forums

MEGA 2026 CFB SZN Thread, Nationwide; Non-Miami Specific

cookies said:


Click to expand...

This is confusing. Like are these saying 16/20 is INCLUDING the play-in teams, or that is the amount AFTER the play in game?

The logical solution is we should keep the current 12 team another year or two. Then remove the 4 major Conference Champ games and replace those with 4 play-in games. So then you have 12 teams “in” the cfp, with the 4 play-in games between 8 bubble teams. And the G5 have to be bubble teams, not auto-in. And the winners of those 4 games form the now 16team playoff with no byes. That seems reasonable to me. But there should be no further expansion after that unless there is a legit 48ish team Super League.
 
Calinative said:
This is confusing. Like are these saying 16/20 is INCLUDING the play-in teams, or that is the amount AFTER the play in game?

The logical solution is we should keep the current 12 team another year or two. Then remove the 4 major Conference Champ games and replace those with 4 play-in games. So then you have 12 teams “in” the cfp, with the 4 play-in games between 8 bubble teams. And the G5 have to be bubble teams, not auto-in. And the winners of those 4 games form the now 16team playoff with no byes. That seems reasonable to me. But there should be no further expansion after that unless there is a legit 48ish team Super League.
Click to expand...
The B1G does not support this proposal; they support a 24 team playoff so Fox can get games; which means this idea was proposed by ESPN and the SEC.

ESPN cannot have the playoffs expand beyond 16 teams and still maintain exclusive media rights. So despite Josh Pate saying Greg Sankey is the only one opposing this, he’s wrong and dumb for even coming to that conclusion; but that shows you where his info is coming from.

Anyways, Pate did give us some information into what the format would be. So what i inferred is that the top 12 would be picked by the committee, and instead of conference championships, the best 2 teams, who were left out of the top 12, in each p4 conference would go against each other at a neutral location (assuming same locales as CCGs) in a playin contest.

Now, that presents a problem for all the G6 schools. Would they have an automatic spot in the 12? Would they be blocked from playoff contention altogether? Who knows. I doubt it on my 2nd question; so i feel like they’d have an automatic spot but they’d need to figure out their own postseason plan i.e. still do conference championships or not.

In theory, last year would’ve had:

Texas vs Vanderbilt

Utah vs Houston (somehow was ranked lower by the committee than 9-3 Arizona who they beat H2H but I’d assume they’d fix this stuff if it was actually consequential like us vs ND)

USC vs Michigan

UVA vs GT; or Miami vs UVA if there is an automatic G6 spot. How Miami vs Alabama vs BYU vs ND all would’ve been ranked in this kind of format we’ll never know, but we finished 12th before the conference championship games so this is all theoretical c’est la vie.
 
www.espn.com

College football changes include tweaks to targeting, OPI rules

Targeting penalties in the second half will no longer require the offending player to sit out the first half of the next game, and OPI will become a 10-yard penalty.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

Two replay challenges: The head coach will now have two replay challenges per game. If a coach wins at least one of their first two challenges, they are awarded a third challenge. A challenge can be made only if the team has a timeout remaining and available; if the challenge is successful, the team's timeout will not be charged.
Click to expand...


IMG_6038.jpeg
 
In a change to align Division I rules with those in the NFL and high school, a team could choose to attempt a fair catch kick after a completed or awarded fair catch. The kick would be a place kick with a holder or a drop kick from the spot where the returner caught the ball. The defense would be at least 10 yards from the spot of the kick.

If the ensuing kick goes through the uprights, it would be worth three points.

The rarely used play last came up in the NFL in 2024 when the Los Angeles Chargers' Cameron ****er converted from 57 yards against the Denver Broncos
Click to expand...
We need Key and Peele back.
Unsportsmanlike conduct: An automatic unsportsmanlike conduct penalty will be called if a player initiates any of these five actions or gestures: any act of simulating the brandishing of a weapon; slashing of the throat or a nose wipe signal; removing helmet after the ball is dead (with exceptions for timeouts and equipment adjustments); dead-ball contact fouls, such as pushing, shoving, striking, etc., that occur clearly after the ball is dead and that are not part of the game action; using forcible contact to push or pull an opponent off the pile after the ball is dead.
Click to expand...
 
The notion was a surprise to almost everyone on a Monday videoconference of the CFP management committee (made up of 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame’s athletic director), said sources who were on the call.
Click to expand...
The 20-team format wasn’t on the agenda, and it only came up after one participant inquired about an X post from college football media personality Josh Pate, who wrote on Sunday that the idea was percolating. Discussion of the matter during Monday’s meeting was brief and dismissed, as the agenda instead focused on potential CFP expansion to 16 and 24 teams. But those conversations didn’t advance much, either.

The belief is that ESPN — the exclusive broadcast rights holder for CFP and SEC games — could be interested in the 20-team compromise rather than the 24-team model favored by the Big Ten.

The 20-team idea was not a new one — it’s one of numerous models the group has seen for more than a year — but it had not been seriously discussed, including at the group’s in-person meeting in Denver in June. It was also considered more of a 16-team hybrid by people aware of it, rather than a 20-team format.
Click to expand...

www.nytimes.com

Plan for 20-team CFP draws confusion and dismissal from commissioners

Under the idea, the first 12 CFP berths would be guaranteed, while eight more teams would vie for the final four spots in play-in games.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
However, this concept creates several obstacles.

For one, the Big Ten doesn’t like it, which is partly why Monday’s conversation went nowhere. The Big Ten and SEC hold the power to determine the next format and have yet to reach an agreement after more than a year.

Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti said in May that his league was solely focused on a 24-team model. He reiterated last month the league had moved beyond last year’s 16-team conversation, which could have included intraconference play-in games. Petitti’s selling point on 24 has been increased access to the postseason, as schools spend greater sums on rosters. Despite not having voting power, the ACC and Big 12 have also expressed support for 24 for the same reason.

Then there’s the financial aspect. Conference championship games are worth more than $200 million to the conferences in broadcast rights fees, so any additional playoff rounds that replace them would need to more than make up for that amount. A 24-team CFP would naturally have more games to sell than a 20-team model.
Click to expand...

But the mood coming out of Monday’s meeting was that a 20-team model will not be taken seriously. The SEC and Big Ten remain far apart.

If the two leagues cannot agree on a new format by Dec. 1 (or an extended deadline), the 2027 playoff would maintain the current 12-team model. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said earlier this year that he expected conversations around expansion to continue into the fall before reaching a resolution. After yet another CFP meeting without major decisions, the fall approaches.
Click to expand...
 
skyman said:
Espn didnt even tell the B1G commish lol.. They only want 24 to reset the tv rights so their partner who ****ed up first time around and passed, can get in on action.. 24 is soo ridiculous but thats only way they get in..
Click to expand...
I’m in favor of 24 but if it expands at all it’ll be 24. If not it’ll stay at 12 which is cool with me too.

Coaches don’t like the CCGs and they’re losing relevancy except for the SEC’s.

This 4 playin game format for a “16-team playoffs,” really isn’t that far off from the 24 team proposal; except it’ll make less money and maintain espn’s de facto monopoly over the CFP.

In both versions, you have to win 4 games minimum, 5 games maximum, to win it all. It’s just about shifting how exclusive that bye week is for each format.

Indiana only had to win 3 but they played against OSU in the CCG which makes 4. In both versions below, the CCGs are eliminated.

Top 12 teams get a bye, 8 teams in a playin. With playins kinda replacing the p4 CCGs.

Or

Top 8 teams get a bye, and first round of playoffs is 8 games to determine who plays the top 8.

Imo the latter solves the issue of OOC scheduling so Texas isn’t scared to play tech and uf with miami or Indiana with ND — in theory —, makes up revenue for the cancellation of CCGs, and still allows for bowl season but stops them all from being unimportant or draft pick opt out type games as Texas, Michigan, usc etc all would’ve been in first round games last year.
 
Back
Top