playoff committee considering Expansion

[AUpreacherman22 3,905]

This is very similar to my thoughts!   I would say top 4 conference champs (top 2 get byes), 2 at large, and at least one of them must be the top G5.  I would give the 5th conference champion “bonus points”, but no guarantee.   I just don’t want to see an 8-4 Washington St.  or something like that in the playoffs when those things happen.  The only bad news is it would leave room for bama to take that 5th or 6th spot.  

11 hours ago, oracle79 said:

The anti-Alabama plan is best. 6 teams. Automatic bids for 5 P5 conference champions. Last bid is highest ranked group of 5. 1 and 2 get byes. 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5. 1 plays lowest winner, and 2 plays highest winner. Then champ game. Closest you can get to deciding on the field. 'Eff the great teams that can't win their conference championship ON THE FIELD! Sorry Nick

[AUloggerhead 2,302]

Well, they're (finally) considering expanding.. Sounds like no changes before the contract expires in 2025.  I predict we'll see an 8-team playoff -- something I've been advocating for since AU got screwed in 2004, btw.  But now?  I'm getting ahead of the curve and am hoping for a 16-game playoff(!)  The writing is on the wall.  The (meaningless) bowl system has outlived any usefulness it once had -- from teams with losing records getting invites to more players opting out of playing in them at all.  Expand the playoffs & play the games at college venues just like they do for the other Divisions.  Let the teams reap the financial benefits of hosting the playoff games.      

[AUght2win 6,918]

20 hours ago, Tigerpro2a said:

I used to be a big fan of 16 teams, but honestly football is not like basketball in the sense of cinderella teams. Yes it could happen here and there, but there is a pretty big disparity in a top 5 team and a top 15 team. Most seasons there are really no more than 3-4 teams that are on that elite level. There are exceptions to that of course. 

I personally like either 6 teams with top 2 seeds getting a bye, or 8 teams. Either way, take our power 5 conference champs and then the highest ranked G5 team and next 2 highest ranked teams. I think it will keep all the season games to where they matter. Biggest thing is get rid of the so called eye test. Playoffs need to be earned. Period. 

Theoretically the disparity may only exist because of the championship structure in football. Nobody's first choice is a school that isn't even eligible for a national title.

So if the playoffs expand and G5 teams (and even smaller P5 teams) could control their own destiny with have a clear route to the championship postseason, those schools will be able to recruit better and the disparity will decrease.

There's no big disparity like football in literally any other NCAA sport, so I'm betting there will be a lot more "Cinderellas" and "Mid Majors" once they expand.

[Tigerpro2a 5,650]

38 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

Theoretically the disparity may only exist because of the championship structure in football. Nobody's first choice is a school that isn't even eligible for a national title.

So if the playoffs expand and G5 teams (and even smaller P5 teams) could control their own destiny with have a clear route to the championship postseason, those schools will be able to recruit better and the disparity will decrease.

There's no big disparity like football in literally any other NCAA sport, so I'm betting there will be a lot more "Cinderellas" and "Mid Majors" once they expand.

I agree my friend. It will take a few years to level, but it would definitely increase the number of potential championship caliber teams in the long run. 

[AlaskanFAN 1,666]

I am all for a 16 team playoff.  Each round can still be sponsored as a "Bowl Game".  Those that don't make the 16 then go to a bowl game as usual.  Look do you realize at any level ( High School, Juco, Div III, DIV II) all play 16  total games to include the playoffs, heck the pros just added 1 regular season game to make it 17 and that does not even include the playoffs. The argument of that's to many games is BS because the NCAA has been doing it for DECADES at the lower levels of collegiate football.  The fact of the matter is that bowl sponsors and TV rights drive the NCAA playoff format right now.  Here is an example of a 16 game playoff season what it would take for us to go undefeated.  We would have to drop 2 teams.

 1 - Akron 

2 - Alabama State or Georgia State or Penn State ( Pick one drop the other 2)

3 - LSU

4 - UGA

5 - Arkansas

6 - BYE

7 - Ole Miss

8 - Texas A&M

9 - Miss State

10 - South Carolina

11 - Alabama

12 - Conference Championship

13 - 1st Round

14 - Quarter finals

15 - Semi Finals

16 - Championship Game

[NoALtiger 3,874]

8 teams and no byes feels right to me. Big enough to include all the real contenders but without getting watered down with the ones with no legit shot. Byes are a bad idea IMO. 

[au701948 1,019]

14 hours ago, AUloggerhead said:

Well, they're (finally) considering expanding.. Sounds like no changes before the contract expires in 2025.  I predict we'll see an 8-team playoff -- something I've been advocating for since AU got screwed in 2004, btw.  But now?  I'm getting ahead of the curve and am hoping for a 16-game playoff(!)  The writing is on the wall.  The (meaningless) bowl system has outlived any usefulness it once had -- from teams with losing records getting invites to more players opting out of playing in them at all.  Expand the playoffs & play the games at college venues just like they do for the other Divisions.  Let the teams reap the financial benefits of hosting the playoff games.      

I agree with 16. Sixteen teams playing in the "Bowls Games" would help all those games with potentially more attendance and possibly even keep some players from opting out, as they would be playing for "something".

[steeleagle 2,945]

I agree on the 8 for now.

It allows that 1 or 2 teams that are knocking on getting into that 4 playoff format a chance. Those that get left out of the 8 probably didn't deserve a shot anyway....

Usually by the end of the year their are really only 7 or 8 team w no losses or only 1 loss, and now they will get a chance to win it all. 

[EagleEye67 1,948]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand.....

 

 

...they said no.  No expansion for the next couple of seasons, at least.

[Zeek 16,660]

8 is the way to go. Ridiculous we have to wait 5+ more years for common sense.

There's currently no path to the playoffs for 80% or more of D1 teams. 

8 allows all P5 champions plus 3 at large (one of which should have to be the best G5 team).

 

[keesler 5,934]

On 4/24/2021 at 7:50 AM, AUBwins said:

If they have started having serious thoughts and conversations about it, then I think it will happen in the next few years.  I like 8. The power 5 champs, Group of 5 leader,  2 at large.  

If the committee is considering 16 teams, that would take 4 weeks.  I say use the 4 weeks but with 8 teams in a bit of a tiered bracket.   The committee can seed the Champions 1 through 6. The at larges will be the 7th and 8th seed determined by committee as well. Seeds 5-8 play each other and will have to play all 4 weeks.  Seeds 3 and 4 play those winners and play 3 weeks. Then you have the semifinals like the setup is now.  Therefore the teams are rewarded for having better seasons or winning more convincingly overall.  This sort of collaborates all the ideas together, while putting an emphasis on winning the conference.

I've plugged in theoretical seeds based on recent trends. 

First round - Dec 18th

8 seed (Big 10 at large)  vs 5 seed (Pac 12 champ) 

7 seed (SEC at large)  vs 6 seed (Group of 5 leader) 

Second round - Dec 24th/25th

4 seed (Big 12 Champ) vs winner of 8vs5

3 seed (Big 10 Champ)  vs winner of 7vs6

Semifinal round - Jan 1st

1 seed (SEC Champ) vs 4/5/8 seed

2 seed (ACC Champ)  vs 3/6/7 seed

Champ Round - Jan 10th

1/4/5/8 seed vs 2/3/6/8 seed. 

 

I could definitely be happy with this set up. 

Good Lord the wear & tear lower ranked teams would endure playing championship games 3-4 weeks straight while the top teams got a double bye?  We're sure to get the same results in the final we get now, SEC/ACC would be the NC Champ with that much rest. 

[AUBwins 10,152]

11 minutes ago, keesler said:

Good Lord the wear & tear lower ranked teams would endure playing championship games 3-4 weeks straight while the top teams got a double bye?  We're sure to get the same results in the final we get now, SEC/ACC would be the NC Champ with that much rest. 

Yes I suppose this is true. I would really like for the 2 at large teams to have at least some sort of disadvantage like a wildcard matchup or something. Didn't win conference, shouldn't be on level playing field.  Thinking Bama not going to SEC Champ game but getting to play in 4 team playoff as example.  If we can fix that, I'm game.  A must for me is 5 power 5 champs, best of Group 5 team,  plus whatever else. 

[BigBlueWDE 1,136]

32 minutes ago, AUBwins said:

Yes I suppose this is true. I would really like for the 2 at large teams to have at least some sort of disadvantage like a wildcard matchup or something. Didn't win conference, shouldn't be on level playing field.  Thinking Bama not going to SEC Champ game but getting to play in 4 team playoff as example.  If we can fix that, I'm game.  A must for me is 5 power 5 champs, best of Group 5 team,  plus whatever else. 

The disadvantage is that they would be destroyed by Bama, Clemson, or tOSU in the first round

[Hank2020 3,231]

5 hours ago, keesler said:

Good Lord the wear & tear lower ranked teams would endure playing championship games 3-4 weeks straight while the top teams got a double bye?  We're sure to get the same results in the final we get now, SEC/ACC would be the NC Champ with that much rest. 

I don’t agree with any byes.

[keesler 5,934]

21 hours ago, Hank2020 said:

I don’t agree with any byes.

Neither do I.  And to thing that it's highly likely the regular teams that customarily make the CPF will most times be the same ones ranked in the top and they'd get a bye that would do nothing but strengthen their roster AND give their coaches more time to prepare.  

[Hank2020 3,231]

5 minutes ago, keesler said:

Neither do I.  And to thing that it's highly likely the regular teams that customarily make the CPF will most times be the same ones ranked in the top and they'd get a bye that would do nothing but strengthen their roster AND give their coaches more time to prepare.  

IMO, One of the greatest advantages to widening the playoff is to knock these regulars off their pedestals and give some excitement to the system

[Tigerpro2a 5,650]

On 4/24/2021 at 12:43 PM, AUpreacherman22 said:

This is very similar to my thoughts!   I would say top 4 conference champs (top 2 get byes), 2 at large, and at least one of them must be the top G5.  I would give the 5th conference champion “bonus points”, but no guarantee.   I just don’t want to see an 8-4 Washington St.  or something like that in the playoffs when those things happen.  The only bad news is it would leave room for bama to take that 5th or 6th spot.  

Nope. I am all  for if we are going to do 6 teams, then power 5 champs and Highest ranked G5 school. If a 7-5 team gets in from the PAC or wherever....they earned it by winning their conference. Don't win the conference...you do not get in. Now, I personally like 8 teams. Power 5 Champs, Highest G5 School, and then next 2 highest ranked teams. That would allow Bamas to get in some when they don't win, but it would also make up for an 8-4 WSU team getting in over an 11-1 Auburn who lost to Bama. That is the way I would like to do it. 

[keesler 5,934]

2 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

IMO, One of the greatest advantages to widening the playoff is to knock these regulars off their pedestals and give some excitement to the system

At the same time, expanding the CFP would give those regulars an almost guaranteed spot even if they had a loss or didn't win their conference.  Unfortunately until some HC turnover happens with those elite teams OR another team knocks them off their pedestal I don't think we see many of them missing a playoff round should it expand to more than 4 teams. 

[BigBlueWDE 1,136]

Most years it stacks up like:

1-2: Clearly favorites to win it all

3-5: little difference between them, all contenders (most likely 4 out of 5 P5 conference champions are included when you expand out to 5 teams)

6-8: flawed second-tier contenders (non-P5 or have lost at least once, maybe even twice. Weakest of the P5 champions)

 

Letting 1-2 off the hook in the earlier rounds does nothing to let the remainder of the field have a shot. In fact, letting them have a bye is effectively the same as going back to the BCS model. 

 

[japantiger 4,064]

I'd like 16...that's plenty.  Frankly, 10 is enough.  I don't care what conference; or whether they won a conference.  Just the 16 best teams.  9-16 should be warmup games for 1-8.  They will make a bowl game worth watching.  Don't care if any non-P5 make it in.  If they are one of the 16 best; then they are in...otherwise, just get the best teams.  That is what folks want to see...would make more bowl games relevant...some great TV over 4 weeks.

[Tigerpro2a 5,650]

So hearing on different shows and websites that a 12 team playoff is gaining steam. Seeds 1-4 get byes, and the higher ranked teams get to play at home up until the Semifinals or NC. They are saying 12 that way they do not have to continue expanding every so often. Even talk of it happening as early as 2023. I personally would like to see a 6 team P5 playoff and a 4 team G5 playoff. 

[Mikey 16,781]

1 hour ago, Tigerpro2a said:

So hearing on different shows and websites that a 12 team playoff is gaining steam. Seeds 1-4 get byes, and the higher ranked teams get to play at home up until the Semifinals or NC. They are saying 12 that way they do not have to continue expanding every so often. Even talk of it happening as early as 2023. I personally would like to see a 6 team P5 playoff and a 4 team G5 playoff. 

Championship game to be played Easter weekend? I think these watered-down versions are for no reason other than appeasement to those whining about being left out. I think if you can't make the top four, you have no business playing for a championship.

[McLoofus 35,182]

8 hours ago, Tigerpro2a said:

So hearing on different shows and websites that a 12 team playoff is gaining steam. Seeds 1-4 get byes, and the higher ranked teams get to play at home up until the Semifinals or NC. They are saying 12 that way they do not have to continue expanding every so often. Even talk of it happening as early as 2023. I personally would like to see a 6 team P5 playoff and a 4 team G5 playoff. 

Good gravy these are some money hungry jackals.

[DAG 34,093]

8 hours ago, Mikey said:

Championship game to be played Easter weekend? I think these watered-down versions are for no reason other than appeasement to those whining about being left out. I think if you can't make the top four, you have no business playing for a championship.

It’s about money and it has always been about money . 

[McLoofus 35,182]

30 minutes ago, DAG said:

It’s about money and it has always been about money . 

Especially when they can get more bang for those scholarship bucks. Kids play more games, scholarship costs the same. I wonder what all our free market economists think of that.