The CFP failed because when drawn up the conference looked different
Oregon and tu changing conferences messed with seeding and produced some of the issues

Sq 17 said:

---

The CFP failed because when drawn up the conference looked different
Oregon and tu changing conferences messed with seeding and produced some of the issues

---

This is a good point. Without it, sips are the Big 12 winner, Oregon the PAC, Ohio St the BIG, and Georgia the SEC. Those are the first round byes.

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

All these 1st round games were blowouts.
The lower seeds are already mismatched, and in addition they play at the higher seed's home?
Just make them all neutral site. Use more of the bowl games as the sites, since there's too many of them anyway.
There's no point having these 1st round games at home for the higher seeds if they're wanting them to be competitive.

LB12Diamond said:

---

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

---

They had a few years to ramp up before actually entering SEC play also.

TxAg76 said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

---

They had a few years to ramp up before actually entering SEC play also.

---

They were also handed a easy schedule, including the playoff seeding. There is no way that the scheduling disparity between OU and horn was achieved by chance.

It all goes back to this.

Everything we want about the past and everything we like about the present comes together with a NCAA national TV contract for regional conferences. It allows the NCAA to have real authority to do all the things we want. As usual, short term gains (that we have celebrated to this point), comes back to bite.

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

TxAg76 said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

---

They had a few years to ramp up before actually entering SEC play also.

---

They were also handed an easy schedule, including the playoff seeding. There is no way that the scheduling disparity between OU and horn was achieved by chance.

---

No, it wasn't achieved by chance. It has been explained over and over and over and over again that it was based on conference records since the last SEC expansion. A time period during which Texas was awful. And during which OU was better. So they got the schedules to go along with that.

The difference is that Texas has improved substantially, handled the SEC teams they should have handled, and OU has regressed.

It's also the reason A&M had a relatively weak conference schedule. It's just that A&M didn't handle the SEC teams they should have. Beat Auburn (something OU managed to do) and they're playing for the SEC title. Fail, and they're playing in the Las Vegas Bowl.

Cheyenne Bodie said:

---

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

TxAg76 said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

---

They had a few years to ramp up before actually entering SEC play also.

---

They were also handed an easy schedule, including the playoff seeding. There is no way that the scheduling disparity between OU and horn was achieved by chance.

---

No, it wasn't achieved by chance. It has been explained over and over and over and over again that it was based on conference records since the last SEC expansion. A time period during which Texas was awful. And during which OU was better. So they got the schedules to go along with that.

The difference is that Texas has improved substantially, handled the SEC teams they should have handled, and OU has regressed.

It's also the reason A&M had a relatively weak conference schedule. It's just that A&M didn't handle the SEC teams they should have. Beat Auburn (something OU managed to do) and they're playing for the SEC title. Fail, and they're playing in the Las Vegas Bowl.

---

How would A&M play for the SEC title if they beat Auburn?

tu vs Georgia would happen as Georgia would win the tiebreaker.

Onionman said:

---

Cheyenne Bodie said:

---

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

TxAg76 said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

---

They had a few years to ramp up before actually entering SEC play also.

---

They were also handed an easy schedule, including the playoff seeding. There is no way that the scheduling disparity between OU and horn was achieved by chance.

---

No, it wasn't achieved by chance. It has been explained over and over and over and over again that it was based on conference records since the last SEC expansion. A time period during which Texas was awful. And during which OU was better. So they got the schedules to go along with that.

The difference is that Texas has improved substantially, handled the SEC teams they should have handled, and OU has regressed.

It's also the reason A&M had a relatively weak conference schedule. It's just that A&M didn't handle the SEC teams they should have. Beat Auburn (something OU managed to do) and they're playing for the SEC title. Fail, and they're playing in the Las Vegas Bowl.

---

How would A&M play for the SEC title if they beat Auburn?

tu vs Georgia would happen as Georgia would win the tiebreaker.

---

https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3514977

TxAg76 said:

---

All these 1st round games were blowouts.
The lower seeds are already mismatched, and in addition they play at the higher seed's home?
Just make them all neutral site. Use more of the bowl games as the sites, since there's too many of them anyway.
There's no point having these 1st round games at home for the higher seeds if they're wanting them to be competitive.

---

Except most fans just can't afford tickets to 4 games. I looked for prices for the Peach Bowl and you can nab tickets for $65. Offsite games aren't going to fill up for 1st rounders.

TxAg76 said:

---

All these 1st round games were blowouts.
The lower seeds are already mismatched, and in addition they play at the higher seed's home?
Just make them all neutral site. Use more of the bowl games as the sites, since there's too many of them anyway.
There's no point having these 1st round games at home for the higher seeds if they're wanting them to be competitive.

---

All these home games were won by the home team? I'm shocked, shocked…

And somehow, miraculously the Rose Bowl still ends up with a traditional PAC team Oregon and traditional B1G team in Ohio State. How convenient for them.

Thanks for the echo
Conference realignment and teams Miami & Bama taking bad losses opened the door for ASU, SMU and Clemson to make the field

TxAg76 said:

---

LB12Diamond said:

---

Good point

And the most likely reason the playoff will be tweaked to 14 teams with two teams getting byes in the near future.

I would rather go to 16 and first two rounds at home. I am fine with expanded playoffs bc bowl games mean nothing now a days and have so many opt outs and p layers transfer prior anyway for non playoff teams.

But they most likely do the above to justify keeping the conference champ games.

Bc in the end it's all about money for them.

One thing though, sips probably are not this good if they are still in the big 12. SEC move had their people start paying more and allure if SEC helped them get better players. Or maybe it was just the change of NIL that helped them.

---

They had a few years to ramp up before actually entering SEC play also.

---

Yep, someone knew 3 years before the move they were going to the Sec. our benevolent Chancellor Sharp one of them. When asked about sip playing Aggies his answer was think of "All the Money", this was done after Young was moved to the law school. Sharp was calling the shots and Wheelz plus esipn.

Sq 17 said:

---

The CFP failed because when drawn up the conference looked different
Oregon and tu changing conferences messed with seeding and produced some of the issues

---

If your aunt had balls...

Conference expansion helps by giving us more good vs good games


Thr problems with the seeding are 2 fold imo


1. SOS did not matter, so we get SMU and Indiana seeded too high. IMO they'd belong in the teens in a 16 team playoff

2. Conference championships seeding Az St and Boise St way too high. They also belong in the teens.



Then first round with no byes these teams face true top seeds and likely lose big, but thry get their shot and the top seeds get their easy path as it should be

12 is perfect. Just get rid of the whole "top ranked conference champions" first round by BS and just do a seeding. Use the conference championships but just as an input. ASU and BSU with byes is idiotic and screws up the power rankings.

This whole disaster is why they've been working on getting it to 14 teams with only 2 byes

They should just go to 16 and no byes but they seem hell bent on making the big10 and sec championship games have meaning instead of dropping those title game altogether

TxAg76 said:

---

All these 1st round games were blowouts.
The lower seeds are already mismatched, and in addition they play at the higher seed's home?
Just make them all neutral site. Use more of the bowl games as the sites, since there's too many of them anyway.
There's no point having these 1st round games at home for the higher seeds if they're wanting them to be competitive.

---

This de-values the regular season too much.

There should be a reward for being #5 instead of #12.

Why do bowls and bowl communities get the benefit of that tourism and not college towns? Why increase the expenses of travel for a school just to benefit a bowl partner?


Games in the regular season should matter as much as possible.

8 and no byes, or 16 and no byes