CFP Expansion Idea

[TKlone3]

Sorry for another thread on CFP expansion and a long post. I've been thinking about this for a while and don't think I have heard this idea come up yet. I don't have all the details worked out but I think this idea could work. Wanted to get other's opinions and see how else it could be better.

In a nut shell I think of it like the NCAA basketball tournament and then use the New Year's Six bowls as your "play-in" games to get into the playoff. You would then have a 1st round bye for the winners of the two top two matchups.

Overview:

• Proposing to make the New Year's Six bowl games the "play-in" games to the playoff. This would expand the playoff to 6 teams (or 12 if you want to think of it that way)
• The top 12 teams will be ranked by a combination of computers and committee (think NCAA selection committee)
• 1st round bye to the winners of the 1 vs 12 game and the 2 vs 11 game
• Each power 5 conference gets an automatic bid which goes to the winner of the conference championship
• Conferences would be limited to 2 participants (could potentially see a scenario for 3 but I think you need to keep it at 2 to allow more none power 5 schools in. These 2 spots are also not guaranteed, just says they can get up to 2)
• The top Independent gets an automatic bid
• Top 1 or 2 group of 5 teams get an automatic bid (This could still be debatable. Not sure the correct way to define the exact number guaranteed)
• No more conference bowl game affiliations
• Bowl game matchup locations (1v12, 2v11, etc.) will rotate each year
• 1st and 2nd round playoff games would be held at non-traditional bowl game locations. I think it would be cool to host those at neutral NFL stadiums like in Minneapolis, Las Vegas, Indianapolis, etc.)
  • Other idea is to play those at the top ranked teams home stadium

Pros:

• Continues to place a emphasis on winning your conference
• Gives a chance for Cinderellas
• Makes New Year's Six games important again
• Will limit the amount of potential opt-outs in New Year's 6 games (See Florida)
• No more conference bowl game affiliations

For the visual people I attached a chart of how it could look. I used this years rankings and it assumes Notre Dame is an independent as they would be in a typical year. Obviously, who I put in there and their seed wasn't anything scientific. Those seeds can be up for debate but just wanted to get the idea out there of how it could look.

 

[TKlone3]

 

[Nor'easter]

Interesting. This is unique and I kinda like it, this way every year all NY6 games are important, still feels like this just makes the rest of the bowl games even more pointless, which they are I suppose. Good job

 

[NWICY]

I came to mock another CFP thread, but it seems like a pretty good idea.

 

[charlie_B]

I like it but I would consider the byes being the two highest seed left not the winner of the two games (1 vs 12 & 2 vs 11). I do not think you want to reward the two lowest teams that much for beating the highest teams. Just my thoughts

 

[isucy86]

IMO people just overcomplicate a college football playoff.

Anymore than 8 teams is overkill. In college football today, there is just too big a difference between the top 3-4 teams and teams 10-16. Just give me 4 first round games with great match-ups or games with great story lines (e.g. this year Georgia vs. Cincinnati)

A few general thoughts and I might have a unique perspective:

• I have no interest in college football stretching much beyond Jan 1. By New Years I am ready to move on to NFL playoffs and college hoops. I enjoy the national championship game, but I don't feel the 10 days between the semi and final game is a period of building anticipation. Rather I find the title game anti-climatic.
• The traditional bowl system is over. What we have today (for teams outside the playoff) is a reward game for players & a team's fans who want a great warm weather trip in Dec/Jan. Many only exist because ESPN owns them and needs programming. Nothing wrong with that, it is the current reality.
• I don't see a need to open the playoff to 12 or 16 teams. All the major conferences (both P5 & G5) play a conference championship game. Those games are playoff games. Football's version of the NCAA Basketball Tournament play-in games. Just with really elite teams. IMO the Conference Championship games could be made more relevant if P5 conferences (other than Big12) would eliminate divisions and require teams to play 10 conference games. A team shouldn't be in the playoff if they didn't play in their conference championship game.

The playoff is straightforward:

• 8 Teams: Five P5 conference game champs, 1 G5 Highest Ranked, 2 At Large
• Play First Round at home sites for teams ranked 1-4 on the week after Conference Championship Games (around Dec 12).
• Semi-Final games weekend around Christmas
• Final Game around New Years

 

[t-noah]

Combination of the two ideas given by @TKlone3 and @isucy86 (both good):

12 Teams: 5 P5 conference game champs, 1 G5 Highest Ranked, 6 At Large Teams according to ranking.
First Round: 4 Games, Byes to Top 4 Seeds, remaining 8 Seeds play (#5 vs. #12, #6 vs. #11, ...), one week after Conference Championship Games (around Sat, Dec.12, AND Tues, Dec 15), at a Bowl site.
Second Round: 4 Games, Top 4 Seeds vs. First Round winners, highest to lowest Seed (Sat, Dec. 19 AND Sat, Dec. 26), at a Bowl site.
Third Round: Semi-Finals, 2 Games, Jan. 1, Bowl sites.
Forth Round: Final, Mon, Jan. 11, Bowl site or Highest Bid site.

 

[cyclones500]

Combination of the two ideas given by @TKlone3 and @isucy86 (both good):

12 Teams: 5 P5 conference game champs, 1 G5 Highest Ranked, 6 At Large Teams according to ranking.
First Round: 4 Games, Byes to Top 4 Seeds, remaining 8 Seeds play (#5 vs. #12, #6 vs. #11, ...), one week after Conference Championship Games (around Sat, Dec.12, AND Tues, Dec 15), at a Bowl site.
Second Round: 4 Games, Top 4 Seeds vs. First Round winners, highest to lowest Seed (Sat, Dec. 19 AND Sat, Dec. 26), at a Bowl site.
Third Round: Semi-Finals, 2 Games, Jan. 1, Bowl sites.
Forth Round: Final, Mon, Jan. 11, Bowl site or Highest Bid site.

For a 12-team I like most of this, but prefer the opening round games at campus sites.

 

[isucy86]

Combination of the two ideas given by @TKlone3 and @isucy86 (both good):

12 Teams: 5 P5 conference game champs, 1 G5 Highest Ranked, 6 At Large Teams according to ranking.
First Round: 4 Games, Byes to Top 4 Seeds, remaining 8 Seeds play (#5 vs. #12, #6 vs. #11, ...), one week after Conference Championship Games (around Sat, Dec.12, AND Tues, Dec 15), at a Bowl site.
Second Round: 4 Games, Top 4 Seeds vs. First Round winners, highest to lowest Seed (Sat, Dec. 19 AND Sat, Dec. 26), at a Bowl site.
Third Round: Semi-Finals, 2 Games, Jan. 1, Bowl sites.
Forth Round: Final, Mon, Jan. 11, Bowl site or Highest Bid site.

I could see a 12 team playoff if the Conference Championship games were eliminated.

One weakness with the current set-up, there have been teams invited to be in the 4 team playoff that didn't play in their conference championship game. I know Georgia made it one year and I believe Ohio State made it. They might have deserved it based on rankings, but I think the selection committee needs to make it a requirement that playoff teams must play in their conference championship game. Then conferences would get away from the craziness of divisions.

I see the same problem with any expanded playoff proposal, where a team losing their conference championship game gets left out of the playoff because a 3rd team in the conference is ranked higher. Only because the 3rd team didn't play in their conference championship game. This year alone Indiana (over NW) and Texas A&M/Georgia (over Florida) would have benefited in the final rankings.

The other thing, IMO the first round game should be on campus. Reward the higher seeded teams and their fans by giving them a home game. I think it is possible you might not see sellouts at the early round games if the spread is pretty big. For example, this year would the Orange Bowl sell out if Texas A&M played Oregon in the first round 5 seed v 12 seed game.

 

[t-noah]

For a 12-team I like most of this, but prefer the opening round games at campus sites.

I could see a 12 team playoff if the Conference Championship games were eliminated.

One weakness with the current set-up, there have been teams invited to be in the 4 team playoff that didn't play in their conference championship game. I know Georgia made it one year and I believe Ohio State made it. They might have deserved it based on rankings, but I think the selection committee needs to make it a requirement that playoff teams must play in their conference championship game. Then conferences would get away from the craziness of divisions.

I see the same problem with any expanded playoff proposal, where a team losing their conference championship game gets left out of the playoff because a 3rd team in the conference is ranked higher. Only because the 3rd team didn't play in their conference championship game. This year alone Indiana (over NW) and Texas A&M/Georgia (over Florida) would have benefited in the final rankings.

The other thing, IMO the first round game should be on campus. Reward the higher seeded teams and their fans by giving them a home game. I think it is possible you might not see sellouts at the early round games if the spread is pretty big. For example, this year would the Orange Bowl sell out if Texas A&M played Oregon in the first round 5 seed v 12 seed game.

Good points about the first round or two being home games for the higher seed. I thought about it, but wondered what the Bowl committees or the cities where these Bowls have historically been played, what would they think or do? So much money involved. Guess I need to think about it some more.

 

[t-noah]

Combination of the two ideas given by @TKlone3 and @isucy86 (both good):

12 Teams: 5 P5 conference game champs, 1 G5 Highest Ranked, 6 At Large Teams according to ranking.
First Round: 4 Games, Byes to Top 4 Seeds, remaining 8 Seeds play (#5 vs. #12, #6 vs. #11, ...), one week after Conference Championship Games (around Sat, Dec.12, AND Tues, Dec 15), at a Bowl site.
Second Round: 4 Games, Top 4 Seeds vs. First Round winners, highest to lowest Seed (Sat, Dec. 19 AND Sat, Dec. 26), at a Bowl site.
Third Round: Semi-Finals, 2 Games, Jan. 1, Bowl sites.
Forth Round: Final, Mon, Jan. 11, Bowl site or Highest Bid site.

Using above as template, no Home games for playoff teams. First, Second and third rounds would equate to 10 Bowl Games, mostly good weather sites (?).

For a 12-team I like most of this, but prefer the opening round games at campus sites.

OK. For First Round, Teams #5-8 would get the Home field. For Second Round, in above template, you would HAVE to give the top 4 seeded teams, Teams #1-4 the home field also, to be fair. If so no "Bowl" sites yet, through the 2nd Round. Problem, as now there are only two more rounds, 3rd and 4th, or only 3 more games, to do "Bowl Game" of some sort/location. What about all the other Bowl locations?

[[[ I could see a 12 team playoff if the Conference Championship games were eliminated. ]]]

....[[[ The other thing, IMO the first round game should be on campus. Reward the higher seeded teams and their fans by giving them a home game. I think it is possible you might not see sellouts at the early round games if the spread is pretty big. For example, this year would the Orange Bowl sell out if Texas A&M played Oregon in the first round 5 seed v 12 seed game. ]]]

My Template above wouldn't work well for Home games to top 4 seeds in First Round as they all get Byes. Maybe create a new Template where all 12 seeds play, Top 6 seeds get Home game. I'm not sure how it would go from there, as Second round would have 6 teams or 3 games. The Third round would have 3 teams or a game and a half (does not compute). There would have to be a Bye for one team, not fair, plus an extra week.

I guess that is why maybe I like the first Template here, just play w/ no Home games, at various Bowl sites or other?

Now using your thought for a 12 team play-off, and skipping the Conference Championship Game, how would that look? You have a good way of simplifying. I have already made it too complex, ha.

 

[t-noah]

What are the two best expanded CFP scenarios people have seen or come up with nationally? Sorry I haven't really kept up.

 

[CascadeClone]

There are never more than 3 elite teams any given season. Id say half the time there are only two and some years only one. Below those are 6 or 10 really good teams, and the gap between them and the elites is significant.

The only reason to expand is to reduce the b!tching (be more fair) in choosing the next level down teams who get a slight punchers chance to knock off an elite team. Then instead of picking 1 or 2 good teams out of those 6-10, you could take 5 or 6. So more 2nd level teams get a shot, though they woukd still lose to the elites 90% of the time.

And you would still have b!tching about a 3rd SEC team vs a G5 etc etc.

 

[JM4CY]

Makes no sense not to expand and throw the G5 a bone. Be nothing but a great thing. They will killed most years but when they do win its huge and great for the sport. We still talk about and remember the Statue of Liberty play how many years later. Imagine if that happened in a game where the little guy had a legit chance to survive and advance.

 

[isucy86]

Makes no sense not to expand and throw the G5 a bone. Be nothing but a great thing. They will killed most years but when they do win its huge and great for the sport. We still talk about and remember the Statue of Liberty play how many years later. Imagine if that happened in a game where the little guy had a legit chance to survive and advance.

Does it make sense for G5 programs to create their own playoff similar to FCS schools? IMO the best those conferences could hope for is an occasional bone in any playoff structure that includes 4 to 12 teams.

Would think those conferences could convince a TV Network to televise.

 

[cyclones500]

OK. For First Round, Teams #5-8 would get the Home field. For Second Round, in above template, you would HAVE to give the top 4 seeded teams, Teams #1-4 the home field also, to be fair. If so no "Bowl" sites yet, through the 2nd Round. Problem, as now there are only two more rounds, 3rd and 4th, or only 3 more games, to do "Bowl Game" of some sort/location. What about all the other Bowl locations?

Valid argument. It's probably a reason going to 8 is better than 12* if you you want to balance a home-field round plus incororpate bowls ... 1-8, 4-5 etc. on-campus, second round the rotating NY6 bowls as we have now.

*I've pitched a 12 and a "tiered" 16 version in a different thread, but won't re-post here unless someone missed it previously and truly wants to see it.

 

[awd4cy]

If we are just going to go beyond 8 we might as well blow it all up and go to a total NFL model. Maybe we do a 16 team playoff and have a P5 division and the G5 teams can have their own lower division with their own championship.

 

[ca4cy]

I like the idea of expansion to 8 or possibly 12 (with a bye to the top 4) but, no matter how many scenarios we throw around, you'll never convince me it's feasible until you show me how they're going to get more money pumped into the system. They're not going to divvy up the same pie to more teams.

Good work though, OP. I like the way you laid it out.

 

[JM4CY]

I don’t think a bye makes sense. They will argue those are the teams that will bring the most eyeballs and will want them playing as much as possible.

 

[t-noah]

I like the idea of expansion to 8 or possibly 12 (with a bye to the top 4) but, no matter how many scenarios we throw around, you'll never convince me it's feasible until you show me how they're going to get more money pumped into the system. They're not going to divvy up the same pie to more teams.

Good work though, OP. I like the way you laid it out.

Good point. Got a rough scenario where that might work? Those games vs. present Bowl games and money involved?

I never thought too much about the money involved in present Bowl system vs. any new playoff system.