12-team college football postseason officially approved

Donate To GopherHole

Gophers_4life said:
Disagree. What is your reasoning?
Click to expand...

My understanding is divisions are going away? Is this confirmed? I imagine a rejiggering is coming regardless with the additional teams. My understanding is conferences will select what they perceive as the two best teams for the championship game, not necessarily based on record or head to head results?

The CFP committee will surely select at least two each of Big Ten and SEC teams for CFP (one champion and one wild card) as these conferences dominate the top 10-15 polls year in and year out. Maybe three, four from one or the other.

Dropping a game, a head to head, or losing the conference championship game has little to no postseason eligibility effect under this format. The tension is gone. It’s silly. Look at the CFP last year. Georgia allegedly conspired with Alabama to throw the SEC championship game to keep other conferences out. Silly.

I also have to endure the CFP committee nonsense. Twisting reality to their choices, making up metrics, and so on. Why should I care what an athletic director thinks. I’ll ask the guy down at the gas station and get an equally valid answer.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
My understanding is divisions are going away? Is this confirmed? I imagine a rejiggering is coming regardless with the additional teams. My understanding is conferences will select what they perceive as the two best teams for the championship game, not necessarily based on record or head to head results?

The CFP committee will surely select at least two each of Big Ten and SEC teams for CFP (one champion and one wild card) as these conferences dominate the top 10-15 polls year in and year out. Maybe three, four from one or the other.

Dropping a game, a head to head, or losing the conference championship game has little to no postseason eligibility effect under this format. The tension is gone. It’s silly. Look at the CFP last year. Georgia allegedly conspired with Alabama to throw the SEC championship game to keep other conferences out. Silly.

I also have to endure the CFP committee nonsense. Twisting reality to their choices, making up metrics, and so on. Why should I care what an athletic director thinks. I’ll ask the guy down at the gas station and get an equally valid answer.
Click to expand...
Your whole post basically boils down to "selection/placement into the post-season isn't entirely automatic and predictable, like it is in the NFL".

Well ... no, it's not. There are 131 teams in the FBS. It's never going to be that neat and orderly, and at some level arbitrary decisions are going to have to be made.


That doesn't mean it won't be interesting at all. I think quite the opposite, but that's me.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Your whole post basically boils down to "selection/placement into the post-season isn't entirely automatic and predictable, like it is in the NFL".

Well ... no, it's not. There are 131 teams in the FBS. It's never going to be that neat and orderly, and at some level arbitrary decisions are going to have to be made.


That doesn't mean it won't be interesting at all. I think quite the opposite, but that's me.
Click to expand...

The bickering over who’s best based on eye test honestly bores me. There can never be any resolution until…games get played.

My preference: each conference equals an NFL division. If you want to throw a bone to G5 allow top ranked G5 champion. Every game matters. Conference races are de facto lead-in brackets. The only tricky part is determining first round byes. By conference in prior year championship participants, lottery, polls.

Lets be very honest - the only reason they adopted this format was the spreadsheet indicated increased tv revenue for SEC and BIG TEN and the others will get a seat at the table. Fine, but I don’t have to like it just from a pure sports and competition perspective.


JMHO.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
The bickering over who’s best based on eye test honestly bores me. There can never be any resolution until…games get played.

My preference: each conference equals an NFL division. If you want to throw a bone to G5 allow top ranked G5 champion. Every game matters. Conference races are de facto lead-in brackets. The only tricky part is determining first round byes. By conference in prior year championship participants, lottery, polls.

Lets be very honest - the only reason they adopted this format was the spreadsheet indicated increased tv revenue for SEC and BIG TEN and the others will get a seat at the table. Fine, but I don’t have to like it just from a pure sports and competition perspective.


JMHO.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply.

I'm not seeing where your criteria would produce something considerably different. Could you mock-up what your post-season bracket would look like based on 2021 season?
 


Gophers_4life said:
Thanks for the reply.

I'm not seeing where your criteria would produce something considerably different. Could you mock-up what your post-season bracket would look like based on 2021 season?
Click to expand...

The difference in my scenario is conference runner ups and also-rans are locked out of the CFP instead of given second chances.

I can see the angle that inclusion of more teams could generate more interest late in the season - and more games (and tv sales numbers). But, using that logic we should move to Mike Leach’s 64 team tournament. Mo Money. Maybe that’s the next step, in all seriousness….
 

Pompous Elitist said:
The bickering over who’s best based on eye test honestly bores me. There can never be any resolution until…games get played.

My preference: each conference equals an NFL division. If you want to throw a bone to G5 allow top ranked G5 champion. Every game matters. Conference races are de facto lead-in brackets. The only tricky part is determining first round byes. By conference in prior year championship participants, lottery, polls.

Lets be very honest - the only reason they adopted this format was the spreadsheet indicated increased tv revenue for SEC and BIG TEN and the others will get a seat at the table. Fine, but I don’t have to like it just from a pure sports and competition perspective.


JMHO.
Click to expand...
So were you not interested in cfb pre bcs?
 


btowngopher said:
So were you not interested in cfb pre bcs?
Click to expand...

I was but followed the NFL more. To answer your question FBS has never had a satisfactory national championship selection process. I am not a fan of polls. They almost got it right here but overshot IMO.

Based on the responses I’m getting maybe I’m not explaining my opinion properly.
 



The problem with the playoff debate is that most people fail to recognize that FBS is (unofficially) but very practically split-up into two distinct leagues.

There are the 50-60 programs that earn revenue of about 50mm+/ year. Those are the programs that actually may have the resources to be competitive. (And those 50-60 teams all play each other 8+ times/year.)

Then there’s the next 70-80 programs. They may have an interesting team once in a blue moon. But they all play each other 10 times/year. They will likely only play 1-2 teams from that group of 50 that is well-resourced, and they demand huge money to travel to those environments.

People want to create a playoff that accommodates two very separate and distinct leagues. Then throw-in the odd agenda of Notre Dame, and have all decisions be made subjectively by a weird committee representing a myriad of agendas that have nothing to do with football. It won’t work.
 
Last edited:


Pompous Elitist said:
The difference in my scenario is conference runner ups and also-rans are locked out of the CFP instead of given second chances.

I can see the angle that inclusion of more teams could generate more interest late in the season - and more games (and tv sales numbers). But, using that logic we should move to Mike Leach’s 64 team tournament. Mo Money. Maybe that’s the next step, in all seriousness….
Click to expand...
OK, I see now. So just conference champions are allowed.

That's valid, I just think TV networks laugh at that and say no way. So roughly what you brought up.
 

btowngopher said:
Any format devalues the regular season. The regular season had peak value pre bcs and has gone down with each playoff expansion.
Click to expand...
Definitely disagree.

More regular season games matter, when more teams have a chance to make it
 



Gophers_4life said:
OK, I see now. So just conference champions are allowed.

That's valid, I just think TV networks laugh at that and say no way. So roughly what you brought up.
Click to expand...
The more conference championships matter to seeding and selection the less an expanded playoff devalues the regular season.

Expanding to 6 conference champions doesn’t devalue the regular season it actually enhances it. Expanding to 6 at larges devalues the regular season.

I liked a 12 team model if all outright conference champions in the top 25 got an auto bid (so this number could flex between probably 5-10 bids) and the rest converting to at larges (between 2-7 at largest probably depending on the year)
This would leave room for all conference to have a conference champ go unbeaten and get in PLUS an independent go unbeaten and get in. Nobody could ever be left it if they had a legitimate argument to get in (we are unbeaten)

With 6 conference champs getting in, I wish they had only expanded to 8. Because I do think having the third or fourth place SEC or Big Ten get in is stupid.
 

Hasn't Alabama won the whole thing without even making it to the SEC championship game?

That's their argument for including "3rd place" teams. Also, without division formats, it is possible to have three very good teams in a conference who don't play each other (as you've brought up numerous times before).


So, I think three from Big Ten and/or SEC is valid, potentially. After that is where I'm not so sure.

But clearly they (TV, the powers that be, etc.) would like to have 4 from the Big Ten and SEC every year, for the best ratings.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Hasn't Alabama won the whole thing without even making it to the SEC championship game?

That's their argument for including "3rd place" teams. Also, without division formats, it is possible to have three very good teams in a conference who don't play each other (as you've brought up numerous times before).


So, I think three from Big Ten and/or SEC is valid, potentially. After that is where I'm not so sure.

But clearly they (TV, the powers that be, etc.) would like to have 4 from the Big Ten and SEC every year, for the best ratings.
Click to expand...
Correct. This is really a gateway to a 16 team playoff with auto bids for the 7-9 conference that remain after everyone poaches everyone


And the big ten and sec with combine to have almost all the at large bids.

It will be kind of what the Missouri valley, big sky, and colonial do to FCS
 

Devil’s advocate regarding seeding what happens if a lower ranked team, say, I don’t know, #10 Minnesota from West Division defeats a #1 ranked Ohio State from the East in the conference championship. We know head to head doesn’t matter for setting poll rankings. We also know MN would probably not vault Michigan or Penn State that might be (hypothetically) sitting at something #4 or #6. So MN ends up #7 or #5 or somewhere in that area, Ohio State #3 or #5 or something like that going into the CFP.

Where are they seeded. Strict conference order, or CFP committee logic sarcasm). Does record factor in? Head to head? MN highest Big Ten seed, or not. If there are home field games that seems significant.

This has significant tongue in cheek factor. Arguing about this stuff makes my eyes glaze.
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist said:
Devil’s advocate regarding seeding what happens if a lower ranked team, say, I don’t know, #10 Minnesota from West Division defeats a #1 ranked Ohio State from the East in the conference championship. We know head to head doesn’t matter for setting poll rankings. We also know MN would probably not vault Michigan or Penn State that might be (hypothetically) sitting at something #4 or #6. So MN ends up #7 or #5 or somewhere in that area going into the CFP.

Where are they seeded. Strict conference order, or CFP committee logic sarcasm). MN highest Big Ten seed, or not.
Click to expand...

Per the proposed rules stated earlier, the top 6 conference champions get an auto bid and the top 4 ranked champions get a bye. It's hard to believe the Big 10 champion wouldn't get a first round bye.
 

Panthadad2 said:
Per the proposed rules stated earlier, the top 6 conference champions get an auto bid and the top 4 ranked champions get a bye. It's hard to believe the Big 10 champion wouldn't get a first round bye.
Click to expand...

Ok, I wasn’t aware they had arrived at the format yet. I thought the presidents just said 12 teams, make it work. Your idea makes more sense to me. It will probably make SEC and Big Ten fans howl if say, the toothless PAC 12 champion eg Oregon gets a first round bye - but I like it.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Ok, I wasn’t aware they had arrived at the format yet. I thought the presidents just said 12 teams, make it work. Your idea makes more sense to me. It will probably make SEC and Big Ten fans howl if say, the toothless PAC 12 champion eg Oregon gets a first round bye - but I like it.
Click to expand...

Even in the off chance a 2-loss BG10 team wins the conference championship game (assuming that game still gets played), which could theoretically get them a 5th or 6th conference champion ranking, I would think the conference champion would still host a first round game.
 

Panthadad2 said:
Per the proposed rules stated earlier, the top 6 conference champions get an auto bid and the top 4 ranked champions get a bye. It's hard to believe the Big 10 champion wouldn't get a first round bye.
Click to expand...

This has probably already been mentioned but Notre Dame will never get a first round bye. I like it. Notre Dame has leadership inertia right now. It might take new blood to make the marriage finally happen.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
This has probably already been mentioned but Notre Dame will never get a first round bye. I like it. Notre Dame has leadership inertia right now. It might take new blood to make the marriage finally happen.
Click to expand...

Goph4Life made that good point earlier in the thread and commented how Notre Dame might not mind playing a first round game at home (below):

12-team college football postseason officially approved

What they are asking the commissioners to do is the 6 conference champions and 6 at-large. Agreed This kills the emerging super-conference model. And it completely ends any further conference realignment (or serious discussion of ND joining a conference). How so? Conferences are expanding...
gopherhole.com gopherhole.com
 

Panthadad2 said:
Even in the off chance a 2-loss BG10 team wins the conference championship game (assuming that game still gets played), which could theoretically get them a 5th or 6th conference champion ranking, I would think the conference champion would still host a first round game.
Click to expand...

Is it set in stone the CFP brackets will be played at higher seed home stadiums? Or will Final Four and championship remain as today.

This is a seismic shift from neutral site top tier bowls. Maybe new “traditions” will start.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Is it set in stone the CFP brackets will be played at higher seed home stadiums? Or will Final Four and championship remain as today.

This is a seismic shift from neutral site top tier bowls. Maybe new “traditions” will start.
Click to expand...

Re-posting the Tweet that lays out the proposal. See #4.

 

Panthadad2 said:
Goph4Life made that good point earlier in the thread and commented how Notre Dame might not mind playing a first round game at home (below):

12-team college football postseason officially approved

What they are asking the commissioners to do is the 6 conference champions and 6 at-large. Agreed This kills the emerging super-conference model. And it completely ends any further conference realignment (or serious discussion of ND joining a conference). How so? Conferences are expanding...
gopherhole.com gopherhole.com
Click to expand...

Depending on the year Notre Dame plays a tougher schedule than some other blue bloods so I’d be ok with that. I think a first round bye is valuable, though. Injury, prep time considerations. Better path to championship game.
 

Panthadad2 said:
Re-posting the Tweet that lays out the proposal. See #4.

Click to expand...

Oof. Thanks for posting this. I see a lot of CFP committee influence. For the first round games some way, some how the matchups will be seeded/arranged to avoid having southern teams travel north, or for tv rating considerations.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Definitely disagree.

More regular season games matter, when more teams have a chance to make it
Click to expand...
When non conference games are meaningless you eliminated much of the season. When teams aren’t eliminated from conference contention until later in the season you eliminated another large portion of the season. When winning big non conference matchups offers little value, you no longer have big non conference matchups being scheduled. The chance to make a big playoff isn’t that riveting compared to watching each week to see who has improved their standing for a championship, or who’s hopes have taken a major blow.
 

I think the regular season will still matter. If MN is playing IA, it matters, regardless of whether the teams are in contention for a conference title or playoff berth. the conferences will still have rivalries and tradition to promote.

on the plus side, an early loss does not end the season. or if a key player is injured early, there is still hope that a 2-loss team could make it into the playoffs, get healthy, and have a shot to do something.

one more thought - I see people saying this "ends" conference expansion. one response: MONEY.
so ND can make $60 million as an independent or $90 million in the B1G. Is ND going to say, we don't need that extra $30 million. Our independence is more important. I wonder. I suspect that a 2-loss team in a major conference might make the playoffs over a 2-loss independent.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I think the regular season will still matter. If MN is playing IA, it matters, regardless of whether the teams are in contention for a conference title or playoff berth. the conferences will still have rivalries and tradition to promote.

on the plus side, an early loss does not end the season. or if a key player is injured early, there is still hope that a 2-loss team could make it into the playoffs, get healthy, and have a shot to do something.

one more thought - I see people saying this "ends" conference expansion. one response: MONEY.
so ND can make $60 million as an independent or $90 million in the B1G. Is ND going to say, we don't need that extra $30 million. Our independence is more important. I wonder. I suspect that a 2-loss team in a major conference might make the playoffs over a 2-loss independent.
Click to expand...

Yep, I don’t know how the money will be allocated but the expanded playoff might push postseason tv distributions for SEC and BIG TEN to stratospheric heights as they will each have 2-4 entrants each year and multiple additional high viewership games. OTOH Notre Dame, should they make the playoff most years, will be able to keep their full share of CFP money instead of having to share. Might be a wash, or support Notre Dame independence depending on the numbers. Father Jenkins is squinting at a spreadsheet as we speak.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom