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

I'm voting for #6.  I'm not a fan of rematches and I think that part of the draw of a playoff is to see teams that do not ordinarily play so it doesn't make sense to slot two B1G teams against each other even if they didn't happen to play that year.  

I'd allow all rematches

let the 6 SEC teams play each other

the stoopid committee always screws around a way to limit rematches anyway

I'm sure they would protect the SEC

besides, I'm certainly NOT a fan of an 8-team playoff, so...... let it suck

Prohibit rematches.  If the bracket ends up in a rematch, eliminate the team that won the regular season game and put in the team they beat in the previous round.  If that also ends up in a rematch, bring in the G5 team with the highest rank that didn't make a playoff.  If no G5 was in the ranking bring in the champion of the Sun Belt, unless they are already in the playoff, then bring in the Sun Belt runner up.  If they also are in the playoff, bring in the CUSA champ.

I picked #1 and I'd put in a provision that no team movement can exceed 1 seed difference (4 to 5, but not 4 to 6).  If it cannot be done, then you don't move them.

I think this is a really good idea and brings me to something that I thought of last night, see below:

I went with #3. I could be swayed to #1.

I think that if you are forced into creating a bracket where you have to put teams on opposite sides of the bracket, though, it creates too much potential upheaval to your bracket.

This isn't like basketball where you have 64 seeds and have 4 teams at each seed line and it's roughly immaterial to move  team from the 2nd-toughest 6 seed draw to the 4th-toughest 6 seed draw. It's just too small.

If you put too many rules on it, then the purpose of seeding gets destroyed because you're forced to put teams in certain places not based on their strength, but based on who they can and cannot face.

I'm generally not a fan of rematches, hence my vote for the most limiting option, #6, which prevents both rematches and games between teams from the same conference in the first two rounds.  

My initial view was that, as a fan, I'd much rather see CFP match-ups between teams that rarely play.  However, prohibiting rematches could be a major detriment to a team that earned an easy first round matchup.  Example:

In 2019 Ohio State played and beat Cincinnati early in the season.  Ohio State ended up #2 and Cincinnati ended up not winning the AAC.  Consider this hypothetical:

• Cincinnati beats Memphis, wins the AAC, and is the highest ranked G5 Champion.  
• LSU and Clemson each lose one game such that Ohio State, as the only 13-0 P5 Champion is a clear and obvious #1.  

In that case Ohio State earned an easy first-round match-up against the ~#20 ranked AAC Champions, Cincinnati.  However, with rematches prohibited the Buckeyes can't play #8 seed Cincinnati so instead they have to play #7 seed Baylor.  In either case it is a home game that the Buckeyes will be favored to win but it is still a humongous difference.  The Buckeyes would be favored over Cincinnati by 20+ and would be expected to be able to rest their starters for most or all of the second half.  Against Baylor the Buckeyes would be something like a 10 point favorite.  

On top of that, the #2 seed (in this case probably LSU) gets an unearned advantage.  They didn't earn the #1 seed and the easy first-round match-up but they'd get it simply by the luck of tOSU and UC playing in September (something that LSU had absolutely nothing to do with).  

It would be interesting to know how often this would have been a problem in the past.  If it only happens say once in a decade, I'd say it's not really a problem to worry about.

In six years of the CFP there would have been one first-round rematch:

In 2016 PSU finished ranked #5 but they were the fourth highest ranked Champion behind #1 Bama, #2 Clemson, and #3 Washington.  Ohio State finished as the highest ranked non-Champion at #3 but if HFA was reserved to the top-4 Champions then PSU would have been the #4 seed and hosted #5 seed tOSU in the first round.  

That rematch seems like a really bum deal for the Nittany Lions.  If they win, blah, they already beat Ohio State so nobody cares.  Meanwhile, if they lose it negates their earlier win.  

2016 with rematches:

• #15 Western Michigan at #1 Bama
• #3 tOSU at #5 PSU
• #7 Oklahoma at #2 Clemson
• #6 Michigan at #4 Washington

2016 without rematches:

• #15 Western Michigan at #1 Bama
• #7 Oklahoma at #5 Penn State
• #6 Michigan at #2 Clemson
• #3 tOSU at #4 Washington

No difference for Bama and Western Michigan.  Differences for everybody else:

• #2 Clemson gets a slightly tougher game against #6 Michigan instead of #7 Oklahoma.  
• #3 Ohio State gets a slightly tougher game at #4 Washington instead of at #5 Penn State.  
• #4 Washington gets a tougher game vs #3 tOSU instead of #6 Michigan.  
• #5 Penn State gets an easier game vs #7 Oklahoma instead of #3 Ohio State.  
• #6 Michigan gets a tougher game at #2 Clemson instead of at #4 Washington.  
• #7 Oklahoma gets an easier game at #5 Penn State instead of at #2 Clemson.  

I voted but thinking about this further... I'd only eliminate rematches in round 1. 

Nah. 

If you get a rematch, tough turkey. I’d be OK with the seeding to try to avoid them within reason, but when you lock in, it gets dumb.