Playoff Format Fix

#1
T

TN Volunteers.

Active Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2024
Messages
25
Likes
107
#1
In the 12-team playoff format we should not have the conference champions automatically get a bye. 1-4 will be the best 4 teams. Then, I think there should still be automatic bids but instead of 5, there should be 4. It will probably just be Big 12, Big 10, ACC, and the SEC. The seeds 5-8 will have a home game with the seeds 9-12 playing away. I also think round two should be home games instead of neutral site. This would be more fun to watch and further reward the bye winners because we saw all of them get knocked out this year. For the semifinals and championship, they should be neutral site.
 
  • Like
Reactions: coachchia and RDU VOL#14
#2
#2
TN Volunteers. said:
In the 12-team playoff format we should not have the conference champions automatically get a bye. 1-4 will be the best 4 teams. Then, I think there should still be automatic bids but instead of 5, there should be 4. It will probably just be Big 12, Big 10, ACC, and the SEC. The seeds 5-8 will have a home game with the seeds 9-12 playing away. I also think round two should be home games instead of neutral site. This would be more fun to watch and further reward the bye winners because we saw all of them get knocked out this year. For the semifinals and championship, they should be neutral site.
Click to expand...
100% agree. I think reseeding should also be considered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami
#5
#5
BearBryant said:
Would reseeding require the committee to make that decision? This committee was a complete failure. They set-up the Big10 from the first rankings they released. 4 of top 5 Big 10, what a biased joke that was.
Click to expand...
I would imagine that with a new seeding process, where the Conference champs are not guaranteed byes the lowest ranked team would play the highest ranked team. This year they sort of got it right by not having the ACC champ get a bye. Let’s say Clemson had beaten Texas, Clemson would then have to play Oregon instead of whoever was in their side of the bracket . I don’t think it would be a terrible idea to get rid of bowl tie ins as well. There was a quarterfinal game in Atlanta where Texas played Arizona State. Uga should’ve been rewarded w/ Atlanta for winning the SEC and Arizona St should’ve gotten to play their Quarterfinal game in Tempe. That’s just common sense stuff that would make travel for fans that much more accommodating.
 
#7
#7
RDU VOL#14 said:
100% agree. I think reseeding should also be considered.
Click to expand...

The simple fix would be seeding them 1-12 with the byes going to the top four seeds, auto bids for the five conference champs, and definitely reseeding after each round. They'll never get rid of the 5th conference champ bid until the G5 is kicked out of the decision process.

They'll never do home games after round one because of the tie-in with the bowls. Decisions about these things aren't about the quality of the product, and will always have only one priority - $$$$$. Too much money is made by too many people from these bowls to ever move away from them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider and RDU VOL#14
#8
#8
TN Volunteers. said:
In the 12-team playoff format we should not have the conference champions automatically get a bye. 1-4 will be the best 4 teams. Then, I think there should still be automatic bids but instead of 5, there should be 4. It will probably just be Big 12, Big 10, ACC, and the SEC. The seeds 5-8 will have a home game with the seeds 9-12 playing away. I also think round two should be home games instead of neutral site. This would be more fun to watch and further reward the bye winners because we saw all of them get knocked out this year. For the semifinals and championship, they should be neutral site.
Click to expand...
I think this will happen. It's been discussed on every platform that this will be what it will eventually be changed to. Hopefully starting next year, but if not then definitely in 26. I think Bye's will be gone too. It was proven that bye's hurt and not helps teams. Especially with all 4 losing their 1st game after getting the bye.
 
#9
#9
Honestly, mostly all they've proved is the more teams they let in, the worse it'll be. Everybody knows that already - the tradition is team #1 gets to play team #16 and so they set you up for some spoiler games and lousy games.

There's no fix. If they let 128 teams in everybody will just talk about who is #129.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sami and feathersax
#10
#10
Go aeiou said:
Joke was SEC. Other than Texas.
Click to expand...
not a good joke. besides OSU who woke up in the playoffs, they look the exact same for the three teams we had in it. they looked better than the SEC did, but that doesn't make us a joke.

IU=Tennessee. first round games on the road, lost embarrassingly.
Oregon=Georgia. first round byes, won their conference, lost to a team who made it to the championship game.
Ped State=Texas. made it from the first round to round 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Go aeiou
#13
#13
I was listening to XM College station this morning w/ Dusty and Danny . Their guest was Jim Dunaway, apparently a sports show host in Birmingham. The topic turned to the CFP and potential changes. He said that a model that is gaining momentum for the SEC and B1G is one that is called Enhanced Championship Saturday. Not only would you have the top 2 teams play in Atlanta and Indy, but you’d have the 3rd and 4th best teams host the 6th and 5th best teams at their home stadiums. Games start at 12, mid afternoon and the late games . Not sure how they would stagger it, maybe a Friday night game. The point of this would be mainly to take the CFP committee influence mostly out of the CFP decision making . Sounds intriguing to me.

 
#14
#14
YankeeVol said:
2 of them technically weren't the top seeds, they just won a conference (seeded 9th and 12th)
Click to expand...
I know, but they were handed top seeds. Not sure a first round bye is a good thing. A month off did not help Georgia or Oregon, although to be fair, Georgia had lost their starting QB. Probably did not deserve that #2 seed.
 
#15
#15
RDU VOL#14 said:
I was listening to XM College station this morning w/ Dusty and Danny . Their guest was Jim Dunaway, apparently a sports show host in Birmingham. The topic turned to the CFP and potential changes. He said that a model that is gaining momentum for the SEC and B1G is one that is called Enhanced Championship Saturday. Not only would you have the top 2 teams play in Atlanta and Indy, but you’d have the 3rd and 4th best teams host the 6th and 5th best teams at their home stadiums. Games start at 12, mid afternoon and the late games . Not sure how they would stagger it, maybe a Friday night game. The point of this would be mainly to take the CFP committee influence mostly out of the CFP decision making . Sounds intriguing to me.
Click to expand...
Sounds like they're admitting the BCS was good, eh?

I hope this is a joke but I guess it's not.
 
#18
#18
LouderVol said:
I think the issue with the BCS was just the format. #1 vs #2.

keep the playoffs, but have an unbiased computer system seed the teams. remove any bs of ESPN trying to create matchups that sell.
Click to expand...
It seems like that the SEC and B1G are trying to get away from the committee with this potential proposal of a play in weekend.
 
#19
#19
LouderVol said:
I think the issue with the BCS was just the format. #1 vs #2.

keep the playoffs, but have an unbiased computer system seed the teams. remove any bs of ESPN trying to create matchups that sell.
Click to expand...
There is no unbiased computer system, because humans program them.

Go to 16 teams, eliminate the conference championship games, and seed the teams 1-16 like the FCS does. Neutral site early games to eliminate the BIG 10 weather advantage. Problems solved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
#20
#20
S.C. OrangeMan said:
There is no unbiased computer system, because humans program them.

Go to 16 teams, eliminate the conference championship games, and seed the teams 1-16 like the FCS does. Neutral site early games to eliminate the BIG 10 weather advantage. Problems solved.
Click to expand...
Don't disagree with any of this but the money grab from the conference championship games is just what it is --- a money grab. Plus the loser gets handicapped into the CFP which makes it a totally meaningless game. What's more is Conference Scheduling is not balanced.

If the NCAA is going to an NCAA format then make the playoffs the same way and balance it all out accordingly. Non Conference teams should not be allowed to compete for the CFP.

Play it as an elimination game 1st round game. It costs GA (who cares) a QB because of an injury. That is on the staff.
 
#21
#21
I know this will be an unpopular take and also will not ever happen but I believe every conference champion should get an auto-bid. Because I believe every team should have a path to a national championship without any committees or computers or any other opinion mechanism blocking them.

But no byes, no auto seeding. You give enough wild cards to fill in a 16 team bracket and I am fine with committees or computers seeding the whole bracket.

I also like the idea of re-seeding after the first round (so highest seed winner advancIng places lowest seed advancing, etc.)

*Alternatively if every conference is not going to be treated equally, then from a competitve standpoint it makes more sense to split FBS and let the 'minor' conferences play their way to their own championship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodpusher
#22
#22
Sudden Impact said:
Don't disagree with any of this but the money grab from the conference championship games is just what it is --- a money grab. Plus the loser gets handicapped into the CFP which makes it a totally meaningless game. What's more is Conference Scheduling is not balanced.

If the NCAA is going to an NCAA format then make the playoffs the same way and balance it all out accordingly. Non Conference teams shoul ind not be allowed to compete for the CFP.

Play it as an elimination game 1st round game. It costs GA (who cares) a QB because of an injury. That is on the staff.
Click to expand...
CFP does t mean "Conference Playoff Championship". It includes all FBS teams including the 3 independents.

It would be more fair to eliminate the conference championship games to eliminate the potential penalty for the losers of those games compared to Indy teams or teams that didn't make their CCG. That would have potentially helped Texas, SMU, and similar teams this past season.
 
#23
#23
S.C. OrangeMan said:
CFP does t mean "Conference Playoff Championship". It includes all FBS teams including the 3 independents.

It would be more fair to eliminate the conference championship games to eliminate the potential penalty for the losers of those games compared to Indy teams or teams that didn't make their CCG. That would have potentially helped Texas, SMU, and similar teams this past season.
Click to expand...
Then we need to go to uniform scheduling for all P4 teams. Have everyone play 9 game conference schedules, 1 P4 OOC game and then whatever else they want. If you eliminate CCG you potentially get some really mediocre teams in the CFP. If UNC had been semi decent this season they could’ve won the ACC without playing a ranked opponent all season and had a breeze into the CFP. At least the CCG forces some teams to have play someone if the schedule they play doesn’t work out to be good.
 
#25
#25
RDU VOL#14 said:
I was listening to XM College station this morning w/ Dusty and Danny . Their guest was Jim Dunaway, apparently a sports show host in Birmingham. The topic turned to the CFP and potential changes. He said that a model that is gaining momentum for the SEC and B1G is one that is called Enhanced Championship Saturday. Not only would you have the top 2 teams play in Atlanta and Indy, but you’d have the 3rd and 4th best teams host the 6th and 5th best teams at their home stadiums. Games start at 12, mid afternoon and the late games . Not sure how they would stagger it, maybe a Friday night game. The point of this would be mainly to take the CFP committee influence mostly out of the CFP decision making . Sounds intriguing to me.

Click to expand...

Just sounds like more games for the conferences to rake in more $$$$$ to me.

Not sure why they're complicating this so much (other than, of course $$$$$, which is the sole factor of every rule and policy change in pro and big time college sports). Rank them and seed them as they are ranked and give auto bids (not byes) to the 5 conference champs if the G5 has to be thrown a bone. Done.

Sankey and the Big 10 commissioner are obsessed with auto bids, but if the teams are good enough they will get the bids. Don't like the "committee"? Put a computer system back in and be done with it. I'm not sure why, in this time of incredible technology, they are so damned scared of some kind of more objective system of selection.

To me, more than 8 teams is overkill, because if you go to 24 it's still going to come down to the 2-3 teams everyone expected. But $$$$$ of course rules all. Funny that they're obsessed with creating a CFB 'March Madness', yet won't simply go with the teams as they are ranked the way CBB does it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top