Question about this 24 [playoff] team absurdity.

[RVACane]

Maybe top to bottom. But the SEC would be wise to cash out while they are ahead. This isn't the SEC of 5yrs ago. They haven't played for the title in 3yrs while the ACC/ND did twice. NIL has changed the landscape. Another 5yrs TT and SMU oil money will be ahead of GA and AL. And I'm talking about a Big 12 that includes TX, A&M, TT, SMU, ASU, USC and UCLA.

This is what I’m talking about - all this. I get pelted with tomatoes here for wanting us to go to the B12. I don’t see the sec and B1G schools in your group leaving those conferences but I’d love to be wrong. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would be perfect there as well.

 

[JHallCanes]

Just make it 12 and don’t give participation trophy spots to G5 teams. If there’s a great G5 team there’s a committee that’s supposed to be smart enough to add them

Notre Dame and Texas last year would have created a **** of a playoff (it still was really)

Had that happened I suppose they would always still want more teams (ratings and money are undefeated and I get that) but seemed like that kicked this obsession with more teams in to high gear because big names were butthurt

 

[U got This]

Except the ncaa isn’t involved in the CFB playoffs

Thanks for this. Thought Ncaa got some piece of the pie, but see that the CFP and NCAA are not in the same boat with the distribution of money. . The ripple effect of nil.

 

[caneingville]

Thanks for this. Thought Ncaa got some piece of the pie, but see that the CFP and NCAA are not in the same boat with the distribution of money. . The ripple effect of nil.

Yeah the NCAA screwed up big time by not getting involved decades ago like they did with basketball and developing a playoff system. Now the networks control everything. We could have maintained some parity and certainty the rivalries, I suspect. On the other hand, maybe things would have been worse for us. Who knows.

Whatever happens, I just want the teams that make it into the CFP to have earned it. I hate the idea of any conferences getting more bids than another, because each season is different. And I still think the G5 should be split off, since it’s not fair that they aren’t playing for anything. After that, I don’t care how many teams. Just figure out what’s important first, then figure out how many teams make sense for a playoff.

They’re doing this all backwards.

 

[U got This]

Yeah the NCAA screwed up big time by not getting involved decades ago like they did with basketball and developing a playoff system. Now the networks control everything. We could have maintained some parity and certainty the rivalries, I suspect. On the other hand, maybe things would have been worse for us. Who knows.

Whatever happens, I just want the teams that make it into the CFP to have earned it. I hate the idea of any conferences getting more bids than another, because each season is different. And I still think the G5 should be split off, since it’s not fair that they aren’t playing for anything. After that, I don’t care how many teams. Just figure out what’s important first, then figure out how many teams make sense for a playoff.

They’re doing this all backwards.

Yea the sense of no direction is truly a aggravating cluster fluck now that we are here, but i def love the chaos it caused that put end to the blind eye mark Emmert was doing to other teams.

But it will be interesting to see how the ship gets navigated

 

[Stingarov]

16 teams is fine.

24 is "why bother with the regular season" territory.

 

[U2Cane]

Wouldnt 24 pretty much ensure Miami a spot every season? Realistically, now that Mario really has the program turned around where it should be consistently, seems to me we are a perennial top 25 team barring a total collapse one season. Plus an expanded pool eliminates the bias vs us. Im for 24.

 

[DrewZ2]

I can get onboard with 16. Reduces the impact of the worthless selection committee.

What I wish they’d really do is an open, clear cut formula to score teams and take the top 11 plus G5 (have to take G5 to not get sued)

With an open formula, everyone knows where they stand and it eliminates the coaches, ADs and others politicking for playoff spots at the end of the year. Also gets rid of the committee BS

 

[cookies]

Big Ten's Tony Petitti stumps for 24-team CFP, says 16 hard no

Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti on Tuesday gave his first extensive public comments in support of a 24-team College Football Playoff model, making it clear the league has no interest in pursuing a 16-team format.

www.espn.com

 

[passitback]

Boo ******* hoo with the teams that miss the cut. I remember when the best team in America got ****ed out of the BCS Championship. I remember it clearly. I am still upset about it, and hope others feel that pain.

**** this 24 team model.

 

[cookies]

Teams seeded No. 1-8 would earn a bye and a home game. The top two teams earn "the best path all the way through." And the bottom teams are constantly trying to stay in the field.

"At 24 you're always trying to improve your résumé," he said. "So if you're somewhere between 16 and 24, 25, the last week of the season, you've got to protect your spot. That's No. 1. If you're somewhere between 17 or 18, you're trying to get in between eight and 16 so you can get a home game. Home games are really valuable, right? So that last game you're playing, I don't understand the resting idea, because you're not ever safely in one spot. This isn't the Philadelphia Eagles who know the last week of the season whether they win or not, they can't improve their seed or make it worse."

For the first time, Petitti also publicly laid out specific counterpoints to a 16-team model.

Petitti said he doesn't think the economics of a 16-team field are feasible because conference championship games would likely still be eliminated, and he didn't think the playoff games would compensate for the lost revenue.

Petitti said he only sees two ways a 16-team playoff works: all 16 teams play the first round with no byes, and that decreases motivation to play in a conference championship game without the winner earning a bye. Or, he said, the bracket could feature the top two teams earning first-round byes and No. 16 would face No. 13, No. 15 vs. 14, etc.

This secondary idea of a playin round and the top 2 seeds getting byes was a nonstarter for the ACC, XII, and Notre Dame.

Without conference championship games, Petitti said the Power 4 conferences would lose collectively more than $200 million of championship game revenue.

"I just don't think it works economically," he said. "I don't think it works schedulingwise as well. I think it doesn't create enough new inventory. And then the last piece, I don't think it gets enough access."

 

[miamimike305]

Just make it 12 and don’t give participation trophy spots to G5 teams. If there’s a great G5 team there’s a committee that’s supposed to be smart enough to add them

Notre Dame and Texas last year would have created a **** of a playoff (it still was really)

Had that happened I suppose they would always still want more teams (ratings and money are undefeated and I get that) but seemed like that kicked this obsession with more teams in to high gear because big names were butthurt

Had this happened, Indiana wouldn't have had the easiest road to the title. We had a gauntlet.

 

[TomAce]

My hope is that going to 24 would allow for more marque OOC games during the regular season because potential losses would be mitigated. 9 conference games, plus two P4 conference games and one at either G6 or FCS. To me, that would help to save the meaning of the regular season

 

[cookies]

MegaBoard - B1G Already Talking About Going To 10 Conference Games Once CFP Expanded To 24

MegaBoard - Per Ross Dellenger on the latest College Football Enquirer from yesterday. Makes a lot of sense, especially from key stakeholders’ perspectives. Also, Andy Staples did an excellent job of refuting Stewart Mandel’s repeated lies about “well Fox didn’t want to pay a lot for the 12 team...

www.on3.com

Andy Staples and Ross Dellenger said contrary to popular belief of a pressure campaign by the B1G and XII being the reason the SEC went from 8 to 9 conference games; the increase was because the SEC wanted better games to sell.

Andy doesn’t believe in the Fox’s CEO theory that a 24 team playoff will create more prominent out of conference games at the beginning of the schedule. ADs still don’t want to add another potential loss on their résumés.

So, if the playoff expands to 24 teams, and no universal agreement about needing 2 OOC P4 games amongst the Power 4 pops up, they believe the B1G’s discussion about moving to a 10 game conference schedule model to be a very legitimate possibility because FOX is not satisfied with the noon games they’re getting from the XII and B1G while their contract does not allow for Fox to get a better choice of the games.

Both guys prefer a 9 game conference schedule with 2 OOC games guaranteed — as do I. This move would actively decrease G6 teams matching up with P4 teams; however, they’d, meaning the G6, still have a single guaranteed spot within the 24 team playoff.

 

[cookies]

My hope is that going to 24 would allow for more marque OOC games during the regular season because potential losses would be mitigated. 9 conference games, plus two P4 conference games and one at either G6 or FCS. To me, that would help to save the meaning of the regular season

100000000% agree.

 

[cookies]

A CBS Sports survey of SEC head coaches and athletic directors -- conducted on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue ahead of Destin -- reveals a conference that does not speak with one voice on the future of the playoff. Some support the 16-team position Sankey has publicly defended for more than a year. Others want the 24-team model the Big Ten is pushing. Another group advocates for a middle path that starts at 16 and expands to 24 within a few seasons.

And so is uncertainty.

Among athletic directors who took a position, at least three support a 24-team field. At least three more said they would start at 16 and expand to 24, a compromise the Big Ten and SEC discussed last year but opted not to pursue.

One AD said they preferred 16 but were open to 24 if the economics worked. Three said they preferred 16 with no commitment to further expansion. One said they were unsure but supported expansion in some form.

Among head coaches who took a position, at least three supported 24. Two said they would support either 16 or 24. Two said they preferred 16 but would accept 24 under certain scheduling conditions. Two said they preferred 16. One said they were indifferent. Two were undecided.

The fault line does not run cleanly along program prestige, geography or competitive pedigree. In multiple cases, an athletic director and that school's head coach are not in alignment, with one favoring 24 and the other favoring 16.