No B1G in the playoff.

[Iowama Red]

I would disagree that winning a conference is settling it on the field. UCF won their conference and didn't get in. The reason they didn't get in is their conference didn't present enough challenges to earn a spot. Now why should we reward a conference that didn't earn it on the field such as the Pac this year? As for Georgia in 2018......they didn't get in that is irrelevant. As for Georgia in 2017. They deserved to be in there as they were the best team in the Nation.

It seems you have a completely different definition of settling it on the field than most people. Settling it on the field means wins and losses. It is the complete opposite of the eyeball test, which pollsters/committees use to deem the SEC a far superior conference because the teams look good beating each other up.

@Hotlanta Husker 's plan settles it on the field by guaranteeing the best teams (conference champs settled on the field) from the 5 best conferences (based on history/eyeball test/money) plus a random really good group of 5 team (settled on field/eyeball test if there are 2 undefeated teams) get in. Nobody who gets left out has a valid complaint, but there are still 2 spots for wildcards that lost a tough early season game or Georgia/LSU or whatever the committee wants based on the eyeball test.

 

[Hville]

The “P5” and “G5” aren’t legal entities. They are naming conventions. A naming convention can’t be a party to a lawsuit.

The College Football Playoff is not an officially sanctioned championship event by the NCAA and the NCAA has never recognized an official national championship for FBS football. There’s no one to sue.

The playoffs aren’t an athletic completion. They are entertainment. It’s the TV rights holder (currently ESPN) that has the most influence.

It would be the entities within the G6 that would sue the entities within the P5..... specifically the Commissions/Presidents that are adopting this playoff format that would be parties in the lawsuit as there is a financial benefit to being treated unfairly. If those entities have the power to develop a playoff system such as they already have with the CFP committee, than they are capable of being sued.

 

[bilsker]

You can eliminate the occasional outlier by not having automatic bids and you get rid of the perception that you are biased by even giving them automatic births. Let all teams earn it on the field instead of just earning it as part of their season within a weak conference.

Winning your conference over the course of 3 months IS earning it on the field.

Eliminating the outlier is simply a concession to you in the negotiations....based on my assertion that not having auto qualifiers for the P5 is a virtual deal breaker.

 

[bilsker]

If the P5 push through an agreement to allow preferential treatment of part of the conferences a guaranteed spot in a playoff while not providing equal guaranteed spots to the other conferences that is potential lawsuit. In all other Division 1 selection processes the lower conferences get equal automatic bids as the bigger conferences. The litigators would be the G6 and independents against the P5.

How was the current system arrived upon?

 

[Hville]

It seems you have a completely different definition of settling it on the field than most people. Settling it on the field means wins and losses. It is the complete opposite of the eyeball test, which pollsters/committees use to deem the SEC a far superior conference because the teams look good beating each other up.

@Hotlanta Husker 's plan settles it on the field by guaranteeing the best teams (conference champs settled on the field) from the 5 best conferences (based on history/eyeball test/money) plus a random really good group of 5 team (settled on field/eyeball test if there are 2 undefeated teams) get in. Nobody who gets left out has a valid complaint, but there are still 2 spots for wildcards that lost a tough early season game or Georgia/LSU or whatever the committee wants based on the eyeball test.

I absolutely disagree. If wins and losses is settling it on the field why is UCF not in? Why would we create automatic qualifiers for teams that could be 8-6 (Wisconsin) or teams like Washington this year with 3 losses or Southern Cal a couple of years ago with 3 losses. Why isn't Cincinnati with only 2 losses right up there in the discussion with Georgia and Michigan this year? Wins and losses is just part of it. Eye ball test will always be a part unless you decide to give automatic berths to teams that don't pass the eyeball test and let them get in because they won a conference championship that doesn't even measure almost a 1/3rd of their season.

 

[Hville]

How was the current system arrived upon?

I don't know specifically.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

It would be the entities within the G6 that would sue the entities within the P5..... specifically the Commissions/Presidents that are adopting this playoff format that would be parties in the lawsuit as there is a financial benefit to being treated unfairly. If those entities have the power to develop a playoff system such as they already have with the CFP committee, than they are capable of being sued.

Ok, so to sum up, you think that all the teams in the G5 are going to band together and hire an army of lawyers to sue the commissioners of the P5? Who hears that case and what are the damages? The G5 gets $80 million from the current playoff which would double up with 8 teams.

There are reasons an expanded playoff might not feature AQs for winning the CCG but fear of a lawsuit from G5/independents isn’t one of them.

 

[Hville]

Winning your conference over the course of 3 months IS earning it on the field.

Eliminating the outlier is simply a concession to you in the negotiations....based on my assertion that not having auto qualifiers for the P5 is a virtual deal breaker.

Earning your conference championship is earning the right to be conference champion only. It doesn't include non-conference games. The measurement stick should be the entire season. Especially with the inbred conference divisions and schedules that we are seeing. Other than the B1G the conferences aren't even fair within divisions. You can have conference playoff games that don't even have the best two teams in the championship game.

As I said before......the biggest snafu in college football right now is the individual conference structures. Why would we want to include this disfunction in the selection process?

 

[Iowama Red]

I absolutely disagree. If wins and losses is settling it on the field why is UCF not in? Why would we create automatic qualifiers for teams that could be 8-6 (Wisconsin) or teams like Washington this year with 3 losses or Southern Cal a couple of years ago with 3 losses. Why isn't Cincinnati with only 2 losses right up there in the discussion with Georgia and Michigan this year? Wins and losses is just part of it. Eye ball test will always be a part unless you decide to give automatic berths to teams that don't pass the eyeball test and let them get in because they won a conference championship that doesn't even measure almost a 1/3rd of their season.

UCF isn't in because it's a 4 team playoff, and the participants are determined by the eyeball test currently. I believe the eyeball test should be considered as a secondary factor to determine the wildcards rather than a primary factor as it currently exists. My system would have UCF in this year as the top ranked (eyeball test) undefeated (on the field test) group of 5 team.

 

[Hville]

Ok, so to sum up, you think that all the teams in the G5 are going to band together and hire an army of lawyers to sue the commissioners of the P5? Who hears that case and what are the damages? The G5 gets $80 million from the current playoff which would double up with 8 teams.

There are reasons an expanded playoff might not feature AQs for winning the CCG but fear of a lawsuit from G5/independents isn’t one of them.

Right now in all other sports the revenue is divided in certain increments to every team. In the CFP it is only divided by playoff contenders. Putting automatic qualifiers in there from only the P5 guarantee's money going to the P5 conferences that is not guaranteed to the other conferences. Exactly why the other sports have automatic qualifiers for all of them and not just a select few of the conferences.

 

[Hville]

UCF isn't in because it's a 4 team playoff, and the participants are determined by the eyeball test currently. I believe the eyeball test should be considered as a secondary factor to determine the wildcards rather than a primary factor as it currently exists. My system would have UCF in this year as the top ranked (eyeball test) undefeated (on the field test) group of 5 team.

Well its not the eyeball test only. You should review the metrics that the committee uses. The teams pretty much match up with all the computer metrics also. They have gotten it right the last 7 years or so without having automatic qualifiers.

 

[Hville]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nc...l-playoff-getting-stale/ar-BBQpX2g?li=BBnb7Kz Good article on this. They talk expansion and the problem with the individual conference alignments. Until the NCAA somehow gets involved in the scheduling the conferences will never be equal enough to treat them like divisions and reward conference champions an automatic spot. Their 8 team example does NOT include Washington as an automatic qualifier. I could live with this scenario because it includes what almost any metric shows as the top 8 teams. I haven't seen a single human poll or computer poll that has Washington inside the top 8 however there are so many it wouldn't surprise me if there were.

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

Right now in all other sports the revenue is divided in certain increments to every team. In the CFP it is only divided by playoff contenders. Putting automatic qualifiers in there from only the P5 guarantee's money going to the P5 conferences that is not guaranteed to the other conferences. Exactly why the other sports have automatic qualifiers for all of them and not just a select few of the conferences.

The playoff teams get an extra $2 million each vs. an NY6 bid. And that $2 million goes to the conferences, so it's chump change on a per-team basis. As I mentioned, the G5 gets $80 million total (Notre Dame and the other independents have their own deals). That's $1.3 million per team, which for a majority of G5 teams will cover their entire coaching payroll for the year. They are also not negotiating from a place of strength. Again, this is show-business. ESPN is paying for match-ups with teams that have broad national followings.

I'm sure this has already been pointed out, but if they broker a deal that gives any undefeated G5 team an AQ to an 8-team playoff, it's all moot. They'll take it.

 

[Hville]

The playoff teams get an extra $2 million each vs. an NY6 bid. And that $2 million goes to the conferences, so it's chump change on a per-team basis. As I mentioned, the G5 gets $80 million total (Notre Dame and the other independents have their own deals). That's $1.3 million per team, which for a majority of G5 teams will cover their entire coaching payroll for the year. They are also not negotiating from a place of strength. Again, this is show-business. ESPN is paying for match-ups with teams that have broad national followings.

I'm sure this has already been pointed out, but if they broker a deal that gives any undefeated G5 team an AQ to an 8-team playoff, it's all moot. They'll take it.

In regards to the last sentence. Not totally in disagreement if that was the case. My question is why put all those stipulations in place when you simply take the top 8 based on criteria that has been used for 100 years. Everyone agrees that conference divisions aren't fair, they agree that conferences amongst themselves aren't fair, they agree the structure and schedules aren't fair amongst all conferences and everyone agrees that conference championships only count 2/3rds to 3/4ths of your entire season.....then why do it? Why give an automatic to a team that most everyone knows isn't qualified to be in the top 8?

I think its silly to use one of the most dissfunctionally unfair metric in FBS.....the conferences.....as your primary means of qualifying.

 

[Hville]

Another thought to ponder. Why aren't conference champions used to determine playoff births in High School?