Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What an 8-team playoff might look like
Author Message
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #41
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-20-2017 06:17 PM)YNot Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 06:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 05:47 PM)YNot Wrote:  The 4 first round playoff games would only need to replace the revenue from the 5 P5 conference championship games. Which I think they would - 4 elimination playoff games.

This part holds up. 4 games is fewer than 5, but each of those games holds more interest. (On the other hand, each conference controls its CCG revenue, while the CFP revenue gets shared, including a slice to the G5)

I can't recall what percentage the G5 gets. The devil's in that detail.

IT's within spitting distance of 1/6 of the total revenue for the 6 CFP bowls and the national title game. (It's complicated, but it works out to around 15-20%.)

(11-20-2017 06:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
Quote:The other NY6 bowls stay in place...just like they do in the current CCG system. CFP Round 1 would replace the CCGs in early or mid December - the rest of the system stays in place.

Except that you've radically devalued the non-playoff major bowls relative to now. Say the Rose and Peach are the semifinals--the Sugar, Cotton, Fiesta and Orange Bowls would be no different than the Gator, Holiday, Alamo, Liberty, Tampa, Charlotte bowls.

No different than the status quo - the four non-CFP NY6 games are better than the other bowls, as seen in their channel selections, kickoff times, and ratings.[/quote]

The Peach and Cotton Bowls profiles were raised dramatically by being CFP games. There is a clear separation between those two and, say, the Holiday or Gator or Alamo Bowls. You're taking that separation away. And on top of that, the pool of teams for the "Other Big Games" goes from being roughly #5-12 to roughly #9-16. Unless you're putting the quarterfinal losers in the bowls? That might be more de-valuing.

(11-20-2017 06:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
Quote:The G5 CCGs aren't worth much as it is and wouldn't really be affected by the playoff expansion. They could stay in place - or, this scenario might motivate a separate G5 playoff or NIT.

If you cut out the G5 like this, they pretty much have to go nuclear--lawsuits, getting a Senator or two on their side to make noise, anything they can think of. Because that would be effectively kicking these programs out of FBS.

The G5 would still hold the contract autobid to the NY6 and would be eligible for the CFP if they finish in the top-8. IF absolutely necessary, the expanded CFP could reserve a spot for the top G5 champ - though in practice it would more likely be through a play-in game against an at large P5 team.[/quote]

But you've devalued those NY6 games. Instead of playing a top 10 team in their big bowl game, they're playing a top 20 team, or a team coming off a quarterfinal loss.

(11-20-2017 06:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
Quote:And, I'm not sure the current environment provides any evidence whatsoever that conferences or the playoffs will earn less money. The B1G's recent TV deal with ESPN, FOX, and CBS nearly tripled the B1G 's take (despite ESPN losing inventory). The power conferences and playoffs are set to earn more...not less.

WE'll see. The B1G deal is either an indication that the party will continue on forever, or it was the last big media deal before the correction. (Disclosure: I expected the Big Ten package to be the first to feel the effects of cord-cutting and ESPN's impending financial crisis. I was wrong).

You might be right on how cord-cutting damages ESPN. However, I think you will continue to be wrong on how cord-cutting will affect the amount of money that college football will continue to generate - and the likely increased revenue that would come from an expanded playoff.
[/quote]

There's no way to replace the money that ESPN has been harvesting from non-sports-fans who have been paying for basic cable. That's the money that ESPN has been using to buy up the games that used to be on network TV. NBC and Fox threw money at sports because they were trying to build their own ESPNs. That's over.

Sports will continue to be the most valuable rights property on television because of live advertising, but ESPN's advantage over OTA networks is going to erode.
(This post was last modified: 11-20-2017 06:35 PM by johnbragg.)
11-20-2017 06:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #42
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
Let's address the devaluing of the NY6. Help me understand how the NY6 bowls would be any different than the current situation? Why would you NOT place a CFP quarterfinal loser in a bowl game? These games would be played the first or second weekend in December.

Last year's non-CFP NY6 bowl included three teams outside the top-10 (#11 Florida St., #14 Auburn, and #15 Western Michigan) and CCG loser Wisconsin. Also, #6 Michigan played in the Orange Bowl coming off a last-week loss which precluded them from the CCG.

In 2015, CCG loser Iowa played in the Rose Bowl.

In 2014, CCG loser Georgia played in the Orange Bowl and CCG lower Arizona played in the Fiesta Bowl.

All the other CCG losers the past three years were ranked well outside the top-8 - some outside the top-25. A Peach Bowl matchup between #10 TCU and #7 Georgia won't be viewed differently because Georgia is a playoff loser instead of a CCG loser. It might even help with the perception of the bowl matchup.
(This post was last modified: 11-20-2017 07:01 PM by YNot.)
11-20-2017 06:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #43
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-20-2017 06:59 PM)YNot Wrote:  Let's address the devaluing of the NY6. Help me understand how the NY6 bowls would be any different than the current situation? Why would you NOT place a CFP quarterfinal loser in a bowl game? These games would be played the first or second weekend in December.

Last year's non-CFP NY6 bowl included three teams outside the top-10 (#11 Florida St., #14 Auburn, and #15 Western Michigan) and CCG loser Wisconsin. Also, #6 Michigan played in the Orange Bowl coming off a last-week loss which precluded them from the CCG.

In 2015, CCG loser Iowa played in the Rose Bowl.

In 2014, CCG loser Georgia played in the Orange Bowl and CCG lower Arizona played in the Fiesta Bowl.

All the other CCG losers the past three years were ranked well outside the top-8 - some outside the top-25. A Peach Bowl matchup between #10 TCU and #7 Georgia won't be viewed differently because Georgia is a playoff loser instead of a CCG loser. It might even help with the perception of the bowl matchup.

because if you thought last year's stuff with Fournette and McCaffery skipping the bowl games was bad- wait until a CFP loser is in there. Any top at least 2-3 rd draft pick would skip the bowl game.
11-20-2017 07:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Vamos Morados
*

Posts: 7,466
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 121
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #44
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
I think any successful playoff expansion has to keep the current New Year’s Six bowls as the first round. Perhaps this becomes the New Year’s Seven or New Year’s Eight to accommodate the disaster scenario of all five P5 champions and the top G5 finishing outside the Top 8, but it still allows the traditional players to have a set matchup that can be promoted as a destination event for 3-4 weeks.
11-20-2017 07:10 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #45
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-20-2017 07:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 06:59 PM)YNot Wrote:  Let's address the devaluing of the NY6. Help me understand how the NY6 bowls would be any different than the current situation? Why would you NOT place a CFP quarterfinal loser in a bowl game? These games would be played the first or second weekend in December.

Last year's non-CFP NY6 bowl included three teams outside the top-10 (#11 Florida St., #14 Auburn, and #15 Western Michigan) and CCG loser Wisconsin. Also, #6 Michigan played in the Orange Bowl coming off a last-week loss which precluded them from the CCG.

In 2015, CCG loser Iowa played in the Rose Bowl.

In 2014, CCG loser Georgia played in the Orange Bowl and CCG lower Arizona played in the Fiesta Bowl.

All the other CCG losers the past three years were ranked well outside the top-8 - some outside the top-25. A Peach Bowl matchup between #10 TCU and #7 Georgia won't be viewed differently because Georgia is a playoff loser instead of a CCG loser. It might even help with the perception of the bowl matchup.

because if you thought last year's stuff with Fournette and McCaffery skipping the bowl games was bad- wait until a CFP loser is in there. Any top at least 2-3 rd draft pick would skip the bowl game.

What? Not sure you can back that up. How many other top draftees from LSU and Stanford sat out the Citrus Bowl or Sun Bowl? Did Solomon Thomas sit out the Sun Bowl too? Did Jamal Adams or Tre'Davious White sit out the Citrus Bowl? Those were "meaningless" exhibition bowl games.

Did TJ Watt or Ryan Ramczyk not play in the Cotton Bowl last year? Wisconsin played in an NY6 game after losing to Penn St. in the B1G CCG.

How many of those draftees saw their draft stock elevate because they played a decent opponent in a big bowl game?
11-20-2017 07:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #46
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-20-2017 07:14 PM)YNot Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 07:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 06:59 PM)YNot Wrote:  Let's address the devaluing of the NY6. Help me understand how the NY6 bowls would be any different than the current situation? Why would you NOT place a CFP quarterfinal loser in a bowl game? These games would be played the first or second weekend in December.

Last year's non-CFP NY6 bowl included three teams outside the top-10 (#11 Florida St., #14 Auburn, and #15 Western Michigan) and CCG loser Wisconsin. Also, #6 Michigan played in the Orange Bowl coming off a last-week loss which precluded them from the CCG.

In 2015, CCG loser Iowa played in the Rose Bowl.

In 2014, CCG loser Georgia played in the Orange Bowl and CCG lower Arizona played in the Fiesta Bowl.

All the other CCG losers the past three years were ranked well outside the top-8 - some outside the top-25. A Peach Bowl matchup between #10 TCU and #7 Georgia won't be viewed differently because Georgia is a playoff loser instead of a CCG loser. It might even help with the perception of the bowl matchup.

because if you thought last year's stuff with Fournette and McCaffery skipping the bowl games was bad- wait until a CFP loser is in there. Any top at least 2-3 rd draft pick would skip the bowl game.

What? Not sure you can back that up. How many other top draftees from LSU and Stanford sat out the Citrus Bowl or Sun Bowl? Did Solomon Thomas sit out the Sun Bowl too? Did Jamal Adams or Tre'Davious White sit out the Citrus Bowl? Those were "meaningless" exhibition bowl games.

Did TJ Watt or Ryan Ramczyk not play in the Cotton Bowl last year? Wisconsin played in an NY6 game after losing to Penn St. in the B1G CCG.

How many of those draftees saw their draft stock elevate because they played a decent opponent in a big bowl game?
biggest thing- the NCAA will NEVER allow it.

Big difference even between a team like a Wisconsin last year and a CFP loser.

And the fact that Fournette and McCaffery didn't see their draft stock slip 1 iota will make it more and more likely.
11-20-2017 07:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,558
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 180
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #47
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-19-2017 10:15 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(11-19-2017 09:07 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  
(11-18-2017 10:22 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  For the 1000th time. It would be top 8, no Conference Champs. CFP is not going to give autobids! 03-banghead

Correct, and UCF would not get a bid no matter what, a 7-4 Ohio state would jump us.

I disagree for two reasons, stated above but that's not going to stop me from re-stating below.

1. I don't think the P5 will sign off on another playoff system that does not guarantee autobids to the P5 champions. (SEC might, everyone else will want a contract guarantee that their champion is in the playoff.)
2. I don't think the P5 want to deal with the political mudwrestling involved in cutting out the G5 entirely, so the Access Bowl spot morphs into an annual #8 seed.

Having 2 at-larges instead of 3 also helps the argument about whether 8 vs 4 devalues the regular season. With 3 fallback spots, Alabama, Miami, Clemson would all have a pretty comfortable cushion if they lose the Iron Bowl or CCG. With 2 spots, there's a lot less margin for error for the top teams. Plus, having the G5 representative as the #8 seed gives the #1 seed a bonus, as they're almost always going to be ranked well below #8.

In other words, I expect that the current CFP balance of power, where the G5 as a whole is a more-or-less equal partner of the SEC, ACC, XII, B1G and PAC to continue. (G5 gets a guaranteed spot, just like each P5, G5 as a whole gets about 1/6 of the CFP revenue when all is said and done.)

The top 8 will be P5 and likely cover all conferences. It would defacto get all conferences in. The CFP learned from the BCS mistakes. If you don't provide autobids, no G5 can sue for Anti-Trust. The P5 will not give the G5 anymore money or PR than they have too.

Honestly, I think you will basically see a P4 created in 2024 and the CCG will serve as as the Semi-Finals with the CFP having the insurance policy in case a 7-5 team upset a 11-1 team. Thus keeping the Bowl setup for conference champs. Not that much different than the four team system. People forget, the NCAA does not run football like they do basketball and other sports.
11-20-2017 08:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BadgerMJ Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,025
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Wisconsin / ND
Location: Wisconsin
Post: #48
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
[quote='Kaplony' pid='14804109' dateline='1511218753']
[quote='BadgerMJ' pid='14798933' dateline='1511064617']

Before any expansion is discussed, how about getting the conferences to play the same number of conference games? Everyone plays the three "warm-up" games at the beginning of the season then plays 9 conference games. That way you don't have certain teams playing a conference game in November and others playing Mercer. Everyone should be on the same terms.
[quote]

If we are going to do that then the Big Slow needs to get rid of the in-conference cupcakes.
[/quote]

Because nothing strikes the fear of God into a team like playing Syracuse, Pitt, Oregon State, Vandy, etc.

Every conference has their share of "cupcakes", all of which are STILL more formidable than The Citadel.
11-21-2017 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,393
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #49
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-21-2017 02:09 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  [quote='Kaplony' pid='14804109' dateline='1511218753']
[quote='BadgerMJ' pid='14798933' dateline='1511064617']

Before any expansion is discussed, how about getting the conferences to play the same number of conference games? Everyone plays the three "warm-up" games at the beginning of the season then plays 9 conference games. That way you don't have certain teams playing a conference game in November and others playing Mercer. Everyone should be on the same terms.
Quote: If we are going to do that then the Big Slow needs to get rid of the in-conference cupcakes.

Because nothing strikes the fear of God into a team like playing Syracuse, Pitt, Oregon State, Vandy, etc.

Every conference has their share of "cupcakes", all of which are STILL more formidable than The Citadel.

You mean the same Citadel Bulldog team that has as many P5 wins the past 3 years as Kansas?

And every ACC & SEC team you listed would be double digit favorites over Rutgers & Illinois.
11-21-2017 06:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BadgerMJ Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,025
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 267
I Root For: Wisconsin / ND
Location: Wisconsin
Post: #50
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-21-2017 06:59 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(11-21-2017 02:09 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  [quote='Kaplony' pid='14804109' dateline='1511218753']
[quote='BadgerMJ' pid='14798933' dateline='1511064617']

Before any expansion is discussed, how about getting the conferences to play the same number of conference games? Everyone plays the three "warm-up" games at the beginning of the season then plays 9 conference games. That way you don't have certain teams playing a conference game in November and others playing Mercer. Everyone should be on the same terms.
Quote: If we are going to do that then the Big Slow needs to get rid of the in-conference cupcakes.

Because nothing strikes the fear of God into a team like playing Syracuse, Pitt, Oregon State, Vandy, etc.

Every conference has their share of "cupcakes", all of which are STILL more formidable than The Citadel.

You mean the same Citadel Bulldog team that has as many P5 wins the past 3 years as Kansas?

And every ACC & SEC team you listed would be double digit favorites over Rutgers & Illinois.

Funny how you pick out possibly the two worst teams in the P5 as you're examples. Both are bad, but I'm safe in thinking that Illinois is still better competition that The Citadel.

You seem to forget that Rutgers had a fairly successful football team up until the last 3 years or so. The previous decade was pretty good for them.

For many programs, there's ups & downs. If you're going to set up a playoff then the only way to make it fair is to ensure that the things that CAN be controlled are. Like the number of conference games, the number of FCS teams that a program can play, etc.
11-21-2017 07:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
micahandme Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 301
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 20
I Root For: PSU
Location:
Post: #51
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-20-2017 07:14 PM)YNot Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 07:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-20-2017 06:59 PM)YNot Wrote:  Let's address the devaluing of the NY6. Help me understand how the NY6 bowls would be any different than the current situation? Why would you NOT place a CFP quarterfinal loser in a bowl game? These games would be played the first or second weekend in December.

Last year's non-CFP NY6 bowl included three teams outside the top-10 (#11 Florida St., #14 Auburn, and #15 Western Michigan) and CCG loser Wisconsin. Also, #6 Michigan played in the Orange Bowl coming off a last-week loss which precluded them from the CCG.

In 2015, CCG loser Iowa played in the Rose Bowl.

In 2014, CCG loser Georgia played in the Orange Bowl and CCG lower Arizona played in the Fiesta Bowl.

All the other CCG losers the past three years were ranked well outside the top-8 - some outside the top-25. A Peach Bowl matchup between #10 TCU and #7 Georgia won't be viewed differently because Georgia is a playoff loser instead of a CCG loser. It might even help with the perception of the bowl matchup.

because if you thought last year's stuff with Fournette and McCaffery skipping the bowl games was bad- wait until a CFP loser is in there. Any top at least 2-3 rd draft pick would skip the bowl game.

What? Not sure you can back that up. How many other top draftees from LSU and Stanford sat out the Citrus Bowl or Sun Bowl? Did Solomon Thomas sit out the Sun Bowl too? Did Jamal Adams or Tre'Davious White sit out the Citrus Bowl? Those were "meaningless" exhibition bowl games.

Did TJ Watt or Ryan Ramczyk not play in the Cotton Bowl last year? Wisconsin played in an NY6 game after losing to Penn St. in the B1G CCG.

How many of those draftees saw their draft stock elevate because they played a decent opponent in a big bowl game?

He can't back it up. I've been debating this issue with him for a month. It's a "wait and see" scenario...but he is confident that 20 or more players will be sitting out this year's bowl season. I think it'll be 5 or so. And 5 players sitting won't kill the bowl system. (Even 20 wouldn't for that matter...)

My system allows for a landing bowl spot for quarterfinal losers...and it allows for teams that aren't in the playoffs to have a whole month to plan for their travel. Here's my model from last year.

Quarterfinals...Friday Dec 16 and Saturday Dec 17.
#8 WMU (G5 rep) at #1 Alabama (SEC champ) (8pm FRIDAY)
#7 OU (Big 12 champ) at #2 Clemson (ACC champ) (1pm SAT)
#6 Michigan (at-large) at #3 OSU (at-large) (5pm SAT)
#5 Penn State (Big Ten champ) at #4 Washington (Pac12 champ) (9pm SAT)

BOWL GAMES (announced Sunday Dec. 4)
Orange—Florida State (ACC). vs. CFP loser
Rose—Wisconsin (Big Ten) vs. USC (Pac12)
Cotton—CFP loser vs. Colorado (at-large)
Sugar—Auburn (SEC) vs. Oklahoma State (Big 12)

*Citrus— CFP loser vs. CFP loser

CFP Semifinals
Peach and Fiesta. 1/8 winner vs. 4/5 winner. 2/7 winner vs. 3/6 winner.

* a 7th bowl needs to be added to accommodate the extra losers

(And assuming higher seeds would have won...Michigan and FSU in the Orange, OU and Colorado in the Cotton, and Penn State/Western Michigan in the Citrus all would get good TV ratings...despite hosting "loser" teams. And TV ratings makes this thing run...)
11-24-2017 01:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
micahandme Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 301
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 20
I Root For: PSU
Location:
Post: #52
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
Ivan Maisel brought up a good point on Twitter today. He said...if there were an 8-team playoff right now, this weekend would not be as exciting? What would the drama be?

--Well, for one, the P5 conference championship game winners would be IN for sure. As it is, OSU/TCU/Pac-12 all are very uncertain if their wins can earn them a berth. That's a wonky system.

--If you give higher seeds the home field in round one as I'm suggesting, then the top 4 seeds are very important. This aspect would be similar to what we have right now...and the debate for the top 4 would be highly significant?

--The main aspect that would suffer in an 8-team playoff...seeding the losers of the CCG. On one hand, it's unfair for PSU and Alabama to sit at home this weekend while the 5 CCG losers had to go out and fight for their playoff berth. On the other hand, if Wisconsin can't beat OSU on a neutral site, then their schedule is finally comparable with PSU (who had to face them in the Shoe with Gameday and 102,000 fans) and you can compare the two teams with similar foes.

In my system, you only have two at-large teams in...so it's two-loss ACC loser vs. one-loss Bama vs. two-loss PSU (vs. two-loss OU if TCU won OR vs. two-loss UGA if Auburn won).

To answer Ivan in a nutshell, the "drama" for this weekend becomes a fair system of inclusion (marginal fans would understand CCG weekend as a "round of 16" essentially), seeding for home field advantage, seeding for quarterfinal match-ups, and measuring CCG losers versus non-division winners (Ohio State 2016, Bama/PSU 2017).
11-30-2017 12:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #53
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
8 team playoff doesn't do very much for the G5.

-Still a b.s. committee making the ranking decisions.
-Still limited pub and awards for the Top 8 of the G5 programs.
-Still complicity in a b.s. system by being a participating conference.

G5 would be better trying to innovate with a new and better system where they would be able to get more pub and awards, IMO.
11-30-2017 01:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #54
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-30-2017 12:36 AM)micahandme Wrote:  Ivan Maisel brought up a good point on Twitter today. He said...if there were an 8-team playoff right now, this weekend would not be as exciting? What would the drama be?

--Well, for one, the P5 conference championship game winners would be IN for sure. As it is, OSU/TCU/Pac-12 all are very uncertain if their wins can earn them a berth. That's a wonky system.

--If you give higher seeds the home field in round one as I'm suggesting, then the top 4 seeds are very important. This aspect would be similar to what we have right now...and the debate for the top 4 would be highly significant?

--The main aspect that would suffer in an 8-team playoff...seeding the losers of the CCG. On one hand, it's unfair for PSU and Alabama to sit at home this weekend while the 5 CCG losers had to go out and fight for their playoff berth. On the other hand, if Wisconsin can't beat OSU on a neutral site, then their schedule is finally comparable with PSU (who had to face them in the Shoe with Gameday and 102,000 fans) and you can compare the two teams with similar foes.

In my system, you only have two at-large teams in...so it's two-loss ACC loser vs. one-loss Bama vs. two-loss PSU (vs. two-loss OU if TCU won OR vs. two-loss UGA if Auburn won).

To answer Ivan in a nutshell, the "drama" for this weekend becomes a fair system of inclusion (marginal fans would understand CCG weekend as a "round of 16" essentially), seeding for home field advantage, seeding for quarterfinal match-ups, and measuring CCG losers versus non-division winners (Ohio State 2016, Bama/PSU 2017).

If you had autobids for the P5 champs and one G5 champ, and only two wild card spots, this weekend would be MORE exciting for MORE teams and fan bases.

Stanford-USC winner is in. UCF-Memphis winner is in. TCU wins and they're in for sure. Ohio St. wins and they're in for sure. Those games become meaningful.

No guarantees at all if Oklahoma, Georgia, Miami, Ohio St., or Wisconsin lose. Alabama sweating out the weekend, hoping to remain in the top 6. Even if Clemson or Auburn or Oklahoma are fairly certain they reach the playoff win or lose, a loss could cost them a home game and the excitement and advantages that come from hosting.

AND, the previous weeks leading up to the conference championship games become EVEN MORE exciting. Win your division and you still have CFP hopes.

How is that less exciting? This week alone, you've doubled the fan bases that still have hope for the playoff. In early November, you probably have quadruple the fan bases that still have hope for the playoff.
(This post was last modified: 11-30-2017 10:56 AM by YNot.)
11-30-2017 10:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #55
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-30-2017 12:36 AM)micahandme Wrote:  --The main aspect that would suffer in an 8-team playoff...seeding the losers of the CCG. On one hand, it's unfair for PSU and Alabama to sit at home this weekend while the 5 CCG losers had to go out and fight for their playoff berth.

I'm not sure that's unfair. You have Alabama sitting home, a heavy favorite for one of the two at-large bids, but their fate is in the hands of the committee, or the poll voters or the computers, and they are at the mercy of what happens in the CCGs. Alabama's secure position is a result of what they did in the first 11 games. (For this purpose, assume that their No.1 ranking before and No. 5 ranking now are true and not just based on Nick Saban's reputation.) You want to "protect" the integrity of the late season, but the first ten games also matter.

Penn State likewise, but on the other side of the fence--I don't think they'd be getting one of the two at-large bids, but if they do it's because of what happens in the CCGs (they'd have to pass Clemson/Miami and Auburn/Georgia, and maybe Oklahoma) and it's up to the committee members or poll voters or the neo-BCS formula.

Maybe you could come up with a "fairer" system, but 8 teams with 2 at-larges would do a good job of "proctecting" the regular season, and preventing what basketball has, where everything before the playoffs/NCAAs is devalued.
11-30-2017 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #56
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
Alabama would have been a lock in a 8 team setup right now. Ahead of Wisconsin should they lose, ahead of Oklahoma should they lose, and ahead of Auburn/Georgia loser- yes Auburn with 3 losses to 1 for Alabama. And even ahead of Clemson should they lose.

Right now going into this weekend we'd have
1 Clemson- probably in regardless
2 Auburn- win and in, lose and really questionable
3 Oklahoma- win and in, lose and really questionable
4 Wisconsin- win and in, lose and out
5 Alabama- in probably no matter what
6 Georgia- win and in, lose and out
7 Miami- win and in, lose and out
8 Ohio St- win and in, lose and out
9 Penn St- could get in if Clemson, Auburn, Oklahoma win- then if Ohio St wins- I could see PSU jumping Wisconsin.
10 USC- win and in, lose and out
11 TCU- win and in, lose and out
12 Stanford- win and in, lose and out
14 UCF- win and in, lose and out
20 Memphis- win and in, lose and out

So by my count 14 teams with a chance. Clemson only team that could lose this weekend and still feel great about making the playoff no matter what.
11-30-2017 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #57
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-30-2017 11:38 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Alabama would have been a lock in a 8 team setup right now. Ahead of Wisconsin should they lose, ahead of Oklahoma should they lose, and ahead of Auburn/Georgia loser- yes Auburn with 3 losses to 1 for Alabama. And even ahead of Clemson should they lose.

Right now going into this weekend we'd have
1 Clemson- probably in regardless
2 Auburn- win and in, lose and really questionable
3 Oklahoma- win and in, lose and really questionable
4 Wisconsin- win and in, lose and out
5 Alabama- in probably no matter what
6 Georgia- win and in, lose and out
7 Miami- win and in, lose and out
8 Ohio St- win and in, lose and out
9 Penn St- could get in if Clemson, Auburn, Oklahoma win- then if Ohio St wins- I could see PSU jumping Wisconsin.
10 USC- win and in, lose and out
11 TCU- win and in, lose and out
12 Stanford- win and in, lose and out
14 UCF- win and in, lose and out
20 Memphis- win and in, lose and out

So by my count 14 teams with a chance. Clemson only team that could lose this weekend and still feel great about making the playoff no matter what.

And the week before, there would have been an additional handful of teams with a chance.

* Notre Dame - beat Stanford and hope that Miami and Georgia win their CCGs
* Oklahoma St., WVU, Iowa St. - win and cards fall right and they play for the B12 championship
* Washington St. - beat Washington and USC
* USF - beat UCF and Memphis and they're in
* Even Boise St.? Beat Fresno convincingly twice and hope that South Florida upsets UCF and Memphis, but looks bad in the process.

None of those teams really had a hope for the CFP on November 20.

But, with the 8-team CFP, at least 20 fan bases are engaged in the CFP hopes and dreams, with may be only Clemson and Alabama comfortable with their position. And even if a lock, the results of the last 2 weekends would be the difference between a favorable home matchup and a tough road game. (ie, UCF or Memphis in Tuscaloosa versus Oklahoma in Norman).
11-30-2017 05:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #58
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-30-2017 10:54 AM)YNot Wrote:  
(11-30-2017 12:36 AM)micahandme Wrote:  Ivan Maisel brought up a good point on Twitter today. He said...if there were an 8-team playoff right now, this weekend would not be as exciting? What would the drama be?

--Well, for one, the P5 conference championship game winners would be IN for sure. As it is, OSU/TCU/Pac-12 all are very uncertain if their wins can earn them a berth. That's a wonky system.

--If you give higher seeds the home field in round one as I'm suggesting, then the top 4 seeds are very important. This aspect would be similar to what we have right now...and the debate for the top 4 would be highly significant?

--The main aspect that would suffer in an 8-team playoff...seeding the losers of the CCG. On one hand, it's unfair for PSU and Alabama to sit at home this weekend while the 5 CCG losers had to go out and fight for their playoff berth. On the other hand, if Wisconsin can't beat OSU on a neutral site, then their schedule is finally comparable with PSU (who had to face them in the Shoe with Gameday and 102,000 fans) and you can compare the two teams with similar foes.

In my system, you only have two at-large teams in...so it's two-loss ACC loser vs. one-loss Bama vs. two-loss PSU (vs. two-loss OU if TCU won OR vs. two-loss UGA if Auburn won).

To answer Ivan in a nutshell, the "drama" for this weekend becomes a fair system of inclusion (marginal fans would understand CCG weekend as a "round of 16" essentially), seeding for home field advantage, seeding for quarterfinal match-ups, and measuring CCG losers versus non-division winners (Ohio State 2016, Bama/PSU 2017).

If you had autobids for the P5 champs and one G5 champ, and only two wild card spots, this weekend would be MORE exciting for MORE teams and fan bases.

Stanford-USC winner is in. UCF-Memphis winner is in. TCU wins and they're in for sure. Ohio St. wins and they're in for sure. Those games become meaningful.

No guarantees at all if Oklahoma, Georgia, Miami, Ohio St., or Wisconsin lose. Alabama sweating out the weekend, hoping to remain in the top 6. Even if Clemson or Auburn or Oklahoma are fairly certain they reach the playoff win or lose, a loss could cost them a home game and the excitement and advantages that come from hosting.

AND, the previous weeks leading up to the conference championship games become EVEN MORE exciting. Win your division and you still have CFP hopes.

How is that less exciting? This week alone, you've doubled the fan bases that still have hope for the playoff. In early November, you probably have quadruple the fan bases that still have hope for the playoff.

I think Alabama and Penn State would be locks for the At-large bids
11-30-2017 05:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #59
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-30-2017 05:23 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  I think Alabama and Penn State would be locks for the At-large bids

Why Penn STate? How is Penn State a lock over the SEC or ACC CCG loser?

I mean you can make a case for Penn STate, they're a top ten tean. But they're not a lock by any means, I don't even think they'd be Vegas favorites.

Part of the reason that I think an 8-team field with 6 autobids would keep the regular season's importance is that with only 2 spots, you can't really count on a margin for error. We're saying Alabama is a lock, but even they're not a lock--you can write a scenarios where the Big 12 game goes to overtime and Oklahoma loses, Ohio State beats Wisconsin on the final play, and both spots go to CCG losers.

(Of course you have to consider that this is Nick Saban and Alabama, so they get the benefit of the doubt because of the last decade or so. Because if you look at Alabama's 2017 resume in isolation, their best wins are LSU, Mississippi State and Fresno State. I'm not sure that, say, Ole Miss playing the same schedule with the same scores, yardages etc is a lock, or if we start picking apart whether Mississippi State and LSU are REALLY any good after all. OTOH, that is an earned benefit of 10 years of Nick Saban kicking everyone's ass.)
11-30-2017 05:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #60
RE: What an 8-team playoff might look like
(11-30-2017 05:23 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(11-30-2017 10:54 AM)YNot Wrote:  
(11-30-2017 12:36 AM)micahandme Wrote:  Ivan Maisel brought up a good point on Twitter today. He said...if there were an 8-team playoff right now, this weekend would not be as exciting? What would the drama be?

--Well, for one, the P5 conference championship game winners would be IN for sure. As it is, OSU/TCU/Pac-12 all are very uncertain if their wins can earn them a berth. That's a wonky system.

--If you give higher seeds the home field in round one as I'm suggesting, then the top 4 seeds are very important. This aspect would be similar to what we have right now...and the debate for the top 4 would be highly significant?

--The main aspect that would suffer in an 8-team playoff...seeding the losers of the CCG. On one hand, it's unfair for PSU and Alabama to sit at home this weekend while the 5 CCG losers had to go out and fight for their playoff berth. On the other hand, if Wisconsin can't beat OSU on a neutral site, then their schedule is finally comparable with PSU (who had to face them in the Shoe with Gameday and 102,000 fans) and you can compare the two teams with similar foes.

In my system, you only have two at-large teams in...so it's two-loss ACC loser vs. one-loss Bama vs. two-loss PSU (vs. two-loss OU if TCU won OR vs. two-loss UGA if Auburn won).

To answer Ivan in a nutshell, the "drama" for this weekend becomes a fair system of inclusion (marginal fans would understand CCG weekend as a "round of 16" essentially), seeding for home field advantage, seeding for quarterfinal match-ups, and measuring CCG losers versus non-division winners (Ohio State 2016, Bama/PSU 2017).

If you had autobids for the P5 champs and one G5 champ, and only two wild card spots, this weekend would be MORE exciting for MORE teams and fan bases.

Stanford-USC winner is in. UCF-Memphis winner is in. TCU wins and they're in for sure. Ohio St. wins and they're in for sure. Those games become meaningful.

No guarantees at all if Oklahoma, Georgia, Miami, Ohio St., or Wisconsin lose. Alabama sweating out the weekend, hoping to remain in the top 6. Even if Clemson or Auburn or Oklahoma are fairly certain they reach the playoff win or lose, a loss could cost them a home game and the excitement and advantages that come from hosting.

AND, the previous weeks leading up to the conference championship games become EVEN MORE exciting. Win your division and you still have CFP hopes.

How is that less exciting? This week alone, you've doubled the fan bases that still have hope for the playoff. In early November, you probably have quadruple the fan bases that still have hope for the playoff.

I think Alabama and Penn State would be locks for the At-large bids

Alabama I agree with. Penn State would need a lot of help quite frankly. Miami beating Clemson or TCU beating Oklahoma- I don't think it's a lock that Penn St gets in ahead of either Clemson or Oklahoma.
11-30-2017 09:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.