This year? A 10-2 ISU would get in over Iowa, much less an 11-1. Although neither would get in. Iowa does have an ISU problem, same records and you would have to put ISU in.
CFP Expanding to 12 Teams
- Thread starter JHUNSY
- Start date
Iowa has been a national laughing stock for several years now. They might be the one school that won't get the B1G benefit of the doubt, and a head-to-head win in favor of ISU probably puts us ahead of them if records are identical.
That said, it's entirely possible that their schedule is pitched as "a true B1G gauntlet" now that the divisions are gone and who they actually played will be completely ignored to push the P2 narrative.
The only way we get in is to win in Dallas- there’s no way they’re taking two Big 12 teams.
They should take 2 of us…but they won’t.
Let’s say it’s us and Utah in the Big 12 Championship and we both finish 12-1 (meaning the Utes beat an undefeated ISU in Dallas)…they’re still not taking 2 of us. It would be Utah and we’d be staying home at 12-1 while 3-loss SEC teams go to the playoffs.
They’re only taking one Big12 team because they have to, if it were entirely up to them, none of us would make the playoffs.
There is a path if both ISU and BYU meet as undefeateds in the championship game and then play an exciting tight game. There is also the chance of ISU as an undefeated losing to Colorado with 1 loss in the championship game again it has to be a close exciting game. Those are the only 2 scenarios I see getting 2 teams in right now without a bunch of chaos.
That or the guaranteed bye and high seed going to teams that aren’t ranked as high. I actually think Clemson is going to win the ACC and Georgia finishes second in the SEC. Then in the CFP Georgia is going to have to play an extra game just to earn a rematch with Clemson.
I think giving conference champs a bye was probably at least partly designed to try to push Notre Dame into a conference but I wonder if they do away with that in the next iteration.
I agree, but Its even worse than how you described it. They keep us around by dangling our one bid in front of us, so we keep watching Big10 and SEC games as if we are equals so they can pay themselves more under media contracts.
We don't know for sure that they will only take one token Big 12 and ACC team. If this is truly what plays out EVERY non Big 10/SEC team that plays FBS should stay in solidarity and not participate in the so called "national" playoff and also immediately cancel any future games scheduled against Big10/SEC teams.
Far better than no bid at all.
And that one bid, with off chance of at-large , is as good of actual access as ever for most outside the P2. Hopefully they can get 2 autos and expanding to 14 back on the table
Dangling a perception of equality so the same few programs can play their own game at the top is the history of college football. There’s never been parity or equality
I’m more worried about the coming stratification of basketball. There’ already has been great access for decades, and parity in terms of being able to win several games in March.
Last edited:
An undefeated TCU lost the Big 12 championship game two years ago and got into a 4 TEAM playoff. Come on.
The problem is always going to be that it's totally secret and doesn't have any truly set criteria other than 'the 5 champions of the best leagues and the next 7 best teams.' No metrics, no indication of what they're actually adjudicating.
They also have no qualms with insulting everyone's intelligence with the mental gymnastics/vocal diarrhea routine the committee chair throws out there every rankings show.
I don't really understand why people are surprised the BIG/SEC getting 7-8 of the 12 bids, leaving the ACC, B12, ND and G5 with the remaining.
I mean the 3 of the teams were in the Big12 and Pac last year so basically they are just stealing the bids from those leagues.
I mean the 3 of the teams were in the Big12 and Pac last year so basically they are just stealing the bids from those leagues.
Yes, that's a problem.
NCAAT selection isn't perfect, and NET has a little "cloudiness," but at least everyone knows what metrics/assessments they're using.
The odd thing to me, if CFB had some transparent element of metric/computer, the SEC/BiG powers would do fairly well, most of the time. What's the fear?
It will be interesting if they even agree on it themselves. SEC knows the B1G is the one who needs the auto bids. SEC also might not like that the B1G wants them to play more conference games. Well they were open to it before, but ESPN said they wouldn’t get more money. Does that change just because it’s what the B1G wants them to do?
It would hardly be “just because” of that
That was halted when caught in bigger realignment negotiations
Fast-forward, and now it would be a part of creating a bigger, more exclusive P2 tier, and locking in at least 4 SEC berths…I suspect espn quickly comes up with the money, unless realignment demands interfere
.
The networks have gotten a taste of a P2 era the last 10 months, and they want more of it.
They may have gotten a taste...but very few established networks with active sports deals have the spare resources to expand on media contracts, at least at the current time. Disney is in such rough shape that they are "shaking the couch cushions" in order to pay the outstanding amount they still own Comcast for the Hulu purchase. Its not a surprise that EPSN wanted that 9th SEC game for free.
They know human voters consistently overrate Big Ten teams (by a lot) and SEC teams (by less but still such) compared to what any good-faith and well-designed computer model would say.
You know the dumb ESPN clichés they use to get around such robust evidence:
"Passed the eye test!" (the ultimate ******** line)
"So much talent!" (if he hits so good then why doesn't he hit good?)
"So much passion in that fanbase!" (code: this is about the money)
"Big wins!" (the computer doesn't think so)
"No bad losses!" (the computer doesn't think so)
"Well, if you look historically..." (nobody ******* cares what happened in 1950)
They could make a transparent poll that is the simple average of a few reputable, independent computer analysts (e.g., Massey, Sagarin, ESPN FPI, SRS, etc.) and let the chips fall where they may. I know there is still a committee for basketball, but that is somewhat close to what they do over there in seeding and setting up the NCAA tournament with the rankings produced by KenPom, Torvik, and the NET rating.
But then they've got nothing to hide behind and have to stand on their own merits.
And that ******* terrifies them. It tells you all you need to know.
No, they don’t have the resources for inefficiencies- like the old fairly equitable P5.
And they may not have the resources for a 17 school ACC, in addition to the Big 12. Expect one of those two to become like the PAC at some point
But more top brands playing each other? The networks will find a way to get that. Canceling the ACC option and spending some of that on the P2 going to 11 games against P2 is within Disney’s means.
Cord cutting and other headwinds brought on the need for consolidation (P2). It has made college football more national and by and large resulted in better ratings for the networks. Expect the networks to keep investing in even more stratification, including more P2 vs P2 inventory
I don’t disagree with a lot of what you are saying but one thing I wonder about is if the computer models will have enough data in the future.
If the SEC goes to 9 conference games and then they schedule this non-conference game of B1G-SEC like they are talking about, then I assume the last 2 games on the schedule are going to be cupcake home games against Sunbelt level teams.
I’m not sure how many remaining games there will be against other conferences for the computers to even know how the conferences compare in terms of strength.
But to be clear, I don’t disagree with the broader point that we need a non-biased way to make the decisions and maybe the computers will still be the best way to do it. Maybe Iowa-ISU will be the last remaining game between the conferences and the winner will determine for the year which conference is stronger that year, lol.
