That's the solution. Look what happened this week to the top 25. At seasons end there could be multiple one and two loss teams that are deserving of playoff spots, and restricting access to just four teams isn't enough.
Tell me who wouldn't have wanted to see this based off last year's standings.


Round 1

Fresno St (MWC Champ)
UCF (AAC Champ)

Florida State (#1) awaits winner in round 2.

Standford (PAC 12 Champ)
Baylor (Big 12 Champ)

Michigan St (#4) awaits winner in round 2.

Rice (CUSA Champ)
Missouri #8

Auburn (#2) awaits winner in round 2.


Bowling Green (MAC Champ)
Ohio St # 7

Alabama (#3) awaits winner in round 2.


More to come later on conference alignment ideas. I already have them in place, but I'd like objective opinions on the concept and a 12 team playoff before arguing over who plays in what conference.

If you're going to have the first two rounds on campus, an 8x16 alignment may be more desirable, especially if conference champs would be seeded ahead of at-large teams (like the NFL Playoffs); every conference champ would have a home game, it would just be a question of what round.

First two rounds are on campus, 12 teams keep the number of games the eventual champ plays to a minimum. Not every champion is guaranteed a home game, but the champions of tje 'lesser' confrences are guaranteed a major conference matchup. No playing each other so as to limit the access

(10-05-2014 06:38 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  That's the solution. Look what happened this week to the top 25. At seasons end there could be multiple one and two loss teams that are deserving of playoff spots, and restricting access to just four teams isn't enough.
Tell me who wouldn't have wanted to see this based off last year's standings.


Round 1

Fresno St (MWC Champ)
South Carolina #9.

Florida State (#1) awaits winner in round 2.

Standford (PAC 12 Champ)
Baylor (Big 12 Champ)

Michigan St (#4) awaits winner in round 2.

Rice (CUSA Champ)
Missouri #8

Auburn (#2) awaits winner in round 2.


Bowling Green (MAC Champ)
Ohio St # 7

Alabama (#3) awaits winner in round 2.


More to come later on conference alignment ideas. I already have them in place, but I'd like objective opinions on the concept and a 12 team playoff before arguing over who plays in what conference.

And where is the AAC champ?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-05-2014 06:38 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  That's the solution. Look what happened this week to the top 25. At seasons end there could be multiple one and two loss teams that are deserving of playoff spots, and restricting access to just four teams isn't enough.
Tell me who wouldn't have wanted to see this based off last year's standings.


Round 1

Fresno St (MWC Champ)
South Carolina #9.

Florida State (#1) awaits winner in round 2.

Standford (PAC 12 Champ)
Baylor (Big 12 Champ)

Michigan St (#4) awaits winner in round 2.

Rice (CUSA Champ)
Missouri #8

Auburn (#2) awaits winner in round 2.


Bowling Green (MAC Champ)
Ohio St # 7

Alabama (#3) awaits winner in round 2.


More to come later on conference alignment ideas. I already have them in place, but I'd like objective opinions on the concept and a 12 team playoff before arguing over who plays in what conference.

Where's UCF?

(10-05-2014 07:15 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(10-05-2014 06:38 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  That's the solution. Look what happened this week to the top 25. At seasons end there could be multiple one and two loss teams that are deserving of playoff spots, and restricting access to just four teams isn't enough.
Tell me who wouldn't have wanted to see this based off last year's standings.


Round 1

Fresno St (MWC Champ)
UCF ( AAC Champ)

Florida State (#1) awaits winner in round 2.

Standford (PAC 12 Champ)
Baylor (Big 12 Champ)

Michigan St (#4) awaits winner in round 2.

Rice (CUSA Champ)
Missouri #8

Auburn (#2) awaits winner in round 2.


Bowling Green (MAC Champ)
Ohio St # 7

Alabama (#3) awaits winner in round 2.


More to come later on conference alignment ideas. I already have them in place, but I'd like objective opinions on the concept and a 12 team playoff before arguing over who plays in what conference.

And where is the AAC champ?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Missed it when copying over from spraedsheet. Fixed now.

Ok thanks


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Did the Sun Belt all get kicked out or something?

(10-06-2014 08:29 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Did the Sun Belt all get kicked out or something?

Expanding to 14 for all leagues wipes out 1 conference and the Sunbelt is the most likely one to be wiped out.

(10-06-2014 08:33 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 08:29 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Did the Sun Belt all get kicked out or something?

Expanding to 14 for all leagues wipes out 1 conference and the Sunbelt is the most likely one to be wiped out.

Not entirely. My math says there would still be a couple SBC teams without places.

Not to mention you'd have to convince the Big 12 that they need to add 4 G5 teams for this to work. Not happening.

(10-06-2014 08:37 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 08:33 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 08:29 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Did the Sun Belt all get kicked out or something?

Expanding to 14 for all leagues wipes out 1 conference and the Sunbelt is the most likely one to be wiped out.

Not entirely. My math says there would still be a couple SBC teams without places.

Not to mention you'd have to convince the Big 12 that they need to add 4 G5 teams for this to work. Not happening.

This is why I said focus on the concept instead of who plays where.

This would require the P5 acknowledge the G5 are equal and deserve equal access to the playoffs. That's not going to happen. If there is playoff expansion, it'll be to guarantee each P5 conference a spot. The G5's access would be by sneaking into an at-large slot, or at best, one spot reserved for a single G5 team. But I can't see any way four or five G5 conferences will be allowed guaranteed spots.

(10-05-2014 07:11 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  First two rounds are on campus, 12 teams keep the number of games the eventual champ plays to a minimum. Not every champion is guaranteed a home game, but the champions of tje 'lesser' confrences are guaranteed a major conference matchup. No playing each other so as to limit the access

I have been a proponent of a 12 team playoff for some time. With four teams having a first round bye, then hosting a second round game, no team gets more than one additional home game.

I am not, however, a proponent of giving every conference an automatic qualifier. I would only give a spot to every conference champ ranked in the top 20 and any independent in the top 12.

You don't need to realign to conferences of equal size to make this work. In fact, you don't need to realign at all.

(10-06-2014 08:37 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 08:33 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 08:29 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Did the Sun Belt all get kicked out or something?

Expanding to 14 for all leagues wipes out 1 conference and the Sunbelt is the most likely one to be wiped out.

Not entirely. My math says there would still be a couple SBC teams without places.

Not to mention you'd have to convince the Big 12 that they need to add 4 G5 teams for this to work. Not happening.

Plus you have to add in the potential FBS teams in the future. 10 years out.

Example

Missouri State
Sacramento State
UC Davis
Cal Poly
Kennesaw State
Eastern Tennessee
Eastern Kentucky
Northern Iowa
Florida Gulf Coast
North Florida

That is ten more teams.

(10-06-2014 11:07 AM)prp Wrote:  This would require the P5 [b]acknowledge[/b] the G5 are equal and deserve equal access to the playoffs. That's not going to happen. If there is playoff expansion, it'll be to guarantee each P5 conference a spot. The G5's access would be by sneaking into an at-large slot, or at best, one spot reserved for a single G5 team. But I can't see any way four or five G5 conferences will be allowed guaranteed spots.

I don't think "acknowledge" is the word you are looking for here. The G5 is not equal, and does not "deserve" equal access to the playoff. If this year has done anything, it is to demonstrate powerfully that the P5 conferences are miles ahead of the G5. Every so often, usually fueled by a special player like a Blake Bortles, an individual team from the G5 will be able to compete with the top teams in the P5. But that will be the exception that proves the rule, not evidence that the G5 as a whole deserves more respect.

(10-06-2014 05:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  The G5 is not equal, and does not "deserve" equal access to the playoff.

I agree with you that the G-5 is not equal to the P-5. Whether most G-5 programs agree with this or not, a separate division needs to be created for these programs while at the same affording it the opportunity to become a financial windfall and play for something meaningful.

At the same time, G-5 need to be given the opportunity to move up to P-5 status and not simply regulated to a G-5 division. Just like FCS programs can move up to FBS.

But just because the G-5 is not equal to the P-5 doesn't mean G-5 programs don't deserve equal access. The P-5 is a very corrupt group of programs lead by some very corrupt leaders. Not all P-5 programs but many of them. It is also a known fact that many of the G-5 programs would like to become a part of this group of corrupt programs and leadership for the money and media attention given to them.

Quote:I'd like objective opinions on the concept and a 12 team playoff before arguing over who plays in what conference.

I would say that a 12-team play-off would be an OK idea. Personally, I like MULTIPLE playoffs (like basketball). I think that would solidify a lot of things: In different "tournaments", you can mesh P5/G5 without any controversy, while still having the Top 8 play while not having an "automatic G5" cause controversy (but instead G5 only auto if they, say, rank Top 16 + other requirements).

Now, with a 12-team playoff, here's the issue: You are including 4 top-G5 teams in. I think that's a little much. I understand, though. 4 Auto-Ins. 4 P5s who "deserve a shot", but they will have to go through 4 top-G5s to earn the shot. Usually P5/G5 matchup, of course. An undefeated ECU could be higher than the B12 champion or something.

Right now, here's how Your 12-team playoff would possibly look, assuming you'd have to WIN your conference to be in the Top 4, and no more than 2 teams from the same conference in:

- Auto-Bid Top 4: #1 Florida State (ACC), #2 Auburn (SEC), #3 Baylor (B12), #4 Notre Dame (IND)
- #12 Colorado St (MW) vs #5 Ole Miss (SEC)
- #11 NIU (MAC) vs #6 Michigan State (B10)
- #10 Marshall (CUSA) vs #7 Arizona (P12)
- #9 ECU (AAC) vs #8 Oklahoma (B12)

Yep, I'd like to see that for sure (assuming things pan out 'predictably', which they won't).

But IMO, fans would want to see LESS auto-G5s in. Maybe *1* in a 12 team playoff, they'd say. Now, you can make the argument that you can't have a LONG tourney, and if a G5 team is oh-so easy, hey, no problem to beat them for a "warm-up" game, right?

Personally, I'd say, in your scenario, a max of 4 G5s, but still requirements on a G5:
- G5 conference winner must have lost only 1 game max (to an FBS school) or 2 losses ranked in the Top 16
- G5 conference winner must have beat a P5 opponent
- If none fit above, top G5 as long as ranked in Top 25

Last year, you'd still see Fresno in. NIU wouldn't make it 'cause their only loss was their conference champ game. This year, Marshall would be opt'd out since they didn't play a P5, and Colorado St would likely be out by just losing 1 more game (tough sched ahead).

I think that'd make it more acceptable for ALL FANS.

Plus, you could have OTHER playoffs/tournaments instead of just isolated bowls. That makes things more fun. Last year, NIU would still have a shot at playing in the "NIT" playoff or something along those lines.

(10-06-2014 06:07 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 05:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  The G5 is not equal, and does not "deserve" equal access to the playoff.

I agree with you that the G-5 is not equal to the P-5. Whether most G-5 programs agree with this or not, a separate division needs to be created for these programs while at the same affording it the opportunity to become a financial windfall and play for something meaningful.

At the same time, G-5 need to be given the opportunity to move up to P-5 status and not simply regulated to a G-5 division. Just like FCS programs can move up to FBS.

But just because the G-5 is not equal to the P-5 doesn't mean G-5 programs don't deserve equal access. The P-5 is a very corrupt group of programs lead by some very corrupt leaders. Not all P-5 programs but many of them. It is also a known fact that many of the G-5 programs would like to become a part of this group of corrupt programs and leadership for the money and media attention given to them.

To just say that "the G5 is not equal to the P5" almost implies that the schools within each group are at least comparable to each other. This is hardly the case. There are probably 15-20 P5 schools that would be more comparable to the top 15-20 G5 schools than they are to the rest of the P5.

Personally, I would prefer to do away with the distinction between FBS and FCS, and replace it with scholarship vs non-scholarship. But all scholarship schools would have to have the same number of scholarships, and the cost to play at this level would have to be high enough to limit the size of this division to about 150 schools. It would be clear that every conference in such a division could not be given AQ status for a playoff, and invitations would have to be based on merit.

If all conference champs get in the playoffs then the G5/P5 gap starts to go away over time.

You are to poor to have a job!

That is just a BS way to justify the status quo and increase the wealth gap.

The reason there understandably exists a P5 vs G5 -- FANS. That's the #1 reason how G5 teams move up to P5. If the P5 teams all expand to 16 team each to aim to have their own greater league, and thereby avoiding criticism of too few teams -- they'll pretty much be picked on # of fans + other things (basketball team; see Memphis / UConn).

The P5 conferences don't want to have to finance directional/mid-major schools sitting in their own conferences. However, it's silly that many don't want games to overlap against competitive ones that allow pathways of sharing the wealth.

IMO, separate 8-team playoffs would be the best way to go -- with one obviously being for National Champion. That would add a mere *2* games for just 2 teams in each playoff for the season. Extending to the end of Janurary -- which is still before the NFL ends -- is not a travesty. It would also allow a chance for G5s to win a playoff tournament among P5s, as well.

TRADITIONAL P5 team/conferences Should have more money. They bring more fans, more viewers, etc.

But expanding to 16 teams each to push out all remaining G5s -- and by the proposal, never to play G5s in non-conf games?? SILLY.

16 teams is too much. That's 8-team divisions, which is a virtual conference within itself. It'd lower the OOC games, too to make up for it. A mess.