How About This For An 8 Team CFP?

[BVHawk95]

So in other words, even an 8-team playoff is bad, and the case can be made that the old bowl system and "on-paper" champions were better. Less games, less injury and CTE exposure.

11-game seasons and the old traditional bowl tie-ins would work for me. That, and cutting back to 24 bowls (48 teams in bowls would equal 37% of FBS teams making bowls) would make it good again. Require 8-game conference schedules, limit one FCS opponent every three years and require it to be same-state (i.e., no Iowa vs. West Wyoming School for the Uncoordinated, but Iowa vs. UNI is permitted), and maximum of four teams from one conference getting bowl bids. And teams could not "jump" a conference member unless you had something like a "if a conference has six eligible bowl teams with the the bottom three being tied, conference can award to team or teams with less recent bowl appearance."

I would actually be fine with all of that.

Actually I'm in favor of an 8-team playoff, even if my post did somewhat indicate otherwise. However yeah I agree with most of what you said there. I do like the idea of cutting back to an 8-game conference schedule, but that would mean we'd only have two crossover games per year, meaning we'd see any given team from the East just once every 6-8 years if we rotated on a home-and-home basis.

I think for shortening the season to work we'd have to cut out a non-conference game, leaving Iowa in particular pretty boxed in with having to play the clowns each year. I like the limit on FCS opponents too, but I'm in favor of just dropping them altogether, since the only plus from it is it's a guaranteed win (mostly, FCS has been getting stronger and more competitive in recent years as well). Also, it wouldn't work for all schools, since not all states have an FCS (Wisconsin and Michigan come to mind).

 

[hawkeyebob62]

Actually I'm in favor of an 8-team playoff, even if my post did somewhat indicate otherwise. However yeah I agree with most of what you said there. I do like the idea of cutting back to an 8-game conference schedule, but that would mean we'd only have two crossover games per year, meaning we'd see any given team from the East just once every 6-8 years if we rotated on a home-and-home basis.

I think for shortening the season to work we'd have to cut out a non-conference game, leaving Iowa in particular pretty boxed in with having to play the clowns each year. I like the limit on FCS opponents too, but I'm in favor of just dropping them altogether, since the only plus from it is it's a guaranteed win (mostly, FCS has been getting stronger and more competitive in recent years as well). Also, it wouldn't work for all schools, since not all states have an FCS (Wisconsin and Michigan come to mind).

With regard to FCS, we wouldn't "have to" play them, of course. But, I'd also shit-can the B1G as we now know it. Let PSU, Rutgers, Syracuse, et. a;., re-constitute a "new" Big East. Let Nebraska go back to where they came from, and frankly, I don't care whether Maryland ends up ACC, Big East, or wherever. They just don't belong in "my father's Big 10", that's for damn sure.

Let the original "big four" bowls retain conference tie-ins, with Rose being Big 10/Pac 10, Sugar being $EC/Big East,, Cotton being Big 12/whoever (we do NOT want a re-constituted Southwest Conference!) and Orange being ACC/whoever. Figure out a way to get some of the traditionally G5 teams into the mix, obviously, then let the other 20 bowls work together to figure out tie-ins of some kind.

Much as like getting bowl bids, they meant a little more when a 9-2 or 8-3 Iowa team got them than when 6-5 Iowa teams did.

 

[4thngoal]

I posted the following a couple years ago:

“Select the top 8 teams in the country no matter what conference they are in. Use the committee and add some sort of RPI-like component to help rank the teams. The RPI wouldn't be the deciding factor, just a metric that the committee looks at so its not all just the eyeball test. Elite 8 and Final 4 rounds are played at the higher seeds home immediately after the conference championship games. This ensures fans can attend games and it rewards teams for their regular season performance. This would help to keep the regular season relevant. Teams that lose in the Elite 8 and Final 4 are guaranteed a New Years 6 Bowl. The final two play for the National Championship. This keeps the bowls alive and gives college football a true playoff.”

The problem is, they do go by sos. That was what I was saying about UCF, NDSU or whoever.
The way they calculate what your sos was like is by the winning percentage of your opponents. But let's be honest, that doesn't tell the entire story. If you put ISU in some other conference than a P5 they would have a higher winning percentage. It has to do with the strength of the conference as a whole. That whole beating up on each other has to be figured in.
Is a one loss Iowa last year better than a one loss Alabama? Absolutely. The games they played are tougher due to the conference as a whole being tougher, regardless of winning percentage. The amount of bowl wins indicate as such.

 

[ChosenChildren]

Are you responding to me?

I wasn't excluding P5 schools.

My scenario was to give all P5 champs automatic bids, and decide the 3 at large by way of a playoff between the 11 FCS conference champs. That would be a 2 round playoff and those three teams would make up the other 3 spots.

So...five P5 schools and 3 at large from FCS.

I like it but I would do it this way:

1. 5 conference champs.
2. 3 at large but none of those teams can be from any of the power 5 conferences.

You could also do a six team playoff very easily, like the NFL:

5 power 5 champs plus one at large. 2 teams get first round byes, with the other 4 playing in the first round.

6 team playoffs work well in the NFL

 

[hawkdrummer1]

I like it but I would do it this way:

1. 5 conference champs.
2. 3 at large but none of those teams can be from any of the power 5 conferences.

You could also do a six team playoff very easily, like the NFL:

5 power 5 champs plus one at large. 2 teams get first round byes, with the other 4 playing in the first round.

6 team playoffs work well in the NFL

--------------------------------------------
You lost me on #2.

Scenario: Iowa and tOSU both go 12-0 (assume we don't meet in cross division that year). tOSU beats IOWA 24-23 in an EPIC B1G title game. Tell me you wouldn't be pissed that we were "ineligible" for the playoff. More importantly...tell me that's fair. (You could insert good examples from any other P5 conference and which would be equally valid).

Show me a year when 3 non-P5 teams were even close to playoff worthy, much less 2. I could see a "required" spot held open for 1... (see UCF last year)... but 3 would result in jumping over a lot of more qualified teams just to fill a quota.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

--------------------------------------------
You lost me on #2.

Scenario: Iowa and tOSU both go 12-0 (assume we don't meet in cross division that year). tOSU beats IOWA 24-23 in an EPIC B1G title game. Tell me you wouldn't be pissed that we were "ineligible" for the playoff. More importantly...tell me that's fair. (You could insert good examples from any other P5 conference and which would be equally valid).

Show me a year when 3 non-P5 teams were even close to playoff worthy, much less 2. I could see a "required" spot held open for 1... (see UCF last year)... but 3 would result in jumping over a lot of more qualified teams just to fill a quota.

No, #2 makes sense.. You're just forgetting about NDs automatic entitlement...er "bid".

 

[hawkdrummer1]

No, #2 makes sense.. You're just forgetting about NDs automatic entitlement...er "bid".

I despise Notre Dame as much as anybody. But they are effectively a "Power 5" team...not part of a conference, but they obviously play at that level. So yeah, they'd have to grab one of the 3 at large IF they were good enough that year to qualify.
Leaving out ND (as they're obviously an anomaly) rarely are there even 2 non P5 teams that would qualify for the playoff.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I despise Notre Dame as much as anybody. But they are effectively a "Power 5" team...not part of a conference, but they obviously play at that level. So yeah, they'd have to grab one of the 3 at large IF they were good enough that year to qualify.
Leaving out ND (as they're obviously an anomaly) rarely are there even 2 non P5 teams that would qualify for the playoff.

NDs "burden" to qualify will be lower than anyone else's at some point. And think about this: a one- or two-loss ND getting in over a B1G CG loser who beats them during the regular season is entirely possible.

I know they have some "tie-in" to the ACCs bowl "pecking order". Under the old BCS system, they had a(compared to P4/5 teams) ridiculously easier path to it. Thank God they kept a healthy 2/3/4 or more losses-per-season there for a while. They were certainly deserving of being Bama's opponent in 2012, but otherwise, their "loss-tolerance" is, in any given season a game or two "easier" than any non-blueblood P5 team.