My 16 team CFP idea

[CHorn427]

- Any participating team must be 9-3 or better

- One autobid for each P4 conference. Let each conference decide how they want the autobid to be earned- if the conference wants it to be winner of CCG, highest CFP ranked team, etc

- If a G5/G6 team is in the Top 15 (unlikely), they are in. If not, the only route is a G5/G6 play in. 

- One spot reserved for G6. Four G6 champion team, two round G6 play in. Winner of the play in gets the G6 spot

- G6 teams could all start playing in Week zero so that their championship weekend is a week earlier (earlier CFB? Yes please!) and the first round of the G6 play in is concurrent with P4 championship weekend, with the G6 interleague championship in between P4 CCG weekend and the first weekend of the CFP. 

[hookem1014]

I also wouldn’t mind the first team out in week 15 to have a play in game vs the G5 conference champ. If you really want the 12 best teams you should not be giving the G5 an auto bid. 

Edited 5 hours ago by hookem1014

[CHorn427]

10 minutes ago, hookem1014 said:

I also wouldn’t mind the first team out in week 15 to have a play in game vs the G5 conference champ. If you really want the 12 best teams you should not be giving the G5 an auto bid. 

This year, the first team out would be 9-3 USC. I don’t think the total G5 champ needs play them in this scenario.

The total G5 champ in this scenario could be 15-0, 14-1 or 13-2. I think a team like that would deserve to be in without playing an additional game vs #16 USC at 9-3.

I agree with the notion that the G5 should be included in the playoff. But the rigor that they have to show should be upped. I think a 4 team play in would be interesting and would make that champion deserving of being in

[GoHorns1]

51 minutes ago, CHorn427 said:

- Any participating team must be 9-3 or better

- One autobid for each P4 conference. Let each conference decide how they want the autobid to be earned- if the conference wants it to be winner of CCG, highest CFP ranked team, etc

- If a G5/G6 team is in the Top 15 (unlikely), they are in. If not, the only route is a G5/G6 play in. 

- One spot reserved for G6. Four G6 champion team, two round G6 play in. Winner of the play in gets the G6 spot

- G6 teams could all start playing in Week zero so that their championship weekend is a week earlier (earlier CFB? Yes please!) and the first round of the G6 play in is concurrent with P4 championship weekend, with the G6 interleague championship in between P4 CCG weekend and the first weekend of the CFP. 

That’s too many games for G5 G6 teams to play with a 2 round play in tournament. 

[hookem1014]

32 minutes ago, CHorn427 said:

This year, the first team out would be 9-3 USC. I don’t think the total G5 champ needs play them in this scenario.

The total G5 champ in this scenario could be 15-0, 14-1 or 13-2. I think a team like that would deserve to be in without playing an additional game vs #16 USC at 9-3.

I agree with the notion that the G5 should be included in the playoff. But the rigor that they have to show should be upped. I think a 4 team play in would be interesting and would make that champion deserving of being in

I would have to respectfully disagree that the G5 team should automatically be included based on their record against other G5 teams. JMU lost by 14 to the only P4 team they played and Tulane lost by 35 to the team they are about to play again in the playoffs. The lines for both of their games are absurd for a CFP game. I agree that they need something to play for at the end of the day, which is why I think proving you deserve a spot by beating a fringe P4 playoff team in a play in is the most fair way to ensure the committee selects the true best 12 (or 16) teams.

[Battrayal]

I like 16 teams with no AQs... or if there are AQs then putting a threshold requirement on it (must be ranked, maybe in top 20?)... But ultimately I think 16 teams is the ultimate solve, since there seems to be about 14/15 playoff quality teams each year (last year bama/USC/Ole Miss woulda got in, this year texas/ND/Vandy gets in) and then can give the G5 a charity. Id rather let in one team not worthy than leave 2-3 teams that are worthy out.. especially since bowls are now worthless..

Dont need to add any additional weeks, just get rid of the byes.

Other idea I like is make a G5 playoff... why do they need to be with the big boys.

[CHorn427]

1 hour ago, GoHorns1 said:

That’s too many games for G5 G6 teams to play with a 2 round play in tournament. 

I disagree. The added games would increase their SOS to respectable/on par level with P4. Plus, they are probably going to lose against the first P4 team they play in the CFP. At least the guys on those teams could potentially have two more fun games together rather than dogwalked by the P4 team. It would be more rewarding for those teams to be proven to be the best G5 and have a championship to show for it.

It would be a mix of the FCS and FBS championship models for the G6. FCS plays 5 playoff rounds + conference championships. 

[GoHorns1]

46 minutes ago, CHorn427 said:

I disagree. The added games would increase their SOS to respectable/on par level with P4. Plus, they are probably going to lose against the first P4 team they play in the CFP. At least the guys on those teams could potentially have two more fun games together rather than dogwalked by the P4 team. It would be more rewarding for those teams to be proven to be the best G5 and have a championship to show for it.

It would be a mix of the FCS and FBS championship models for the G6. FCS plays 5 playoff rounds + conference championships. 

Too much wear and tear and possible injuries not fair. 

[CHorn427]

59 minutes ago, GoHorns1 said:

Too much wear and tear and possible injuries not fair. 

Alright, pick the best 2 and let them do a play in.

Bottom line, I think it’s important for the G5 to be included, but I think they need to do more than what they do to earn it and I think there should only be one rep

[Traves]

A playoff should be about getting the best x number of teams. Rank them 1-16 and play ball. AQs need to go. 

[GoHorns1]

2 minutes ago, CHorn427 said:

Alright, pick the best 2 and let them do a play in.

Bottom line, I think it’s important for the G5 to be included, but I think they need to do more than what they do to earn it and I think there should only be one rep

Would the G5 teams have play and win their CCG?

[GoHorns1]

1 minute ago, Traves said:

A playoff should be about getting the best x number of teams. Rank them 1-16 and play ball. AQs need to go. 

Including ND

[CHorn427]

42 minutes ago, GoHorns1 said:

Would the G5 teams have play and win their CCG?

Yes

[CHorn427]

43 minutes ago, Traves said:

A playoff should be about getting the best x number of teams. Rank them 1-16 and play ball. AQs need to go. 

Best will always be subjective. I do think they need a smaller element of objective certainty. I’m fine with the top 15 having the chance and one G5 that has actually earned it getting a chance

[CHorn427]

3 hours ago, hookem1014 said:

I would have to respectfully disagree that the G5 team should automatically be included based on their record against other G5 teams. JMU lost by 14 to the only P4 team they played and Tulane lost by 35 to the team they are about to play again in the playoffs. The lines for both of their games are absurd for a CFP game. I agree that they need something to play for at the end of the day, which is why I think proving you deserve a spot by beating a fringe P4 playoff team in a play in is the most fair way to ensure the committee selects the true best 12 (or 16) teams.

How about this, 4 team hybrid P4/G6 play in. #16 and #17 (P4 or G6) as the 1 and 2 seeds, Top 2 G6 champs as the 3 and 4 seeds.

I like this idea rather than going to a full 24 team playoff for everyone. The whole damn AP Top25 does not deserve to be in the CFP.