http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/brett-mcmurphy/18938708

Re-posted from Conference Realignment Board:
From the article:

If a conference champion was among the top six in the rankings, it would automatically qualify for the four-team playoff. The top four ranked conference champions among the top six would qualify and if less than four conference champions were among the top six teams then the remaining spots would be filled by the highest ranked non-conference champions or an independent (Notre Dame, BYU, Army or Navy).

This achieves the same result I had suggested for the compromise (top 3 conference champions but an at-large could bump a fourth conference champ if they were 'x' spots ahead of the fourth conference champ).

This is a cleaner way of addressing and communicating both the #2 Alabama of 2011 issue and the #6 Louisville of 2006 and the #6 Utah of 2008 issues.

If the BiG, Pac, Big East, and ACC could rally around this proposal they would be smart to do so.
ACC commissioner John Swofford said he like's the simplicity of No. 1 vs. No. 4 and No. 2 vs. No. 3.
Well, that confirms it. He's an idiot.

Cheers,
Neil

far from an idiot

I'm surprised Omni --- a normally rational poster --- would characterize Swofford as an Idiot.

In comparison to the competition in the other conferences, Swofford seems like a pretty sharp guy who has created a lot of change in the college football landscape. Did it all work out as well as the most optimistic might have wanted? Probably not. But the clock is still running. He certainly took the Big East to the cleaners.

From a corporate planning perspective, his plan and the execution of it have been near perfect. If only Miami and FSU were what they were, he'd be heralded as a genius.

I do not know why he would back a system of Top 4. Does he realize that the ACC hasn't been very good as of late? He should be fighting for a Top 8 conference champ so the ACC has a shot. Top 6 they still fail. looking back at past seasons and using the future conference make ups:

From 2003-2011 (last 9 seasons) the ACC Champ would have qualified just ONCE and they would have had ZERO at large. By comparison the SEC Champ 8 times (9 teams total), P12 Champ 8 times (8 total), B12 Champ 7 times (10 total), B1G Champ 5 times (6 total), and Big East Champ 2 times (2 total).

Heck during that span the ACC Champ averaged a 10.4 ranking in the BCS. That isn't even close to qualifying. And if I am Delany I want to expand it to include the Top 8 as well because only 5 of 9 years the B1G Champ qualified. If you expand to Top 8 the ACC Champ would have had an additional TWO appearances. The BE Champ an additional one. The B1G would have had 1 less bid and the B12 2 less.

BTW under a Top 6 it would be possible to have the #1 BCS team not make the playoff. See 2003 where OU was #1 in the BCS but was not B12 champ. Had FSU been #6 instead of #7 then we would have seen #2, #3, #4, and #6 in the playoff.

I hesitate to characterize another person's post, but. . .

I think omni was talking specifically about Swofford's position favoring the 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3 playoff format. That is a formula for the ACC to be (often) excluded from the championship race, and a boon to the SEC, and occasionally even the Big 10. This past season, while rather exceptional, is a template for the SEC's continued domination of college football.

Just to further the Top 8 Conf Champ:

SEC, B12, P12 would make it 8 of last 9 years
B1G 5 of 9
ACC, BE 3 of 9

That would be great for the ACC and BE but stink for the SEC. With a Top 8 Conf Champ system we would have seen only one non Conf Champ make the playoffs (Bama last year). And going forward one would expect the following:

SEC, B12, P12 Champs make it every year
B1G Champ two in three years
ACC Champ one in three years

I wouldn't expect the BE Champ to make it. Boise is the best program but with a more challenging conf schedule, a BE CG, and more travel it will be harder for them to make it through a season without a L and a Top 8 ranking.

The ACC may be seen as the #5 BCS conference after the B1G, B12, Pac-eleventy, and $EC, but it was Swofford's raid of the Big East that put it in a stable position and made sure it didn't end up in the situation the Big East is in.

Picking up SU and Pitt to drive the nail into the Big East as a major conference and making the ACC the pre-eminent conference on the eastern seaboard was a great move.

He may or may not be an idiot, but he's our idiot.

Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

being the 5th of 5, yet advocating a 4 team playoff.....is genius.

baby steps and hes shown to be a team player.

hes already positioned himself to ally with the SEC or b1g when they bitch their 2nd best team is left out and the push for a 6 or 8 team playoff begins.

If the goal is to maximize the chance for one of your conference teams to appear in the 4 team playoff then the ACC should support the conference champion model with the cap at being ranked in the top 6 (8 would be even better). An ACC school will be selected more times under that scenario than if they just go with the top 4 ranked teams regardless of being a conference champ. Also it provides ND with an incentive to join a conference. Under the top 4 ranked teams model, ND would have an equal shot with anyone else so there is zero incentive to ever join a conference. I can see why the SEC wants the top 4 ranked teams model (so they have a much greater chance of getting multiple teams in to the playoff) but I can't see at all why Swofford should support that. I can't see any conference other than the SEC supporting it.

Swofford is agreeing with Mike Slive, who wants the Top 4 in whatever rankings system is used, regardless of conference affiliation, to try to have more SEC vs. SEC National Championship games. He is allying with Slive because the Big Ten and the Pac are going to be even tighter than ticks from here on out, and because standing against the Big Ten is necessary to persuading ND to join the ACC.

The long term big picture has all these particulars:

The playoff is not going to remain 4 teams for long. I expect to see many writers calling for 8 teams before the first National semi-final is played. I think we will see 16 not many years after the first 8 team playoff. So where you land right now about how the 4 are chosen is not particularly relevant to what will be the landscape in a few years.

By the time the playoff is 8 teams, the champs of all Major conferences (and there are 5 now) will be given automatic invites, with certain conditions (at least 9 wins and/or Top 12 ranking, etc.).

Slive intends to have a conference ally for when the SEC needs it to take on the Rose Bowl Alliance. As Slive and the SEC detest and are smart enough to never trust Texas, and Texas is almost the sole proprietor of the Big XII, Slive has 1 option:the ACC. Swofford from his time talking to Texas last year learned how duplicitous it is and knows its wrath. And he knows that the Rose Bowl Alliance would love to gut the ACC so ND has only 1 option regarding a conference for all sports. Thus Swofford knows that the ACC needs an ally conference: the SEC is the option.

Slive and the SEC do not want ND in the Big Ten under any circumstances, and would greatly prefer that ND not be in the Big XII for all sports but football, because that might help Big XII basketball at the expense of the SEC. Even with ND in the ACC, Slive and the SEC would not be threatened by ACC football because it would be a league with a bunch of small schools, a quarter of them north of the Mason-Dixon line.

Swofford has been trying to get ND into the ACC since he became commissioner.

Swofford has at least two immediate major challenges: to renegotiate the ACC TV contract with ESPN so the ACC has a payout comparable to the other major conferences and to make sure the ACC is best positioned to participate within the new playoff games, which includes revenue payout.

Although the ACC has a number of currently and historically strong teams, the rankings are heavily influenced by the assumption the SEC has the strongest teams, with the Big 10 and PAC 12 and Big 12 all having highly ranked teams in recent years.

It seems obvious the ACC would have the best chance of participating by supporting the proposal of including conference champions ranked in the top 6, and permitting participation of a top ranked "other" team only if there were not 4 top 6 ranked conference champions.

It's only a great move IF the league performs well, particularly in football. And the ACC is already hampered by a bad TV contract and small schools with pitiful fanbases.

Looking in the rearview mirror and seeing the Big East behind us shouldn't be our focus anymore or be a judgment as to how well a conference commissioner is doing. We need to look at what is in front of us and what it will take to get us on an even playing field with them.

Cheers,
Neil

Exactly. I'm hoping the ACC presidents see it this way and give Swofford his marching orders.

Cheers,
Neil

And he's not planning on FSU and Miami being down forever. I would assume he's thinking what's the best case scenario for the ACC when FSU and Miami get closer to where they were in the 90s.

If he thinks in the now, then he's considered a have not. I wouldn't want to align with that group.

The fact that the ACC isn't the Big East is exactly the main reason that Swofford is no idiot.

the balance of power is always shifting.

is it in the midwest(b1g)? cali (usc)? southwest(texas, okie)? the south (flast, mia, fla)? or the deep south(bama, lsu, tenn)?

to paraphrase a quote line from my favorite NYG board about Eli.............the ACC will be fine.

and at the end of the day........

Just Win Baby.

Again, focusing on the ACC not being the Big East is the wrong approach. More important to focus on the ACC not being the SEC, the BiG, or now, the Pac. Do posters even realize that the Pac has now surpassed the ACC? And that is with only one King - USC.

Cheers,
Neil

While I agree that football is cyclical and that eventually both FSU and Miami will turn things around, with SOS rumored to be back in as part of whatever the new rankings will be, that factor alone could hinder the ACC in any Top 4 only playoff.

As for the belief that an 8-team playoff is around the corner, considering how long it's taken to get to a 4-team playoff I wouldn't hold my breath. Nor, if one comes, will it necessarily take the shape of being one that is played after conference championships.

Cheers,
Neil

Certainly some interesting and good points spread throughout the thread. But here is another take...."I know the BE (substitute SEC) and the ACC is not one of them"....

In bringing 'Cuse and Pitt to the ACC, Swofford did as the conference wanted....two teams with basketball prowess and football history that may rise again. He took out the BE in such a way I do not expect it to either survive long and/or be a competitive league as is the ACC, SEC, B1g...etc.
Basketball was the reason that 'Cuse and Pitt (probably would have 'been 'Cuse and Uconn if BC wasnt such a Nancy--not counting that the Big 12 may have wanted to expand into PA)....so the ACC was driven more by strengthening basketball because that is what it was known for and it was being trumped by the BE...so take 'Cuse and Pitt and get back to #1.
As far as football is concerned, FSU and Miami are sitting there wanting to get better. If you recall, both teams were strong in the '80s and '90s. If they get back then the ACC becomes important again in football.

Swofford now has to find two schools to reach 16 that will bring football in as a top sport. Even Coach K said this. It was unfortunate that WVU did not have better academic standard as its all around sports and football capability would have been good for the ACC. If we look over the field and geography, there isnt even a few teams for the ACC to expand with that play good football and are academically strong. In fact, aside from ND, there probably isnt one hanging around right now...so Swofford would have to steal two teams if ND does not come to the ACC. And those teams may have to come from a conference and only teams to raid maybe Penn ST, Vandy, WVU (discussed above) and...damn, hope ND joins cause there isnt a whole lot of good academic and football playing schools left.

I believe Swofford is a pretty smart guy and everything he does is predicated on first strengthening the ACC and second fighting to get ND to join. Do any of us here believe that in the next five years any football team other than FSU or Miami can be a top 4 or top 6 team. I DO NOT. If that is the case, then support the four team playoff, endeavor to get closer to the SEC....something like B1G and PAC association and bide time. Eventually, ND is going to have to join somewhere as good teams will all be tied up in conferences and may not want to play ND because of tough schedules.

Lastly, Swofford must negotiate a very good TV package. He has several points in his favor...one demographics of the NE and SE corridor including Florida...one of only two regions really growing at this time and projected into the future....he has one of the two best basketball conferences...and ACC football is okay not great. If this is all about the money, and most of us think it is; than anything Swofford does must be to entice in whatever way that ND joins and no good football teams leave. I doubt that Swofford decided all by himself to support a four team playoff. Something tells me Presidents of Universities and ADs have a lot to say...and Swofford is following their direction and his beliefs.

What do you think?

You could be right, but I think the hurdle of going from 2 to 4 is bigger than the hurdle would be to go from 4 to 8. 2 to 4 changes the landscape, opens the door that had remained shut for so long.

Now you have buy-in on the concept. From here, it's just enhancements.

Even with Virginia Tech being a very good program, people historically have seen the ACC as having two kings - Miami and Florida State - thile those two down, and Oregon up in the Pac-12, that's the difference.

If Florida State puts up a team competing for the national title, then people associate it with raising the whole conference. Look no further than ACC basketball, it's perennially been Duke-UNC and a bunch of meh, but people still associate it as a great basketball conference. People care about the top, and for the time being, there's no one at the top from the ACC. That'll change.

I find it hard to believe that WVU could be that different a school than Virginia Tech. Is WVU really that much further down the food chain academically than Tech is? Either way that is the one school the ACC could have easily taken if they really wanted to improve the level of their football.

Yes. The academic standings of VaTech and WVU are immensely different.

Yes, and that's not saying VPI is a great school by and stretch.

Louisville is also a crap school.

The only way that the ACC can get fully on an equal playing field with the SEC and Big Ten in terms of TV money and prime exposure is to get ND to join. ND has the nation's largest TV fan base for football, and football is about 5 times more important than basketball. ND joining the ACC would double the value of ACC football, because it would guarantee prime national interest in the ACC regular season to determine whether ND gets to the Championship Game.

That means that giving ND what it needs to give up its football independence is absolutely necessary. That must be Swofford's main focus, one that has no remotely close second focus.

ACC Presidents will defer to the Commissioner on matters like whether it is better to have only conference champs in a 4 team playoff. He will certainly hear what everybody has to say, but he will develop a plan and implement it.

Swofford has a long range plan to get ND to join, and part of it includes closer ties with the SEC. If, for example, we eventually get to something like the Pac-Big Ten deal to have every league team play 1 game annually against a team in the allied conference, then ND as an ACC member could use that to play in Texas (say in the Jerry Jones Dome against either A&M or Arkansas) or in St. Louis (against Mizzou) or in the Super Dome (against LSU or Bama).

UNC has wasted Top 10 talent in the Davis years - see all the NFL players produced. So if Fedora is like the young Mack Brown, whose final 2 UNC teams were Top 5, then UNC can se a big rise before long. Fedora inherits more talent than Mack did, and Fedora is more experienced as HC than Mack was when came to Chapel Hill. Clemson has had Top 10 talent many times the past 20 years and choked it away. If Dabo can learn from his mistakes, Clemson can be Top 10 this year. Beamer's teams tend to overachieve a little based on available talent, but blow 1 or 2 games it should have won every year. If the Hokies can stop losing games they should win and stop losing 1 big OOC game badly each year, VT can be a Top 5 team.

Pitt sits surrounded by talent. If ACC membership and new HC Chryst mean that Pitt starts recruiting PA and adjacent OH better, and if Chryst needs little time to learn on the job, Pitt can be a Top 10 team.

We are not that far off.

--------------------------------

I love how it is assumed WVU is a football powerhouse.

Last year, last place SU won 49-23 on Oct 21.
UL won 38-35 on 11/5.

WVU beat Cinn 24-21 on 11/12.
WVU beat Pitt 21-20 on 11/25.
WVU beat USF 30-27 on 12/1.

Their last 3 conference games were won by 7 points: almost the definition of parity, in a conference assumed to be uncompetitive.

Their huge win over Clemson 70- 33 was a shocker; I guess that's what makes college football interesting.


------------------

The ACC selection of SU and Pitt wasn't about BB schools vs football schools.

It was a selection based on expanding the ACC market footprint in the northeast and selecting teams that have the potential to contribute; it was also about affinity: selecting a university the ACC schools want to be associated with.

Both Miami and FSU have top 10 ratings for recruits this year; with new coaches, I would be surprised if they don't return to playing at a higher competitive level.

-----------------


"Jim Delany says he would back champs-only playoffs, but with a minimum ranking"

with minimum ranking of 6.

That's likely to be the agreement, since it is certainly in the interest of all conferences other than the SEC and leaves a spot open for all other teams if the top 6 teams aren't conference champs.

I'd love to have a condition in this agreement that throws out the preseason rankings. If they are still using the coaches poll then don't rank teams until the first Monday in October.