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

I think selections would be problematic. 

That's why I don't think you can have a hard rule to prohibit rematches in round 1--perhaps just a strong preference. And once you hit round 2, all bets are off.

I like what OAM mentioned of "if avoiding a rematch can be done with a 1 seed difference, you do it, but if it requires moving down two or more seed lines, then it's too much" is a good idea. 

You don't want to destroy the entire concept of seeding to avoid conference matchups or rematches. 

That's why I don't think you can have a hard rule to prohibit rematches in round 1--perhaps just a strong preference. And once you hit round 2, all bets are off.

I like what OAM mentioned of "if avoiding a rematch can be done with a 1 seed difference, you do it, but if it requires moving down two or more seed lines, then it's too much" is a good idea.

You don't want to destroy the entire concept of seeding to avoid conference matchups or rematches.

I like what you and @OrangeAfroMan are trying to accomplish but I think it should be based on rankings rather than seeds.  Ie, we avoid rematches so long as it doesn't change any team's opponent by more than (for example) three spots in the rankings.  

My reason for this is that OAM's one seed difference could be a HUMONGOUS difference in quality of opponent.  Using last year's standings as an example:

• #1 LSU (SEC Champ)
• #2 tOSU (B1G Champ)
• #3 Clemson (ACC Champ)
• #4 Oklahoma (B12 Champ)
• #5 UGA (at-large)
• #6 Oregon (Pac Champ)
• #7 Baylor (at-large)
• #17 Memphis (AAC Champ)

So the first round match-ups should be:

• #17 Memphis at #1 LSU
• #5 UGA at #4 Oklahoma
• #7 Baylor at #2 tOSU
• #6 Oregon at #3 Clemson

If Ohio State had played Baylor earlier in the season it is no big deal.  #2 seed Ohio State and #3 seed Clemson could simply swap opponents and there isn't much impact:  

• Ohio State gets a slightly tougher game against #6 Oregon instead of #7 Baylor
• Clemson gets a slightly easier game against #7 Baylor instead of #6 Oregon
• Oregon gets a slightly tougher game at #2 Ohio State instead of at #3 Clemson
• Baylor gets a slightly easier game at #3 Clemson instead of at #2 Ohio State

Now suppose instead that LSU had already played Memphis.  If #1 seed LSU and #2 seed Ohio State swap opponents there is a HUMONGOUS difference:

• LSU gets a vastly tougher game against #7 Baylor instead of #17 Memphis
• Ohio State gets a vastly easier game against #17 Memphis instead of #7 Baylor
• Baylor gets a slightly tougher game at #1 LSU instead of #2 tOSU
• Memphis gets a slightly easier game at #2 tOSU instead of at #1 LSU

I'm with you. I don't know that we put hard and fast rules on it, since we're leaving seeding to the committee anyway...

But have a stated guideline that rematches or conference matchups should be avoided unless it makes a meaningful difference in team quality giving one team or another an large unearned advantage by moving seeds. 

I don't think going to 8 solves anything that needs solving personally.  The next step might well be 6.

In 50 years will it be 16 or 32?  Maybe, probably not.  Might not even play in 50 years.

I don't think going to 8 solves anything that needs solving personally.  The next step might well be 6.

In 50 years will it be 16 or 32?  Maybe, probably not.  Might not even play in 50 years.

Just to clarify, I'm not really an advocate of going to eight.  I've said from the beginning that every time you increase the size of the Playoff (to two with the BCS, to four with the CFP, next to eight) you necessarily decrease the magnitude of each regular season game.  

My example is the Texas, Ohio State game in 2005.  I attended it in Columbus.  Texas was ranked #2 and Ohio State was ranked #4.  Additionally, #3 Michigan was obviously on Ohio State's schedule so both teams effectively controlled their own destiny to the BCSNCG.  

The game was HUGE.  Losing REALLY sucked in large part because it effectively ended Ohio State's NC hopes.   Also, it was a heartbreaking loss in which the Buckeyes led from mid-second-quarter until DEEP in the fourth quarter and had a chance with just about five minutes to go to take what would have been an insurmountable two-score lead.  

Regular season games just aren't that big anymore.  If that same situation had repeated itself early in 2019 Ohio State still would have been very much alive in the NC race because one close loss to a quality opponent probably wouldn't keep them out of the CFP.  

That said, I assume that we  ARE going to an 8-team playoff so my interest is in what it will be.  

Come up with all the interesting theories/alignments possible but if the season is stretched, Sunday bound kids will sit.What will a 6 or 8 team tournament garner CFB then?Over exposure,apathy and dilution I'm guessing

I don't know about this.  I can't recall a "Sunday bound" kid sitting out the BCSNCG or any CFP games.  We have seen LOTS of "Sunday bound" kids sitting out "other" bowls but I don't think we'll ever see a lot of them sit out games that could win them a NC ring.  

done

Yeah. Probably so.