Lets just do a playoff with the top 25. The CFP top 25 ranking at the end of the regular season before conference championship games get in. Bowls take teams 26 and down for their games, which are all played in December. Playoff games start Jan 1 and end by Jan 31st.

AgFan1974 said:

---

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?

---

I removed the inclusion of G5 teams because they are highly unlikely to win a first round playoff game on the road.

1. 16 playoff teams

2. No automatic bids. No CCG's

3. No CFP spots for Group of 5 teams unless they are truly ranked as one of the top 16

4. No first-round byes

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

6. SOR & SOS heavily weighted in ranking, not just wins and losses. Could naturally eliminate most of Big 12 (tceh), ACC, G5, nd with their fluff schedules.

7. Give all these games Bowl names complete with corporate sponsors, TV deals, $$$$.

Go to 16 and get rid of CCGs. Problem solved.

The championship games became obsolete when they got rid of divisions, anyways. If you're using records and tiebreakers to determine who gets to the CCG, just use them to pick the champion.

Big Cowboy said:

---

1. 16 playoff teams

2. No automatic bids. No CCG's

3. No CFP spots for Group of 5 teams unless they are truly ranked as one of the top 16

4. No first-round byes

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

6. SOR & SOS heavily weighted in ranking, not just wins and losses. Could naturally eliminate most of Big 12 (tceh), ACC, G5, nd with their fluff schedules.

7. Give all these games Bowl names complete with corporate sponsors, TV deals, $$$$.

---

This, but adding to number 6: use computers to determine the rankings. None of this committee bull****

Computers only compute based on how they're programmed, so it's still a "committee" telling the computer what to do.

Shorten regular season to 11 games (9 conference games, 2 non-conference)
Move bowl games to 1st game of season. Make them the 1 non-conference against a P4 school.
Expand playoffs to 24 teams and have a selection show on Sunday after conference championship weekend.

Alternative is to do separate playoffs 12 or 16-team P4 playoff and same for G6 leagues

BboroAg 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]

---

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

---

Exactly.
And the thing about expanded playoffs is; the cream will rise to the top. No pretender is running a 5 game gauntlet. There will be absolutely no question who the best teams are when it's over.

The old format worked for this year. Should be Indiana vs Georgia and call it.

HarryRocket said:

---

The old format worked for this year. Should be Indiana vs Georgia and call it.

---

What is wrong with more college football? Why don't you want to see the Ags play Miami at Kyle Field and then possibly play Ohio St in the Cotton Bowl? Why don't you want to watch Oregon play Texas Tech? Bama or Oklahoma vs Indiana doesn't interest you? Those are all great matchups. Especially when you have the pressure of win or go home.

Georgia vs Indiana… no expansion needed!

Vintage bowl games:
Rose Bowl: OSU vs Oregon
Sugar Bowl: tu vs Bama
Orange Bowl: Miami vs OU
Cotton Bowl: Ole Miss vs A&M
Peach Bowl: Duke vs Vandy
Fiesta Bowl: TT vs ND

I'd watch all those games.

I'm not going to watch James Madison, Tulane, or OU Bama rematch.

Just make it the SEC vs everyone else.

SEC could have the top 8 teams play one round to get to top 4 teams. Rest of the nation do the same and figure out a way to pick their top 8 teams to play one round and top 4 advance.

Then 8 teams are in and their 4 play our 4 in first round. Semifinals. Finals.

Georgia vs UT or Mizz
A&M vs Vandy
Ole Miss vs tu
OU vs Bama


IU vs Tulsa
OSU vs JM
Tceh vs ND
Org vs Mia


Round 2

Ga vs Org
A&M vs Tceh
Ole Miss vs OSU
OU/Bama vs IU

Semis

Finals

16 Maximum. Or keep it as-is.

Right now you effectively need to be a top 10 team to make the playoffs considering the auto-bids. That means you can only lose 1 game and feel confident in making the playoffs. 2 losses puts you on the bubble. 3 losses and you are pretty much out (not including conference championship games).

Going to 16 teams would mean that 1 loss and 2 loss teams are in. 3 loss teams would be on the bubble. That wouldn't change the stakes that much, and may even be optimal if you are trying to drive engagement. That also might be optimal to ensure that "good" out of conference matchups still occur.

Going to 24 teams would mean that 1 loss, 2 loss, and 3 loss teams are in. 4 loss teams would be on the bubble and I think that is just too watered down. Plus that adds an extra round. That would probably give you a lot of good OOC matchups, but lower the stakes all around.

I like 16 the best on balance, but I could see an argument for just keeping it at 12.

jeffdjohnson said:

---

16 Maximum. Or keep it as-is.

Right now you effectively need to be a top 10 team to make the playoffs considering the auto-bids. That means you can only lose 1 game and feel confident in making the playoffs. 2 losses puts you on the bubble. 3 losses and you are pretty much out (not including conference championship games).

Going to 16 teams would mean that 1 loss and 2 loss teams are in. 3 loss teams would be on the bubble. That wouldn't change the stakes that much, and may even be optimal if you are trying to drive engagement. That also might be optimal to ensure that "good" out of conference matchups still occur.

Going to 24 teams would mean that 1 loss, 2 loss, and 3 loss teams are in. 4 loss teams would be on the bubble and I think that is just too watered down. Plus that adds an extra round. That would probably give you a lot of good OOC matchups, but lower the stakes all around.

I like 16 the best on balance, but I could see an argument for just keeping it at 12.

---

12 is enough if they'd just fix the selection and seeding process

1. You can do 5 highest conference Champs get a bid but only if they are ranked in the top 16. If one is not then it goes to an at large

2. Fix the sos metric. An sec team with an sos of 91 means the system is completely flawed

3. the formula used to rank the teams must be made public. Full disclosure.

Quote:

---

12 is enough if they'd just fix the selection and seeding process

1. You can do 5 highest conference Champs get a bid but only if they are ranked in the top 16. If one is not then it goes to an at large

2. Fix the sos metric. An sec team with an sos of 91 means the system is completely flawed

3. the formula used to rank the teams must be made public. Full disclosure.

---

Agree.

I need to hear any justification for keeping the bowl games involved.


People whining about having CCGs, and the expansion of the playoffs decreasing the value of the regular season, but then want to play later rounds at neutral sites 500 miles away from both schools. It's stupid.



Give the Big Ten and SEC champion (or other P4 champion, if appropriate that year) home field advantage throughout the playoffs until the championship game. That's not only gives regular season top teams an on-field advantage, it rewards college towns and their fans for having great regular season.



It makes no sense that Indiana has just went undefeated, beating OSU in the CCG, and their reward for these playoffs is that they have to haul ass to Pasadena, and then Atlanta, and then to Miami.

JohnClark929 said:

---

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

---

Would you do away with the conference championship games? If you went with this system, what would be the point of playing a CCG? Would they be part of the playoff and treated as elimination games? If not, why on earth would any team want to play in one?

Maybe the same reason basketball teams play in conference tournaments before the NCAA tournament?

AgFan1974 said:

---

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?

---

Gruden's video is a patch job. And frankly, in the current model, stupid.

His idea was for the teams not playing a championship game to have to play a game. Loser knocked out of the playoff. Championship games losers are still in. That's ****ing ******ed when you consider that the only reason us and Ole Miss weren't in the championship game was because of tiebreaker rules. And that we didnt get a chance to play the other 1 loss teams. Why should we be knocked out with a second loss but Alabama not with a 3rd? F that.

clominac said:

---

JohnClark929 said:

---

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

---

Would you do away with the conference championship games? If you went with this system, what would be the point of playing a CCG? Would they be part of the playoff and treated as elimination games? If not, why on earth would any team want to play in one?

---

CCG's are direct revenue for the conferences and it's not shared. It's likely more valuable for a conference than an early round playoff game that's shared among 4 conferences.

I am anti-expansion. I was good with 4. I would be fine with 8. I think 12 is too many. 16 would be ludicrous. And 24 would be beyond stupid.

The question should not be CAN Team X win it all? The question should be has Team X EARNED the right to play for a national championship. And, imo, that number of teams is almost always <8.

I will echo what Josh Pate says: The beauty of college football is in the regular season, the pageantry of each game day in the fall. What made winning a national championship difficult, among other things, was how little margin for error you had. The regular season meant something, every game had meaning. Take some games from this season as an example: Texas losing to Florida, Notre Dame losing to us, Alabama losing to FSU, Miami losing to Louisville. All these games would mean that the winner would be in pole position in the rankings and the losing team would have zero margin for error the rest of the way. All those teams went on to lose more games, but two of them are in the playoff. In 2023, when Michigan and Ohio State we both undefeated going into The Game, the loser was eliminated from the playoffs. There was so much riding on that game which I argue was what made it all the more exciting. If that game were to be played today, both could afford to lose as they would be assured a spot in the playoff.

Now, you can lose 2-3 games and still make the playoff. Has Oklahoma earned the right to play for a national title? Has Miami earned the right to play for a national title? Has Alabama earned the right to play for a national title? Have we?

With all that said, this 12 team format is what we have right now. And with the current rules, we are still in contention. So let's BTHO Miami!!!

I think 16 is perfect with no byes and only 1 G5 team. ND either joins a conference or takes their chances as an at large team. No guarantees. I would also add a rule that FCS games don't count and it takes 10 wins to qualify for a spot. I would also have the committee select the field before the conference championship games. They have no impact but can still happen. Also the seeding of the P4 teams must be grouped by wins. So all 12-0 teams first, then all 11-1, then all 10-2.

This year it would have been likely>

1 Ohio State hosting 16 Tulane
2 Indiana hosting 15 Utah
3 Georgia hosting 14 Virginia
4 Tech hosting 13 Vandy
5 Oregon hosting 12 ND
6 Ole Miss hosting 11 Miami
7 Texas Aggies hosting 10 Bama
8 BYU hosting 9 OU

All of the 12 and 11 win teams get a home game and the 2 loss teams get a road game. Seems fair. No tu or Michigan unless they do better.

Perfectly said.

YNWA.2013 said:

---

I am anti-expansion. I was good with 4. I would be fine with 8. I think 12 is too many. 16 would be ludicrous. And 24 would be beyond stupid.

The question should not be CAN Team X win it all? The question should be has Team X EARNED the right to play for a national championship. And, imo, that number of teams is almost always <8.

I will echo what Josh Pate says: The beauty of college football is in the regular season, the pageantry of each game day in the fall. What made winning a national championship difficult, among other things, was how little margin for error you had. The regular season meant something, every game had meaning. Take some games from this season as an example: Texas losing to Florida, Notre Dame losing to us, Alabama losing to FSU, Miami losing to Louisville. All these games would mean that the winner would be in pole position in the rankings and the losing team would have zero margin for error the rest of the way. All those teams went on to lose more games, but two of them are in the playoff. In 2023, when Michigan and Ohio State we both undefeated going into The Game, the loser was eliminated from the playoffs. There was so much riding on that game which I argue was what made it all the more exciting. If that game were to be played today, both could afford to lose as they would be assured a spot in the playoff.

Now, you can lose 2-3 games and still make the playoff. Has Oklahoma earned the right to play for a national title? Has Miami earned the right to play for a national title? Has Alabama earned the right to play for a national title? Have we?

With all that said, this 12 team format is what we have right now. And with the current rules, we are still in contention. So let's BTHO Miami!!!

---

Well said! Worth a thousand blue stars. There is a silent majority out there that agrees with this point of view that the money hungry media, greedy sports companies/agents, and inept athletics administrations are running roughshod over!!!

The future playoff structure will be determined by one factor, what will maximize profits for ESPN/Disney.

Espn is the evil overlord of the cfp.

It's not "can Team X win it all if they get in?" It's about getting into the tournament and making extra $. Do JMU and Tulane think they can win it all? Of course not. Same with the left-out bubble teams. They just want the payday and the exposure.

aggiehawg said:

---

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?

---

Basically Sankey, ND, and Big 12 iirc. And that recommendation didn't yet have the even more putrid best sux conference champion auto-bids or the byes but was more of a best 12.

The effort by the disappearing conferences to wire in the conference champions poisoned the well and then the B1G sought to sign up themselves and the SEC to the further poisoned (due to the committee continuing non-accountability btw) four auto bids for each conference.

To the B1G's defense, they imagined a conference playoff/play-in for those auto-bids. SEC coaches led the opposition to the idea there are four qualified automatic bid teams in the entire B1G and perhaps Sankey merely got in front of that parade by saying the SEC could pull out of the playoff and host their own.

Remember the B1G and Pac-0 opposed playoffs all along, too…

FCS has 24 and it works well.

Why can't FBS do the same?

Kenneth_2003 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 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.

---

For what it's worth, and I have no clue how often something like this does happen... the #17 seed, Illinois State, is in the Final Four of the FCS Bracket and will play the #12 seed, Villanova. Also, since they're the 17, all of their games have been on the road.

Quit delaying the inevitable (and best) option and do a 64 team play off. 10 game regular season no conference CG. Proof of concept? March Madness and TXHSFB. Done and done. No more skipping bowl games or sitting out for NFL.

It will stop when they give cry babies like tu and ND automatic bids regardless of how much they suck

One of the differences between the 24-team FCS, 32-team D2, or 40-team D3 playoffs, and FBS playoffs is the incredible disparity between the conferences. I am sure that there are stronger and weaker conferences at those lower levels, but the SEC and Big Ten have loaded up with all the top teams. One thing I still love about those lower levels is the regionality of those conferences, but the FBS conference setups are so different from the lower levels, some of the comparisons need some context.

Iraq2xVeteran said:

---

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

---

I agree with this. However I selfishly want on campus games up until the championship. I know wishful thinking but man that would be a lot of fun