I hope that doesn't happen only because it would be completely redundant. The top 3 sec teams in the standings are what ended up in the CFP this year. To have TN play AL and SC play OM in a play in tournament after they've already played and beat eachother to determine those standings in the first place would be pointless.
Lol, if it adds another game (more money) it is not pointless, in fact, it is the only point that matters. More games = more money, that is all they care about
@newsnowcarolina6409 but then if they don't play in the regular season then what's the point in having a conference, it just goes down a rabbit hole. I don't agree with Pate on the 4 team playoff because of an undefeated Florida state team and an undefeated regular season georgia getting left out, that just can't happen. So just seed top 12 regardless of conference, top 4 get a bye. The rest will sort itself but the powers at be won't allow that.
GA beat Texas in the regular season then played again in the SEC champ game. It happens already. It would also put a huge emphasis on winning to get in.
Agreed. Texas lost the game and UGA lost its QB. All downside. 16-17 games is too much for these kids especially when they are bashing their heads in against the best teams in the country all season.
In the suggested scenario, the games would mean more. They're all trying to qualify for the play-in, but at the same time the argument of which team should receive the 3rd & 4th pick would be moot. The idea of eliminating the CCG as well would be unfortunate.
@@RoadTo19 I like the conference championships, but watching them this year, I didn't not feel like they mattered when the teams that played could just play each other again in a few weeks. And there is all this talk about not punishing teams for playing in them, but you can certainly reward the team that wins, but not punish the loser. That's just crazy. If you have 2 teams playing each other and they are both getting into the playoff, the game is pointless, just a chance for players to get hurt like Georgia's QB.
This whole "play in" business is the dumbest solution I've heard yet. As a Georgia fan, I don't want to get rid of the SEC championship. That diminishes the conference itself
Keep conference championships and use them as an award to be able to move up in rankings while everyone else is stagnant. If you lose the conference championship you also stay stagnant. Top four get a bye
@user-tz2zz5ij1s I mostly agree with you. But you can't move someone up without moving someone down. But I get it. Someone shouldn't drop drastically if they don't play. They also shouldn't get rewarded for not playing
@@matthewsharpe393the reality would be only 4 P4 teams would have the chance to move up, and 1 G5 team. I’m also in favor of no auto bid G5, they can earn it like Boise State did this year. Everyone else stays stagnant unless the are jumped by the conference champion moving up. I wouldn’t imagine a conference champ moving up 10 slots. This has been an oddball year with the B1G top teams pretty spaced out and cleaner records while the SEC just devoured themselves. I just wonder is this going to be the norm going forward. Once USC and Michigan get back to where they should be, there will be some B1G devouring itself and having sloppier records. It’s definitely a new age in college football, but end of the year I just want to see the 12 best teams in the CFP.
@@user-tz2zz5ij1s So no auto-bids for the G5, even tho the most controversial auto-bid is from the ACC this year? We havent even had the most contreversial selections for the G5, which was always a flaw of the 12 team format. Lets say Army and Boise State both went undefeated this year - who makes the playoffs?
There is a very vocal minority leading all of these changes, and it's ruining the game we love. It's not the playoff system so much, but the other rules like NIL and transfers that are really destroying the game. But it won't happen over night but it is already happening where people aren't watching as much
You're in the minority with that take. College football interest is way up this year - the new format may be flawed with the auto-bids/seeding situation but it's definitely working when it comes to helping the sport grow. And honestly the fix is super easy, just make it the top 12 teams period, end of. But overall the anti-12 team playoff takes make no sense to me. It's made the end of the season games matter a lot more for a lot more teams, and greatly reduced the chance that someone with a shot at winning the title gets left out. How are these not good things
@@EB-bl6ccagreed. It is much better this year. They are rewarding the year the team has and not just picking from a “select” group to be in the championship.
Every single thing that was proposed in this video was way worse than the current format. Boise State and Arizona State got byes because the ACC and Big XII decided to suck this year. And what's with the "this diminishes conference championships" argument? Winning a conference championship secures you a spot in the playoffs. How can it get any more meaningful?
Because the loser has an imaginary floor so they aren't punished for losing. Meaning the game is basically an exhibition. This is exacerbated when conference schedules aren't balanced so one team in the championship game may have not played any of the top teams in the conference while the other did. SMU didn't play any of the top ACC teams in the regular season. Texas only played Georgia and lost. Penn State only played Ohio State and lost, yet they all made the championship game and lost again and weren't punished at all. Meanwhile Ohio State played all the top teams in the B1G and the only reason they didn't make the championship game is cause Penn State didn't have to play Oregon in the regular season. Penn State and Ohio State both ended the year with two conference losses. Ohio State beat Penn State @ Penn State yet Penn State is the 6th seed and Ohio State is the 8th. Long story short, conference schedules aren't balanced so they really need to make every conference play 10 conference games at the minimum and get rid of the Wofford and Mercer games. It still wouldn't be balanced but with conferences as big as they are, it'd be a lot better and everyone would be more likely to play good teams.
You don’t see any flawed logic where a team who was hovering around fringe playoff team all year… (Clemson) wins a conference championship in a pretty weak conference and now all of a sudden they go from 16th to potentially 4th ??? All bc they won their conference ??? The ACC is terrible ! You can still be guaranteed a playoff spot without being catapulted into top 4 is all I’m trying to say
I guess I'm in the minority on this... but I kind of like the format. It's different, but it pretty much gets us a good playoff field. Which is the ultimate goal here.
@@kevinbond8966 they don't though. Not according to seeding..unless your argument is that the seeding is wrong. If the top seed of every game wins in the first round, then Oregon has the "easiest" game according to the seed
@user-tz2zz5ij1s there is a reason. They won their conference. The best team is going to win regardless, so what does it matter if a conference champion gets in?
@@matthewsharpe393 Oregon having to play Ohio State then Texas is NOT easier than Georgia having to play ND and BSU lol. I know you said higher seed but there's really no reason ASU is actually higher than Texas. this would be remedied by not giving ASU and BSU automatic byes. just give them automatic bids and leave them wherever they land in the top 12.
I always thought the FCS, formally Division 1 AA had the best systems, 16 team playoff field. Conference champions get automatic bid. All conferences that get automatic champs bids, get first round byes.
Completely agree with FCS comparison. It feels like no one on the CFP bothered to learn any lessons FCS already had to figure out. I don’t think byes should be guaranteed though.
I agree with the byes the only problem is the home field advantage for the bye teams. The 1-4 don't get a home game at all. Though the 5-8 get a home game so they have that advantage.
Where do you think this is headed? Once this deal ends in 26 the playoffs will be expanded to 16 teams. Or the SEC and big 10 will form their own thing.
@@ThatDawg21 I hope they do and then they have a national championship game between the winner of the big ten and sec face the national champion for brand supremacy.
the big ten gets inflated records bc it's a top heavy conference, the sec just proved that they can have a down year, neither should be guaranteed extra slots
The big 10 is much weaker overall than the SEC but has a couple good teams at the top, that may or may not (we will find out in the playoff) be a bit better than the top SEC teams. The SEC is much scarier top to bottom, even the midlevel teams and cellar dwellers can be scary and beat almost any team in the country if they bring their A game on a particular day. I would argue the SEC when viewed as a whole is still easily the strongest conference, even in their "down year". The problem with that is that teams get beat up and it's hard for anyone to go through the schedule unscathed. Of course Big 10 homers will call this cope, but watching the games it does seem to be the case. I don't think a team like Indiana would have any less than 3 losses in the SEC, and they might very well have more.
SEC.... Down year? Oh no sir. They cannibalized on each other and are sending 13 of their 16 teams to a bowl. It just gives you an idea of how no week in conference play is a given.
To me let former college football players and coaches be on the college football committee, including NCAA tournament in march, not athletic directors and presidents don't know what they doing in picking teams
The problem isn't anything the committee did though. They ranked the teams and the rankings are, at the very least, reasonable if not accurate. The seeding and bracket placement are dictated by the format and that's where the problem occurred. Though frankly the problem is being overblown.
@DoomPlague The issue is this is infinitely better than 4 teams end of discussion. My issue us there should be zero first round byes in 12 team format
@@loon1994 With 12 teams the bracket gets all messed up. Six games first week. Now your are down to only six teams. So 2nd Round there are THREE games. Now you have only three teams left. What are you going to do. Round Robin, everyone plays each other and all end up 1-1. Or one of the three gets a BYE to the Championship. So with 12 you have to have First Round Byes for four teams, only way the bracket can work.
My suggestion is that the College Football Tournament change its name from playoff to an Invitational. They are not trying to get the best teams to actually playoff. They are having a tournament of those they deemed good and invited. They think it’s their path to the best money return. Cannot argue with the effort to make your money.
One problem is you would have crowned Texas as the conference champ without them having to play Alabama, Tennessee, Ole Miss, or South Carolina. How is that a true champion?
You’re suggesting that unless a team plays every single team in their conference during the year, they can’t be crowned the conference champ? Or does this only apply to Texas for you? That’s what it’s looking like here.
@BigPermDawg it's almost like conferences with more than 9 teams should be split into 2 divisions where teams play every team in the divisions and then have the two divisional winners play each other for the conference championship.
If they aren’t the best in their conference, they can’t be the best in the county. Auto bids done this way evens out the subjectivity of those married to the SEC.
this is why I like the format as it is now, I think it will lead to more balanced conferences over a few years. The Big12 and ACC can start recruiting better if they are treated exactly the same as the SEC and Big10, which will level out the playing field over time. It's no wonder that the SEC and Big10 hate the format.
The greed of these two conferences is insatiable. They are complaining because of one spot they didn't get. They want half. Once they get half, they will want more. I graduated from an SEC school, and used to champion the conference any chance I could. They're greed now is making me loathe them. They will continue taking until they destroy the game. All they care about is themselves, and they think they are so big, they don't need anybody else. I am trying to convince my friends that college football became so big because of all of the teams and the traditions. We need everybody. The big two conferences need other people watching their games to get their big deals, besides their own fans. This isn't the NBA. People don't just switch teams when their team is not good or doesn't have a chance. They quit watching. If we exclude everybody else from having a legit chance, it isn't good for the health of the game. They don't need much but just some legit hope that if they have that dream season, they will be included. But even the that is too much to give. In no other year has the fourteenth best team ben complained about so much about being robbed. Two conference champions and one group of five spot. That's all anybody wants, but even that is in jeopardy. 3 spots, and the big 2 can have the other 9. But the thing is, they didn't earn it this year, so instead of trying to make themselves better, they are going to change the rules to make sure they get those spots. You can't beat them on the field, change the rules. That seems to be their motto
@ letting the SEC and Big10 control the narrative is the worst thing that can happen to college football. The networks’ opinions as well are not in the best interest of NCAAF as a whole. The SEC race this year has never been more exciting to watch all the way to the end. I don’t want to watch a season where the results are predetermined by 2 conferences and the networks.
@@casongarrett exactly. This format helps build up the big12 and acc which obv aren’t as strong right now. You give sec 4 auto bids and they will forever be better than the rest
Find it puzzling that NO one ever has any issues with Big-10 getting 4 in, with 3 of the 4 getting a bye or home games. This Big-10 biasness becomes comical in the NCAAM basketball tourney selections where the Big-10 has had the most selection in last 36 yrs with exactly ONE NC. Michigan State gets in every year with far superior Big East teams getting left out...for the last 26 years.
If Ole Miss and Bama didn't choke the SEC would have 5 teams in and the Big 10 would have 3. The only bias this year is anti SEC bias which gifted SMU a playoff berth.
@WaywardAnalysis: Is Maryland's Natty by Coach Gary Williams a B1G achievement? They were in a different Conference when he etched his name in the Record Books.🤔😉🐢🏀B.W.
I think it would be wise to allow conferences to have 4-team playoffs (2 weeks) and trim the CFP to just 8 teams (3 weeks). The length of the season would be the same. 3 at-large teams in the CFP is fine as 4 teams per conference were given a chance. SEC and B1G and ND would probably get all the at-large bids. This season, you'd have a playoff of Oregon/PSU/Indiana/OSU and Texas/Georgia/TN/5-3 team (Bama). Hash that out... Then the CFP would be more like: - B1G #1 vs Clemson (Rose) - SEC #1 vs ASU (Sugar) - SEC/B1G #2 vs BSU (Peach) - SEC/B1G #2 vs ND (Fiesta) Reseed with each round...maybe. In this format, Bama (or whoever SEC #4 is) gets a shot in the SEC. Miami and Syracuse get a shot. BYU/Colorado get a shot. Navy/Memphis get a shot.
@@michaelm7537 complaining about Bama vs SMU is also stupid. Neither team is deserving of a chance to win the title this year so who cares which one got the 12 spot? Any given year there are about 6-8 teams who truly "deserve" to compete for a title, and this year it is Oregon, PSU, Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, and Notre Dame, and all of them got it. The fact that some dark horse teams like Boise and ASU not only got in but secured a bye because you should get rewarded for winning your conference, and the fact that a couple of merely good teams like Bama and SCAR didn't get in shouldn't really matter. The 12 team format as it stands is a good mix of making sure all deserving teams get a chance (since 4 team playoffs did not give that chance) but also some dark horse teams also not only get in, but might even get a bye/home game out of it to introduce a twist on each years playoffs. Those stupid entitled Bama fans bitching about getting left out for ONE YEAR! C'mon now. You don't think your team will get to go to the playoffs most years? What that's not enough for you. Well Boise and SMU might only get that chance once a decade if not even less, and you're bitching about getting left out over them for a single year?
@@nineties_og True, but everyone moaning that SMU is in over Bama seems to conveniently forget that Bama put up ONE FIELD GOAL on a like ~.500 Oklahoma. Does a top 12 team in the nation get absolutely RAPED like that? I mean I don't doubt that if you put SMU and Alabama on a field together that Alabama would win, but they (and the SEC fans saying they should be in) don't really have a leg to stand on there. I mean dropping 25% of your games still has to mean something.
Seems to me theres very little incentive for non-SEC/B1G administrators to move from the existing format. Now, you can probably buy their assent by modifying some playoff revenue sharing numbers but otherwise I don’t see it for the same reason it didn’t happen when they initially negotiated the format.
I see it as it didn’t happen because there wasn’t a reason yet. Now the SEC/Big 10 have their reason to enact the plan. Sankey didn’t come up with this idea this year nor did he alone. This plan has been in motion the moment the 12 team playoff was discussed. I’m afraid he just spoke about the inevitable future.
@@bigticket0805I don't think anyone disputes it's what the SEC/B1G wants to happen, but there are like 2 other major confs, 4 minor confs, and Notre Dame you need to sign off as well. That probably happens with adjusted revenue share numbers.
@@JayArrYT I get you there but there is an enormous power imbalance between those conferences. I’m not trying to say other conferences are less but, the SEC/Big 10 took a 60% split of the new CFP deal on ESPN. They outgained the ACC/BIG 12 by half a billion too. It’s no question who has the say at the end of the day in the room and don’t need the consent of the other conferences if they only change within their own. I’m just saying they’re gonna change the playoffs and it will be to the benefit of the SEC and Big 10. Money talks above all..
@@bigticket0805 they can change whatever they want in their own conference, but the other conferences aren't going to agree with more SEC/B1G auto bids unless they get compensated accordingly
@ I’ll just say it like this. College football is a business first and they’re gonna do what’s best for the business. They don’t need agreement from others to accomplish this, I guarantee you. Again, it’s gonna happen sooner than later and I’m not too happy about it because it should just be the 12 best teams but they got the result what they wanted to achieve they’re actual goal
I’ll be honest this idea sounds great. It would mean that regular season standings would be a larger factor than the committee in determining who makes the playoff. This is how it works in like every sport ever. Fans of soccer will see how similar this system could be to how teams qualify for the champions league. Better leagues get more guaranteed spots. You can give the SEC and B1G 3-4 guaranteed spots and the Big12 and ACC 1-2 plus 1 for a G5 team and things would look very similar to this year anyway. There would just be less debating and less griping about a committee making all the decisions.
The First thing that needs to happen is ALL Conferences HAVE TO Play the SAME NUMBER of Conference Games! I don't care if it's 8, 9 or 10, but they all Need to play the same number, to limit padding records. I'm Talking to you SEC.
Now that we’re getting to multiple playoff rounds, I think there ought to be better opportunities for the sub-500 teams to at least practice, if not play each other, during the “playoff season”. The extra practice for bowls always used to mean something, even if the actual bowl was not so important. Now you’ve got the “haves” program getting multiple weeks of extra practice and extra games, while the “have nots” don’t, and the disparity gets even worse.
They definitely need to remove the athletic director from Michigan from the committee. Michigan got caught stealing signals and they are probably going to be banned from everything real soon. Why is he in there??
The format is perfect, The only “people” that think it’s it’s a problem is SEC homers. The format work because if left up to the SEC all the guys would be SEC team and 4 more spots would go to SEC teams
Excellent breakdown, and full agreement the current iteration of the playoffs is good but needs work. I'm all for 1-12 ranking gets in and top 4 get byes as long as every conference uses the same schedule format for the season. x amount of neutral site games, x amount of conference games, x amount of FCS/cupcake games and yes with full understanding that a cupcake the year you schedule it can be a top 30 team in 3 years when you play it and vice-versa, but that's the risk/reward aspect of schedules.
The obvious solution is this... Top 5 conference champions get automatic bids... The Top 4 RANKED teams get first round byes... So the conference champions still automatically get in. Upsets could happen and teams like Clemson could find themselves in. But the byes are set aside for the Top 4 ranked teams instead. In other words, those two things don't have to be tied together.
@@SuperSirianRigel Thats a great idea and I like the way your thinking, my only issue is ranking teams based on performance/record/SoS is arbitrary and is influenced by those who have invested monetary interest in the ranks. (revenue, television advertisement income, etc)
Here's by far the best and easiest solution to this possible. They should add a show after the first round where the teams who got first-round byes choose who they want to play out of the first-round victors, where the number 1 team gets the first pick, all the way down to the number 4 team getting forced to play whoever's left. This would allow for the 1 seed to actually mean something (which it seemed almost like a penalty this year), and would seriously raise the entertainment value of the second-round games. It would add a whole new level of drama to that round, as both team's pride would be on the line. One program's getting called out for being the weakest team left, while the other has to defend their decision. Imagine Norte Dame blows out Indiana just to have Oregon choose to play them. Cinema.
The same commissioner that suggests his team's schedules are too hard (even though they play less confrence games then most) now is practically demanding that his teams get garunteed spots. This hubris will lead to the conferences downfall. If they have a few more years like this one it may be quicker than you think. If you think it's not possible just look how quickly the PAC 12 fell apart when a silicone valley commissioner's cockiness and belief in internet streaming value destroyed a 100 year old institution.
Division champions always gets the bye ..an that’s why it’s a power4 right .for the bye to go too the four power4 conferences.the question is why is Boise there …
I like a 14 team idea where the top 2 conference champs get byes. That would make SEC and BIG conference title games must see. Also go ahead and give SEC and BIG 4 auto bids each. Big 12 and ACC 2 each. G5 1. 1 at large. Conferences could do a play in style in conference championship weekend if they want. For instance is the Big 12 played their 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 with the winners getting their 2 spots. ASU vs Colorado and Iowa State vs BYU. Lotta ways to do it if conferences are guaranteed a set number of teams.
One way to make all the big conferences happy and the group of 5 conferences happy is to do what the FCS does. They have 24 teams in the playoffs and it works perfectly fine with no issues.
I see the big10 wants the drama the Big12 had this year next year …with a four way tie for 1st an have 5 teams in the new 14 team playoffs next year ..
So, the only "fair" way to have a playoff is to have the SEC & Big 10 have 3-4 guaranteed teams? Or just put the top 12 teams in?? That could be fine if the polls didn't suck the nuts of the power 2 every year!! Just because talking heads think they know what teams deserve to be in the playoff doesn't make it true! You can't honestly say that the polls don't have an SEC/Big 10 bias! Yes, they usually have 2-3 great teams a piece any given yr, but people act like losing to an SEC bottom feeder is a good loss! Idk man, I can agree that the power 2 are better conferences at the top, but Id rather watch a league that has more teams that have a chance at winning it, where every week is a toss up! Just makes watching other games in the conference a lot more fun! Now, having said that, I do understand that having a few dominate teams at the top is probably better for the conference come playoff time!
Can’t wait to watch the regular season match, play in game, then the playoffs. Nothing better than 3 games against same opponent. The more network money is put into sports the worse it is. NASCAR ruined ncaa sports ruined. These are examples.
You said there was going to be change two years ago too Josh. The reality is that College Football is forever broken. There’s no fixing it. It can only get worse, not better.
People fail to realize I repeat the playoff will never be perfect people will always complain about their team not getting in it will never change stop tweaking the system
They should just expand to 16 teams and get rid of the first round byes. Otherwise, there's no real issue and shut up, SEC, we're tired of you. Stop trying to make conference championships pointless. If your such good teams, you can win one more. Otherwise, you're trying to cash in on bias to get a much easier playoff.
@@randombutrelevantThat I have to see. Not even one D2 School has ever Scheduled Mount Union of Alliance, Ohio who Won TWELVE and potentially a Baker's Dozen Natties in just over Three Decades at D3. You might've heard of a guy who grabbed two Rings there as a Defensive Tackle. Iowa State's Matt Campbell. What a joy to turn NDSU, SDSU, South Dakota, Idaho, Drake, Montana, Montana State, Delaware, Tennessee State, Ferris State, Harding, Colorado School of Mines, yes Slippery Rock, North Central, Cortland, Keiser of Florida and Morningside from The NAIA, and for that matter Laval from Canada loose and give them a chance to "punch upward" for a refreshing change if they join forces. And they can start with Ohio State or Michigan, which always refuses to Play MAC Teams at their place! Think it's hot now? As the old Preacher once said: "Just wait!"😏🏈B.W.
This is how it should be, IMO: - Power 4 Conference Champs all make CFP. - Highest ranked Group of 5 Conference champ makes CFP. - We use a BCS era style of computer generated rankings with the AP and Coaches Poll factored in, which determines the seeding. - Top 4 seeds all get a bye, regardless if they are a conference champ or not. - For the conference champs who make the CFP but don’t earn a bye, we could give them the home field for the 1st round games (wouldn’t be opposed to not doing this) Then we let it ride from there.
No matter what they do you will complain. That’s your job. If you can’t make a 12 team field (read Alabama) then beat the teams you were supposed to beat or win your conference. This is great having a playoff!
Buddy he's not complaining about Bama not making it, the problem lies when teams not even ranked top 15 (Clemson) can basically walk backwards into the 12 team field. There are problems when a team get's in bc they won 11 games against teams with a 7-5 or worse record and got blown out in the 1 game against a team with a record better than 8-4 (Indiana)
Hypotheticals love this so you actually think that a conference champion that is 7-5 is getting in the playoffs. I mean good Lord it's highest rank conference champion. Lord have mercy the only thing i don't like about it is that for some reason the 5-8 gets a bye again no problem with that. The problem lies 1-4 doesn't get home field advantage in the next round. So guess what winning your conference doesn't help as much as you think unless you are Arizona State or Clemson because you might get a home field game in the first round. Btw everyone complains about Boise State let me ask y'all a question why don't people schedule them? Remember when Georgia schedule them oh yea they lost at home and never scheduled them again. However Boise State is going to lose in the second round they don't deserve a bye. It is so hypocritical of people like this who dismiss Boise but also don't get on other conferences for not scheduling them.
@@djgamecx9489 If alabama backed into the sec chip and won, it would literally be same argument youre using against clemson... This current format welcomes a 3 or 4 loss team making it especially with the autobids...
@@zachroberts1988 what? My argument wasn't against 3 or 4 loss teams, my argument was for teams ranked outside the top 15 being able to get in, if you remember Alabama is ranked 11th. Winning the sec for them wouldn't be walking backwards, it would be a top 12 team securing one of the 12 spots. Not to meantion a team winning a power 4 conference with Bama's SoS is not the same as someone winning it with Clemson's SoS. And I don't suppose you have a counter for the second point I made? Or are you just going to cherry pick the convo?
I mean, Oregon, Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State are all usually top 25 caliber if not directly competing for national championships every year. USC and Washington are in the conference too now and are just having pretty down years but they've been contenders recently too.
Not that anyone asked but here's my idea. It maintains the importance of the conference championship games but also won't result in the dumpster fire that the current format has. The top four conference champions get an automatic bid - but not an automatic seeding. The next highest ranked 8 teams have a play-in bracket (12 at 5, 11 at 6, 10 at 7, and 9 at 8) and the conference champions get a bye - thus maintaining the importance of the conference championship. Once the play-in games are complete, the resulting 8 teams (4 play-in winners and 4 conference champions) are seeded per their ranking. It's possible that a conference champion may not have a top-4 seeding and even possible or even likely that a play-in team may get a top-4 seeding. The key to making this work is that the 8-team seeding not happen until AFTER the play-in round is complete. If a conference has an exceptional season then it's possible that one conference will have 3 or 4 bids (or even 5 in an unlikely scenario) and a very low-power conference would be relegated to a single bid (for their conference champion). I'm not familiar with the way that the bowl games have to decide which teams go to which bowls so maybe there are issues with scheduling that would make this untenable but it seems to make more sense to me than the current format.
IDEA: Instead of granting conferences set # of spots (based on prior success), instead have every P4 team play one game each against the other 3 P4 leagues. Compile all the data and the strongest conference (based on beating teams from other conferences) would get 4 teams in playoff, then 2nd gets 3, then 3rd and 4th get 2 each. Then one non-P4 gets in too. That would add HUGE value to non-conference games (every game would become must-watch TV for conference members).
All this is an overreaction based off of a fluky year where the Group of 5 team is 11-1 and the Big12 and ACC had a down year. An easy way to do it if another expansion is coming... 16 teams. No byes. 2 guaranteed spots for each Power4 conference ,being the championship game participants. Add the best Group of 5 team and you have 9 teams in. 7 at-large bids left for the SEC or Big10 or whoever else is deserving to gobble up. Until a hierarchy is determined in the new Big12 without Texas and Oklahoma, they should be thankful to have 2 spots guaranteed. And the SEC and Big10 will have the comfort of knowing that most of the 7 at-large spots will go to them in addition to their guaranteed 2 spots each. Everyone's happy.
Also the conferences are so enormous that two schedules IN THE SAME CONFERENCE might not be comparable. I don't think we're far away from a 4-team playoff to decide conference champions to make the CFP. Playoff-ception!
I would prefer a 16-team field with no byes. The eight conference champs would have the top eight seeds, with the wildcards all having to go on the road for the 1st round or two. Yes, you would have lower-seeded teams that were more highly ranked or were favorites in their games, but that's the same way any professional playoff league (which college football is now) operates, and conferences cease to mean anything if conference winners don't deserve preferential treatment in the postseason.
Record and strength of schedule is all that should matter. Let the computers decide, they aren't perfect but they're way more accurate than humans who have biases and greed in mind. 16 teams and no byes for anyone.
When that was agreed upon before the SEC and B10 ruined everything by blowing up the Pac12. In “normal” years it would be B10, SEC, and two slots for Pac12/Big XII/ACC with the other getting a “wild card”
Yeah they did..... Because as strong as you think you are and with as much money as you have I promise you good ol Uncle Sam would squash you like a bug. Nobody has made the NCAA and a post season league sht as big of a brick as the G5 did in 2009-2012. This is what youre trying to avoid. You wont hear it talked about a lot, but in the BCS era the G5 got so upset they took the nuclear approach and nearly destroyed the entire league.... This wasnt some FSU cry show. This was a coordinated effort by 12 universities that sued the league civilly, and criminally on both the state and federal level. By the end of it there was: - $240 million class action suit - 3 State Governments suing on 12 felony counts of fraud and anti-trust - US DOJ investigation - FBI investigation - later conviction of 6 sponsors of the BCS - US Senate trials with $2 billion penalties against the league And currently we still have 2 G5 programs that were involved in these lawsuits still in the G5 today. One of them is the current G5 rep in these playoffs and this program has got receipts for days.....
Contractually speaking there is no such thing as P4 and G5. This is why when talking about FSU, the committee had to specify "so called P5" and why the language used in the CFP playoffs is "5 highest ranked champions". So the moment you try to split G5 from P4 officially in this playoff, you will immediately get sued for essentially breach of contract with the NCAA. You can argue that the CFP is seperate from the NCAA, but this gets into a lot tangled language, and it doesnt do you any favors for much worse and next lawsuit that would be an anti-trust lawsuit. If your lucky it would be just from a university, but what you fail to realize is that not all 50 states are represented in your P4. Many state governments get tax revenue and benefits from the state universities. Therefore eventually what you will get are anti-trust lawsuits from state governments as well as likely fraud lawsuits against the league for unfair business practices against the state. This is where things start to get really really bad for you, because now youre gonna have to prove why the league should be able to discriminate against a state government in national business, which fyi there are multiple federal laws prohibiting. This will then immediately lead into US House of Reps and US Senate hounding your business in DC and now you have the full weight of the US government up your a$4. This is why you really dont wanna push the G5 too far. Fyi Boise State football is really the only sports gonna on in that entire state - and taking that away would have serious repercussions for your health.
If you were thinking of doing this, youre gonna need to seriously vet your language for the playoffs. Cuz in the example of Boise State using any language for competition or ability to play the sport is going to put you into a very bad position. Boise State has 13 rejection letters from the P5 none of which state anything related to their football program. The reason they dont if because it would be extremely hard/basically impossible to argue that this program could not physically compete with the programs in current P4 conferences. Heck they currently have more wins than some of them all time. Not to mention they have statistically the most successful G5 program of the last 30 years, so any P4 conference to bring in a G5 team would be met with the question as to why this program wasnt taken. All of this is to illustrate that P4 conferences historically have never been formed based on competitive ability to play the sport. So if you then create language for your playoff that you must be a P4 team to make the playoffs or get x benefit in the playoffs because the P4 is supposedly better in competition this immediately becomes a contradictory statement.
Minus Bama, all top 12 teams did get in the playoffs. Clemson was the only team not in the top 12. The only thing I might change is giving the top 4 teams byes. Give auto bids to conference champs (from the top 4 conference champs teams). Allow for 2 at-large spots for a highly ranked independent team and/or 5th highest conference champ. Reseed after the first round of playoff games.
Nobody complained about the format, specifically the seeding element of the format, until the ultimate unintended consequence of the PAC-12 implosion happened (aided somewhat by the effects of NIL and the transfer portal) - a G5 conference champion was ranked higher than a P4 and snuck into a first round bye. Clutching their pearls, indignant P4 purists recoiled at the thought of a pariah crashing the Brahmins’ party and have vowed to put a pick-proof lock on the front door. Invariably, they will forget about the back door, the garage door, and every window too. Get your thumbs off the scale and let the players play the games.
If you want conference championship games to matter, it needs to tie into the playoffs. Reduce the schedule to 10 games, increase the playoffs to 24 teams, have the 10 conference champs get auto bids and the top 8 champs get first round byes. After the champs, the next 14 best teams get in. The G5 ends up with 5 teams in which keeps them happy. And you could still end up with 4 or 5 SEC and BIG 10 teams in as well as 3 ACC and Big 12 and 1 or 2 at large like a Notre Dame. The two big problems with this is that the 3 remaining teams without a conference will never get a first-round bye due to not playing in a championship game and that most people will say the G5 doesn't deserve 5 spots in the playoffs. But with a 24-team playoff, it could happen without the format I just mentioned. There are 5 G5 schools in the AP Top 25 right now. And for the other point, we can't shape the entire college football format around a team like Notre Dame who doesn't want to join a conference for football but plays almost all other sports as a part of the ACC. There won't be a perfect system, but I think this one looks much better than the 12-team format we currently have (even if it is pretty similar). Otherwise, make conference championship games irrelevant to the playoffs and drop the autobids. Just seed everyone based on ranking.
The problem is that NIL is resetting the landscape and you're going to have non=tranditional powers with deep pockets (SMU, BYU, etc...) starting to build super teams because they can outbid the Blue Bloods. I mean, we're really one or two seasons away from seeing players that would routinely go to, say tOSU or Alabama, going to the highest bidder. It's already happening in basketball.
Don't change a thing. Make the mw, acc teams tap out after a few years of humiliation. I love the underdog story more than anyone but if by some chance one of those teams actually win a natty how would that not be good for the sport?
Whoever is in charge should have made these changes 40 years ago! Division 3 has placed a 32-team field into its playoffs for a few decades now. How did these big conferences and ESPN not figure out decades ago that a playoff would be profitable for one and all. For the most part.
What the crap is this play-in nonsense? The obvious solution is this... Top 5 conference champions get automatic bids... The Top 4 RANKED teams get first round byes... So the conference champions still automatically get in. Upsets could happen and teams like Clemson could find themselves in. But the byes are set aside for the Top 4 ranked teams instead. In other words, those two things don't have to be tied together.
It made more sense when the PAC-12 was still a thing. Then the weakest power 5 wouldn't get a bye and the G5 team would have to beat out two major conferences to get the bye. Now we have too many rewards to give out with the byes and not enough deserving candidates that meet the criteria. The problem is the lopsided conferences. Not the format. There isn't a great solution when the SEC and BIG10 are as dominant as they are.
A play-in to determine who gets to play for the title? We had a season-long one for decades, and it was glorious, it made CF the most intense sport in the world. The expansion to 4 had a valid argument, but for most years there are 4 or fewer teams that have shown they are the creme de la creme....the others can try again next year.
I like the changes. I just got into college football this year after several years of trying to get into it and the playoff change was a big reason why. For so long I felt like despite being over a hundred teams to root for, you really only had about 10-12 to pick from if you wanted to have a shot to see your team win the National Title. If you were a fan of a non power conference, your team could spend the next decade going undefeated and never even be given a shot to compete because of the conference they were in. So I want to give smaller conferences and lesser teams the chance to get in and even get byes. Will most the time these smaller teams probably fall to a bigger team? Absolutely. But it also means at some point in time we can get a Cinderella story of a team getting in for winning a weak conference, no one gives them a shot to win and they pull off a miracle run.
@@whitetigerak until ever year the Cinderella story doesn’t turn out the eyeballs. Who watched Georgia blow out TCU? How many people remember a really awesomely game where it went down to the last second?
Power 4 Conference champions/runners up are in, best of G5 and next best 3 teams, if equal record then SOS decides. Alterntively if you want a play in next best 6 teams play each other for final 3 spots. Seems ridiculous to me to expand further
The obvious solution is this... Top 5 conference champions get automatic bids... The Top 4 RANKED teams get first round byes... So the conference champions still automatically get in. Upsets could happen and teams like Clemson could find themselves in. But the byes are set aside for the Top 4 ranked teams instead. In other words, those two things don't have to be tied together.
Back in the 70s, the Big 10 athletic directors met and voted for who went to the Rose Bowl. Michigan lost a vote to Ohio State in the early 70s because its quarterback got hurt in the game. A vote by the athletic directors addresses the problem of a team diminished because of injury (Florida State last season), cheating, or imbalanced strength of schedule. Don't ever leave it up to coaches or the press. As far as inventory, play a minimum of 10 conference games. You get a maximum of two games against NW Roadkill State and Notre Dame should probably find a conference.
I think it will slowly morph into something closer to the nfls model, but with a slightly different setup. Instead of 2 conferences, it will be (at least for now) 4 conferences. What they could do is implement their conference championships into the playoff itself. Make it a 16 team playoff, with each power conference getting 4 autobids. Then you would have 2 conference semi finals per conference, 4 conference championship games, and then 2 interconference games as a national semifinal and final a championship game from the best 2 conferences
As someone who know the expansion of the playoff was happening but didn’t look at the details of it, i genuinely thought it would be the top 12 teams. Coming to understanding the circus of everything hasn’t been fun lol
It’s going to be messy as long as teams just get to avoid eachother. The majority of the playoff was decided by teams getting to avoid the good teams in conference
I actually like guaranteed(defined) spots. Assuming a 14 team playoff it could look like this. Give the SEC 3, B1G 3, Big12 2, ACC 2 and the G6 1 spot. Then hold an in-season P4 conference challenge similar to CBB to determine which conferences get the final 3 spots. For example, you could hold an SEC/Big12 challenge and an B1G/ACC challenge in September. Two spots up for grabs. Then in late October the 2 winning conferences could hold a challenge for the last playoff spot. The networks should love the additional inventory. The SEC/B1G would have the possibility of 5 playoff spots. The Big12/ACC could have up to 4 if they won both challenges. Have the matchups based on the finish in conference standings from the previous season. i.e. B1G 1st vs ACC 1st and so on. Top 15 only to avoid ties. Alternate each season. Year 1- SEC vs Big12 and B1G vs ACC Year 2- SEC vs ACC and B1G vs Big12. If the SEC and B1G truly are superior conferences, they should have no problem proving it on the field, right?
I like the idea of a 16 team playoff with no byes. This is still college football and this would be so all fan bases get to enjoy a home game. Wouldn`t add any more weeks of games just no byes and 4 more teams. That would probably also take care of SEC complaints would be a rare year when SEC wouldnt have 4 teams in the top 16.
The AFC/NFL East, West, North, & South are each guaranteed to have one team in the NFL tourney. Both the AFC and the NFC are guaranteed to get one team in the Super Bowl.
The byes are stupid. The field’s gotta be 8 or 16, seeded by ranking. That said, there needs to be more consideration for conferences before evaluating teams. Berths need to be distributed more equitably across the leagues. If the SEC is going to try to take their ball and go home then they need to just do it and see how the market responds. Nobody wants to see a four-loss SEC team in the playoff over a 2-loss Big 12 or ACC team, even if they boast the roster talent.
The playoff should include the top 12 highest ranked teams. No matter your conference. No bias. 1 vs 12, 2 vs 11, 3 vs 10, 4 vs 9... and so on. End of story.
What about a combination of polls and computer selection methods to determine relative team rankings throughout the season, and after the conference championship games take the top two teams to play in the national championship. You can still keep the same bowl games but they would be played separate from a playoff format.
Every solution to the 'problem' of the playoff format always involves SOS, quality wins, the eye test, or some other subjective criteria that relates directly to the AP poll. So I ask you, if the almighty AP poll is sophisticated enough to take into account all these unquantifiable variables and accurately rank the top 25 teams, just let it pick the overall champion and be done with it.
So, since we have a playoff bracket somewhat in place, why do we still have preseason polls? It's never mattered, and will never matter. We should've done away with preseason polls 100 years ago. All that does, is choose favorites.
You should set the bracket up as if there were still automatic bids, but no automatic bye's. Then get FanDuel to give you what the spreads would be on those games to see if we would of had better matchups.
Well, we used to have arguments that the team ranked #3 or #4 really deserved to be in the championship game. Now we’re arguing about whether the #11 team should be allowed to prove they should be champions. This is just dumb.
This “play-in” thing is only a good idea if we have a 16-team playoff with no byes. We can’t have 4 guaranteed seats at the table for the SEC and Big 10 in a 12-team playoff and I’m a Georgia fan.
Move the playoff to 16 teams with conference champions getting a guaranteed first round home playoff game. That leaves 3-non champions hosting. Then follow the format as it is now.
As long as College Football rankings are based on opinion, it will never be accepted by the majority. Make a standard like the NFL playoff system and let opinion remain at the door. Most People mad at the playoff format have SEC biases
How about we cut to the chase and just expand the field to 16. Then the top 5 conference champions get in automatically. The top 4 conference champs along with the top 4 at-large get a home playoff game. Then play it out. At that point absolutely NOBODY can gripe about not making the playoffs.
Conference championships will be done away with. Just an unnecessary extra game. Conferences will need to make up that revenue somehow but I don't see those games surviving much longer.
The only reason they were created was because they had separate divisions, which justified their existence, and so the two divisions played off in the CCG. And they got rid of the divisions for some reason, rendering them totally unnecessary, but they still kept the CCG on account of it was such a spectacle. And sure enough, Clemson got in, by winning a CCG that didn't need to be played because SMU had won the conference outright, and finished 11-1, good enough to warrant an at large bid over a 9-3 SEC team. And so Bama's out, and now this guy wants to overthrow the whole system. And according to him it's 'common sense'. Sure it is, buddy....
This format with the automatic byes wouldn’t have seemed as bad last year, with Michigan Washington Texas and bama getting byes I think. Just something I realized. But once you get a year like this the flaws are highlighted
But Josh… Alabama and Tennessee and Ole Miss and SC already played each other in the regular season. So those games are merely for seeding? The play rematches if that’s how the seeding works out? Higher seed gets a home game?
Getting rid of the conference championship games would be ideal, but more “play in” games will help prevent worse teams getting artificial bye weeks as a reward for losing
personally, I like the conference win requirement. what if the top four are all SEC teams? the winner should get preference, the loser should not, nor should the other two who literally weren't in the top two in their conference.
I hope that doesn't happen only because it would be completely redundant. The top 3 sec teams in the standings are what ended up in the CFP this year. To have TN play AL and SC play OM in a play in tournament after they've already played and beat eachother to determine those standings in the first place would be pointless.
Totally agree. Maybe if the teams didn't play in the regular season then they could play
Lol, if it adds another game (more money) it is not pointless, in fact, it is the only point that matters. More games = more money, that is all they care about
@newsnowcarolina6409 but then if they don't play in the regular season then what's the point in having a conference, it just goes down a rabbit hole. I don't agree with Pate on the 4 team playoff because of an undefeated Florida state team and an undefeated regular season georgia getting left out, that just can't happen. So just seed top 12 regardless of conference, top 4 get a bye. The rest will sort itself but the powers at be won't allow that.
GA beat Texas in the regular season then played again in the SEC champ game. It happens already. It would also put a huge emphasis on winning to get in.
Exactly. This doesn’t make sense
The SEC play-in games are a terrible idea. The regular season has to mean more not less with any changes.
And no traditional SECCG
Agreed. Texas lost the game and UGA lost its QB. All downside. 16-17 games is too much for these kids especially when they are bashing their heads in against the best teams in the country all season.
In the suggested scenario, the games would mean more. They're all trying to qualify for the play-in, but at the same time the argument of which team should receive the 3rd & 4th pick would be moot.
The idea of eliminating the CCG as well would be unfortunate.
It’s turning into the mini NFL. I never really liked NFL football.
@@RoadTo19 I like the conference championships, but watching them this year, I didn't not feel like they mattered when the teams that played could just play each other again in a few weeks. And there is all this talk about not punishing teams for playing in them, but you can certainly reward the team that wins, but not punish the loser. That's just crazy. If you have 2 teams playing each other and they are both getting into the playoff, the game is pointless, just a chance for players to get hurt like Georgia's QB.
This whole "play in" business is the dumbest solution I've heard yet. As a Georgia fan, I don't want to get rid of the SEC championship. That diminishes the conference itself
Keep conference championships and use them as an award to be able to move up in rankings while everyone else is stagnant. If you lose the conference championship you also stay stagnant. Top four get a bye
@user-tz2zz5ij1s I mostly agree with you. But you can't move someone up without moving someone down. But I get it. Someone shouldn't drop drastically if they don't play. They also shouldn't get rewarded for not playing
@@matthewsharpe393the reality would be only 4 P4 teams would have the chance to move up, and 1 G5 team. I’m also in favor of no auto bid G5, they can earn it like Boise State did this year. Everyone else stays stagnant unless the are jumped by the conference champion moving up. I wouldn’t imagine a conference champ moving up 10 slots. This has been an oddball year with the B1G top teams pretty spaced out and cleaner records while the SEC just devoured themselves. I just wonder is this going to be the norm going forward. Once USC and Michigan get back to where they should be, there will be some B1G devouring itself and having sloppier records. It’s definitely a new age in college football, but end of the year I just want to see the 12 best teams in the CFP.
Expansion and conference championships games have ruined college football
@@user-tz2zz5ij1s So no auto-bids for the G5, even tho the most controversial auto-bid is from the ACC this year? We havent even had the most contreversial selections for the G5, which was always a flaw of the 12 team format. Lets say Army and Boise State both went undefeated this year - who makes the playoffs?
I stopped watching the NFL about 10 years ago. I see myself not watching or caring about college football in less than 5 with the way it's going.
Spot on. CFB is being ruined before our very eyes…
There is a very vocal minority leading all of these changes, and it's ruining the game we love. It's not the playoff system so much, but the other rules like NIL and transfers that are really destroying the game. But it won't happen over night but it is already happening where people aren't watching as much
You're in the minority with that take. College football interest is way up this year - the new format may be flawed with the auto-bids/seeding situation but it's definitely working when it comes to helping the sport grow. And honestly the fix is super easy, just make it the top 12 teams period, end of.
But overall the anti-12 team playoff takes make no sense to me. It's made the end of the season games matter a lot more for a lot more teams, and greatly reduced the chance that someone with a shot at winning the title gets left out. How are these not good things
@EB-bl6cc Your opinion is irrelevant to me, nor do I care what you think of mine.
@@EB-bl6ccagreed. It is much better this year. They are rewarding the year the team has and not just picking from a “select” group to be in the championship.
Every single thing that was proposed in this video was way worse than the current format. Boise State and Arizona State got byes because the ACC and Big XII decided to suck this year. And what's with the "this diminishes conference championships" argument? Winning a conference championship secures you a spot in the playoffs. How can it get any more meaningful?
Because the loser has an imaginary floor so they aren't punished for losing. Meaning the game is basically an exhibition. This is exacerbated when conference schedules aren't balanced so one team in the championship game may have not played any of the top teams in the conference while the other did. SMU didn't play any of the top ACC teams in the regular season. Texas only played Georgia and lost. Penn State only played Ohio State and lost, yet they all made the championship game and lost again and weren't punished at all. Meanwhile Ohio State played all the top teams in the B1G and the only reason they didn't make the championship game is cause Penn State didn't have to play Oregon in the regular season. Penn State and Ohio State both ended the year with two conference losses. Ohio State beat Penn State @ Penn State yet Penn State is the 6th seed and Ohio State is the 8th.
Long story short, conference schedules aren't balanced so they really need to make every conference play 10 conference games at the minimum and get rid of the Wofford and Mercer games. It still wouldn't be balanced but with conferences as big as they are, it'd be a lot better and everyone would be more likely to play good teams.
@inomadcampdave If both teams are locked in, then a bye week is still at stake. Doesn't make it meaningless by any stretch.
@@LEGO_NASCARyeah Georgia getting three weeks off instead of two is huge for health
You don’t see any flawed logic where a team who was hovering around fringe playoff team all year… (Clemson) wins a conference championship in a pretty weak conference and now all of a sudden they go from 16th to potentially 4th ??? All bc they won their conference ??? The ACC is terrible ! You can still be guaranteed a playoff spot without being catapulted into top 4 is all I’m trying to say
@ Clemson is the 12th seed lmao who cares what happens hypothetically
I guess I'm in the minority on this... but I kind of like the format. It's different, but it pretty much gets us a good playoff field. Which is the ultimate goal here.
You don't think it's terrible that the #1 overall seed has one of the hardest paths in the entire playoff?
There is no reason a #16 ranked team should be in a 12 team playoff.
@@kevinbond8966 they don't though. Not according to seeding..unless your argument is that the seeding is wrong.
If the top seed of every game wins in the first round, then Oregon has the "easiest" game according to the seed
@user-tz2zz5ij1s there is a reason. They won their conference. The best team is going to win regardless, so what does it matter if a conference champion gets in?
@@matthewsharpe393 Oregon having to play Ohio State then Texas is NOT easier than Georgia having to play ND and BSU lol.
I know you said higher seed but there's really no reason ASU is actually higher than Texas. this would be remedied by not giving ASU and BSU automatic byes. just give them automatic bids and leave them wherever they land in the top 12.
I always thought the FCS, formally Division 1 AA had the best systems, 16 team playoff field. Conference champions get automatic bid. All conferences that get automatic champs bids, get first round byes.
Completely agree with FCS comparison. It feels like no one on the CFP bothered to learn any lessons FCS already had to figure out. I don’t think byes should be guaranteed though.
I agree with the byes the only problem is the home field advantage for the bye teams. The 1-4 don't get a home game at all. Though the 5-8 get a home game so they have that advantage.
Where do you think this is headed? Once this deal ends in 26 the playoffs will be expanded to 16 teams. Or the SEC and big 10 will form their own thing.
@@ThatDawg21 I hope they do and then they have a national championship game between the winner of the big ten and sec face the national champion for brand supremacy.
How do teams get byes with a 16 team playoff? 🤣
the big ten gets inflated records bc it's a top heavy conference, the sec just proved that they can have a down year, neither should be guaranteed extra slots
If a down year is have three 9-3 teams miss the playoffs by 1, 2 and 4 spots, that means their down year they have six top 15 level teams at minimum
The big 10 is much weaker overall than the SEC but has a couple good teams at the top, that may or may not (we will find out in the playoff) be a bit better than the top SEC teams. The SEC is much scarier top to bottom, even the midlevel teams and cellar dwellers can be scary and beat almost any team in the country if they bring their A game on a particular day.
I would argue the SEC when viewed as a whole is still easily the strongest conference, even in their "down year". The problem with that is that teams get beat up and it's hard for anyone to go through the schedule unscathed. Of course Big 10 homers will call this cope, but watching the games it does seem to be the case. I don't think a team like Indiana would have any less than 3 losses in the SEC, and they might very well have more.
SEC.... Down year? Oh no sir. They cannibalized on each other and are sending 13 of their 16 teams to a bowl. It just gives you an idea of how no week in conference play is a given.
Penn State And Indiana Just Got Good Big 10 Is Overrated
I believe the transfer portal will keep creating this parity..
To me let former college football players and coaches be on the college football committee, including NCAA tournament in march, not athletic directors and presidents don't know what they doing in picking teams
The problem isn't anything the committee did though. They ranked the teams and the rankings are, at the very least, reasonable if not accurate. The seeding and bracket placement are dictated by the format and that's where the problem occurred. Though frankly the problem is being overblown.
@DoomPlague The issue is this is infinitely better than 4 teams end of discussion. My issue us there should be zero first round byes in 12 team format
@@loon1994 ? In a 12 team format, there has to be byes. You want to avoid byes, you have to go to 8 or 16.
@@elche1976 I didn't say no byes, I said no first round byes. Highest 2 remaining seeds after round one have a second round bye into the semi-finals
@@loon1994 With 12 teams the bracket gets all messed up. Six games first week. Now your are down to only six teams. So 2nd Round there are THREE games. Now you have only three teams left. What are you going to do. Round Robin, everyone plays each other and all end up 1-1. Or one of the three gets a BYE to the Championship. So with 12 you have to have First Round Byes for four teams, only way the bracket can work.
My suggestion is that the College Football Tournament change its name from playoff to an Invitational. They are not trying to get the best teams to actually playoff. They are having a tournament of those they deemed good and invited. They think it’s their path to the best money return. Cannot argue with the effort to make your money.
Absolutely!
The old way was an invitational, the way the NFL, FCS, AND EVERY OTHER SPORT does it is a true playoff.
If it was a true playoff where teams earned it, the criteria would be to win your conference and you're in. Don't win your conference, you're out.
Sounds like you want a johnshull-itational, or the teams you deem good.
Get some cheese with that whine.
One problem is you would have crowned Texas as the conference champ without them having to play Alabama, Tennessee, Ole Miss, or South Carolina. How is that a true champion?
@@BigPermDawg exactly. When they already lost to the #2 team. And they lost to them again, proving they weren't the top SEC team.
It's actually impossible to do unless you want a 16 game season, which isn't happening
You’re suggesting that unless a team plays every single team in their conference during the year, they can’t be crowned the conference champ?
Or does this only apply to Texas for you?
That’s what it’s looking like here.
Yes Im saying when teams only play half the conference, how would you crown anyone champion? You could but it wouldn’t make sense .
@BigPermDawg it's almost like conferences with more than 9 teams should be split into 2 divisions where teams play every team in the divisions and then have the two divisional winners play each other for the conference championship.
if you had 8 power conferences ,like pac12 sw conf big east etc then you could have a 16 team playoff 8 champs with home games 8 wildcards
You’re sick … you need help
2 conferences got over half of the spots in the playoffs. It’s a good check and balance to have auto bids
If they aren’t the best in their conference, they can’t be the best in the county. Auto bids done this way evens out the subjectivity of those married to the SEC.
this is why I like the format as it is now, I think it will lead to more balanced conferences over a few years. The Big12 and ACC can start recruiting better if they are treated exactly the same as the SEC and Big10, which will level out the playing field over time. It's no wonder that the SEC and Big10 hate the format.
The greed of these two conferences is insatiable. They are complaining because of one spot they didn't get. They want half. Once they get half, they will want more. I graduated from an SEC school, and used to champion the conference any chance I could. They're greed now is making me loathe them. They will continue taking until they destroy the game. All they care about is themselves, and they think they are so big, they don't need anybody else. I am trying to convince my friends that college football became so big because of all of the teams and the traditions. We need everybody. The big two conferences need other people watching their games to get their big deals, besides their own fans. This isn't the NBA. People don't just switch teams when their team is not good or doesn't have a chance. They quit watching. If we exclude everybody else from having a legit chance, it isn't good for the health of the game. They don't need much but just some legit hope that if they have that dream season, they will be included. But even the that is too much to give. In no other year has the fourteenth best team ben complained about so much about being robbed. Two conference champions and one group of five spot. That's all anybody wants, but even that is in jeopardy. 3 spots, and the big 2 can have the other 9. But the thing is, they didn't earn it this year, so instead of trying to make themselves better, they are going to change the rules to make sure they get those spots. You can't beat them on the field, change the rules. That seems to be their motto
@ letting the SEC and Big10 control the narrative is the worst thing that can happen to college football. The networks’ opinions as well are not in the best interest of NCAAF as a whole. The SEC race this year has never been more exciting to watch all the way to the end. I don’t want to watch a season where the results are predetermined by 2 conferences and the networks.
@@casongarrett exactly. This format helps build up the big12 and acc which obv aren’t as strong right now. You give sec 4 auto bids and they will forever be better than the rest
Find it puzzling that NO one ever has any issues with Big-10 getting 4 in, with 3 of the 4 getting a bye or home games. This Big-10 biasness becomes comical in the NCAAM basketball tourney selections where the Big-10 has had the most selection in last 36 yrs with exactly ONE NC. Michigan State gets in every year with far superior Big East teams getting left out...for the last 26 years.
How many have 3 losses not to mention none of them lost to inferior opponents.
@@WaywardAnalysis because we all know they're gonna lose.
When Tennessee plants that flag the Committee needs to answer for 4 from Slow 10 (except Oregon who doesn’t play defense)
If Ole Miss and Bama didn't choke the SEC would have 5 teams in and the Big 10 would have 3. The only bias this year is anti SEC bias which gifted SMU a playoff berth.
@WaywardAnalysis: Is Maryland's Natty by Coach Gary Williams a B1G achievement? They were in a different Conference when he etched his name in the Record Books.🤔😉🐢🏀B.W.
I think it would be wise to allow conferences to have 4-team playoffs (2 weeks) and trim the CFP to just 8 teams (3 weeks). The length of the season would be the same. 3 at-large teams in the CFP is fine as 4 teams per conference were given a chance. SEC and B1G and ND would probably get all the at-large bids.
This season, you'd have a playoff of Oregon/PSU/Indiana/OSU and Texas/Georgia/TN/5-3 team (Bama). Hash that out...
Then the CFP would be more like:
- B1G #1 vs Clemson (Rose)
- SEC #1 vs ASU (Sugar)
- SEC/B1G #2 vs BSU (Peach)
- SEC/B1G #2 vs ND (Fiesta)
Reseed with each round...maybe.
In this format, Bama (or whoever SEC #4 is) gets a shot in the SEC. Miami and Syracuse get a shot. BYU/Colorado get a shot. Navy/Memphis get a shot.
If the playoff was 24 teams, people would still complain.
complaining about Bama vs SMU is different from Mizzou vs Army lol
@@michaelm7537 complaining about Bama vs SMU is also stupid. Neither team is deserving of a chance to win the title this year so who cares which one got the 12 spot? Any given year there are about 6-8 teams who truly "deserve" to compete for a title, and this year it is Oregon, PSU, Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, and Notre Dame, and all of them got it. The fact that some dark horse teams like Boise and ASU not only got in but secured a bye because you should get rewarded for winning your conference, and the fact that a couple of merely good teams like Bama and SCAR didn't get in shouldn't really matter.
The 12 team format as it stands is a good mix of making sure all deserving teams get a chance (since 4 team playoffs did not give that chance) but also some dark horse teams also not only get in, but might even get a bye/home game out of it to introduce a twist on each years playoffs.
Those stupid entitled Bama fans bitching about getting left out for ONE YEAR! C'mon now. You don't think your team will get to go to the playoffs most years? What that's not enough for you. Well Boise and SMU might only get that chance once a decade if not even less, and you're bitching about getting left out over them for a single year?
You have a 10-2 team playing 9-3 teams to make playoff? You take away importance of regular season wins and losses.
All conferences are not the same
@@nineties_og True, but everyone moaning that SMU is in over Bama seems to conveniently forget that Bama put up ONE FIELD GOAL on a like ~.500 Oklahoma. Does a top 12 team in the nation get absolutely RAPED like that? I mean I don't doubt that if you put SMU and Alabama on a field together that Alabama would win, but they (and the SEC fans saying they should be in) don't really have a leg to stand on there. I mean dropping 25% of your games still has to mean something.
Seems to me theres very little incentive for non-SEC/B1G administrators to move from the existing format. Now, you can probably buy their assent by modifying some playoff revenue sharing numbers but otherwise I don’t see it for the same reason it didn’t happen when they initially negotiated the format.
I see it as it didn’t happen because there wasn’t a reason yet. Now the SEC/Big 10 have their reason to enact the plan. Sankey didn’t come up with this idea this year nor did he alone. This plan has been in motion the moment the 12 team playoff was discussed. I’m afraid he just spoke about the inevitable future.
@@bigticket0805I don't think anyone disputes it's what the SEC/B1G wants to happen, but there are like 2 other major confs, 4 minor confs, and Notre Dame you need to sign off as well. That probably happens with adjusted revenue share numbers.
@@JayArrYT I get you there but there is an enormous power imbalance between those conferences. I’m not trying to say other conferences are less but, the SEC/Big 10 took a 60% split of the new CFP deal on ESPN. They outgained the ACC/BIG 12 by half a billion too. It’s no question who has the say at the end of the day in the room and don’t need the consent of the other conferences if they only change within their own. I’m just saying they’re gonna change the playoffs and it will be to the benefit of the SEC and Big 10. Money talks above all..
@@bigticket0805 they can change whatever they want in their own conference, but the other conferences aren't going to agree with more SEC/B1G auto bids unless they get compensated accordingly
@ I’ll just say it like this. College football is a business first and they’re gonna do what’s best for the business. They don’t need agreement from others to accomplish this, I guarantee you. Again, it’s gonna happen sooner than later and I’m not too happy about it because it should just be the 12 best teams but they got the result what they wanted to achieve they’re actual goal
I’ll be honest this idea sounds great. It would mean that regular season standings would be a larger factor than the committee in determining who makes the playoff. This is how it works in like every sport ever. Fans of soccer will see how similar this system could be to how teams qualify for the champions league. Better leagues get more guaranteed spots. You can give the SEC and B1G 3-4 guaranteed spots and the Big12 and ACC 1-2 plus 1 for a G5 team and things would look very similar to this year anyway. There would just be less debating and less griping about a committee making all the decisions.
The First thing that needs to happen is ALL Conferences HAVE TO Play the SAME NUMBER of Conference Games! I don't care if it's 8, 9 or 10, but they all Need to play the same number, to limit padding records. I'm Talking to you SEC.
Now that we’re getting to multiple playoff rounds, I think there ought to be better opportunities for the sub-500 teams to at least practice, if not play each other, during the “playoff season”. The extra practice for bowls always used to mean something, even if the actual bowl was not so important. Now you’ve got the “haves” program getting multiple weeks of extra practice and extra games, while the “have nots” don’t, and the disparity gets even worse.
Problem with all of this is -gonna have college teams playing 17-18 games
They definitely need to remove the athletic director from Michigan from the committee. Michigan got caught stealing signals and they are probably going to be banned from everything real soon. Why is he in there??
The format is perfect, The only “people” that think it’s it’s a problem is SEC homers. The format work because if left up to the SEC all the guys would be SEC team and 4 more spots would go to SEC teams
12 best teams PERIOD! NO BYES! TAKE RANKINGS 1-12!
The public would rather see champ Boise than a 5th place 3 loss SEC also ran.
Excellent breakdown, and full agreement the current iteration of the playoffs is good but needs work. I'm all for 1-12 ranking gets in and top 4 get byes as long as every conference uses the same schedule format for the season. x amount of neutral site games, x amount of conference games, x amount of FCS/cupcake games and yes with full understanding that a cupcake the year you schedule it can be a top 30 team in 3 years when you play it and vice-versa, but that's the risk/reward aspect of schedules.
The obvious solution is this...
Top 5 conference champions get automatic bids...
The Top 4 RANKED teams get first round byes...
So the conference champions still automatically get in. Upsets could happen and teams like Clemson could find themselves in.
But the byes are set aside for the Top 4 ranked teams instead. In other words, those two things don't have to be tied together.
@@SuperSirianRigel Thats a great idea and I like the way your thinking, my only issue is ranking teams based on performance/record/SoS is arbitrary and is influenced by those who have invested monetary interest in the ranks. (revenue, television advertisement income, etc)
@@MoreIrrelevantTwaddle Yeah. Idk. Money is Always going to be involved. So I doubt we ever get a Perfect system. lol.
Josh, I like your line of thinking!
Here's by far the best and easiest solution to this possible.
They should add a show after the first round where the teams who got first-round byes choose who they want to play out of the first-round victors, where the number 1 team gets the first pick, all the way down to the number 4 team getting forced to play whoever's left. This would allow for the 1 seed to actually mean something (which it seemed almost like a penalty this year), and would seriously raise the entertainment value of the second-round games.
It would add a whole new level of drama to that round, as both team's pride would be on the line. One program's getting called out for being the weakest team left, while the other has to defend their decision. Imagine Norte Dame blows out Indiana just to have Oregon choose to play them. Cinema.
This isn't a game show. No thanks. lol.
The same commissioner that suggests his team's schedules are too hard (even though they play less confrence games then most) now is practically demanding that his teams get garunteed spots. This hubris will lead to the conferences downfall. If they have a few more years like this one it may be quicker than you think. If you think it's not possible just look how quickly the PAC 12 fell apart when a silicone valley commissioner's cockiness and belief in internet streaming value destroyed a 100 year old institution.
@@BrotherhoodOfDisfunction SEC: 12 appearances (16-6) Big Ten: 9 appearances (5-7) ACC: 8 appearances (6-6) Big 12: 6 appearances (1-6) that is why
Wahhhhhh. Pate the SEC Peter puffer sell out.
Division champions always gets the bye ..an that’s why it’s a power4 right .for the bye to go too the four power4 conferences.the question is why is Boise there …
I like a 14 team idea where the top 2 conference champs get byes. That would make SEC and BIG conference title games must see. Also go ahead and give SEC and BIG 4 auto bids each. Big 12 and ACC 2 each. G5 1. 1 at large. Conferences could do a play in style in conference championship weekend if they want. For instance is the Big 12 played their 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 with the winners getting their 2 spots. ASU vs Colorado and Iowa State vs BYU. Lotta ways to do it if conferences are guaranteed a set number of teams.
One way to make all the big conferences happy and the group of 5 conferences happy is to do what the FCS does. They have 24 teams in the playoffs and it works perfectly fine with no issues.
I see the big10 wants the drama the Big12 had this year next year …with a four way tie for 1st an have 5 teams in the new 14 team playoffs next year ..
So, the only "fair" way to have a playoff is to have the SEC & Big 10 have 3-4 guaranteed teams? Or just put the top 12 teams in?? That could be fine if the polls didn't suck the nuts of the power 2 every year!! Just because talking heads think they know what teams deserve to be in the playoff doesn't make it true! You can't honestly say that the polls don't have an SEC/Big 10 bias! Yes, they usually have 2-3 great teams a piece any given yr, but people act like losing to an SEC bottom feeder is a good loss! Idk man, I can agree that the power 2 are better conferences at the top, but Id rather watch a league that has more teams that have a chance at winning it, where every week is a toss up! Just makes watching other games in the conference a lot more fun! Now, having said that, I do understand that having a few dominate teams at the top is probably better for the conference come playoff time!
@@pnut2552 then watch the NFL. All the teams are reasonably the same.
Once you guarantee seats at the table to these conferences, you will never get them back.
Can’t wait to watch the regular season match, play in game, then the playoffs. Nothing better than 3 games against same opponent. The more network money is put into sports the worse it is. NASCAR ruined ncaa sports ruined. These are examples.
You said there was going to be change two years ago too Josh. The reality is that College Football is forever broken. There’s no fixing it. It can only get worse, not better.
People fail to realize I repeat the playoff will never be perfect people will always complain about their team not getting in it will never change stop tweaking the system
They should just expand to 16 teams and get rid of the first round byes. Otherwise, there's no real issue and shut up, SEC, we're tired of you. Stop trying to make conference championships pointless. If your such good teams, you can win one more. Otherwise, you're trying to cash in on bias to get a much easier playoff.
No, you’re tired of SEC winning championships
Wrong, they should expand to 342 teams, that way the roughly 12 teams that would always make the final, still would make the final
@@randombutrelevantThat I have to see. Not even one D2 School has ever Scheduled Mount Union of Alliance, Ohio who Won TWELVE and potentially a Baker's Dozen Natties in just over Three Decades at D3. You might've heard of a guy who grabbed two Rings there as a Defensive Tackle. Iowa State's Matt Campbell. What a joy to turn NDSU, SDSU, South Dakota, Idaho, Drake, Montana, Montana State, Delaware, Tennessee State, Ferris State, Harding, Colorado School of Mines, yes Slippery Rock, North Central, Cortland, Keiser of Florida and Morningside from The NAIA, and for that matter Laval from Canada loose and give them a chance to "punch upward" for a refreshing change if they join forces. And they can start with Ohio State or Michigan, which always refuses to Play MAC Teams at their place! Think it's hot now? As the old Preacher once said: "Just wait!"😏🏈B.W.
This is how it should be, IMO:
- Power 4 Conference Champs all make CFP.
- Highest ranked Group of 5 Conference champ makes CFP.
- We use a BCS era style of computer generated rankings with the AP and Coaches Poll factored in, which determines the seeding.
- Top 4 seeds all get a bye, regardless if they are a conference champ or not.
- For the conference champs who make the CFP but don’t earn a bye, we could give them the home field for the 1st round games (wouldn’t be opposed to not doing this)
Then we let it ride from there.
What would be nice is if you get a bye, your next game should be in your stadium instead of like Georgia who has to play in Louisiana
No matter what they do you will complain. That’s your job. If you can’t make a 12 team field (read Alabama) then beat the teams you were supposed to beat or win your conference. This is great having a playoff!
Buddy he's not complaining about Bama not making it, the problem lies when teams not even ranked top 15 (Clemson) can basically walk backwards into the 12 team field. There are problems when a team get's in bc they won 11 games against teams with a 7-5 or worse record and got blown out in the 1 game against a team with a record better than 8-4 (Indiana)
Hypotheticals love this so you actually think that a conference champion that is 7-5 is getting in the playoffs. I mean good Lord it's highest rank conference champion. Lord have mercy the only thing i don't like about it is that for some reason the 5-8 gets a bye again no problem with that. The problem lies 1-4 doesn't get home field advantage in the next round. So guess what winning your conference doesn't help as much as you think unless you are Arizona State or Clemson because you might get a home field game in the first round. Btw everyone complains about Boise State let me ask y'all a question why don't people schedule them? Remember when Georgia schedule them oh yea they lost at home and never scheduled them again. However Boise State is going to lose in the second round they don't deserve a bye. It is so hypocritical of people like this who dismiss Boise but also don't get on other conferences for not scheduling them.
@@djgamecx9489 If alabama backed into the sec chip and won, it would literally be same argument youre using against clemson... This current format welcomes a 3 or 4 loss team making it especially with the autobids...
@@zachroberts1988 what? My argument wasn't against 3 or 4 loss teams, my argument was for teams ranked outside the top 15 being able to get in, if you remember Alabama is ranked 11th. Winning the sec for them wouldn't be walking backwards, it would be a top 12 team securing one of the 12 spots. Not to meantion a team winning a power 4 conference with Bama's SoS is not the same as someone winning it with Clemson's SoS. And I don't suppose you have a counter for the second point I made? Or are you just going to cherry pick the convo?
OR play a Boise State type schedule and get a free pass to the quarters.
The 2 Big 10 play in games would be awful almost every year.
I mean, Oregon, Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State are all usually top 25 caliber if not directly competing for national championships every year. USC and Washington are in the conference too now and are just having pretty down years but they've been contenders recently too.
Not that anyone asked but here's my idea. It maintains the importance of the conference championship games but also won't result in the dumpster fire that the current format has.
The top four conference champions get an automatic bid - but not an automatic seeding. The next highest ranked 8 teams have a play-in bracket (12 at 5, 11 at 6, 10 at 7, and 9 at 8) and the conference champions get a bye - thus maintaining the importance of the conference championship.
Once the play-in games are complete, the resulting 8 teams (4 play-in winners and 4 conference champions) are seeded per their ranking. It's possible that a conference champion may not have a top-4 seeding and even possible or even likely that a play-in team may get a top-4 seeding. The key to making this work is that the 8-team seeding not happen until AFTER the play-in round is complete.
If a conference has an exceptional season then it's possible that one conference will have 3 or 4 bids (or even 5 in an unlikely scenario) and a very low-power conference would be relegated to a single bid (for their conference champion).
I'm not familiar with the way that the bowl games have to decide which teams go to which bowls so maybe there are issues with scheduling that would make this untenable but it seems to make more sense to me than the current format.
IDEA: Instead of granting conferences set # of spots (based on prior success), instead have every P4 team play one game each against the other 3 P4 leagues. Compile all the data and the strongest conference (based on beating teams from other conferences) would get 4 teams in playoff, then 2nd gets 3, then 3rd and 4th get 2 each. Then one non-P4 gets in too. That would add HUGE value to non-conference games (every game would become must-watch TV for conference members).
All this is an overreaction based off of a fluky year where the Group of 5 team is 11-1 and the Big12 and ACC had a down year.
An easy way to do it if another expansion is coming...
16 teams. No byes. 2 guaranteed spots for each Power4 conference ,being the championship game participants. Add the best Group of 5 team and you have 9 teams in. 7 at-large bids left for the SEC or Big10 or whoever else is deserving to gobble up.
Until a hierarchy is determined in the new Big12 without Texas and Oklahoma, they should be thankful to have 2 spots guaranteed. And the SEC and Big10 will have the comfort of knowing that most of the 7 at-large spots will go to them in addition to their guaranteed 2 spots each. Everyone's happy.
What Josh just described is the CFB version of the NBA play-in tournament.
There is no problem with the current format. SEC just thinks their needle dick 4 loss teams should get in regardless
a 4 loss
SEC team would
STOMP
SMU
Also the conferences are so enormous that two schedules IN THE SAME CONFERENCE might not be comparable. I don't think we're far away from a 4-team playoff to decide conference champions to make the CFP. Playoff-ception!
16 team playoff with no byes. Also schedule outside of conference needs to be addressed. No way these D1 teams should be playing JV D2 teams.
This is the correct answer. We need a 16-team playoff with no byes.
If they decide to add more teams it probably won't be 16 it'll probably be more then that because they are screwy
The top 12 ranked teams in the country, are the ones that should be in the playoff, 1-4 get a bye. No one should be guaranteed a spot.
I would prefer a 16-team field with no byes. The eight conference champs would have the top eight seeds, with the wildcards all having to go on the road for the 1st round or two. Yes, you would have lower-seeded teams that were more highly ranked or were favorites in their games, but that's the same way any professional playoff league (which college football is now) operates, and conferences cease to mean anything if conference winners don't deserve preferential treatment in the postseason.
Best College Football show ... by far the best thing going today. Thank you for your work Josh Pate ! 🔥
Record and strength of schedule is all that should matter. Let the computers decide, they aren't perfect but they're way more accurate than humans who have biases and greed in mind. 16 teams and no byes for anyone.
When that was agreed upon before the SEC and B10 ruined everything by blowing up the Pac12.
In “normal” years it would be B10, SEC, and two slots for Pac12/Big XII/ACC with the other getting a “wild card”
They didn't need to negotiate with the G5s. They should have said it's this way and if you don't want to participate oh well.
If the G5 (including the ACC :) ) complain too much, that is exactly what SEC and Big 10 will do.
Yeah they did..... Because as strong as you think you are and with as much money as you have I promise you good ol Uncle Sam would squash you like a bug. Nobody has made the NCAA and a post season league sht as big of a brick as the G5 did in 2009-2012. This is what youre trying to avoid. You wont hear it talked about a lot, but in the BCS era the G5 got so upset they took the nuclear approach and nearly destroyed the entire league....
This wasnt some FSU cry show. This was a coordinated effort by 12 universities that sued the league civilly, and criminally on both the state and federal level. By the end of it there was:
- $240 million class action suit
- 3 State Governments suing on 12 felony counts of fraud and anti-trust
- US DOJ investigation
- FBI investigation - later conviction of 6 sponsors of the BCS
- US Senate trials with $2 billion penalties against the league
And currently we still have 2 G5 programs that were involved in these lawsuits still in the G5 today. One of them is the current G5 rep in these playoffs and this program has got receipts for days.....
Contractually speaking there is no such thing as P4 and G5. This is why when talking about FSU, the committee had to specify "so called P5" and why the language used in the CFP playoffs is "5 highest ranked champions".
So the moment you try to split G5 from P4 officially in this playoff, you will immediately get sued for essentially breach of contract with the NCAA. You can argue that the CFP is seperate from the NCAA, but this gets into a lot tangled language, and it doesnt do you any favors for much worse and next lawsuit that would be an anti-trust lawsuit.
If your lucky it would be just from a university, but what you fail to realize is that not all 50 states are represented in your P4. Many state governments get tax revenue and benefits from the state universities. Therefore eventually what you will get are anti-trust lawsuits from state governments as well as likely fraud lawsuits against the league for unfair business practices against the state. This is where things start to get really really bad for you, because now youre gonna have to prove why the league should be able to discriminate against a state government in national business, which fyi there are multiple federal laws prohibiting. This will then immediately lead into US House of Reps and US Senate hounding your business in DC and now you have the full weight of the US government up your a$4.
This is why you really dont wanna push the G5 too far. Fyi Boise State football is really the only sports gonna on in that entire state - and taking that away would have serious repercussions for your health.
If you were thinking of doing this, youre gonna need to seriously vet your language for the playoffs. Cuz in the example of Boise State using any language for competition or ability to play the sport is going to put you into a very bad position.
Boise State has 13 rejection letters from the P5 none of which state anything related to their football program. The reason they dont if because it would be extremely hard/basically impossible to argue that this program could not physically compete with the programs in current P4 conferences. Heck they currently have more wins than some of them all time. Not to mention they have statistically the most successful G5 program of the last 30 years, so any P4 conference to bring in a G5 team would be met with the question as to why this program wasnt taken.
All of this is to illustrate that P4 conferences historically have never been formed based on competitive ability to play the sport. So if you then create language for your playoff that you must be a P4 team to make the playoffs or get x benefit in the playoffs because the P4 is supposedly better in competition this immediately becomes a contradictory statement.
Minus Bama, all top 12 teams did get in the playoffs. Clemson was the only team not in the top 12. The only thing I might change is giving the top 4 teams byes. Give auto bids to conference champs (from the top 4 conference champs teams). Allow for 2 at-large spots for a highly ranked independent team and/or 5th highest conference champ. Reseed after the first round of playoff games.
Nobody complained about the format, specifically the seeding element of the format, until the ultimate unintended consequence of the PAC-12 implosion happened (aided somewhat by the effects of NIL and the transfer portal) - a G5 conference champion was ranked higher than a P4 and snuck into a first round bye. Clutching their pearls, indignant P4 purists recoiled at the thought of a pariah crashing the Brahmins’ party and have vowed to put a pick-proof lock on the front door. Invariably, they will forget about the back door, the garage door, and every window too. Get your thumbs off the scale and let the players play the games.
If you want conference championship games to matter, it needs to tie into the playoffs. Reduce the schedule to 10 games, increase the playoffs to 24 teams, have the 10 conference champs get auto bids and the top 8 champs get first round byes. After the champs, the next 14 best teams get in. The G5 ends up with 5 teams in which keeps them happy. And you could still end up with 4 or 5 SEC and BIG 10 teams in as well as 3 ACC and Big 12 and 1 or 2 at large like a Notre Dame. The two big problems with this is that the 3 remaining teams without a conference will never get a first-round bye due to not playing in a championship game and that most people will say the G5 doesn't deserve 5 spots in the playoffs. But with a 24-team playoff, it could happen without the format I just mentioned. There are 5 G5 schools in the AP Top 25 right now. And for the other point, we can't shape the entire college football format around a team like Notre Dame who doesn't want to join a conference for football but plays almost all other sports as a part of the ACC. There won't be a perfect system, but I think this one looks much better than the 12-team format we currently have (even if it is pretty similar). Otherwise, make conference championship games irrelevant to the playoffs and drop the autobids. Just seed everyone based on ranking.
The problem is that NIL is resetting the landscape and you're going to have non=tranditional powers with deep pockets (SMU, BYU, etc...) starting to build super teams because they can outbid the Blue Bloods. I mean, we're really one or two seasons away from seeing players that would routinely go to, say tOSU or Alabama, going to the highest bidder. It's already happening in basketball.
Don't change a thing. Make the mw, acc teams tap out after a few years of humiliation. I love the underdog story more than anyone but if by some chance one of those teams actually win a natty how would that not be good for the sport?
Gotta leave something broke .to make claim of fixing something right😂…
Whoever is in charge should have made these changes 40 years ago! Division 3 has placed a 32-team field into its playoffs for a few decades now. How did these big conferences and ESPN not figure out decades ago that a playoff would be profitable for one and all. For the most part.
What the crap is this play-in nonsense? The obvious solution is this...
Top 5 conference champions get automatic bids...
The Top 4 RANKED teams get first round byes...
So the conference champions still automatically get in. Upsets could happen and teams like Clemson could find themselves in.
But the byes are set aside for the Top 4 ranked teams instead. In other words, those two things don't have to be tied together.
It made more sense when the PAC-12 was still a thing. Then the weakest power 5 wouldn't get a bye and the G5 team would have to beat out two major conferences to get the bye. Now we have too many rewards to give out with the byes and not enough deserving candidates that meet the criteria. The problem is the lopsided conferences. Not the format. There isn't a great solution when the SEC and BIG10 are as dominant as they are.
A play-in to determine who gets to play for the title? We had a season-long one for decades, and it was glorious, it made CF the most intense sport in the world. The expansion to 4 had a valid argument, but for most years there are 4 or fewer teams that have shown they are the creme de la creme....the others can try again next year.
I like the changes. I just got into college football this year after several years of trying to get into it and the playoff change was a big reason why. For so long I felt like despite being over a hundred teams to root for, you really only had about 10-12 to pick from if you wanted to have a shot to see your team win the National Title. If you were a fan of a non power conference, your team could spend the next decade going undefeated and never even be given a shot to compete because of the conference they were in.
So I want to give smaller conferences and lesser teams the chance to get in and even get byes. Will most the time these smaller teams probably fall to a bigger team? Absolutely. But it also means at some point in time we can get a Cinderella story of a team getting in for winning a weak conference, no one gives them a shot to win and they pull off a miracle run.
@@whitetigerak until ever year the Cinderella story doesn’t turn out the eyeballs. Who watched Georgia blow out TCU? How many people remember a really awesomely game where it went down to the last second?
16 teams. No byes.
5 champs + 4 SOR + 4 AP + 3 Coaches or
5 champs + 4 P4 runner ups + 3 AP + 2 Coaches + 2 SOR
Pretty bulletproof.
Power 4 Conference champions/runners up are in, best of G5 and next best 3 teams, if equal record then SOS decides. Alterntively if you want a play in next best 6 teams play each other for final 3 spots. Seems ridiculous to me to expand further
The obvious solution is this...
Top 5 conference champions get automatic bids...
The Top 4 RANKED teams get first round byes...
So the conference champions still automatically get in. Upsets could happen and teams like Clemson could find themselves in.
But the byes are set aside for the Top 4 ranked teams instead. In other words, those two things don't have to be tied together.
Back in the 70s, the Big 10 athletic directors met and voted for who went to the Rose Bowl. Michigan lost a vote to Ohio State in the early 70s because its quarterback got hurt in the game. A vote by the athletic directors addresses the problem of a team diminished because of injury (Florida State last season), cheating, or imbalanced strength of schedule. Don't ever leave it up to coaches or the press. As far as inventory, play a minimum of 10 conference games. You get a maximum of two games against NW Roadkill State and Notre Dame should probably find a conference.
I think it will slowly morph into something closer to the nfls model, but with a slightly different setup. Instead of 2 conferences, it will be (at least for now) 4 conferences. What they could do is implement their conference championships into the playoff itself. Make it a 16 team playoff, with each power conference getting 4 autobids. Then you would have 2 conference semi finals per conference, 4 conference championship games, and then 2 interconference games as a national semifinal and final a championship game from the best 2 conferences
As someone who know the expansion of the playoff was happening but didn’t look at the details of it, i genuinely thought it would be the top 12 teams. Coming to understanding the circus of everything hasn’t been fun lol
It’s going to be messy as long as teams just get to avoid eachother. The majority of the playoff was decided by teams getting to avoid the good teams in conference
I actually like guaranteed(defined) spots. Assuming a 14 team playoff it could look like this. Give the SEC 3, B1G 3, Big12 2, ACC 2 and the G6 1 spot. Then hold an in-season P4 conference challenge similar to CBB to determine which conferences get the final 3 spots. For example, you could hold an SEC/Big12 challenge and an B1G/ACC challenge in September. Two spots up for grabs. Then in late October the 2 winning conferences could hold a challenge for the last playoff spot. The networks should love the additional inventory. The SEC/B1G would have the possibility of 5 playoff spots. The Big12/ACC could have up to 4 if they won both challenges. Have the matchups based on the finish in conference standings from the previous season. i.e. B1G 1st vs ACC 1st and so on. Top 15 only to avoid ties. Alternate each season. Year 1- SEC vs Big12 and B1G vs ACC Year 2- SEC vs ACC and B1G vs Big12.
If the SEC and B1G truly are superior conferences, they should have no problem proving it on the field, right?
I like the idea of a 16 team playoff with no byes. This is still college football and this would be so all fan bases get to enjoy a home game. Wouldn`t add any more weeks of games just no byes and 4 more teams. That would probably also take care of SEC complaints would be a rare year when SEC wouldnt have 4 teams in the top 16.
A play-in conference tournament with the top 4 teams playing each other with the winners going to the playoffs? I like it
It's coming Mr. Josh. When you get there, you need to go ahead on and open up Pate State, as well.
So out of conf games are meaningless
The AFC/NFL East, West, North, & South are each guaranteed to have one team in the NFL tourney. Both the AFC and the NFC are guaranteed to get one team in the Super Bowl.
The byes are stupid. The field’s gotta be 8 or 16, seeded by ranking.
That said, there needs to be more consideration for conferences before evaluating teams. Berths need to be distributed more equitably across the leagues.
If the SEC is going to try to take their ball and go home then they need to just do it and see how the market responds. Nobody wants to see a four-loss SEC team in the playoff over a 2-loss Big 12 or ACC team, even if they boast the roster talent.
You get it!
The playoff should include the top 12 highest ranked teams. No matter your conference. No bias. 1 vs 12, 2 vs 11, 3 vs 10, 4 vs 9... and so on. End of story.
What about a combination of polls and computer selection methods to determine relative team rankings throughout the season, and after the conference championship games take the top two teams to play in the national championship. You can still keep the same bowl games but they would be played separate from a playoff format.
Every solution to the 'problem' of the playoff format always involves SOS, quality wins, the eye test, or some other subjective criteria that relates directly to the AP poll. So I ask you, if the almighty AP poll is sophisticated enough to take into account all these unquantifiable variables and accurately rank the top 25 teams, just let it pick the overall champion and be done with it.
So, since we have a playoff bracket somewhat in place, why do we still have preseason polls? It's never mattered, and will never matter. We should've done away with preseason polls 100 years ago. All that does, is choose favorites.
You should set the bracket up as if there were still automatic bids, but no automatic bye's. Then get FanDuel to give you what the spreads would be on those games to see if we would of had better matchups.
NOTICE THE ONLY ONES COMPLAINING ARE THE SEC HOMERS U ARE USED TO THEIR ESECPN 'HOUSE EDGE'. THIS FORMAT IS ABSOLUTELY GREAT
Well, we used to have arguments that the team ranked #3 or #4 really deserved to be in the championship game. Now we’re arguing about whether the #11 team should be allowed to prove they should be champions. This is just dumb.
Because it's all just based on opinions and thoughts until they get out there play ball.
BSU has a player called Ashton, I know the media is propping up Hunter, but in the first CFP game, Boise has, you all are in for a show.
Go Irish ☘️✝️🏈
This “play-in” thing is only a good idea if we have a 16-team playoff with no byes. We can’t have 4 guaranteed seats at the table for the SEC and Big 10 in a 12-team playoff and I’m a Georgia fan.
Move the playoff to 16 teams with conference champions getting a guaranteed first round home playoff game. That leaves 3-non champions hosting. Then follow the format as it is now.
As long as College Football rankings are based on opinion, it will never be accepted by the majority.
Make a standard like the NFL playoff system and let opinion remain at the door.
Most People mad at the playoff format have SEC biases
How about we cut to the chase and just expand the field to 16. Then the top 5 conference champions get in automatically. The top 4 conference champs along with the top 4 at-large get a home playoff game. Then play it out. At that point absolutely NOBODY can gripe about not making the playoffs.
Conference championships will be done away with. Just an unnecessary extra game. Conferences will need to make up that revenue somehow but I don't see those games surviving much longer.
They havent even been around that long to begin with...
The only reason they were created was because they had separate divisions, which justified their existence, and so the two divisions played off in the CCG. And they got rid of the divisions for some reason, rendering them totally unnecessary, but they still kept the CCG on account of it was such a spectacle. And sure enough, Clemson got in, by winning a CCG that didn't need to be played because SMU had won the conference outright, and finished 11-1, good enough to warrant an at large bid over a 9-3 SEC team. And so Bama's out, and now this guy wants to overthrow the whole system. And according to him it's 'common sense'. Sure it is, buddy....
I get the idea of wanting to make the conference championships mean something, but the CFP as a whole strips those games of real meaning.
Oh wow! The idea of taking the top 12 teams were such a better idea than doing away with conference championship games.
This format with the automatic byes wouldn’t have seemed as bad last year, with Michigan Washington Texas and bama getting byes I think. Just something I realized. But once you get a year like this the flaws are highlighted
But Josh… Alabama and Tennessee and Ole Miss and SC already played each other in the regular season. So those games are merely for seeding? The play rematches if that’s how the seeding works out? Higher seed gets a home game?
Getting rid of the conference championship games would be ideal, but more “play in” games will help prevent worse teams getting artificial bye weeks as a reward for losing
personally, I like the conference win requirement. what if the top four are all SEC teams? the winner should get preference, the loser should not, nor should the other two who literally weren't in the top two in their conference.