OT: Playoff Expansion Update

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Stubbornness knows no bounds if they'd actually give up 450M. Money is the driver of most things in sports but I guess stubbornness, pride and hurt feelings may even override that.

Comments from Bowlsby in the tweet.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

Forget the SEC... let everyone who is NOT in the SEC agree to 8 team playoff with 6 AQs and if the SEC conference doesn't want to participate they can make their own bowl deals and play with themselves or G5s who don't make it.

Talk Fox into buying it at a good price, without the SEC, so you know if you vote for 8 what kind of payout you are looking at. Let the SEC turn down some specific sum just because they want more than 2 teams possible in an 8 team playoff.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Sounds like they’re going to change the rules on the amount of agreement needed for playoff changes in the next deal.

 

[Mufasa94]

When the hell has a B10 champ ever fallen behind a G5…

In 2010 and 2011 under different labels.

But, just having fun with you. Though I disagree with you completely about seemingly the whole subject, thanks for providing those updates.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

In 2010 and 2011 under different labels.

But, just having fun with you. Though I disagree with you completely about seemingly the whole subject, thanks for providing those updates.

Hey everyone is entitled to their opinion I have no issues. Back and forth debate is what this place is for and makes it fun. It would be boring if everyone had the same opinion.

 

[krup]

Article is same as I posted above but just some new comments from Warren in the tweet. I don’t know why he’s so staunchly for it. The B10 isn’t affected it’s the PAC12/ACC/B12 that might be….in that order. 6 spots for the P5 is plenty and should get all the P5 in almost every year and for sure the B10 every year just like the SEC. 6 highest is essentially the same as 5+1 probably close to 95% of the time give or take.

We all were taught that “everybody is somebody” and “sharing is caring” as young children, but evidently it really stuck with Warren because he is completely averse to the B1G actually using the power it has over lesser conferences.

 

[RUGuitarMan1]

The sport really needs a strong, independent oversight executive or commitee to decide and influence these questions. That is the only way that a fair and inclusive approach will prevail. It is essential for the long term health of the sport. From the crazy escalating coaching contracts, facility arms races and playoff issues an independent , autonomous authority is needed. As long as a conference like the SEC is driving the debate, excessive greed will prevail.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

The sport really needs a strong, independent oversight executive or commitee to decide and influence these questions. That is the only way that a fair and inclusive approach will prevail. It is essential for the long term health of the sport. From the crazy escalating coaching contracts, facility arms races and playoff issues an independent , autonomous authority is needed. As long as a conference like the SEC is driving the debate, excessive greed will prevail.

Actually the SEC is the one that's being fair here. The original plan released in the summer was a good one that was fair to a lot of parties. 6 highest conf champs even allows for the chance of 2 G5. 95% of the time 6 highest and 5+1 are going to end up in the same result but on rare occasion a P5 could get left out. Sankey is pushing for that plan but the ACC/B10 are pushing for 5+1 with AQs for the P5 and highest G5. The SEC is pushing the plan that's more open and allows slightly more opportunity.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

 

[RUevolution36]

Actually the SEC is the one that's being fair here. The original plan released in the summer was a good one that was fair to a lot of parties. 6 highest conf champs even allows for the chance of 2 G5. 95% of the time 6 highest and 5+1 are going to end up in the same result but on rare occasion a P5 could get left out. Sankey is pushing for that plan but the ACC/B10 are pushing for 5+1 with AQs for the P5 and highest G5. The SEC is pushing the plan that's more open and allows slightly more opportunity.

The SEC wants as many at large bids as possible because they're betting on themselves to fill as many as possible. Don't think for a second that they are in it for equity amongst conferences.

 

[Mufasa94]

3-loss Utah, who went 0-2 OOC against FBS (non-P5 btw) teams, automatically being provided a quota filling opportunity to be crowned MNC, no thanks.

3-loss Utah, provided an opportunity to compete in the prestigious Rose Bowl after doing well only in their regional conference, good for them.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

The SEC wants as many at large bids as possible because they're betting on themselves to fill as many as possible. Don't think for a second that they are in it for equity amongst conferences.

Sure but the B10 would have had more bids than the SEC since 2014. They’re just about equal. Also other P5s would never be shut out and all of them have had as many as 3 teams qualify in some of the those years. Much better situation for them than what they have now being shut out.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

3-loss Utah, who went 0-2 OOC against FBS (non-P5 btw) teams, automatically being provided a quota filling opportunity to be crowned MNC, no thanks.

3-loss Utah, provided an opportunity to compete in the prestigious Rose Bowl after doing well only in their regional conference, good for them.

Sure but other way to look at it which I prefer lol…after a qb change, team goes on a 9-1 run gets hot and who knows what kind of noise they may make in the playoffs.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

What’s going on in the SEC champ game is exactly why Sankey doesn’t have to budge. Mind you he’s got support from the G5 and others on the 6 highest but now for the second time the SEC might get two teams in while others get shut out.

 

[Mufasa94]

..,for the second time the SEC might get two teams in while others get shut out.

This is the biggest mindset problem. The CFP is set up to choose the top 4 individual teams which will play to determine the MNC. It just so happens 2 of them are from the SEC this year.

It was increased from 2 to 4 because of the many years where there wasn’t a clean resolution. Think of ‘04 with more than 2 regular season unbeatens, ‘03 OU blown out in their CCG but remaining #1 in computers to overrule the human polls, ‘11 Bama over Okie State for the second slot, a couple unbeaten minor conference teams left out, etc

This year should have absolutely zero controversy in regards to which 4 teams are chosen.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

This is the biggest mindset problem. The CFP is set up to choose the top 4 individual teams which will play to determine the MNC. It just so happens 2 of them are from the SEC this year.

It was increased from 2 to 4 because of the many years where there wasn’t a clean resolution. Think of ‘04 with more than 2 regular season unbeatens, ‘03 OU blown out in their CCG but remaining #1 in computers to overrule the human polls, ‘11 Bama over Okie State for the second slot, a couple unbeaten minor conference teams left out, etc

This year should have absolutely zero controversy in regards to which 4 teams are chosen.

I don’t think any controversy this year with the 4 and I’m okay with Alabama and UGA. They deserve a chance.

If the SEC gets two I don’t like it but it is what it is and I think they deserve it this year the way it’s played out. My point is that Sankey doesn’t have to budge an inch, his conference is sitting pretty at 4. It’s other conferences that should be doing everything they can to expand and not be shut out. The proposal by the subcommittee was very fair for everyone I don’t know why the hell some of them are putting up any fight. Top 6 and 5+1 are almost always likely to be the same result. Get over it people and just come to an agreement.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Some comments from MWC Commish Craig Thompson who was on the original working group

 

[fsg2_rivals]

3-loss Utah, who went 0-2 OOC against FBS (non-P5 btw) teams, automatically being provided a quota filling opportunity to be crowned MNC, no thanks.

3-loss Utah, provided an opportunity to compete in the prestigious Rose Bowl after doing well only in their regional conference, good for them.

Sounds like you weren't actually watching. They were a different team after replacing their QB, destroyed playoff-bound Oregon, then destroyed it again.

No different from a hot team making a late run in any sport. If they're so unworthy, they'll get bounced early.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Comments from ACC commish. Sounds like they (possibly Warren) could stand in way of expansion before the contract expires. Guess 450M isn’t enough incentive.

 

[DJ Spanky]

The only equitable way to do this is to shorten the regular season to 9 games and have a 128 team, single elimination playoff.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Comments from B12 commish

 

[Mufasa94]

Sounds like you weren't actually watching. They were a different team after replacing their QB, destroyed playoff-bound Oregon, then destroyed it again.

No different from a hot team making a late run in any sport. If they're so unworthy, they'll get bounced early.

Been watching cfb long enough to know it isn’t a run of the mill any sport. Part of that is knowing there have been consequences for failing to win.

Don’t fret, the trophy participation side will eventually win out. Started 20+ years ago with providing teams not good enough to win a game additional time to get the full credit of a win.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

 

[fsg2_rivals]

Been watching cfb long enough to know it isn’t a run of the mill any sport. Part of that is knowing there have been consequences for failing to win.

Don’t fret, the trophy participation side will eventually win out. Started 20+ years ago with providing teams not good enough to win a game additional time to get the full credit of a win.

Whatever, old school. You prefer a committee ordaining those worthy?

Conf champs is the best way to do it that doesn't involve off-field political bs.

 

[NickRU714]

Whatever, old school. You prefer a committee ordaining those worthy?

Conf champs is the best way to do it that doesn't involve off-field political bs.

So 11 team playoffs?
I’m assuming you mean all Conference Champs, right?

Or are you ordaining that only Conference Champs from 5 conferences are worthy?

 

[fsg2_rivals]

So 11 team playoffs?
I’m assuming you mean all Conference Champs, right?

Or are you ordaining that only Conference Champs from 5 conferences are worthy?

I'm fine with 11. Also fine with 6. Has there ever been a time in history when ALL G5 champs deserved in?

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

 

[Mufasa94]

Whatever, old school. You prefer a committee ordaining those worthy?

Conf champs is the best way to do it that doesn't involve off-field political bs.

Conference champs only? So the best way to determine a national champion is to ignore the results of 25-33% of a teams games and only consider the 67-75% of games that are regionally based that you selectively deem to be important?

Providing equal rewards regardless of performance reeks of a quota system, and is not a good system.

I do think 4 is the best. It would have settled practically all past controversial seasons with a only few outliers.

 

[FastMJ]

I do not believe it is well thought out if the main reason for jumping to 12 is to avoid ESPN keeping control for a couple years if it were to go to 8.

Keep at 4 through the current contract and actually look at all the factors in time for the new contract(s).

Not to mention that the current system is the right one

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

 

[NickRU714]

NIL Thread: It's not fair that some schools have advantages other schools don't!

Playoff Thread: Give P5 schools an advantage that G5/Indy schools don't!

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Here's a crazy idea on its face but maybe not really if it can break the impasse. The issue is at 12 teams.....5+1 vs 6 highest.

How about alternating the 2 formats for some time so they can see how it runs in practice. At least like 95% of the time it's gonna end up with the same results. It gives both sides a chance to save face and then hopefully after some time just stick with one solution after you've seen it run in practice and hard feelings will have dissipated by then too. It gives everyone a win and we can move on.

 

[MADHAT1]

Just make it 16.
The 11 conference champions are auto qualifiers and 5 at large.

 

[NickRU714]

Just make it 16.
The 11 conference champions are auto qualifiers and 5 at large.

Best idea.
Either all get AQ or none do.

Why should a P5 champion get preferential treatment over a G6 champ?

 

[RU_DIO]

Except for the gambling standpoint the NCCA BB tourney sucks as there are two many teams that have no business being in it. Since going to 64 what is the highest seeded team to win it all? Nova at 8?? A million years ago. The tournament should be 32 Max.

I don't think many people feel this way. It's so much fun when a low level team beats a P5 school in the lower rounds and when a Butler or VCU gets to the Final Four.

 

[RU_DIO]

Best idea.
Either all get AQ or none do.

Why should a P5 champion get preferential treatment over a G6 champ?

Nah, only P5 and the best team of the rest should get an AQ.

And,

Any Rutgers fan who doesn't want 12 teams is crazy. I'd like to see us in the playoffs eventually and having more teams in it helps our cause.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Best idea.
Either all get AQ or none do.

Why should a P5 champion get preferential treatment over a G6 champ?

I don't have a problem with G5 getting opportunity but don't want them taking up too many spots because it's not feasible. They don't play the schedule the P5 does, so no the opportunity should not be equal. I like highest 6 best which in could in theory get 2 G5s in a strange year but at least 1 G5 ever year is more than fair. Football isn't basketball. Basketball can add all those G5 teams and it won't be at the expense of of many worthy non conf champ teams. BTW 6 highest conf champs isn't AQ either, it's technically not tied to any particular conference but in practice obviously it's going to be the P5 in there.

The money and attention for this playoff is generated by the P5 conferences and their marquee programs not the G5 so the balance isn't going to be even. That's just the way it is. Just like the NIL stuff you bring up. It's hard for us to do what other high status programs do and that's just the way it is and have to accept it. 16 teams also makes it certain 17 games will be played, at 12 that's less likely. Some may think it's not a big deal but I don't think the admins want to touch the NFL season number all that often at the very least for optics if nothing else.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

https://www.si.com/college/2021/12/09/college-football-playoff-expansion-disagreement-12-team-8-team