the number to 24? Pretty radical if you ask me. I don`t like 12, want 16, but don`t blame Sankey for not being willing to go to 24. Seems pretty ridiculous to be to go from 12 to 24. I asked why so I`m guessing $$$ is the reason.
I don`t get the Big 10 - they are stuck on wanting 24 teams? Why? Everything has been gradual, as going to 16 would be, but they want to double
- Thread starter Psycock
- Start date
In a way, I actually think that's where it's headed. I think the P4 teams (plus ND and maybe a couple of others) will break off from the NCAA and do their own thing, and negotiate one giant TV deal involving all of the relevant networks, similar to the NFL's deal. Every game is against P4 competition, making the TV rights more valuable (no patsy teams to have to schedule around). Once that happens, the teams may be divided into some kind of geographically-logical divisions, but the conferences themselves cease to exist.
Because they're greedy like that! These conferences are way too big, I really hope they implode internally! I seem to remember around 1998 or 1999 the WAC having about 16 teams, it got too big to sustain and half of that conference broke off and formed the Mountain West Conference.
None of these conferences should have more than 12 teams, they should have at least eight, and above all they should geographically make sense!
None of these conferences should have more than 12 teams, they should have at least eight, and above all they should geographically make sense!
There will always have to be some sort of conferences or divisions in football with geographic ties. I don't think it is reasonable to have a pool of 80 or so teams that are all trying to schedule each other every year. Travel alone would make one national college football group untenable.
8 10 team geographically oriented conferences.
Any team wanting to play for the national championship MUST BE IN A CONFERENCE. (Get over yourself Notre Dame)
8 conference champions play in a 3 round playoff to determine national champion.
No byes, no seeding, no polls or committees to determine conference champions.
I think it was the right move. I think it produces greater value for the fans by eliminating an additional cupcake. I'm certain it gets all the teams and fanbases exposure to each other in a shorter time span.
We have and have had more than that in actuality since the playoff started. The regular season and Championship Saturday were culling teams every week - all the way down to the requisite number. All we're doing is extending the end of the season for the sake of TV money by hunting
more unworthy teams to add.
That's where the "may be divided into some kind of geographically-logical divisions," part of my post comes into play. I think your 80-team super division works fine, but I was thinking more of a 72-team super division (the current P4 plus about 3 others, if my math is correct). Those 72 teams get divided into eight 9-team geographically logical "conferences" or "divisions." The winners of those 8 divisions are your 8 automatic bids, with 8 at-large teams for a 16-team playoff. You play the other 8 teams in your division plus 4 additional games. I think ALL traditional rivalries would be maintained (or at least have a chance to be maintained).
This is true. The Convicts vs Catholics regular season game was a defacto playoff game, as were the annual matchups between FSU and Miami. In the 90s, when Fulmer's Tennessee teams squared off against Spurrier's Florida teams in about the third week of the season, that game was also viewed as a defacto playoff game. We'll never again see regular season games again that match that level of interest an intensity.
I think we're saying close to the same thing. I don't want any at-large teams because that would bring in polls or some sort of committee or some other subjective "who deserves to be in" type thing. I want a true champion derived from teams that are in the playoff because they won games on the field, not because of the "eye test" or "quality wins" or any other subjective BS.
In my mind, the 10 teams in each conference would play 9 conference games, every team in the conference every year, and 3 OOC games against teams from the other 7 conferences, playing teams from FBS or G5 level programs would not be allowed. Traditional rivalries could be maintained and teams could schedule really great OOC games since a loss would not affect their chances of getting in the playoff. Conferences could determine their champion however they wanted to, championship game, some sort of conference level committee, head to head record, whatever they wanted to do.
I don't necessarily disagree about the at-large bids, but I don't think it's realistic to expect the playoffs to contract at this point. Playoffs are like government - they only grow. Additionally, I think teams are going to want an opportunity for at large bids - even with an all-P4 super division, not all "conferences" are going to be equal each year. I'd also want to encourage teams to schedule those tough traditional rivals that might have ended up in separate geographic divisions (ND v Southern Cal, or Florida vs LSU, for example).
I agree G5 and FCS games shouldn't count. But I'd go further and not even allow the games to be scheduled. If we're chasing an NFL-type model, then that means every game needs to be a compelling matchup to maximize TV dollars.
To be clear, I'm not saying this is what I want for college football, but what I consider to the be the best path forward for a screwed up situation. I'm a traditionalist, so I'd love to go back and redo the BCS with something like a "bowls plus one" scenario. But that bird flew the coup a long time ago.
My question is that with 24 teams how do.you do the qualifiers. I saw that all the commissioner had said each P4 gets 4 in that format. The additional 8 teams are filled with at-large bids. The football fan in me just loves to watch these games. But in what world does the 5th or 6th place team in any conference have a chance at winning the Natty? Honestly if you cant finish in the top 4 of a conference? Regardless of the precieved strength of that conference. 24 may be too many?? I love the new blood in the natty tonight, but both of these teams were solid top 4 in their conference. The teams that were fringe teams are gone.
Go ahead and make it 128 teams. EVERYBODY GETS A PLAYOFF TROPHY!!!
Think about how this will help the self esteem of all the players.
Well, the Big 10 just won their 3rd consecutive national title so they are in the CFB driver's seat at the moment. The SEC still carries considerable weight, but they aren't anyone's big brother like a few years ago.
It's absurd, no matter how entertaining it turns out to be for some people. Among other things, you add to the attrition factor. Good teams will lose key players while swatting patently undeserving teams. You know that there aren't 16 teams that deserve a shot at the national championship, let alone 24.
Let's face it, the SEC has been surpassed. The brand is sullied and will suffer significant loss going forward in terms of both prestige - already in the toilet - and money.
It's getting absurd what is being piled on in the postseason. With a 24-team CFP, you're looking at up to 5 additional games, 4 games for those teams with a bye. That means you're looking at 17-18 games. Limiting the calendar/schedule used to be a priority b/c of the student athlete. Now we're asking them to play darn near another half season of games.
SEC has never had the money the B1G schools have. The SEC was dominant because the best players lived in the South and wanted to go to school close enough to home that their family could come watch them play. Now, a player can charter a plane to bring his family to every game no matter where they play. SEC schools (outside of the Texas/OK oil money schools) can't match the money the alumni of the B1G schools.
The SEC was upwardly mobile both financially AND competitively - and comparable - until now. Don't think that damage hasn't been done.
Nevertheless, the charade continues. SEC still lands 4 teams in top 10 of the final poll.
Just stop with the nonsense! Let the private sector purchase the rights to each schools name and pay them accordingly. Mark Cuban would be the first one to purchase a team. Who you think would purchase the Gamecocks?
These are good teams, not exceptional teams. Saban gone and coaching instability elsewhere have wounded the league. I do expect some recovery but I don't know how long it will take to evidence itself.