in those games meant nothing, and actually benefitted PSU's playoff seed. PSU had one game all season with the tension, excitement and importance of some of those huge matchups of the past, the game against ND in the playoffs. That's it.

Your blood pressure barely rose for one score games against top level teams?

 

[PSUSignore]

You’re blood pressure barely rose for one score games against top level teams?

Because there was little consequence for losing. It didn't matter.

 

[LB99]

Because there was little consequence for losing. It didn't matter.

You don’t think it mattered to those players and coaches that have put in all the time in the film room, weight room, practices, etc? Maybe it didn’t to you, but I bet you if you asked them all, it mattered.

 

[PSUSignore]

You don’t think it mattered to those players and coaches that have put in all the time in the film room, weight room, practices, etc? Maybe it didn’t to you, but I bet you if you asked them all, it mattered.

I never said it didn't matter to them, did I? Every game matters to the players, regardless of the format, old or new, playoffs or no playoffs. We are talking about game importance to fans in terms of impact to a season, playoffs, etc.

 

[[email protected]]

Didn’t check my blood pressure but entirely ******** to say it did not matter

 

[LB99]

I never said it didn't matter to them, did I? Every game matters to the players, regardless of the format, old or new, playoffs or no playoffs. We are talking about game importance to fans in terms of impact to a season, playoffs, etc.

We sure are spoiled as a fanbase.

 

[Tom McAndrew]