|
Post by tigercpa on Jun 8, 2021 14:36:03 GMT
sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-expansion-plan-043900023.htmlThe inevitability of the College Football Playoff expanding has been embraced around every corner of the sport. From the academic ivory towers to the athletic departments to the locker room, an evolution of some type has long been an expectation. The next three weeks offer a critical period in charting what the future of the College Football Playoff will look like. A pair of CFP meetings are expected to decide a specific recommendation, with a final decision, details and television contract determined later in the fall.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 8, 2021 15:05:10 GMT
Hmnnn... Maybe. I think the KEY statement in that long article is this:
I don't think any of these power brokers give a rat's ass about "access for the G5", but they are a lot of P5 programs (like Texas) VERY concerned about being perceived as not have a chance for top athletes to participate in the high profile playoffs. That's hurting recruiting, NOW. It's an urgent problem and needs a solution ASAP.
And, I think some of the top bowls are seeing the writing on the wall: Player opt-outs are growing. In the next year or two, practically every potential NFL draftee will "opt out". The Bowls see their future now best resides with being part of the playoff format.
I don't understand why they would limit it to 12 though. The problem with going bigger than 8 is, the extra week required to do it. If they accept a 4th week, why not go ahead and maximize the field to 16?
Well... I know why. Then, there'd be even more pressure to give auto-bids to all the G5 champs.
EVERYTHING would be so much easier, and better if the G5 just had their OWN playoff structure and Champion.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Jun 8, 2021 15:21:38 GMT
On my first read of this article, I came away with this is wishful thinking on someone's (Thamel?) part.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Jun 8, 2021 15:42:03 GMT
They talked about this this morning on the first team - they said this plan offers the path of least resistance - by that I think they mean there's a little something for everyone but it still favors the power conferences. They were saying they need a plan that everyone will buy in to. This pan would give the top 4 seeds a buy and seeds 5-8 would host playoff games at their home fields. It would also be doubtful that many teams would have wind up playing 4 games. They believe that a top 4 seed would probably eventually win meaning. Interesting - personally, I don't like buys.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Jun 8, 2021 16:02:27 GMT
sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-expansion-plan-043900023.htmlThe inevitability of the College Football Playoff expanding has been embraced around every corner of the sport. From the academic ivory towers to the athletic departments to the locker room, an evolution of some type has long been an expectation. The next three weeks offer a critical period in charting what the future of the College Football Playoff will look like. A pair of CFP meetings are expected to decide a specific recommendation, with a final decision, details and television contract determined later in the fall. This will not be Hen approved.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Jun 8, 2021 16:15:31 GMT
Hmnnn... Maybe. I think the KEY statement in that long article is this: I don't think any of these power brokers give a rat's ass about "access for the G5", but they are a lot of P5 programs (like Texas) VERY concerned about being perceived as not have a chance for top athletes to participate in the high profile playoffs. That's hurting recruiting, NOW. It's an urgent problem and needs a solution ASAP. And, I think some of the top bowls are seeing the writing on the wall: Player opt-outs are growing. In the next year or two, practically every potential NFL draftee will "opt out". The Bowls see their future now best resides with being part of the playoff format. I don't understand why they would limit it to 12 though. The problem with going bigger than 8 is, the extra week required to do it. If they accept a 4th week, why not go ahead and maximize the field to 16? Well... I know why. Then, there'd be even more pressure to give auto-bids to all the G5 champs. EVERYTHING would be so much easier, and better if the G5 just had their OWN playoff structure and Champion. You are on point on this one. Currently the system we have is very limited to get to the playoffs unless you are Ohio State, BAMA, Clemson, or OU. If a player wants in the CFP then they better get an offer from one of these and take it. An expanded playoffs will help all of the next level teams recruiting. The opt out issue has made the bowls even more irrelevant than they already are. When most teams in the NY 6 games have significant opt outs then there is a major problem that needs to be 6. With the extra week then just give have the top 4 play the bottom four in round one. That way all conferences get one guaranteed representative and 6 at large.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 8, 2021 17:28:59 GMT
sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-expansion-plan-043900023.htmlThe inevitability of the College Football Playoff expanding has been embraced around every corner of the sport. From the academic ivory towers to the athletic departments to the locker room, an evolution of some type has long been an expectation. The next three weeks offer a critical period in charting what the future of the College Football Playoff will look like. A pair of CFP meetings are expected to decide a specific recommendation, with a final decision, details and television contract determined later in the fall. This will not be Hen approved. Nothing will ever be Hen approved, short of giving the smallest school a bye to the Finals... or, having a 16 week tournament.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jun 8, 2021 19:24:20 GMT
Hey...can anyone think of any other team sport in the world....youth, amateur, pro...anything at any level in which league champions are NOT permitted to compete for that sport's championship ?
Can anybody think of any team sport in the world...youth, amateur, pro....anything at any level in which the championship of that sport is not administered by the governing body of that sport ?
There are your two problems with exhibition college football.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Jun 8, 2021 20:11:16 GMT
Hey...can anyone think of any other team sport in the world....youth, amateur, pro...anything at any level in which regular season champions are NOT permitted to compete for that sport's championship ? Can anybody think of any team sport in the world...youth, amateur, pro....anything at any level in which the championship of that sport is not administered by the governing body of that sport ? There are your two problems with exhibition college football. NCAA Basketball is the exact opposite. In NCAA Hoops winning your regular season league championship means absolutely nothing. All games played from October through February do nothing for you in terms of getting to the post season. Then in March you have all of these conference tournaments a team gets hot at the right time and wins 3 games in a row you get invited to the dance.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jun 8, 2021 20:26:20 GMT
I agree , aj. It doesn't seem fair, but the tournament winner is considered the champ and All of those get auto opportunities to compete for the sport's championship....no matter what un hyped league they come from. I edited my question to "league champions" from "regular season champions" based on your good point.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Jun 9, 2021 13:50:24 GMT
Even if you consider making more regular season games relevant…
47 different teams have played a game while ranked in the CFP top 12.
17 have spent 10+ games.
6 have spent 20 games (Bama 43, OhSt 37, Clem 37, Okla 29, UGA 25, ND 20).
Does it solve "access"? Maybe.
the real impact of this that cannot be overstated…
In a 12-team playoff, going back the last 5 seasons, the B1G & SEC would’ve owned HALF the playoff teams (30 of 60).
Instead, the SEC has had two teams in just once & the B1G missed the playoff 2x in past 5 years.
Does it involve the G5? Yeah, it throws the G5 a small bone.
G5 would’ve been guaranteed a playoff team each year… but in 5 of the 7 years, it’d still have been the No. 12 seed.
So a 12-team playoff, since 2016, would’ve included 9 Pac-12 teams rather than 1. That's obviously a huge win for the Pac-12. Except 4 of them came in 2016 and only 3 (’14 Wash, ’17 USC & ’19 Oregon) would’ve been higher than a 9 seed.
So, I guess it's buyer beware.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Jun 10, 2021 0:57:55 GMT
Bowls will be part of the playoffs, become a preseason game or bite the dust.
The NCAA is determined to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jun 10, 2021 2:10:27 GMT
Bowls will be part of the playoffs, become a preseason game or bite the dust. The NCAA is determined to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Expound on that for me, Hero. : "the NCAA is determined to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs"
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Jun 10, 2021 13:52:14 GMT
Bowls will be part of the playoffs, become a preseason game or bite the dust. The NCAA is determined to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Expound on that for me, Hero. : "the NCAA is determined to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs" Every decision they make hurts more than it helps. Example...transfers were extremely rare when players were forced to contemplate sitting a year to think. Now we have teenagers making snap decisions about transferring and most are falling through the cracks. Literally thousands have decided to transfer and how many have helped themselves probably a few dozen. One example of NCAA Buffoonery. I know you worship the NCAA. As a governing body I wouldn't trust them to pourpissoutofaboot with directions on the heel.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jun 10, 2021 14:30:46 GMT
Agree with lots of that. I thought you were talking about bowls/playoffs,...post season stuff which the NCAA has very little to do with at the FBS level. That's what the discussion seemed to be about. Look at the thread title. How is the NCAA screwing up the post season format ?
|
|