I’d take that bet, the big ten won’t agree to expansion of the playoff till that happens
SEC/Big10 Pushing for 16 Team Playoff
- Thread starter Flyforcy
- Start date
It isn't just the SEC and B1G you'd have to worry about. We may as well guarantee ND one of those at-large spots every year. And the ACC has bigger brands that would likely be more attractive to the committee with all else being equal... Clemson, Miami, Florida St.
Better include the ACC in that as well. Somehow everyone forgets they only play 8 and have a MUCH easier road than any SEC team.
Yeah but no one really cares about the ACC schedule, most of the league is just a bye week
it matters more to the big 12, where we were seeing ACC teams being nonsensically rated higher than they deserved because they don't take those guaranteed losses in conference and voters/committee members are still stuck in the stone age.
Yet it’s usually only the Big 12 talked about not deserving two bids because brands. Which is the fundamental problem with the sport.
SMU lost to BYU, played less conference games than BYU, and had their best win over a 8-4 Louisville team and BYU wasn’t even in the conversation. Not even mentioned.
I think that's the problem with any format you draw up. There's not 16 competitive teams year to year. Most the time there's not even 10. We all saw the numerous blowouts last year. If the new format doesn't include byes it's going to take years and years to ever see a 16 seed advance imo. This isn't basketball the level difference between the top 3-5 teams and the 15th to 20th is astronomical imo. Especially in a road game. It's really just going to be a nice accomplishment and extra cash for the conferences of last few teams that make it but expansion doesn't seem necessary
Last edited:
Spoiler: no model will do the Big 12 any favors.
The current makeup of conferences to the date aren’t even a year old. Everyone wants to write in stone what will happen based on past success/failures and make changes immediately based on that.
Knowing the uphill climb the conference is up against I’d rather roll the dice on proving it on the field.
Hypothetically speaking, we were one missed targeting penalty away from the Big 12 having a team in the final 4 and the SEC not having a single one. If BYU was preseason top 20 team they could have been a second team in. It’s just dumb to draw assumptions (I know you aren’t doing that) in stone before any season and make wholesale changes after one year but I don’t get paid to make those decisions.
And if they don't. there is no 5+11 and the CFP format likely stays as-is through the end of the decade.
The B12 and BYU certainly cared about the ACC schedule last season, especially SMU's who got beat by BYU at home and then proceeded to play an 8-game ACC schedule that was similar in poor quality to what Indiana played in the B10. Like Indiana, they ran up the score vs inferior opponents which helped their computer rankings and then the Committee essentially ignored their loss in the ACC title game which provided Exhibit A of the future absurdity of most CCGs (ASU vs ISU being an exception).
Yeah they didn’t want to punish the title game participants which I both understand but is also pretty weird. The only way SMU’s schedule is any different is if their extra game was against Miami or ND. If it’s not those teams and it’s just another game against a Wake, UNC, NCST, etc then it really doesn’t matter. They had non conference against BYU and TCU anyways.
That’s why the SEC schedule changing is pretty important as even if the teams have a rougher record the talent on the field still wears teams down more then a week 10 game against Troy or random directional school.
Btw you keep bringing up this computer ranking which I believe has been proven not to exist. Are you still basing this off that Reddit post or did you find something more substantial?
There's never more than 1-3 elite teams that really can win it. That's been true as long as I can remember (80s). An 8-team playoff is MORE than enough to make sure you include those 1-3 elite teams.
The arguing about who the other 6ish teams that get in among the probably 10 that are worth talking about is going to be there whether you have 8 teams, 12 teams, 16 teams, 64 teams etc.
Turns out the unneeded additional games are just about money.
Yeah 8 really would have been the sweet spot but that only really works if you cut the G5 out
Maybe I'm just in that mood today. But, if I were to have just lay down because Goliath was my opponent, I never would've excelled beyond my own abilities. I always come from the school of thought where the mighty will fall, but only if someone challenges them. And I hope to God, Brett Yormark is more like me than many of the cynics or podium pumpers here.
He needs to challenge the other commissioners to a bare knuckle boxing match
ESPN isn’t going to be shilling for 8-4 Iowa over 10-2 BYU.
But yeah, of course Sankey thinks he’ll get more. He’s probably right.
It’s not the SEC part of this that pisses everyone off. As annoying as their propaganda is, they’ve won a lot. The Big 10 gets put in that tier because large population/big brand schools, while the bulk of the league could be swapped out with ACC and Big 12 teams and see no change to the TV value or overall quality.
