Exactly. And at a certain point you’ll turn CFB fans into Quasi NBA fans like me who start watching after the first round of the playoffs.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Exactly. And at a certain point you’ll turn CFB fans into Quasi NBA fans like me who start watching after the first round of the playoffs.
I think a lot of your point is the old "earned it" vs "best teams" argument.
Some people don't care if you are 12-0; if they think 10-2 Bama would be favored over you, then they are better and should get in. I think there's a balance there to be had. I would be OK with taking the conference champs and next best wildcards or such. I think that is a reasonable approach.
Now, if I were king for a day, we'd have 8 conferences with 9 teams each, and CFP would take the 8 conference champs and 4 (or maybe even 8 someday) wildcards.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
If you think the playoff committee rankings aren’t biased by the previous 2+ months of polls, including the preseason rankings, well … I’m not sure what to tell you.
Just because they aren’t as good as GA or Bama doesn’t mean they aren’t better than Big 10 team X or Big 12 team X. It’s not like we’re flying blind here. Conference strength metrics, ranking, SOS, analytics, etc. it’s no different than the NCAA basketball tournament. That is what will make this new format better.
We want the best teams, not some kind of weird whine about what’s “fair” or not. There’s also the entire premise which is to make money. You can hate that, but it doesn’t change the reality.
I think it's easier to say our top 3-4 teams are worthy than it is to say our 2 second place in their division teams are worthy. Not to mention, it allows for several of the Top Tier teams to have easy schedules often enough that the 5 or 6 top programs cycle through easier and tougher schedules.
But with a 20 or 24 team conference with 4 divisions, being a division champ holds more weight than being the 3rd or 4th highest rated team in a 20-24 team conference. Even with identical records.
Divisions work in every other sport league. So no reason college sports should be different.
The issue with college sports, specifically the Big 10, was small #'s. Only 2 teams are eligible for CCG and only 4 teams selected to CFP. With a 12 team playoff years ago, my guess is Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State wouldn't have complained about being left out over an Iowa or Purdue because they would still get in the 12 team playoff. They might appreciate resting the CCG weekend.
Don't disagree that divisions have a purpose. As always it comes down to the formation of the divisions, especially with the number of top tier teams they have. You are bound to have divisions that are stacked and those that are weak. Just like the NFL has.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
But my point is why give Tennessee another chance when they already couldn’t beat Bama and Georgia? Maybe Ohio State dropped a game to Penn State or Clemson tripped up against Notre Dame … why give UT another shot over them when they didn’t have common opponents?
When the SEC gets 6 or 7 teams ranked in the preseason, giving them a leg up on rankings over the course of a season, and somehow wins over Mississippi State or Arkansas mean more than other conferences’ wins … how are you supposed to determine “best”?
A conference championship is a clear-cut measurement, is all I’m saying. If I were in charge - and believe me, I know I’m not, just ask my wife - conference championships would be playoff criteria instead of “conference A is just tougher than conference B therefore a second or third place finisher in A should get a second chance before a second place team or conference co-champ in B.” If you don’t like my criteria, too bad, so sad, win your own frickin’ conference first, is all I’m saying.
But that all goes out the window with 12 teams, I know that, I’m just an old man yelling at clouds, don’t mind me.
Frankly I’m just sitting here waiting for the fallout after the top 18-20 teams in the country decide they don’t need the rest of their conference mates any more and they go off to form a SuperDuperUltraCash conference … and then half the schools are all surprised-Pikachu when they find out they’re now the “bottom half” of this new conglomeration ending up 5-7 or 3-9 every year.
Agree at least with the expanded playoff. With only a four team playoff, I was totally fine with accepting that MAYBE we don't have the best four teams if it means avoiding a rematch of a conference title game that just happened. I was OK with treating a CCG as a defacto playoff game.
Realistically you can do about any kind of 8 plus team playoff, and the two best teams are going to be in there. Even if you did some autobids that maybe let the 10th best team in over the 7th or 8th best team, who cares. The job of a college playoff in my opinion is not to get the best 8 or 12 teams in, but at least make sure you're getting in the top 2-3. Doesn't mean someone outside of that can't win, but if the 12th best team gets left out of a 12 team playoff, big deal. Just like the NCAA tournament is not set up, nor should it to get the best 64 teams in. If you are a P5 team that's the 50th best in the country, who gives a **** if you get left out over Farleigh Dickinson?
You say that now but wait until Iowa State is #7 and gets passed for a #15 team. Getting the Top X is important for the integrity alone.
Once you get past the top 2 or 3 the rest of the SEC is usually pretty ordinary. They're the best conference because they have a deeper top end of elite teams in most seasons than the B1G, Big 12, and ACC, which usually have 1 or maybe 2 if it's a good year for the conference. After those top 2 or 3 SEC schools most years the rest isn't all that special but many assume just because your name is "Auburn" you're elite even though you went 5-7 and got curbstomped by PSU.
That's why it could make sense to not have fixed divisions and schedule on a 2 year cycle.
With AI it shouldn't be tough to create 2, 3 or 4 divisions that are balanced SOS.
I think we have a bunch of idealists on this board. Believers of unicorns, rainbows and a 12 team playoff comprised of the 12 best teams. The reality it's all just a money grab.
The current selection process only applies the first 2 years. What happens starting in 2026 is yet to be determined. I doubt we'll see 6 conferences get auto bids. There is also a lot of speculation that CFP money will be paid out like the NCAA Tournament- based on units and only paid on teams making the playoff. We could also see it expanded to 16 teams.
The current selection process only applies the first 2 years. What happens starting in 2026 is yet to be determined. I doubt we'll see 6 conferences get auto bids. There is also a lot of speculation that CFP money will be paid out like the NCAA Tournament- based on units and only paid on teams making the playoff. We could also see it expanded to 16 teams.
I don’t disagree but if you’re talking about qualifying for the playoff, I guarantee you more than 3 SEC teams get in.
I have no doubt that more than 3 SEC get in consistently, partly because they'll have more teams ranked highly in early season polls based on program name more than anything else.
Yeah I think you probably getIn a 12 team playoff, SEC with 4, BIG 4, ND, BIG12 1, ACC 1 , and PAC 12 1. If the Big is bad, SEC will probably get 5, or the lowly BIG 12 might get another.
-a total of 4 spots for the B12, ACC, and PAC combined.
-one G5 and one for ND
That leaves 6 for SEC and B10. SEC probably gets 4 typically and B10 2 (3 if ND is out)
I don't mean this in a derogatory way towards the B1G, just as I believe people here also have an inflated view of the Big 12... but the SEC's top 3-4 each year are usually REALLY good, not just good like Michigan or tOSU the past few years.
Going forward, you're going to have a tier that includes Bama, Georgia, LSU, Texas, OU, and A&M as legit Top 10 programs. And you'll still have the occasional bursts from Tenn, Auburn, and Florida. Now, because some will play against each other, they'll obviously have losses and some move down in the polls, allowing for more opposing conference teams.
But if you had a playoff that included the Top 6 from every conference, I'm betting that the SEC would end up with 3 of the 4-6 teams standing at the end more often than any other conference having 2 standing.
This gets proven out every year in the playoffs. The only program that has really tested the SEC in the playoffs more than once is Clemson, and some would question if they're still at that ability right now. And the losses other conference winners take are usually pretty significant.
I'd say every year the SEC has 3 that are REALLY good, I think 4 in any given year is a stretch. The B1G has consistently had 1 on that level most seasons, tOSU. That's what I meant when I said the SEC has a deeper top end of elite programs year in and year out.
I do believe when you get past that top end, the rest of the conference isn't all that much more special than the middle of the pack from other P5 conferences.
I don't see any way that you're going to see 6 legit top-10 teams out of the SEC regularly. There are just as many losses to go around as there are wins. But I agree that we're going to see a minimum of 4 SEC schools in the 12-team playoffs consistently, and I wouldn't be surprised if 2-3 of them are standing at the end.
I think this is the most realistic and ok with me. I think the Big 12 could get 2 of those 4 spots consistently, but would have at least 1 each year.
