forums

Man I would love this

Highline17 said:
The bigger thing he mentions is how difficult and weird it gets with really large conferences and their championships when a lot of the teams don’t play each other. Just cancel the conference championships. Maybe transition to a normal 16 team playoff structure.
Click to expand...
Agree. There shouldn't be conference championship games, since the conference schedules are too unbalanced to reliably deliver the two best teams. This year Big10 & Big12 managed to but the SEC & ACC did not.

Use the final regular season CFP rankings to determine the autobid for the P4 & G5 winners. This year would be: OSU (Big10), UGA (SEC), TTU (Big12), Miami (ACC), & Tulane (G5). I don't think you'd even have to expand the field to 16. You could just put the next 7 highest ranked teams in the final CFP in, or you could do play in games (really playoff expansion to 14 teams) for say the final 2 bids, like they do for the worst teams in the basketball tourney now.

So the field would look something like:

Autobids: OSU/UGA/TTU/MIAMI/Tulane (5)
At-large: Indiana/Oregon/Ole Miss/TAMU/Oklahoma/Bama/ND (7)

Or, w/play-in:
At-large: IU/UO/Ole Miss/TAMU/OU
Play-ins: Bama vs Texas & ND vs BYU

Top 4 seeds would still get a bye (OSU/IU/UGA/TTU).
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Highline17 said:
It doesn’t operate as play in traditionally does. It just operates as a full expansion of the playoff, just make it a regular 16 team format.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t for the top 4 teams. You should be rewarded for being a top 4 team not punished for with other teams getting to rest. Also this would keep teams from playing soft schedule. Texas lost 3 games but should be rewarded for being Ohio state on the schedule. If they never played them they would be in the playoffs this year.
 
The bottom line is conference championships just don’t mean what they used to. It’s all about getting to the playoff and trying to win it. The immediate goal until they get rid of those is to do away with the automatic bids…nobody likes it. Also, no offense to the G5, but until they possibly expand the field they got to go. It’s absolutely insane that teams like Tulane, North Texas, and James Madison are being discussed while teams like Miami, Vanderbilt, and Texas are sitting at home.
 
From a conference POV what I don’t understand is how you don’t put your best team forward like March Madness does. That's why cfp rankings no matter the argument against it should dominate the conversation Ima conf tie breaker
 
canesstevealum08 said:
From a conference POV what I don’t understand is how you don’t put your best team forward like March Madness does. That's why cfp rankings no matter the argument against it should dominate the conversation Ima conf tie breaker
Click to expand...
Well, in basketball it makes more sense to include these smaller schools in the tournament because all you need is 1-2 good players and you can make a run. Plus, the 3-point shot can neutralize a more talented team if you get hot from three. In football, there’s no way a team like James Madison can “neutralize” an Ohio St. or Georgia. They’re going to get dominated at the line of scrimmage and the smaller schools don’t have the depth to compete. That’s why it’s silly to me when people defend these smaller schools being in the CFP. It’s crazy to even try to compare the two. It’s also 64 teams compared to 12 so there’s just no room for them in the current construction.
 
Eliminate the g5 deal all together by just ranking everyone straight up no conference championship winner auto bid. The game can help you get in. It will still matter. And if they still want the conference to matter they need to partner with the p4 conferences and give each one an auto bid of their choosing
 
DoctorKrazey said:
Well, in basketball it makes more sense to include these smaller schools in the tournament because all you need is 1-2 good players and you can make a run. Plus, the 3-point shot can neutralize a more talented team if you get hot from three. In football, there’s no way a team like James Madison can “neutralize” an Ohio St. or Georgia. They’re going to get dominated at the line of scrimmage and the smaller schools don’t have the depth to compete. That’s why it’s silly to me when people defend these smaller schools being in the CFP. It’s crazy to even try to compare the two. It’s also 64 teams compared to 12 so there’s just no room for them in the current construction.
Click to expand...
Oh no I was referring more to the ACC using the college football playoff rankings as a tiebreaker that way the conference could put its best foot forward
 
Back
Top