Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

out of curiosity, what the 5th?

and he's wrong about a few.
sos, were basically neck and neck. depending on where you look (i don't know where cfb selectors look), bama is ahead by 1 or 2 in some (sagarin, teamrank.com, massey, espn fpi sor), and tenn is ahead 1-2 on some (espn fpi sos, colley, probably few others i didn't look for).
h2h is obvious, but about as close as you can get.
top 25 we're both 2-2 vs current top 25. tenn has both the better wins and worse loses, so not sure where you fall there.
common opp, we're 1-1, they're 2-0 (lsu and vandy).

fwiw, neither should be in this year, imo. both have 2 losses, neither is a conf champ or even a division champ. both are lacking a real "eye test" passing grade too, imo.

How about a maximum limit on the number of teams, like 2, any conference can have in the payoff?  With each team on the other side of the bracket in that situation.

I think this would have been fine a few years ago and actually would be fine THIS year but once Texas and Oklahoma go to the SEC and then the two LA schools go to the B1G that is just too many historically REALLY good programs in those conferences for them to be capped.  

It is not entirely impossible that USC, Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State could all have a REALLY good season in the same year.  So USC goes 12-0/9-0 and wins the expanded B1G-W (USC, UCLA, UNL, MN, IA UW, NU, IL), Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State all go 1-1 against each other and each finishes 11-1/8-1 and wins the expanded B1G-E (RU, UMD, PSU, tOSU, M, MSU, IU, PU).  Then lets say the tOSU/M/PSU tiebreaker winner takes out USC in the B1GCG (in Shanghi I assume) so the B1G ends up with:

• 12-1 B1G Champion tOSU/M/PSU
• 12-1 B1GCG loser USC
• 11-1 B1G-E co-Champion/tiebreaker loser tOSU/M/PSU
• 11-1 B1G-E co-Champion/tiebreaker loser tOSU/M/PSU

All four of those teams are clearly good enough for the playoff and really none of them are definitively worse than any of the others.  

I would not like to see some team left out simply because three teams in their conference was ranked higher and the substitute was "Cincinnati".

Take this year if LSU beats UGA, both are in a 12 team mix, and then you have Bama and Tenn with pretty comparable records, better than anyone else further down who would not be in.

I'm not much of an SEC fan, as some think of it.  I try and emulate ftbobs without all the math.

The old bowl system, with a +1 caveat if there are 2 undefeateds remaining.  
.
I was looking back at things yesterday, and it's amazing to me that the BCS was a thing.  In hindsight, it's incredible that computers were involved.  But keep in mind, the computers were never plainly used - it was always a tamed version of the computers and then further altered as outcomes happened that the masses didn't like or understand.
The problem with the computers was that a team could automatically move up with a loss vs a great team or the opposite - demolish a bad team and move down.  That wasn't a problem with the computers actually, just with the human's reaction to the computers.

Yes, they were compromised computer rankings/formulas from the start.
We're dumb.

well, since nothing is perfect, the leaders that be...  jackets that grub for $$$

keep tweaking and changing things

usually to benefit the helmets / SEC

Uhhh...what?

Didn't this all start because of 2011? 
So they expanded for more inclusion and what did we get?  Alabama 2015 and 2017.  LSU 2019.  Alabama 2020.  Georgia 2021.  And to say "I told you so," I warned against that and said be careful what you wish for. 
So the rest of the country isn't a fan of all these SEC NCs.  So let's expand.  Again.
.
So when it's 2 teams, it benefits the SEC?  But when it's 12....it benefits the SEC?  Did I miss something?
And yes, with this 12-team format, you risk having 4 SEC teams in it, with 2 or 3 making it to the semis. 
Sorry???