Wait, so not only did they not expand the playoffs, they succeeded in screwing it up even more......

[OG Goat Holder]

Going by the article on the right: https://www.on3.com/news/big-ten-se...l-playoff-format-but-cant-come-to-a-decision/

1) They are still valuing conference champions by giving all 4 P4's a slot for their champion (which would have meant Duke this year);
2) They are de-valuing G6 conference champions by saying the highest ranked G6 champion gets in, not necessarily the champion;
3) Notre Dame gets in automatically if they rank in the top 12 (bumping other at-large teams, because reasons).

These idiot old men simply cannot get out of their own way. Like Mike Detiller said, it's these old head judges that are screwing this stuff up. Is it control? I don't know but they haven't made a good decision regarding college sports in years. Just bad after bad after bad.

The solution is simple:

1) Expand to 16;
2) Conference championship games are gone; you can still award 4 conference champs in the playoff but it's based on record and gives flexibility;
3) It's based on ranking - period, and at least 1 G6 team is guaranteed. I might even give 2, as they would be rewards for the top 2 seeds, similar to the NCAA dance.

 

[paindonthurt]

Going by the article on the right: https://www.on3.com/news/big-ten-se...l-playoff-format-but-cant-come-to-a-decision/

1) They are still valuing conference champions by giving all 4 P4's a slot for their champion (which would have meant Duke this year);
2) They are de-valuing G6 conference champions by saying the highest ranked G6 champion gets in, not necessarily the champion;
3) Notre Dame gets in automatically if they rank in the top 12 (bumping other at-large teams, because reasons).

These idiot old men simply cannot get out of their own way. Like Mike Detiller said, it's these old head judges that are screwing this stuff up. Is it control? I don't know but they haven't made a good decision regarding college sports in years. Just bad after bad after bad.

The solution is simple:

1) Expand to 16;
2) Conference championship games are gone; you can still award 4 conference champs in the playoff but it's based on record and gives flexibility;
3) It's based on ranking - period, and at least 1 G6 team is guaranteed. I might even give 2, as they would be rewards for the top 2 seeds, similar to the NCAA dance.

I bet you are awesome to work with!!

 

[615dawg]

I think it is as simple as this.

1. Top 16 teams make the playoff.
2. If a conference champion is ranked 17-20 in two of the three polls, then the top team meeting this criteria takes the 16th seed and plays a road game at the top seed.

 

[Villagedawg]

Yes. Every time they do something, they make it worse. A 4 team playoff was enough. But I digress. If you are going to keep it 12 just make it the top 12. But then "the committee" would manipulate who the 12 were just like they did this year. If you are going to 16, that's fine too, and I like the idea of if you are going with conference champs, and the IDEA of just basing that on record, but as we see this year, there is a problem with that when you have 16 and 18 team conferences. Likely 3 to 6 teams are going to finish with one or two losses, and the tiebreaker is going so far down the line to something like what cheer squad finished highest at last year's NCA as to be meaningless. Even with nine games next year the SEC will only be playing 60% of the other 15 teams. The only time it's been lower than that in the modern era was this year and last at 53%. Is that a champion? I wish I knew a way to just take on field results and forget polls, but there are too many teams. Maybe a combination kind of like the old BCS computer model along with a poll to get the top 16 and go with that.

 

[aTotal360]

64 team, round robin, double elimination.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

If you are going to 16, that's fine too, and I like the idea of if you are going with conference champs, and the IDEA of just basing that on record, but as we see this year, there is a problem with that when you have 16 and 18 team conferences. Likely 3 to 6 teams are going to finish with one or two losses, and the tiebreaker is going so far down the line to something like what cheer squad finished highest at last year's NCA as to be meaningless. Even with nine games next year the SEC will only be playing 60% of the other 15 teams. The only time it's been lower than that in the modern era was this year and last at 53%. Is that a champion? I wish I knew a way to just take on field results and forget polls, but there are too many teams. Maybe a combination kind of like the old BCS computer model along with a poll to get the top 16 and go with that.

I get that. Essentially it's just a way to ensure each team gets one team in the playoff, which is going to happen anyway.

Beyond that, it's just an accomplishment for more teams to be able to hang a banner. And make no mistake.....in this day and age......HOPE matters to fanbases.

 

[Ranchdawg]

They should have gone to 16 and done away with the bye for top 4. Do away with conference championship games (will not happen for $$ reasons). Teams that make the CFP are playing too many games with chances for injury.

Use the bowl games to playoff 16 teams (17-32) for ranking purposes. Winner is 17th and rank based on how far each team finished. This will give the bowls more meaning.

 

[MStateDawg]

The SEC wanted 16 teams and the Big Ten wanted 24. They couldn't agree to a compromise, thus it's getting stuck at 12.

 

[patdog]

The SEC wanted 16 teams and the Big Ten wanted 24. They couldn't agree to a compromise, thus it's getting stuck at 12.

That doesn't make any sense at all. But that's what happened.

 

[paindonthurt]

Yes. Every time they do something, they make it worse. A 4 team playoff was enough. But I digress. If you are going to keep it 12 just make it the top 12. But then "the committee" would manipulate who the 12 were just like they did this year. If you are going to 16, that's fine too, and I like the idea of if you are going with conference champs, and the IDEA of just basing that on record, but as we see this year, there is a problem with that when you have 16 and 18 team conferences. Likely 3 to 6 teams are going to finish with one or two losses, and the tiebreaker is going so far down the line to something like what cheer squad finished highest at last year's NCA as to be meaningless. Even with nine games next year the SEC will only be playing 60% of the other 15 teams. The only time it's been lower than that in the modern era was this year and last at 53%. Is that a champion? I wish I knew a way to just take on field results and forget polls, but there are too many teams. Maybe a combination kind of like the old BCS computer model along with a poll to get the top 16 and go with that.

Should just use an updated BCS system and let the top 12 teams into bracket. If legalese demands the G schools get an opportunity, then take the top 10 plus 2 G5.

If they wanna keep conference titles in the mix, make the damn decision before conference champ week.

Scenario, Georgia going 11-1 in regular season and losing to undefeated Bama in the conference championship shouldn't knock them out of the playoffs if they are still a top 10 team.

 

[paindonthurt]

The SEC wanted 16 teams and the Big Ten wanted 24. They couldn't agree to a compromise, thus it's getting stuck at 12.

Good.

 

[dawgstudent]

Ol Brett McMurphy is cussin' in his articles...

Big Ten, SEC demanded power to determine College Football Playoff format, but can't come to a decision

The Big Ten and SEC sought the power to determine the College Football Playoff format, but the two conferences cannot agree on a decision.

www.on3.com

 

[OG Goat Holder]

The SEC wanted 16 teams and the Big Ten wanted 24. They couldn't agree to a compromise, thus it's getting stuck at 12.

We all know that.

Problem is they made some more dumb decisions, thus my OP.

 

[Darryl Steight]

Ol Brett McMurphy is cussin' in his articles...

Big Ten, SEC demanded power to determine College Football Playoff format, but can't come to a decision

The Big Ten and SEC sought the power to determine the College Football Playoff format, but the two conferences cannot agree on a decision.

www.on3.com

 

[40 acres and a mule]

That doesn't make any sense at all. But that's what happened.

Isn't Keenum on the committee? Just spitballin', but maybe football decisions are not his forte.

 

[John Deaux VII]

I bet you are awesome to work with!!

If I did not know any better, I'd think he's my FIL. He has answer or solution for everything....

 

[MississippiTexan]

Yes. Every time they do something, they make it worse. A 4 team playoff was enough. But I digress. If you are going to keep it 12 just make it the top 12. But then "the committee" would manipulate who the 12 were just like they did this year. If you are going to 16, that's fine too, and I like the idea of if you are going with conference champs, and the IDEA of just basing that on record, but as we see this year, there is a problem with that when you have 16 and 18 team conferences. Likely 3 to 6 teams are going to finish with one or two losses, and the tiebreaker is going so far down the line to something like what cheer squad finished highest at last year's NCA as to be meaningless. Even with nine games next year the SEC will only be playing 60% of the other 15 teams. The only time it's been lower than that in the modern era was this year and last at 53%. Is that a champion? I wish I knew a way to just take on field results and forget polls, but there are too many teams. Maybe a combination kind of like the old BCS computer model along with a poll to get the top 16 and go with that.

I'm not sure how anyone could say the 4 team playoff was better after what we got this year. The 4 team playoff gave us 3 games and multiple teams arguing about how they were incorrectly left out and hanging banners anyway. This year could have been better with some changes but was definitely better than a 4 team playoff. We got 11 games instead of 3. More meaningful football is better. We still had teams crying about being left out but no one hung any banners claiming to be a national champion as the 13 seed. That's better. The results this year showed that maybe those teams being left out of a 4 team playoff had some valid arguments. We had the 5 seed take out the 4 seed, the 6 seed take out the 3 seed, the 10 seed took out the 7 seed, 2 seed, and 6 seed and lost in a good game to the 1 seed. Do your 2, 3, or 4 seeds get out of the first round without a bye, who knows, but they all lost in the second round and all 3 would have been in before the teams they lost to in a 4 team playoff.

I mean really, what is the justification behind saying 4 teams was enough? It really makes no sense.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Isn't Keenum on the committee? Just spitballin', but maybe football decisions are not his forte.

You ain't wrong. I like Keenum and think people who want him gone are crazy, but it seems he needs to stay out of athletics.

Further, you could even let the committee rank the Top 25. Then take 50% of those ratings vs. 50% Sagarin power ratings and there is your field. Every P4 team guaranteed one slot, that keeps the Dukes and Virginias out. For the 12 teamer, one G6 guaranteed. For a 16 teamer, two are guaranteed. That would have yielded this for a 12 teamer:

Indiana
Ohio State
Oregon
Georgia
Texas Tech
Ole Miss
Notre Dame
Miami
Texas A&M
Alabama
Texas
Tulane

Makes sense to me. And people will point to Texas and say hey they don't deserve it. Well, they only to Ohio State, Florida and Georgia but they beat Oklahoma, Vanderbilt and Texas A&M. Looks like they did deserve to make it.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I'm not sure how anyone could say the 4 team playoff was better after what we got this year. The 4 team playoff gave us 3 games and multiple teams arguing about how they were incorrectly left out and hanging banners anyway. This year could have been better with some changes but was definitely better than a 4 team playoff. We got 11 games instead of 3. More meaningful football is better. We still had teams crying about being left out but no one hung any banners claiming to be a national champion as the 13 seed. That's better. The results this year showed that maybe those teams being left out of a 4 team playoff had some valid arguments. We had the 5 seed take out the 4 seed, the 6 seed take out the 3 seed, the 10 seed took out the 7 seed, 2 seed, and 6 seed and lost in a good game to the 1 seed. Do your 2, 3, or 4 seeds get out of the first round without a bye, who knows, but they all lost in the second round and all 3 would have been in before the teams they lost to in a 4 team playoff.

I mean really, what is the justification behind saying 4 teams was enough? It really makes no sense.

4 teams was asinine. Just a passive middle ground and it's been proven now that we needed more teams. What it did was lessen interest and create a slow grinding death for the bowls. College can't do anything quickly. I mean in one fell swoop they brought in NIL/portal, they should have done the same here, go to 16 and be done with it.

I mean, how silly was the last 25 years of playoff hand wringing, really? "hOw CaN wE dO tHaT, mUh AcAdEmIcS". Leach said it best 10 years ago in his rant. I semi-get when they talk about playing too many games, but so is every other division of football, so it didn't hold up. Now that they are being paid, this big playoff is about the only good thing it has going for it.

 

[Villagedawg]

I'm not sure how anyone could say the 4 team playoff was better after what we got this year. The 4 team playoff gave us 3 games and multiple teams arguing about how they were incorrectly left out and hanging banners anyway. This year could have been better with some changes but was definitely better than a 4 team playoff. We got 11 games instead of 3. More meaningful football is better. We still had teams crying about being left out but no one hung any banners claiming to be a national champion as the 13 seed. That's better. The results this year showed that maybe those teams being left out of a 4 team playoff had some valid arguments. We had the 5 seed take out the 4 seed, the 6 seed take out the 3 seed, the 10 seed took out the 7 seed, 2 seed, and 6 seed and lost in a good game to the 1 seed. Do your 2, 3, or 4 seeds get out of the first round without a bye, who knows, but they all lost in the second round and all 3 would have been in before the teams they lost to in a 4 team playoff.

I mean really, what is the justification behind saying 4 teams was enough? It really makes no sense.

Didn't say it was better to watch. It was enough to determine a champion. Number 4 usually got blown out. We did get more football this year, and what compelling football was Tulane-Ole Miss, JMU-Oregon, Oregon- Texas Tech, Alabama-Indiana, Oregon-Indiana!! Miami made a run, but even if they had won the thing, they were not the best team in the country. They lost 2 regular season games to bad teams. You want in? Win your games. Some 4 team combination of Ole Miss, Georgia, Indiana, Ohio State, and Oregon would have produced the same champion. You can expand it to 65 and there will still be teams complaining about getting left out. Just see the march madness bracket. I don't care who hangs what kind of banner. Let USM hang a national champion banner for all I care.

Edited to add: I don't care how many they expand to. I will probably watch. Just make sure you get the best 4.

 

[paindonthurt]

If I did not know any better, I'd think he's my FIL. He has answer or solution for everything....

But never really ever does anything! Armchair QB to the max!

 

[OG Goat Holder]

It was enough to determine a champion. Number 4 usually got blown out.

Was it? I don't know. BCS was just as good and we still had bowls, but I digress. I still think that maybe we all have so much old school thinking that we figure sure we know who the best 2-3 teams are so 17 it. But Ohio State blew a hole in that theory twice in 2014 and in 2024.

And I do think you were more correct in the pre-NIL/portal era. But less so now. I think we all agree there's more parity.

We did get more football this year, and what compelling football was Tulane-Ole Miss, JMU-Oregon, Oregon- Texas Tech, Alabama-Indiana, Oregon-Indiana!! Miami made a run, but even if they had won the thing, they were not the best team in the country. They lost 2 regular season games to bad teams.

I would argue that those may be the most important games, for the good of the overall game. They give people hope, I mean hell the absolute end game goal for MSU right now is to simply have a CHANCE at one of those blowout losses. And plus you never know how it will go, absolutely no one expected Indiana to just massacre two teams in a row named Alabama and Oregon.

You want in? Win your games. Some 4 team combination of Ole Miss, Georgia, Indiana, Ohio State, and Oregon would have produced the same champion.

I do take issue with this, because all these schedules and conferences are unequal. You can't simply go by record. Ohio State proved that last year. Will you get it right with the top 4 most of the time? Maybe, probably around 80% in the old system, but I'd argue it's much less, around 50-60%, in this new one.

You can expand it to 65 and there will still be teams complaining about getting left out. Just see the march madness bracket. I don't care who hangs what kind of banner. Let USM hang a national champion banner for all I care.

I agree, but no one will care. They'll be some bltching but it'll die down. I do think 16 pretty much eliminates most of the noise. Even if you allow 2 G6s in, I think you can say you've got the best ones.

Why do I care about this? Well, I like defined systems. Since the season and the overall system is so 17ed up due to NIL/portal and uneven schedules, you can at least make the playoff a good system, and salvage some good out of this shltty mess.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

My suggestion when we had the BCS should work. Get rid of conference championships and have a play-in weekend that pits teams ranked 7 thru 18. If you want you can have conference matchups to eliminate teams from the bigger conferences. This would easily give the lower leagues a shot. The winners fill the 7 thru 12 playoff slots.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

Apparently the 16-team model under consideration included a double bye for the #1 and #2 seeds, and a play-in round for #13 through #16 on the same day as the Army-Navy game (which is considered to be sacred and unmovable despite only being played after the conference championship games for less than 20 years). Not sure what happens if Army or Navy finish ranked 13 through 16.

That's dumb. Just have 4 rounds, 1 plays 16, 2 plays 15, etc. (Or have 2 each of 1 through 8 seeds so you can navigate away from rematches.) Guarantee 1 bid for each P4 conference champion (without conference championship games if the conferences will agree, or with them if they won't), and 1 bid saved for the G5. It's an easy fix.

 

[patdog]

Apparently the 16-team model under consideration included a double bye for the #1 and #2 seeds, and a play-in round for #13 through #16 on the same day as the Army-Navy game (which is considered to be sacred and unmovable despite only being played after the conference championship games for less than 20 years). Not sure what happens if Army or Navy finish ranked 13 through 16.

That's dumb. Just have 4 rounds, 1 plays 16, 2 plays 15, etc. (Or have 2 each of 1 through 8 seeds so you can navigate away from rematches.) Guarantee 1 bid for each P4 conference champion (without conference championship games if the conferences will agree, or with them if they won't), and 1 bid saved for the G5. It's an easy fix.

Army & Navy are talking about moving that game to an earlier date. Which I’m not crazy about but I understand why they’re doing it.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

Army & Navy are talking about moving that game to an earlier date. Which I’m not crazy about but I understand why they’re doing it.

They should play it on Thanksgiving since nobody else really wants to (except me as an excuse to skip family events)

 

[Ranchdawg]

I'm not sure how anyone could say the 4 team playoff was better after what we got this year. The 4 team playoff gave us 3 games and multiple teams arguing about how they were incorrectly left out and hanging banners anyway. This year could have been better with some changes but was definitely better than a 4 team playoff. We got 11 games instead of 3. More meaningful football is better. We still had teams crying about being left out but no one hung any banners claiming to be a national champion as the 13 seed. That's better. The results this year showed that maybe those teams being left out of a 4 team playoff had some valid arguments. We had the 5 seed take out the 4 seed, the 6 seed take out the 3 seed, the 10 seed took out the 7 seed, 2 seed, and 6 seed and lost in a good game to the 1 seed. Do your 2, 3, or 4 seeds get out of the first round without a bye, who knows, but they all lost in the second round and all 3 would have been in before the teams they lost to in a 4 team playoff.

I mean really, what is the justification behind saying 4 teams was enough? It really makes no sense.

Last year the top 4 were eliminated in their 1st game. 3 of the top 4 this year.

 

[leeinator]

Doesn't matter how many teams are in the playoff, but if it's determined by a committee of human beings, then it's nothing more than a fashion show.