This year is only the second of the expansion from 4 to 12 teams. Many are already calling for 16 teams. As I noted elsewhere, the current format requires an additional 33% of games to win the NC for 8 of the participants. Unfortunately, I think we are headed for a situation in which many great players will be injured seriously. I hope I'm wrong, but I think if that gets going, it is more likely than not to kill the expansion even to 12 teams.

HikesNH said:

---

lI think we are headed for a situation in which many great players will be injured seriously.

---

Expansion is inevitable. All the parties agree, only the format is an issue.


Not sure what your last sentence means, but they will never go lower than 12 team playoff

Which is why going to 16 and eliminating the CCG is the obvious solution
The most any team could play would be 4
Under the old system of CCG and 4 team playoff the maximum was 3 games
Currently teams can play 3,4, or 5 extra games ( If ND got a top 4 seed they would only play 3 extras ). This makes it less equitable than a 16 team playoff where everybody gets the same amount of time off and has the same number of extra games

I expect OU to crush bama because they are at home and had an extra week off. While Bama was getting beat up by the dawgs The land Thieves were resting.

Sorry for being cryptic. What I envision is a situation wherein a few top teams, that could have won it all, are knocked out by injury to a top player in, say, the penultimate game. Such that the complaint becomes about too many games exposing key players to injury.

They'll need to go to around 25 with some play in games

Why 25? It has been the accepted number for rankings so long. Sure, some people get worked up over by being left out when theyre receiving votes but nobody really listens. At 25+ you're too far removed to have anybody really listen by the end of the year.

Texas high school football teams play up to 16 games. NFL teams play up to 20. The concern for number of games in college is strange.

FCS plays a 24 team playoff. The format is what the Big10 is pushing for. The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented. This would work and keep all the conferences happy with their participation trophy.

The FCS Playoff uses a 24-team bracket, with 10 conference champions earningautomatic bids and 14 at-largeteams selected by a committee;
the top 8 seeds get first-round byes, while the other 16 teams play in the firstround at campus sites, leading to aknockout tournament culminating in aNational Championship game in Nashville.

Here's the breakdown:
[ol]

Field Size: 24 teams total.

Automatic Bids: 10 conferences get automatic entry for winning their conference.

At-Large Bids: 14 teams are chosen by the FCS Championship Committee based on rankings and performance.

Seeding: The top 8 overall seeds receive a bye in the first round.

First Round: The remaining 16 teams (seeds 9-24) play eight games at the higher seed's home field.

Subsequent Rounds: The 8 winners join the top 8 seeds for the Second Round, then Quarterfinals, Semifinals, all at campus sites.

Championship: The final two teams play in the National Championship game

[/ol]

Need to go down to eight best teams. And less power for the Keystone Kops fire drill in the committee.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

The need.

Every format will have teams on the edge, on the margins, on the bubble. The more you add, as records and strengths of schedule equilibrate, you'll have more on the bubble.

Ultimately the question isn't, "Should they get in?" The question is, "Can they win?"

All we've heard over the last three days is should Texas be in, should ND be in, should ___ be in? Well they both lost to teams that are in. We can criticize committee logic (or lack thereof) and thought process (or lack thereof). I'm not going down the 2-G5 team rabbit hole, but I digress... Can any of those teams win the whole thing? Can they string together, not just one win on "any given Saturday," but can they win three or four back to back games against the best of the best?

I've said in earlier threads... In the March Men's BB tournament, NO 9-12 seed has ever won the whole damn thing. They've made runs. They've had wins. They've knocked off some higher seeds; some favorites. BUT they've never been able to string together the back to back to back wins required to win it all. Because... They simply aren't good enough.

Edit.. Typos

---

If the SEC and B1G each had a 4 team playoff with their conference champions meeting for a 'national championship', I would consider that much better than what we have now.

TyperWoods said:

---

Get rid of byes. Go to 8 or 16 teams, I don't care, but no byes.

Frankly, the SEC and B1G champs should play each other and that's your NC game.

Miami, Florida State, Clemson, maybe NC can join the SEC. ND can join the B1G. F everyone else.

---

This

Going to 16 teams only adds a game for 4 teams.
It does not add an additional round of games, just eliminates the byes.

I never have understood the " its too many games" or "someone is going to get injured" m

Currently the most games any team could play including CCG and playoffs is 17

NFL teams max is 21 possible games ( 17 regular season and 4 playoff), not counting 3 preseason games as starters play limited

FCS football the max number of games possible is 18. 12 regular season, a possible conference champ game and then 5 in the playoffs.

High School football in Texas plays max of 16 games, 10 regular season and 6 playoff.

So if those teams can do it not sure why it cant be done at the FBS level

JohnClark929 said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

The need.

Every format will have teams on the edge, on the margins, on the bubble. The more you add, as records and strengths of schedule equilibrate, you'll have more on the bubble.

Ultimately the question isn't, "Should they get in?" The question is, "Can they win?"

All we've heard over the last three days is should Texas be in, should ND be in, should ___ be in? Well they both lost to teams that are in. We can criticize committee logic (or lack thereof) and thought process (or lack thereof). I'm not going down the 2-G5 team rabbit hole, but I digress... Can any of those teams win the whole thing? Can they string together, not just one win on "any given Saturday," but can they win three or four back to back games against the best of the best?

I've said in earlier threads... In the March Men's BB tournament, NO 9-12 seed has ever won the whole damn thing. They've made runs. They've had wins. They've knocked off some higher seeds; some favorites. BUT they've never been able to string together the back to back to back wins required to win it all. Because... They simply aren't good enough.

Edit.. Typos

---

If the SEC and B1G each had a 4 team playoff with their conference champions meeting for a 'national championship', I would consider that much better than what we have now.

---

This. Or just send their top 4 and do an interconference playoff. Either way, make it objective and not a beauty contest with criteria that's impossible to equate

The more they grow the playoff the more they need to reduce non conference games and length of the schedule. Expanded playoff could be 5 extra games for a team if we hypothetically ever got up to 32 or 24 with play in games or something.

The more they expand the less point I see in conference championship games and definitely should delete bowl games.

Sq 17 said:

---

I expect OU to crush bama because they are at home and had an extra week off. While Bama was getting beat up by the dawgs The land Thieves were resting.

---

Except that theory turned out to be completely false last season.

It will go to 16 teams, then potentially 24. All for more $$$.

It will be fun when we have 5 loss teams *****ing about how they should have been in.

HikesNH said:

---

This year is only the second of the expansion from 4 to 12 teams. Many are already calling for 16 teams. As I noted elsewhere, the current format requires an additional 33% of games to win the NC for 8 of the participants. Unfortunately, I think we are headed for a situation in which many great players will be injured seriously. I hope I'm wrong, but I think if that gets going, it is more likely than not to kill the expansion even to 12 teams.

---

I dunno. It seems like nobody is being killed or mutilated in division 2 or 3 football playoffs and they have a 24+ team playoff format. It's important when you have an irrational fear you stop and think about it.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

The need.

Every format will have teams on the edge, on the margins, on the bubble. The more you add, as records and strengths of schedule equilibrate, you'll have more on the bubble.

Ultimately the question isn't, "Should they get in?" The question is, "Can they win?"

All we've heard over the last three days is should Texas be in, should ND be in, should ___ be in? Well they both lost to teams that are in. We can criticize committee logic (or lack thereof) and thought process (or lack thereof). I'm not going down the 2-G5 team rabbit hole, but I digress... Can any of those teams win the whole thing? Can they string together, not just one win on "any given Saturday," but can they win three or four back to back games against the best of the best?

I've said in earlier threads... In the March Men's BB tournament, NO 9-12 seed has ever won the whole damn thing. They've made runs. They've had wins. They've knocked off some higher seeds; some favorites. BUT they've never been able to string together the back to back to back wins required to win it all. Because... They simply aren't good enough.

Edit.. Typos

---

Nd would have absolutely been capable of winning it all

The sips…no so much

The only way to do this without committee bias or bad judgement is to get to an NFL model. Gruden has a youtube video already linked in one of these threads, it is worth a watch.

I get it.. that is alot to sort out. That said, Im surprised we do not hear more (in these forums or in national media) about this option. My guess is there is an issue around $$$$ that makes this option the Voldermort of the bunch. Probably on the NCAA side as this would likely be the start of a significant decline in their control/power (possibly the end of the org altogether).

Some obvious issues outside of $$$$$ winners/losers:

1. You would have to do a major conference realignment. Everyone would have to play everyone in a conference in order to crown a champ without a championship game. Roughly 140 FBS Schools so you are talking about 14-18 conferences of 8-10 teams.

2. 10 team conferece would allow for 1 bye week (assuming you keep those) 1 cupcake, no out of conference games (if you are trying to get to a 12 game regular season). I assume the cupcake games would still be needed so those teams do not lose that revenue source. 8 team conferece would allow for the bye week and 2-3 out of conferece and/or cupcakes.

3. Who would take ND at this point?

4. Probably going to lose some rivalry games. There may be a work around here but someone else will have to figure that out. My guess is the big rivalries would not be an issue.

Some positives:

1. League champs get a bye while the second tier has to participate in some wild-card or play in round. The exact opposite of what happens now which is absurd.

2. The Tulanes of the world would still have a cinderella shot but likely get ousted in the play-in round.

3. These are head to head outcomes with zero human input/bias


I am not advocating for this, really. I do think it should be in the discussion. Thoughts on pros-cons? Any chance something like this has legs?

RoadkillBBQ said:

---

FCS plays a 24 team playoff. The format is what the Big10 is pushing for. The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented. This would work and keep all the conferences happy with their participation trophy.

The FCS Playoff uses a 24-team bracket, with 10 conference champions earningautomatic bids and 14 at-largeteams selected by a committee;
the top 8 seeds get first-round byes, while the other 16 teams play in the firstround at campus sites, leading to aknockout tournament culminating in aNational Championship game in Nashville.

Here's the breakdown:
[ol]

Field Size: 24 teams total.

Automatic Bids: 10 conferences get automatic entry for winning their conference.

At-Large Bids: 14 teams are chosen by the FCS Championship Committee based on rankings and performance.

Seeding: The top 8 overall seeds receive a bye in the first round.

First Round: The remaining 16 teams (seeds 9-24) play eight games at the higher seed's home field.

Subsequent Rounds: The 8 winners join the top 8 seeds for the Second Round, then Quarterfinals, Semifinals, all at campus sites.

Championship: The final two teams play in the National Championship game

[/ol]

---

I think this is a great idea...and if the FCS can do it, so can whatever we call the top division

RoadkillBBQ said:

---

FCS plays a 24 team playoff. The format is what the Big10 is pushing for. The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented. This would work and keep all the conferences happy with their participation trophy.

The FCS Playoff uses a 24-team bracket, with 10 conference champions earningautomatic bids and 14 at-largeteams selected by a committee;
the top 8 seeds get first-round byes, while the other 16 teams play in the firstround at campus sites, leading to aknockout tournament culminating in aNational Championship game in Nashville.

Here's the breakdown:
[ol]

Field Size: 24 teams total.

Automatic Bids: 10 conferences get automatic entry for winning their conference.

At-Large Bids: 14 teams are chosen by the FCS Championship Committee based on rankings and performance.

Seeding: The top 8 overall seeds receive a bye in the first round.

First Round: The remaining 16 teams (seeds 9-24) play eight games at the higher seed's home field.

Subsequent Rounds: The 8 winners join the top 8 seeds for the Second Round, then Quarterfinals, Semifinals, all at campus sites.

Championship: The final two teams play in the National Championship game

[/ol]

---

This is too many teams and would pretty much dilute the regular season to the point where there'd be very few "big games"

But I fear it will eventually happen

Think a straight top 8 or or top 16 seeded by ranking no auto bids is what a lot of fans would want but the conferences are clinging on to these championship games for dear life because they don't want to lose the money

But I think all their clinging won't save those games in the long term

It's the only reason bama wasn't dropped out after getting crushed by Georgia

But as the conferences greed keeps expanding the playoff its going to come at the expense of conference championship games

NyAggie said:

---

RoadkillBBQ said:

---

FCS plays a 24 team playoff. The format is what the Big10 is pushing for. The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented. This would work and keep all the conferences happy with their participation trophy.

The FCS Playoff uses a 24-team bracket, with 10 conference champions earningautomatic bids and 14 at-largeteams selected by a committee;
the top 8 seeds get first-round byes, while the other 16 teams play in the firstround at campus sites, leading to aknockout tournament culminating in aNational Championship game in Nashville.

Here's the breakdown:
[ol]

Field Size: 24 teams total.

Automatic Bids: 10 conferences get automatic entry for winning their conference.

At-Large Bids: 14 teams are chosen by the FCS Championship Committee based on rankings and performance.

Seeding: The top 8 overall seeds receive a bye in the first round.

First Round: The remaining 16 teams (seeds 9-24) play eight games at the higher seed's home field.

Subsequent Rounds: The 8 winners join the top 8 seeds for the Second Round, then Quarterfinals, Semifinals, all at campus sites.

Championship: The final two teams play in the National Championship game

[/ol]

---

This is too many teams and would pretty much dilute the regular season to the point where there'd be very few "big games"

But I fear it will eventually happen

Think a straight top 8 or or top 16 seeded by ranking no auto bids is what a lot of fans would want but the conferences are clinging on to these championship games for dear life because they don't want to lose the money

But I think all their clinging won't save those games in the long term

It's the only reason bama wasn't dropped out after getting crushed by Georgia

But as the conferences greed keeps expanding the playoff its going to come at the expense of conference championship games

---

Its a matter of when not if on the CCGs I believe.

Playoff Fix
1. 16 playoff teams

2. Automatic bids for the Power 4 conference winners, but they can be seeded anywhere

3. No first-round bye

4. Home field advantage for seeds 1-8 in the first round

5. Every Power 4 team should play one Power 4 nonconference opponent for 10 regular season games against Power 4 opponents

RoadkillBBQ said:

---

FCS plays a 24 team playoff. The format is what the Big10 is pushing for. The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented. This would work and keep all the conferences happy with their participation trophy.

The FCS Playoff uses a 24-team bracket, with 10 conference champions earning automatic bids and 14 at-large teams selected by a committee;
the top 8 seeds get first-round byes, while the other 16 teams play in the first round at campus sites, leading to a knockout tournament culminating in a National Championship game in Nashville.

Here's the breakdown:
[ol]

Field Size: 24 teams total.

Automatic Bids: 10 conferences get automatic entry for winning their conference.

At-Large Bids: 14 teams are chosen by the FCS Championship Committee based on rankings and performance.

Seeding: The top 8 overall seeds receive a bye in the first round.

First Round: The remaining 16 teams (seeds 9-24) play eight games at the higher seed's home field.

Subsequent Rounds: The 8 winners join the top 8 seeds for the Second Round, then Quarterfinals, Semifinals, all at campus sites.

Championship: The final two teams play in the National Championship game

[/ol]

---

In the FCS 24 team system...
How many times has a team in the 13-24 seeds won? How many times have they made the final? How many have made the (to borrow from MBB) Final Four? Their Elite Eight?

For example... JMU is the current CFP #24 (AP & Coaches #19) ranked team. They will not win the CFP. Most likely they're going to be splattered like a bug on a windshield in the first round. That's what a 24 team playoff will look like.

Iraq2xVeteran said:

---

Playoff Fix
1. 16 playoff teams

2. Automatic bids for the Power 4 conference winners, but they can be seeded anywhere

3. The CFP spots for the two highest ranked Group of 5 teams

4. No first-round bye

5. Home field advantage for seeds 1-8 in the first round

6. Require every Power 4 team to play 10 regular season games against Power 4 opponents: 9 conference games and 1 Power 4 Nonconference game

---

Are you saying G5 teams will be required to play P4 out of confernce games too or they are now the Busch league doing their own thing?

The main con is you're asking very large, rich schools to voluntarily leave money on the table to include these smaller schools, all because we're pretending like all 133 teams should be viewed as equally deserving of the same division rank. The top 40-50 schools make sooooo much more money than the bottom 80-90 that it's not even funny. The stadium size is wildly disproportionate between the top 40 and bottom 90. Enrollment, name recognition, ability to fund travel schedules, etc. It's comical.

Now if the top 40-50 split out, then you can make the case for division champs facing off ala the NFL. I'm all for it, as it creates objective criteria. But forcing us, for example, to realign and share revenue with Rice of Sam Houston. It's never going to happen, and it shouldn't.

The 4 best teams from the crap conferences should do a 2-week play-in tournament before the real playoff starts. They feel like they're doing something, it's fun for degenerate gamblers, and the winner gets the **** kicked out of them by the 5th seed.

The next best 12 teams (minus the 4 in the play-in) play a concurrent 12-team playoff that runs on Thursdays/Fridays during Dec-January in the lesser bowl venues. There's a big prize for the winning school.

Teams that refuse to participate in this NIT-esque version take a 1-year penalty of being ineligible for either playoff the next year.

The TV networks then have 3 days a week of meaningful college football every week for a month

Notre Dame and any other independents are told they are ineligible for either playoff unless they are part of a conference.

Coaches sign contracts that say they must work for the school for the entire academic year: August to May. If they quit early, the contract is void.

Players sign a two-year "contract" when they sign the scholarship out of high school. Entering the transfer portal isn't allowed until after the completion of 2 years on the roster. When you transfer, you sign a 2-year contract with the new school. Nobody gets to use the transfer portal more than once, no matter how many times you get injured.

What is angering me is that Sankey and other commissioners met behind closed doors for two years to figure out CFP expansion from four teams. Two years! And this was the crap they came up with? And now we are letting them crap it up even more?

The sheer number of programs is an issue altogether. Pushing those 80-90 teams down to FBS causes issues. This would trickle down all the way to D3 as the lesser teams in all divisions would get relegated, for lack of a better term.

The 40-50 team carve out likely births a tiered system based on NIL budgets, I would think.

AgFan1974 said:

---

The sheer number of programs is an issue altogether. Pushing those 80-90 teams down to FBS causes issues. This would trickle down all the way to D3 as the lesser teams in all divisions would get relegated, for lack of a better term.

The 40-50 team carve out likely births a tiered system based on NIL budgets, I would think.

---

I don't think it's pushing them down as much as it is elevating the top 40. Give it whatever name you want, and let the 90 keep the FBS label. The top 40 are paying a lot of money to those bottom 90 to abuse their football teams 3-4 weeks out of the year. We are not the same, so however we have to split it, do it and be done with it.

AgFan1974 said:

---

The sheer number of programs is an issue altogether. Pushing those 80-90 teams down to FBS causes issues. This would trickle down all the way to D3 as the lesser teams in all divisions would get relegated, for lack of a better term.

The 40-50 team carve out likely births a tiered system based on NIL budgets, I would think.

---

And that is very problematical. There needs to be a cap applicable to everybody, like scholarship limits.

LB12Diamond said:

---

The playoff is fine as is. Needs to stay this way for 10 years and then reviewed.

---

Agreed other than I can understand the argument to do away with automatic bids. 12 teams works for me though. Just because people are mad doesn't mean something is broken and needs to be fixed.