CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on June 23, 2021, 01:46:16 PM
-
It is sounding more and more like a 12-team playoff is in our near future (https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-playoff-takes-next-step-toward-expansion-to-12-team-format-173402568.html).
I honestly don't get it. I honestly consider myself a "moderate" in between the hardcore "Best Teams Only" proponents like @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) and the legion of "Conference Champs Only" proponents on here and, IMHO, this proposal is basically the worst of both worlds.
The proposal from the linked article above is (really short version):
- The top-6 highest ranked Conference Champions without regard to which conference they come from get in as do
- Six at-large teams that will be the next highest ranked six teams. Then
- The top-4 Conference Champions get a bye in the first round while the other eight CFP participants play campus-site opening round games (5v12, 6v11, 7v10, 8v9). Then
- The four winners and the four highest ranked league champions play neutral-site quarter-finals (I'm assuming around NYE/NYD). Then
- The four winners play neutral site semi-finals (I'm assuming roughly the current time of the NCG). Then
- The two semi-finalists play a neutral site NCG (I'm assuming mid-to-late January).
Why I think this is a worst-of-both-worlds proposal:
First, I think that six is WAY too many at-large teams. Looking at the last "normal" season, in 2019 the entrants (based on AP) would have been:
- #1 SEC Champ LSU - bye
- #2 B1G Champ tOSU - bye
- #3 ACC Champ Clemson - bye
- #4 B12 Champ Oklahoma - bye
- #5 UGA 11-2, L SECCG to #1 LSU and a regular season SEC game to unranked USCe. Best win was #6 UF.
- #6 Florida 10-2, L regular season SEC games to #1 LSU and #5 UGA. Best win was 8-5 either @KY or vsTN.
- #7 PAC Champ Oregon
- #8 Baylor 11-2, L twice to #4 OU. Best win was 8-5 either @KSU, @OkSU, or vsTX.
- #9 Bama 10-2 L regular season SEC games to #1 LSU and #10 Auburn. Best win was @8-5 aTm.
- #10 Auburn 9-3, L regular season SEC games to #1 LSU, #5 UGA, and #6 UF. Best win was vs #9 Bama.
- #11 Wisconsin 10-3, L twice to #2 tOSU and once to unranked IL. Best win was #19 Iowa.
- #15 AAC Champ Memphis
You have two teams that lost twice to their respective league champions (Baylor and Wisconsin) and three teams whose best win was over an 8-5 team (UF, Baylor, Bama). You also have both the winner AND the loser from all of the following CCG's:
- SEC: LSU and GA
- B1G: tOSU and UW
- B12: OU and Baylor
Second, I just don't like byes. I'm not sure that they even help. I think you'd be better off to be in Georgia's spot with a home tune-up against Memphis than in the position of LSU/tOSU/Clemson/OU waiting for an opponent.
Third, to reseed or not to reseed: Suppose that Memphis (yeah right) and Wisconsin upset UGA and UF respectively. If you don't reseed then the top-2 League Champions (LSU, tOSU) get theoretically stronger quarterfinal opponents (Oregon and Baylor) than the third and fourth League Champions (Clemson and OU) who get Wisconsin and Memphis. It is tricky either way.
Fourth, this will create way too many games that don't matter. This mock-up includes two three-loss teams (Auburn and Wisconsin). In both cases they lost to some really good teams but they still lost.
Fifth, this give insufficient deference to Conference Champions. The reward of a bye isn't much of a reward IMHO and with six at-large teams winning the league title isn't terribly important since you can easily get in without it.
-
Seems like the best option for the school and fans is to be seeded 5-8... You get the financial benefit for your school (and the surrounding businesses/etc) of a home game.
1-4 gets a bye, but have to play all neutral site games and miss out on the revenue and the home game for fans.
-
I loathe byes. There just aren't enough games in college football, to warrant giving ANY team a free pass to the second round.
12 teams really is the worst of all worlds. I'd be in favor of going to 16 just to avoid the byes.
In short-- this sucks and I'd say I'm shocked that the idiots running college football could come up with something so dumb, but of course I'm not surprised at all that the idiots running college football could come up with something so dumb.
-
I think a bye is very important. To have to play means facing, and beating, a competent opponent. Maybe your odds are say 60-40 of winning, at home.
The bye teams are 100:0. The odds mount up as you proceed obviously, even if they are 70% likelihood of a win at each phase. Even with two games, your odds of winning both are less than 50-50.
-
I think a bye is very important. To have to play means facing, and beating, a competent opponent. Maybe your odds are say 60-40 of winning, at home.
The bye teams are 100:0. The odds mount up as you proceed obviously, even if they are 70% likelihood of a win at each phase. Even with two games, your odds of winning both are less than 50-50.
Which is precisely why byes are completely idiotic.
-
I suspect we will rarely see the NC being from a team without a bye.
-
I loathe byes. There just aren't enough games in college football, to warrant giving ANY team a free pass to the second round.
12 teams really is the worst of all worlds. I'd be in favor of going to 16 just to avoid the byes.
In short-- this sucks and I'd say I'm shocked that the idiots running college football could come up with something so dumb, but of course I'm not surprised at all that the idiots running college football could come up with something so dumb.
Don't give them any ideas!
I say we grab the torches and pitchforks and besiege the castle until they fall back to a 6+2.
-
Don't give them any ideas!
I say we grab the torches and pitchforks and besiege the castle until they fall back to a 6+2.
Amen, brutha!
-
I suspect we will rarely see the NC being from a team without a bye.
I strongly disagree. Teams 5-8 are going to include a lot of REALLY good teams like:
- Alabama the kick-6 year. In this set-up they would not have gotten a bye because those are for the top-4 Champions but they were still they best team in the country and would have gotten a fairly easy home game as their first round game.
- Ohio State in 2015. Coming off the NC in 2014 the Buckeyes lost just once but it was the one game they couldn't afford to lose. The Spartans beat the Buckeyes then tied them in the final standings so the Buckeyes missed the B1GCG. In this scenario they'd have likely been #5 or #6 and were certainly good enough to win it all.
- There are plenty of other examples of teams that just barely missed either getting to or winning their CG.
-
Seems like the best option for the school and fans is to be seeded 5-8... You get the financial benefit for your school (and the surrounding businesses/etc) of a home game.
1-4 gets a bye, but have to play all neutral site games and miss out on the revenue and the home game for fans.
I completely agree. I'd rather have the extra game at home than a bye.
I loathe byes. There just aren't enough games in college football, to warrant giving ANY team a free pass to the second round.
I completely agree.
12 teams really is the worst of all worlds. I'd be in favor of going to 16 just to avoid the byes.
In short-- this sucks and I'd say I'm shocked that the idiots running college football could come up with something so dumb, but of course I'm not surprised at all that the idiots running college football could come up with something so dumb.
I completely agree. As I said in my initial post, I think this is the worst of both worlds. A team with a CG will have the possibility of playing 16 games:
- 12 regular season
- 1 CCG
- 1 quarter-final
- 1 semi-final
- 1 National Championship.
If you are accepting that, why not have every playoff team in this boat rather than just 2/3 of them. As much as I oppose expanding the number of teams, I think I might choose 16 over 12. IMHO, 12 makes no sense at all.
-
I completely agree. I'd rather have the extra game at home than a bye. I completely agree.
I completely agree. As I said in my initial post, I think this is the worst of both worlds. A team with a CG will have the possibility of playing 17 games:
- 12 regular season
- 1 CCG
- opening round playoff-game
- 1 quarter-final
- 1 semi-final
- 1 National Championship.
If you are accepting that, why not have every playoff team in this boat rather than just 2/3 of them. As much as I oppose expanding the number of teams, I think I might choose 16 over 12. IMHO, 12 makes no sense at all.
-
I think a bye is very important. To have to play means facing, and beating, a competent opponent. Maybe your odds are say 60-40 of winning, at home.
The bye teams are 100:0. The odds mount up as you proceed obviously, even if they are 70% likelihood of a win at each phase. Even with two games, your odds of winning both are less than 50-50.
I disagree for a multitude of reasons.
First, the timeline:
For the purpose of this discussion I am assuming that they will use the timeline I laid out above, namely:
- Opening round games in mid-December (the eight CFP teams that do NOT get byes)
- Quarter-finals at bowl sites around NYE/NYD
- Semi-finals about when the NCG is now
- NCG in mid-to-late January
The four highest ranked Champions will play their last game in the CCG the first Saturday in December then have a month off. Some of them will get a little rusty. All of them will see friends and family and be told how great they are. Some of them will let that go to their heads.
Meanwhile the other eight CFP teams will have a game in late December to keep them focused. Aside from the possibility of sustaining injuries in the first round, IMHO the winners of the opening round game will be better positioned for the quarter-finals than the top-4 Champions.
Second, history:
Back when the Big11Ten had 11 teams in the Basketball tournament the #6 seed almost always beat the #3 seed. Our conclusion was that the bye hurt #3. In that format, #6 had a great set-up. They got the league's worst team in their first game so they almost always won and it was a great tune-up for their game against #3 the next day.
More history, I don't think that teams overall in CFB have a great record coming off of an open date. I don't have good stats on that at hand, just a feeling. I could be wrong.
Of course you are right at least in theory that the odds of winning all of a group of games decrease as the number of games increases. If you have a 60% chance of winning each game then your chances of winning the NC with a bye are 21.6% (60%^3) while your chances of winning it without a bye are 12.9% (60%^4) but that isn't how this actually works.
In the 2019 set-up that I posted above the chances of either #4 Oklahoma or #5 Florida beating #15 Memphis are close to 100%. Their chances against each other are close to 50/50 and either of their chances against their likely semi-final opponent (LSU) are very slim and their chances against their likely NC opponent (Clemson) are not much better. In this scenario Florida would have a home game against Memphis in late December while Oklahoma rested. IMHO, that set-up is better for Florida than it is for Oklahoma.
-
I don't think the odds of a #5 beating a #12 are more than 80% or so.
-
I don't think the odds of a #5 beating a #12 are more than 80% or so.
I strongly disagree. In 2019 Memphis would have been that last team in. For comparison they BARELY beat Cincinnati twice:
- 34-24 at home in the regular season
- 29-24 at home in the AACCG a week later.
For comparison that same Cincy team that was nearly equal to Memphis got annihilated 42-0 when they played Ohio State and when Memphis got to the Cotton Bowl they got whipped 53-39 by Penn State. IMHO, Florida was similar to tOSU/PSU and would have cake-walked past Memphis in a first round playoff game.
-
I suspect we will rarely see the NC being from a team without a bye.
10%, once each decade?
I think this could happen
-
if the Huskers (go ahead and laugh) are a great team and capable of winning a MNC, then I want them to get the bye, rest up and take their best shot at winning 2 games.
if they don't seem capable w/o some luck and unlikely, then give me the home game in Lincoln
-
I
A team with a CG will have the possibility of playing 16 games:
- 12 regular season
- 1 CCG
- 1 quarter-final
- 1 semi-final
- 1 National Championship.
If you are accepting that, why not have every playoff team in this boat rather than just 2/3 of them. As much as I oppose expanding the number of teams, I think I might choose 16 over 12. IMHO, 12 makes no sense at all.
16 only if they get a bye, 17 if they don't.
-
Meh, it'll probably be fine and be fun.
-
Meh, it'll probably be fine and be fun.
It's a shame that we're letting entertainment value getting the way of solving important world issues
-
Meh, it'll probably be fine and be fun.
It's going to be a massive disaster and lead to the end of western civilization as we know it.
-
It's going to be a massive disaster and lead to the end of western civilization as we know it.
I guess I can move to eastern civilization. I don’t think I would make a very good warlord, but skill development is important, so maybe I’ll figure it out here
-
I think I'd do well with acupuncture, that's big in the East, isn't it?
-
I'm pretty easy going, obviously, so I'm not going to get hot and b'thered by it, but I suspect we'll have some unintended consequences.
And of course whoever is 13th will complain.
Have we considered the impact on the bowl games, the more important but below top variants like Cap One, or whatever it is today?
I guess they didn't matter that much anyway. What will likely be the "best" bowl game now?
-
I think I'd do well with acupuncture, that's big in the East, isn't it?
The wife has foot numbness and has been seeing one, results so far unclear.
-
I think I'd do well with acupuncture, that's big in the East, isn't it?
it's an acquired taste
it'll grow on you
-
I guess I can move to eastern civilization. I don’t think I would make a very good warlord, but skill development is important, so maybe I’ll figure it out here
Better a warlord than a concubine...
-
Acupuncture kind of sticks in my craw, as I pointed out before, but it's a prickly subject with the wife if I needle her about it.
-
Better a warlord than a concubine...
Depends on how much work you want to do
-
I'm pretty easy going, obviously, so I'm not going to get hot and b'thered by it, but I suspect we'll have some unintended consequences.
And of course whoever is 13th will complain.
Have we considered the impact on the bowl games, the more important but below top variants like Cap One, or whatever it is today?
I guess they didn't matter that much anyway. What will likely be the "best" bowl game now?
Per my OP on this, in 2019 the top 11 teams and #15 (AAC Champ Memphis) would be in the expanded playoff. The remaining ranked teams would thus be:
- #12 Utah, 11-2 coming off PACCG loss to Oregon
- #13 Penn State, 10-2
- #14 Notre Dame, 10-2
- #16 Minnesota, 10-2
- #17 Michigan, 9-3
- #18 Boise State, 12-1 MWC Champion
- #19 Iowa, 9-3
- #20 ApSt, 12-1 SunBelt Champion
- #21 Navy, 9-2
- #22 USC, 8-4
- #23 Cincinnati, 10-3 coming off AACCG loss to Memphis
- #24 Air Force, 10-2
- #25 OkSU, 8-4
The best remaining bowl games would generally be a bunch of bowls involving B1G teams since the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 7th highest ranked teams not in the playoff are B1G teams.
-
Some decent potential bowl games there for December. Will there be an official Rose Bowl? Utah-PSU worth watching.But I don't see any SEC teams ...
- #12 Utah, 11-2 coming off PACCG loss to Oregon
- #13 Penn State, 10-2
- #14 Notre Dame, 10-2
- #16 Minnesota, 10-2
- #17 Michigan, 9-3
- #18 Boise State, 12-1 MWC Champion
- #19 Iowa, 9-3
- #20 ApSt, 12-1 SunBelt Champion
- #21 Navy, 9-2
- #22 USC, 8-4
- #23 Cincinnati, 10-3 coming off AACCG loss to Memphis
- #24 Air Force, 10-2
- #25 OkSU, 8-4
-
You didn't because as of the pre-bowl rankings in 2019 the SEC had a bunch of teams that would have gotten into the playoff:
- #1 Champion, LSU, 13-0
- #5 SECE Champion, UGA, 11-2
- #6 SECE runner-up, UF, 10-2
- #9 SECW runner-up, Bama, 10-2
- #10 SECW 3rd place Auburn, 9-3
They had five teams in the top-10 but no other ranked teams. The B1G by comparison had two in the playoff and four more ranked teams (more ranked teams than the SEC but nowhere close to as many highly ranked teams:
- #2 Champion, tOSU, 13-0
- #11 B1GW Champion, UW, 10-3
- #13 B1GE runner-up, PSU, 10-2
- #16 B1GW runner-up, MN, 10-2
- #17 B1GE third place, M, 9-3
- #19 B1GE third place, IA, 9-3
Every team in the SEC and B1G that had three or less losses as of the pre-bowl poll was ranked. The SEC did better with hypothetical CFP invites because nearly all of theirs had only two losses and the one with three (Auburn) lost to #1, #5, and #6. The major problem for the B1G was that Minnesota was good enough to wreak havoc but not quite good enough to gain national respect. They were a two-loss team having lost only to hypothetical playoff bound Wisconsin and ranked Iowa but they were only ranked #16. That also hurt Penn State because the Nittany Lions' two losses were to #2 tOSU and . . . Minnesota. Had the Gophers gotten a little more love either they or PSU or both could have made the playoff in lieu of perhaps three-loss Auburn.
If Minnesota had been slightly worse they would have lost to PSU and the Nittany Lions would have been an obvious playoff team with only a single loss and that to an undefeated #2 tOSU. OTOH, if they had been slightly better they would have beaten Iowa and gone to the B1GCG. Then 10-2 Wisconsin would still probably have made the playoff along with 11-2 or 12-1 Minnesota and 13-0 or 12-1 tOSU.
This would likely have resulted in a terrible bowl record for the SEC because their non-playoff teams would have been pretty far down the pecking order.
We have seen that before both during the BCS and CFP eras. When a conference gets extra major bowl teams, the rest of their teams end up moving up a slot or two and find themselves in over their heads in their bowl matchups. Ie, in theory the CapOne Bowl should be between the B1G #2 and the SEC #2. That would be Wisconsin vs Georgia which would probably be a great game. Instead, in this scenario it looks like it would end up being B1G #3 PSU vs SEC #6 aTm and PSU would be a pretty solid favorite there.
-
You didn't because as of the pre-bowl rankings in 2019 the SEC had a bunch of teams that would have gotten into the playoff:
I meant it as a joke, or sarcasm, or something humorous and entertaining.
-
Gee, if only there was already a thread about this exact thing.
Damn, I'm gone a few days, and already erased.
-
don't take it personal
-
No fear of that
-
No fear of that
I looked, didn't see a post. Sorry, must have missed it.
-
Gee, if only there was already a thread about this exact thing.
Damn, I'm gone a few days, and already erased.
Wouldn't be this board if someone didn't start a new playoff thread every week
-
Well... weekly playoff threads aren't going to start themselves.
-
We could have a playoff between competing playoff threads.
-
Wouldn't be this board if someone didn't start a new playoff thread every week
Well... weekly playoff threads aren't going to start themselves.
We could have a playoff between competing playoff threads.
In my defense this isn't a "Medina's idea for a playoff" thread, this was specific to an actual proposal under consideration by the powers that be.
-
We could have a thread "Medina's idea for a playoff" ....
-
We could have a playoff between competing playoff threads.
How many threads do we let in?
-
We could have a thread about how many threads we let in.