CFP Expansion Potentially Tabled till 2026

[isucy86]

Man people think the playoff committee is biased and changed their rules for teams. That is nuts. They've used the same formula since the first playoff. Follow @cfb_matrix, they predict the playoff ranking each week and are off by less than one spot on average. Nuts that people still think this way.

Regardless, there is no reason to have a committee select teams. The practice just opens itself to criticism of bias/rules shifting. Instead, just use a ranking system based on objective/quantifiable criteria. Be transparent about the criteria and let Watson do the rest.

My other pet peeve, if there is expansion to 12 teams, why play Conference Championship games. I think the loser in the CCG's might get pushed out of a 12 team playoff in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams that don't play in their CCG. But since greed rules, the conferences will want to keep their CCG.

 

[CyCrazy]

Regardless, there is no reason to have a committee select teams. The practice just opens itself to criticism of bias/rules shifting. Instead, just use a ranking system based on objective/quantifiable criteria. Be transparent about the criteria and let Watson do the rest.

My other pet peeve, if there is expansion to 12 teams, why play Conference Championship games. I think the loser in the CCG's might get pushed out of a 12 team playoff in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams that don't play in their CCG. But since greed rules, the conferences will want to keep their CCG.

The committee is inherently bias. Its made up of commissioners, ads, and retired people who align with a school or conference. They will always do whats best for said team or conference.

 

[HFCS]

Got hoodwinked by the B10. No scheduling alliance and no CFP expansion. B10 got what they wanted by keeping the alliance together until this announcement came out. Will be fascinating to see how the “playoff” shakes out in 4 years. 4 teams, 12 teams, or nothing when the contract is over.

They were morons for not realizing the true alliance should be the big 12 and ACc.

 

[HFCS]

Man people think the playoff committee is biased and changed their rules for teams. That is nuts. They've used the same formula since the first playoff. Follow @cfb_matrix, they predict the playoff ranking each week and are off by less than one spot on average. Nuts that people still think this way.

This guy thinks requiring 13 or 6 games and disqualifying a 12 game season is rational.

Apologies if I’m missing the sarcasm. I mean there is no formula by definition.

 

[HFCS]

The committee is inherently bias. Its made up of commissioners, ads, and retired people who align with a school or conference. They will always do whats best for said team or conference.

And Big Ten always has the most people. SEC doesn’t need the pull anyway.

 

[KidSilverhair]

LOL all these SEC giants and likely only two spots a year.

“It’s not a true playoff until they make room for Vanderbilt!”

 

[HFCS]

If A&M thought that the SEC would never pursue additional schools in a "football" state of 30 million people, that amounts to stupidity on the part of A&M, not backstabbing on the part of the SEC...

Youre talking about the same A&M that created Longhorn Network on purpose then got mad about Longhorn Network. Of course they are stupid.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Regardless, there is no reason to have a committee select teams. The practice just opens itself to criticism of bias/rules shifting. Instead, just use a ranking system based on objective/quantifiable criteria. Be transparent about the criteria and let Watson do the rest.

My other pet peeve, if there is expansion to 12 teams, why play Conference Championship games. I think the loser in the CCG's might get pushed out of a 12 team playoff in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams that don't play in their CCG. But since greed rules, the conferences will want to keep their CCG.

I totally agree with your first paragraph.

As for your second, the CCGs can act as a de facto “first round” of the playoffs, particularly if you’re moving to auto bids for conference champs. If you‘re a 1-loss blue blood planning on a CFP spot, but then you blow your CCG, get upset, and dont get selected, well, too bad. Consider it the same as getting upset in the first round of the CFP.

I will shed no tears over a CFP hopeful missing out if they lose their CCG. Isn’t the whole point winning your games on the field?

 

[twojman]

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. There is a formula and always has been. There is no bias.

A quality win is beating a team above .500. If a team finishes 6-6, that's NOT a quality win. This is why SEC has an advantage, they can rack up quality wins. How? Their teams can go 4-0 or 3-1 at worst in non-con. They play 8 conference games vs our nine which saves half their teams a guaranteed loss. This is how you build strength of record and schedule. You've faced teams that don't have as many losses. You rack up the wins and this how you bud yourself to be in the top top 25. You start adding up top 25 wins and quality wins, you move up the rankings. Ask Dave Bartoo, friend of Chris Williams, he can give you specifics. Listen to @chriswilliams interviewing Bartoo, he spells it out. Conspiracy theorists think the committee has an agenda. There's no agenda, they've followed the same formula. Bartoo can give you the rankings before the committee. It really isn't rocket science.

 

[Die4Cy]

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. There is a formula and always has been. There is no bias.

A quality win is beating a team above .500. If a team finishes 6-6, that's NOT a quality win. This is why SEC has an advantage, they can rack up quality wins. How? Their teams can go 4-0 or 3-1 at worst in non-con. They play 8 conference games vs our nine which saves half their teams a guaranteed loss. This is how you build strength of record and schedule. You've faced teams that don't have as many losses. You rack up the wins and this how you bud yourself to be in the top top 25. You start adding up top 25 wins and quality wins, you move up the rankings. Ask Dave Bartoo, friend of Chris Williams, he can give you specifics. Listen to @chriswilliams interviewing Bartoo, he spells it out. Conspiracy theorists think the committee has an agenda. There's no agenda, they've followed the same formula. Bartoo can give you the rankings before the committee. It really isn't rocket science.

Works out great if you have a high preseason ranking and can just hold serve. Like you said, a soft five game non con plus soft conference schedule can put you right into the playoff if you are one of those teams. People's beef with that is it goes against what the committee claims to want to do: find the best football teams. The fact of the matter is that the SEC knows they are granted this huge advantage and schedule that way, and don't take a penalty for doing it.

 

[HFCS]

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. There is a formula and always has been. There is no bias.

A quality win is beating a team above .500. If a team finishes 6-6, that's NOT a quality win. This is why SEC has an advantage, they can rack up quality wins. How? Their teams can go 4-0 or 3-1 at worst in non-con. They play 8 conference games vs our nine which saves half their teams a guaranteed loss. This is how you build strength of record and schedule. You've faced teams that don't have as many losses. You rack up the wins and this how you bud yourself to be in the top top 25. You start adding up top 25 wins and quality wins, you move up the rankings. Ask Dave Bartoo, friend of Chris Williams, he can give you specifics. Listen to @chriswilliams interviewing Bartoo, he spells it out. Conspiracy theorists think the committee has an agenda. There's no agenda, they've followed the same formula. Bartoo can give you the rankings before the committee. It really isn't rocket science.

Link me this unchanging committee formula.

Specifically the part where a team has to play 13 games instead of 12, but if they played just 6 to everyone else’s 11 that’s totally fine.

Some of these years it’s a no brainer which 4 teams should go. Others it’s pretty clear the formula is whatever helps Ohio State that year.

Im not arguing against SEC strength and SEC bids, I’m looking at the committee that always has an outsized Big Ten makeup and their ever evolving taste in # of games played.

Ohio State shouldn’t have even been eligible with just six games according to their previous position. The difference between 12 and 13 games is nothing when both teams played 9 conference games anyway. The difference between 6 and 11 games is half a freaking season. If 12 is out 6 should get laughed out of the discussion.

 

[BCClone]

XFL 2.0 was actually outperforming their own (publicly stated) metrics for success, but was not a pet project Vince McMahon wanted to keep afloat with his own money while WWE was subjected to open ended shutdown.

I still think spring football can be successful if the product is decent, the fan appetite is there. I'm not sure about USFL playing all games in Birmingham will build any kind of team following for fans in their "host cities," with games going head to head against MLB. It feels like a sham. It just seems really rushed to get on the field before the XFL tries again to soak up some of the media money. Now I'm laughing at myself thinking the XFL is somehow "more legit."

Wow did not know they would be in Birmingham. That makes it even more interesting since the guy I mentioned graduated from UAB.

He used that as an example for the players feeling uncertain about its future. Two leagues have started and died, the Canadian league is stable, why he’s staying there.

 

[BCClone]

Should we be rooting for A&M? Since they got backstabbed by the SEC, their revenge of leaking the OuT story ruined everything ESPN had planned. So they are bitter weirdoes, but their willingness to pee on their own conferences best interests kind of saved the Big12.

It’s A&M, that ain’t pee.

 

[RonBurgundy]

Let's discuss the Big 12 strategy. Why did we vote to approve the expansion, and then why does Bowlsby come out so publicly with his disappointment? I understand he is doing the bidding of the AD/chancellors, but I think we should have voted no with the "Alliance" of B1G, ACC, and Pac12.

Long term, we definitely want an expansion, but why cave to the SEC and vote with them at this time? Leverage would indicate you present a united front against the SEC until you get something you want. I understand the vote needs to be unanimous, so we have power to yield,

I get it that the Alliance did not initially include the Big 12, but you have to admit we were back on life support once OU and UT bailed. The Alliance decided not to prop us up and recognize us as a player. Would it not have been smart to show the Alliance we are with them and not the SEC?

Or are we just continuing to be too dumb to get out of our own way?

 

[jmb]

I don't think I'd say "screw" but it is the failure of their plan to destroy the Big12 so OuT could go to SEC right away for free.

They wanted expanded playoff, OuT in the SEC, SEC getting 3-5 teams into an expanded CFP, and no more Big12 costs. And to get the expanded CFP inventory without having the cost bid up by competitors. So they missed that.

The SEC is fine, because getting 2 teams in every other year is still OK, and they don't owe OuT anything til whenever they actually show up. And if the rights get bid up higher due to Fox/CBS competing with ESPN in 2026, no problem, more revenue for SEC then too. The only downside for SEC is probably there will be limits on # of teams from 1 conference.

Which is why it makes no sense for ou to take a harder path through the sec.

 

[Die4Cy]

Let's discuss the Big 12 strategy. Why did we vote to approve the expansion, and then why does Bowlsby come out so publicly with his disappointment? I understand he is doing the bidding of the AD/chancellors, but I think we should have voted no with the "Alliance" of B1G, ACC, and Pac12.

Long term, we definitely want an expansion, but why cave to the SEC and vote with them at this time? Leverage would indicate you present a united front against the SEC until you get something you want. I understand the vote needs to be unanimous, so we have power to yield,

I get it that the Alliance did not initially include the Big 12, but you have to admit we were back on life support once OU and UT bailed. The Alliance decided not to prop us up and recognize us as a player. Would it not have been smart to show the Alliance we are with them and not the SEC?

Or are we just continuing to be too dumb to get out of our own way?

Two reasons:

One, a guaranteed playoff spot for the Big 12 as an autonomous conference, and the potential being there for more than one playoff spot in some years.

Two: the biggest potential pot of money over the other proposed options, and let's face it, that's going to matter in the new Big 12.

 

[ISUTex]

Poor ol 8-5 Oklahoma.

There aren't five teams in the SEC good enough to beat OU on a regular basis. More like Good ol 10-2 or 9-3 Oklahoma.

 

[JM4CY]

There aren't five teams in the SEC good enough to beat OU on a regular basis. More like Good ol 10-2 or 9-3 Oklahoma.

All depends on scheduling. If the mothership promotes the hell out of the first year their playing in that league, they could schedule the big boys and OU will take lumps. Texas is completely screwed though.

 

[Clonehomer]

Regardless, there is no reason to have a committee select teams. The practice just opens itself to criticism of bias/rules shifting. Instead, just use a ranking system based on objective/quantifiable criteria. Be transparent about the criteria and let Watson do the rest.

My other pet peeve, if there is expansion to 12 teams, why play Conference Championship games. I think the loser in the CCG's might get pushed out of a 12 team playoff in favor of 3rd or 4th place teams that don't play in their CCG. But since greed rules, the conferences will want to keep their CCG.

It depends on how many conferences get bids. IMO, it should be more like the NCAA tournament where we reward even the small conference champions with an invite. Give me 11 conference champs + 1 at large invite

 

[CyCrazy]

All depends on scheduling. If the mothership promotes the hell out of the first year their playing in that league, they could schedule the big boys and OU will take lumps. Texas is completely screwed though.

Agree the SEC could do to OuT like the B10 did to Nebby. They have always had the hardest road to go through, which is comical.