Regarding the new CFP | Syracusefan.com

Regarding the new CFP

texasorange

2nd String
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
579
Like
350
Should the commissioners of the ACC, the PAC 12 and the Big Ten pull the brakes on this new 12 team CFP? It seems to me that the SEC, Texas, Oklahoma and Notre Dame were playing a side game that perfectly suited them in regards to the new CFP, while new leadership was being installed at the other conferences. Just a thought…
 
Should the commissioners of the ACC, the PAC 12 and the Big Ten pull the brakes on this new 12 team CFP? It seems to me that the SEC, Texas, Oklahoma and Notre Dame were playing a side game that perfectly suited them in regards to the new CFP, while new leadership was being installed at the other conferences. Just a thought…
Throw in ESPN as a co-conspirator

This looks more like too much pandemic zooming with bored rich guys in Austin and Tuscaloosa

Similar to the European super league for soccer guys thinking how much more money they’ll make
 
And if the reports are accurate; that these negotiations between the SEC and Texas/Oklahoma were going for almost a year while the new CFP was being worked on ; doesn’t this lead to ESPN’s culpability? Who else gave the SEC & UT & OU the “yes” this will lead to $60 million per year to each university? And Sankey & Swarbrick were on the CFP committee that spearheaded this . SEC & Notre Dame….
 
And if the reports are accurate; that these negotiations between the SEC and Texas/Oklahoma were going for almost a year while the new CFP was being worked on ; doesn’t this lead to ESPN’s culpability? Who else gave the SEC & UT & OU the “yes” this will lead to $60 million per year to each university? And Sankey & Swarbrick were on the CFP committee that spearheaded this . SEC & Notre Dame….

If i'm the big 12 i'm definitely considering my legal options.
 
And if the reports are accurate; that these negotiations between the SEC and Texas/Oklahoma were going for almost a year while the new CFP was being worked on ; doesn’t this lead to ESPN’s culpability? Who else gave the SEC & UT & OU the “yes” this will lead to $60 million per year to each university? And Sankey & Swarbrick were on the CFP committee that spearheaded this . SEC & Notre Dame….
$60 MILLION per year? I guess that's so every SEC institution can own and operate its own theme park
 
Should the commissioners of the ACC, the PAC 12 and the Big Ten pull the brakes on this new 12 team CFP? It seems to me that the SEC, Texas, Oklahoma and Notre Dame were playing a side game that perfectly suited them in regards to the new CFP, while new leadership was being installed at the other conferences. Just a thought…
Yes. 12 teams is too many.

If we must expand beyond 4 (and the BT demands that) then 8 should be the max. There are now 4 Power Conferences. 4 champs have auto bids. 1 slot goes to best team from non-Power 4 leagues. The committee picks 3 at-large teams. No more than 3 teams can come from any league.
 
Yes. 12 teams is too many.

If we must expand beyond 4 (and the BT demands that) then 8 should be the max. There are now 4 Power Conferences. 4 champs have auto bids. 1 slot goes to best team from non-Power 4 leagues. The committee picks 3 at-large teams.

No more than 2 teams can come from any league.

FIFY.

THIS is how you save the non-$EC / non-B1G conferences.

May make TX and OK think twice, if they know that being 3rd wheel in $EC ='s sitting home,
vs
being 1st or 2nd in their current conference = 's being in the Playoffs.
 
FIFY.

THIS is how you save the non-$EC / non-B1G conferences.

May make TX and OK think twice, if they know that being 3rd wheel in $EC ='s sitting home,
vs
being 1st or 2nd in their current conference = 's being in the Playoffs.
The best reason, and a very good one I think, to restrict an 8 team playoff to no more than 2 teams from any league is that so many large and super-sized leagues means we have fewer inter-league games.

In the past, the BT would have joined with the SEC in wanting the possibility of 3 league teams in an 8 team playoff, because the BT has always been arrogant. With OU and Texas in the SEC, the BT should be leading the charge to restrict the playoff slots to no more than 2 teams per league. If the BT takes that lead, it can come to pass.
 
The best reason, and a very good one I think, to restrict an 8 team playoff to no more than 2 teams from any league is that so many large and super-sized leagues means we have fewer inter-league games.

In the past, the BT would have joined with the SEC in wanting the possibility of 3 league teams in an 8 team playoff, because the BT has always been arrogant. With OU and Texas in the SEC, the BT should be leading the charge to restrict the playoff slots to no more than 2 teams per league. If the BT takes that lead, it can come to pass.
12 was always ridiculous.

8 is the most and i think 6 ideal.

the B1G and the PAC may just go play the Rose Bowl and if necessary, declare themselves the National Champion.
 
12 was always ridiculous.

8 is the most and i think 6 ideal.

the B1G and the PAC may just go play the Rose Bowl and if necessary, declare themselves the National Champion.
This - only ND, BYU and UCONN get to battle it out for a spot atop the Independence Bowl and crown themselves
 
12 was always ridiculous.

8 is the most and i think 6 ideal.

the B1G and the PAC may just go play the Rose Bowl and if necessary, declare themselves the National Champion.

It should be 6. There needs to be a reward for being #1 so at most you take 7 teams. But do we really need three at larges or conference champs outside the Top 8? If the Top 4 conference champs get in then the worst team each year would be (taking out Oklahoma):

2020 #8 Cincy (#6 and #7 get left out)
2019 #6 Oregon
2018 #8 UCF (#5 and #7 get left out)
2017 #8 USC (#6 and #7 get left out)
2016 #5 Penn State
2015 #6 Stanford
2014 #4 Ohio State

The G6 would have access (made it twice) so they can't complain. Top 4 teams were left out: 0.0 times. Only once was a Top 5 team left out. Can the 3rd best at large really complain?
 
Last edited:
It should be 6. There needs to be a reward for being #1 so at most you take 7 teams. But do we really need three at larges or conference champs outside the Top 8? If the Top 4 conference champs get in then the worst team each year would be (taking out Oklahoma):

2020 #8 Cincy (#6 and #7 get left out)
2019 #6 Oregon
2018 #8 UCF (#5 and #7 get left out)
2017 #8 USC (#6 and #7 get left out)
2016 #4 Washington
2015 #6 Stanford
2014 #4 Ohio State

The G6 would have access (made it twice) so they can't complain. Top 4 teams were left out: 0.0 times. Only once was a Top 5 team left out. Can the 3rd best at large really complain?

If you wanted to go to 7 and take the Top 5 conference champs:

2020 #12 Coastal Carolina
2019 #7 Baylor
2018 #9 Washington
2017 #12 UCF
2016 #12 Oklahoma State
2015 #11 TCU
2014 #5 Baylor

How can you justify it when too often they are outside the Top 10?
 
If you wanted to go to 7 and take the Top 5 conference champs:

2020 #12 Coastal Carolina
2019 #7 Baylor
2018 #9 Washington
2017 #12 UCF
2016 #12 Oklahoma State
2015 #11 TCU
2014 #5 Baylor

How can you justify it when too often they are outside the Top 10?
King, 6 is the best.

there is no question.

thank you for the research.

it still keeps the integrity of multiple bowls.

dropping it down to 12, ruins a bunch of good games for schools, there really is no need.
 
It should be 6. There needs to be a reward for being #1 so at most you take 7 teams. But do we really need three at larges or conference champs outside the Top 8? If the Top 4 conference champs get in then the worst team each year would be (taking out Oklahoma):

2020 #8 Cincy (#6 and #7 get left out)
2019 #6 Oregon
2018 #8 UCF (#5 and #7 get left out)
2017 #8 USC (#6 and #7 get left out)
2016 #5 Penn State
2015 #6 Stanford
2014 #4 Ohio State

The G6 would have access (made it twice) so they can't complain. Top 4 teams were left out: 0.0 times. Only once was a Top 5 team left out. Can the 3rd best at large really complain?

I'm a fan 8 because I'm not a fan of bye weeks for higher ranked teams. You could sell me on it but first you'd have to institute a solution to the rankings problem. 8-10 SEC teams in the preseason top 25 means win and beat a ranked opponent for the resume or lose and barely drop having lost to a ranked opponent.

Teams should either start the season ranked where they finished the prior (as with Cuse currently picked last in the ACC) or preseason rankings should simply not exist nor any rankings until a few conference games are played. It is currently near impossible for a lower or unranked team to climb into the top 4 and equally difficult for a 1 loss preseason top 4 to miss the playoffs.
 
Throw in ESPN as a co-conspirator

This looks more like too much pandemic zooming with bored rich guys in Austin and Tuscaloosa

Similar to the European super league for soccer guys thinking how much more money they’ll make

To be fair the NCAA and UEFA both are incredibly corrupt. Not a fan of recent tactics and not certain the solution but just because a bad solution is attempted doesn't mean the status quo is good.

At some point a viable/palatable new option has to arise otherwise it ends up looking like the US political system circa since anyone can remember.
 
To be fair the NCAA and UEFA both are incredibly corrupt. Not a fan of recent tactics and not certain the solution but just because a bad solution is attempted doesn't mean the status quo is good.

At some point a viable/palatable new option has to arise otherwise it ends up looking like the US political system circa since anyone can remember.
Yeah, agreed 100%. Problem is rich folks prioritizing their wallets without thinking about the health of the whole thing.

In both footballs ;) they are sitting on a cash cow. The goal should be more holistic - make money while doing as little harm as possible and even growing the thing into something better in as many places as possible.
 
Yeah, agreed 100%. Problem is rich folks prioritizing their wallets without thinking about the health of the whole thing.

In both footballs ;) they are sitting on a cash cow. The goal should be more holistic - make money while doing as little harm as possible and even growing the thing into something better in as many places as possible.

It's different realities and priorities honestly. As someone who's not overly wealthy personally it's easy to think what I'd do if so HOWEVER I also kind of understand those who are solely focused on share holders and profit margins. Interesting dynamic for sure and not sure the solution unless societal improvements equally become monetized. Otherwise, to a major corp/investor/donor, what is the point?
 
I'm a fan 8 because I'm not a fan of bye weeks for higher ranked teams. You could sell me on it but first you'd have to institute a solution to the rankings problem. 8-10 SEC teams in the preseason top 25 means win and beat a ranked opponent for the resume or lose and barely drop having lost to a ranked opponent.

Teams should either start the season ranked where they finished the prior (as with Cuse currently picked last in the ACC) or preseason rankings should simply not exist nor any rankings until a few conference games are played. It is currently near impossible for a lower or unranked team to climb into the top 4 and equally difficult for a 1 loss preseason top 4 to miss the playoffs.

How many conference champs are you taking with 8 teams? How many at larges? If you have 8 teams you better have the top seeds host the 1st round. If it is at a neutral site, what point is being #1? If you get to the playoffs healthy as a 5 seed it is better than grinding out the season as the 1 seed. All that matters is making the playoffs.

IMO at larges should be capped at 2 teams. Do we really need the 3rd best SEC team getting in every year? Doesn't that render the SEC regular season meaningless? And the SEC CG? If you are a lock for the playoffs do you rest your best players in the SEC CG? Especially if you are playing a bubble team which gives the conference more money if they win?

With 8 teams and the Top 5 conference champs the last at large would be:

2020 #6 Oklahoma (3rd in SEC West). SEC West gets 3 teams.
2019 #8 Wisconsin (1st B1G West). SEC gets 3 teams.
2018 #5 Georgia (1st in SEC East). SEC gets 3 teams.
2017 #6 Wisconsin (1st in B1G West). SEC gets 3 teams.
2016 #7 (2nd SEC West). B1G East gets 3 teams.
2015 #7 Ohio State (2nd B1G East). B1G gets 3 teams.
2014 #8 Michigan State (2nd in B1G East). No one gets 3 teams.

How can we justify having a team that comes in 3rd place in their own division make the playoffs? or a team with 3 losses?
 
How many conference champs are you taking with 8 teams? How many at larges? If you have 8 teams you better have the top seeds host the 1st round. If it is at a neutral site, what point is being #1? If you get to the playoffs healthy as a 5 seed it is better than grinding out the season as the 1 seed. All that matters is making the playoffs.

IMO at larges should be capped at 2 teams. Do we really need the 3rd best SEC team getting in every year? Doesn't that render the SEC regular season meaningless? And the SEC CG? If you are a lock for the playoffs do you rest your best players in the SEC CG? Especially if you are playing a bubble team which gives the conference more money if they win?

With 8 teams and the Top 5 conference champs the last at large would be:

2020 #6 Oklahoma (3rd in SEC West). SEC West gets 3 teams.
2019 #8 Wisconsin (1st B1G West). SEC gets 3 teams.
2018 #5 Georgia (1st in SEC East). SEC gets 3 teams.
2017 #6 Wisconsin (1st in B1G West). SEC gets 3 teams.
2016 #7 (2nd SEC West). B1G East gets 3 teams.
2015 #7 Ohio State (2nd B1G East). B1G gets 3 teams.
2014 #8 Michigan State (2nd in B1G East). No one gets 3 teams.

How can we justify having a team that comes in 3rd place in their own division make the playoffs? or a team with 3 losses?

5 conference champs, 1 G5 spot locked, 2 at large. Cap 2 teams per conference.

Conference championships still mean something to most schools as far as I know. I'd love an ACC title.

Have no issue with either the higher seed hosting or neutral site. Benefit of being a 1 seed would be playing the 8 seed Vs dropping to 5 and playing the 4. Bit like NCAA tourney seeding. Of course the preseason rankings issue still persists in this scenario
 

Similar threads

    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Football
Replies
6
Views
582
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Thursday for Football
Replies
4
Views
386
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Football
Replies
6
Views
348
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Thursday for Football
Replies
10
Views
473
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Football
Replies
4
Views
415

Forum statistics

Threads
167,131
Messages
4,681,953
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
313
Guests online
2,370
Total visitors
2,683


Top Bottom