CFP 5+11 model gaining traction as leaders eye next steps

MisterGopher

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
392
Reaction score
214
Points
43
https://www.espn.com/college-footba...model-gaining-traction-leaders-eye-next-steps

A 16-team College Football Playoff model featuring the top five conference champions and 11 at-large teams is gaining traction following SEC spring meetings this week, but the next step in playoff expansion for 2026 and beyond will depend on how quickly the sport's leaders can make a flurry of decisions.

A critical component is the SEC's choice between staying at eight league games or moving to nine, a topic ACC sources say could be revisited in their league after years of being dormant if prompted by playoff expansion. The linchpin to those scheduling decisions is one thing every conference seems to agree on: the need for clarity about how the CFP selection committee ranks its teams, starting with how strength of schedule is determined and applied.

Currently, strength of schedule is one of several factors not weighed in the committee's ambiguous protocol -- language the FBS commissioners wrote at the inception of the four-team playoff in 2014. There's a sense among some athletic directors in the SEC and ACC that moving to nine conference games is feasible -- if the committee doesn't penalize teams for losing two or three games against strong opponents.

Multiple ACC sources said the conference would prefer a 5+11 model, and Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark has publicly supported it at his league's spring meetings this week.

"It has always been our first choice," Yormark told ESPN. "It's fair and rewards on-field performance. I'm not surprised SEC coaches like it."

The Big 12's administrators agree.

"The construct of the CFP wasn't to give one or two conferences more value. It was supposed to be the best way to conduct a real national championship," UCF athletic director Terry Mohajir said. "I think a 5+11 is the best way to do that, and it gets the best teams in."
 

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...model-gaining-traction-leaders-eye-next-steps

A 16-team College Football Playoff model featuring the top five conference champions and 11 at-large teams is gaining traction following SEC spring meetings this week, but the next step in playoff expansion for 2026 and beyond will depend on how quickly the sport's leaders can make a flurry of decisions.

A critical component is the SEC's choice between staying at eight league games or moving to nine, a topic ACC sources say could be revisited in their league after years of being dormant if prompted by playoff expansion. The linchpin to those scheduling decisions is one thing every conference seems to agree on: the need for clarity about how the CFP selection committee ranks its teams, starting with how strength of schedule is determined and applied.

Currently, strength of schedule is one of several factors not weighed in the committee's ambiguous protocol -- language the FBS commissioners wrote at the inception of the four-team playoff in 2014. There's a sense among some athletic directors in the SEC and ACC that moving to nine conference games is feasible -- if the committee doesn't penalize teams for losing two or three games against strong opponents.

Multiple ACC sources said the conference would prefer a 5+11 model, and Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark has publicly supported it at his league's spring meetings this week.

"It has always been our first choice," Yormark told ESPN. "It's fair and rewards on-field performance. I'm not surprised SEC coaches like it."

The Big 12's administrators agree.

"The construct of the CFP wasn't to give one or two conferences more value. It was supposed to be the best way to conduct a real national championship," UCF athletic director Terry Mohajir said. "I think a 5+11 is the best way to do that, and it gets the best teams in."
Finally, some basic sensibility about the CFP. Working out the number of conference games played and how teams will be ranked is going to be a bit contentious.
 

I think the reason for a push for more auto bids in the 4-4-2-2-1-3 model is because if the big ten locked in a 4 bid minimum they could make a lot of money by doing a 10 game conference schedule….Big 10-SEC challenge…without hurting their chances at bids
 




I think the reason for a push for more auto bids in the 4-4-2-2-1-3 model is because if the big ten locked in a 4 bid minimum they could make a lot of money by doing a 10 game conference schedule….Big 10-SEC challenge…without hurting their chances at bids
If they do go 5+11, the SEC could get a huge number of teams into the playoff every year by not going to a 9th conference game and using the extra game to schedule cupcakes.

(4 teams seem locked into yearly in-state rivalry games with ACC teams, while some newer SEC teams seem to have escaped similar yearly games against in-state rivals in Big 12 teams)

But on the other hand, like you're pointing out here, the SEC can make a lot of money in their conference TV deal by going to a 9th conference game. I think?

Or is that even true? Do the TV partners mostly just care about a premier game or two each week? Which it would seem they could still deliver just fine with 8 conf games? Same could have been argued for the Big Ten, but they went to 9 long ago.


Lot of ins, lot of outs
 

I would love 9 auto bids for conference champs and 7 at larges straight seeded by a formula
Aren't there still 10 FBS conferences? The PAC-12 is going to survive by taking Mountain West teams, which itself is also still going to survive. The CUSA also has managed to survive.
 

Aren't there still 10 FBS conferences? The PAC-12 is going to survive by taking Mountain West teams, which itself is also still going to survive. The CUSA also has managed to survive.
Currently the pac 2 isn’t eligible
In other ncaa sports there is a minimum

I haven’t followed it. Maybe next year there are 10
There were 10 two years ago
I know the pac 2 was adding teams, not sure if they got to the minimum
 

If they do go 5+11, the SEC could get a huge number of teams into the playoff every year by not going to a 9th conference game and using the extra game to schedule cupcakes.

(4 teams seem locked into yearly in-state rivalry games with ACC teams, while some newer SEC teams seem to have escaped similar yearly games against in-state rivals in Big 12 teams)

But on the other hand, like you're pointing out here, the SEC can make a lot of money in their conference TV deal by going to a 9th conference game. I think?

Or is that even true? Do the TV partners mostly just care about a premier game or two each week? Which it would seem they could still deliver just fine with 8 conf games? Same could have been argued for the Big Ten, but they went to 9 long ago.


Lot of ins, lot of outs
The quantity vs quality is an important measure

if they’re worried about quantity dropping, that’s when another expansion happens
 



Currently the pac 2 isn’t eligible
In other ncaa sports there is a minimum

I haven’t followed it. Maybe next year there are 10
There were 10 two years ago
I know the pac 2 was adding teams, not sure if they got to the minimum
They are one school short, as you need 8 full members who play football and they are currently scheduled to be at 8 by 2026-27 but with one of those being Gonzaga. There aren't any great options that seem to be on the table.

There is quite the on-going (legal) saga surrounding all this. For those who care to read more: https://nevadasportsnet.com/news/re...or-the-future-of-the-pac-12-and-mountain-west
 




Top Bottom