Started By
Message
FBS/CFP renovation plan
Posted on 1/21/21 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 4:38 pm
Advocates of an 8-team CFP w/automatic bids for P5 conference champs and a G5 push false narratives that it'll improve CFB and fan interest. But their very flawed CFP model not only makes it likely that some of the best FBS teams will be excluded from the CFP, it'll also reduce CFB's #1 appeal -- what CFB needs more of -- competitive regular season games that matter.
How to expand CFP opportunities and get more competitive & appealing regular season games:
FBS CFP - top 6 teams per committee rankings: No auto-bids. Rnd-1: #6@#4, #5@#3, #1/#2 bye. Rnd-2: R1 winners vs #1/#2. Final 1st Sat in Jan.
A 6-team CFP without auto-bids still values conf champs and has key advantages over an 8-team with 6 auto-bids. Auto-bids for P5 conf-champs discourage scheduling good out-of-conf teams. The top-6 model with round-1 byes for #1 & #2 and home-fields for #3 & #4 encourages it -- in order to achieve higher seeding. Also, #8 at #1 and #7 at #2 games would probably be routs. Worst of all, 6 of 8 as auto-bids would result in undeserving multi-loss conf champs getting in over 1-loss non-champs with better resumés.
FBS scheduling criteria - to qualify for the CFP:
• 12 games in Sep-Nov; CCGs 1st Fri-Sat in Dec.
• P5 must schedule 9 in-conf, 1 other P5, 0 FCS.
• G5 must schedule 8 in-conf, 3 to 4 P5s, 0 FCS.
CFP expansion to 6 teams, with the criteria that G5s must schedule 3-4 P5s to qualify, will give G5s a viable means to achieve a top-6 ranking. Since P5s can & will schedule a couple of G5s, good G5s like Memphis, ULL or CCU aspiring to reach the top-6 can find 3-4 good P5s seeking a quality G5 opponent to strengthen their resumé. Teams without CFP expectations don't have to schedule out-of-conf P5s; instead they can aim for bowl eligibility.
Conf realignment to bolster rivalries & balance: 14 teams in each P5 conf & 12 in each G5 conf.
-- P5 conf cross-div: 1 fixed; 6 rotate in 2 slots.
-- G5 conf cross-div: 0 fixed; 6 rotate in 3 slots.
6 G5 (UCF, Cin, Houston, SMU, Boise, SDS) move to P5, likely enabling better hiring and recruiting.
2 small private schools Vandy & Wake go to G5. Conf TV revenue split equally among its teams; Big12 lost Neb, Col, ATM & Miz due to unequal.
Division 1A (FBS P5) = 70 teams:
(moves underlined; cross-div rivals paired)
ACC (14) - Atlantic
N: BC, Syr, Pitt, WVU, VT, VA, MD
S: Mia, DU, NC, NCS, CL, SC, UCF
B1G (14) - Northern
E: UM, MS, Ind, Cin, OSU, PSU, Rtg
W: ND, NW, Pur, Illn, Iowa, Wis, MN
B12 (14) - Central
N: OU, OSt, Neb, Miz, Kan, KSt, ISU
S: Tex, Bay, Col, Hou, SMU, TT, TCU
PAC (14) - Pacific
N: OR, BYU, UT, OS, WA, WS, Boise
S: SC, Ucla, AS, AZ, Stn, Cal, SDSt
SEC (14) - Southeastern
E : TN, GA, FLA, FSU, UK, Lou, GT
W: UA, AU, LSU, aTm, AR, OM, MS
Bama's out-of-conf & cross-div rotations:
9th SEC replaces FCS; 6 SEC-West games
in 2nd half of season; 7 homes & 5 aways.
'22: vs G5, vs P5, vs G5; at UK, vs FS, at TN
'23: vs G5, at P5, vs G5; vs UL, at Ga, vs TN
'24: vs G5, vs P5, vs G5; at GT, vs UF, at TN
'25: vs G5, at P5, vs G5; vs UK, at FS, vs TN
'26: vs G5, vs P5, vs G5; at UL, vs Ga, at TN
'27: vs G5, at P5, vs G5; vs GT, at UF, vs TN
Consistent schedule grids for all conferences would simplify in- and out-of-conf scheduling.
Division 1B (FBS G5) = 60 teams:
(moves underlined)
AAC (12) - Eastern
N: Tem, Mass, Con, Army, Navy, Lib
S: Mrsh, Chrlt, ECU, Appn, CCU, WF
CUSA (12) - Mid South
E: Mem, ArSt, ULL, ULM, LaTc, Tuln
W: Tuls, UNT, TxSt, Rice, UTSA, UTEP
MAC (12) - Northern
E: Buf, Kent, M-OH, OH, Akrn, BGS
W: Ball, Tol, WMU, EMU, CMU, NIU
MWC (12) - Western
S: Haw, NMS, NM, FrSt, SJS, UNLV
N: Nev, UTSt, AFA, CSU, Wyo, IDSt
Sun Belt (12) - Southeast
E: GaSt, GaSo, Troy, USF, FAU, FIU
W: WKy, USM, USA, UAB, Van, MTS
Pitt, WV, VT, VA, MD and NC schools, along with SC and UCF, are regional rivals that belong in the ACC. Miz, Neb, Col, Hou and SMU belong in the Big12. ND and Cincy belong in the B1G. Boise, BYU and SDS belong in the PAC. FSU, Louisville and GT are better fits in the SEC-E than Miz, SC and Vandy. It appears all realigned conferences, including regional G5, would gain net increases in TV ratings and attendance. Perhaps ESPN could also provide G5 conference TV networks.
There are good reasons smart people chose a Top-4 CFP model. The Top-6 CFP model above supports those same good reasons even better. It enables all 5 P5 conf champs and a G5 conf champ to earn a top-6 ranking. And it inherently encourages teams to enhance their resumés by scheduling good out-of-conf teams.
CFP expansion to 6 teams, benefits/incentives for higher seedings, scheduling criteria, and conference realigment will produce schedules with more competitive games that will improve clarity of the true top 6. The regular season will become a better "initial playoff" filled with more appealing games that matter. TV ratings and attendance should improve significantly.
How to expand CFP opportunities and get more competitive & appealing regular season games:
FBS CFP - top 6 teams per committee rankings: No auto-bids. Rnd-1: #6@#4, #5@#3, #1/#2 bye. Rnd-2: R1 winners vs #1/#2. Final 1st Sat in Jan.
A 6-team CFP without auto-bids still values conf champs and has key advantages over an 8-team with 6 auto-bids. Auto-bids for P5 conf-champs discourage scheduling good out-of-conf teams. The top-6 model with round-1 byes for #1 & #2 and home-fields for #3 & #4 encourages it -- in order to achieve higher seeding. Also, #8 at #1 and #7 at #2 games would probably be routs. Worst of all, 6 of 8 as auto-bids would result in undeserving multi-loss conf champs getting in over 1-loss non-champs with better resumés.
FBS scheduling criteria - to qualify for the CFP:
• 12 games in Sep-Nov; CCGs 1st Fri-Sat in Dec.
• P5 must schedule 9 in-conf, 1 other P5, 0 FCS.
• G5 must schedule 8 in-conf, 3 to 4 P5s, 0 FCS.
CFP expansion to 6 teams, with the criteria that G5s must schedule 3-4 P5s to qualify, will give G5s a viable means to achieve a top-6 ranking. Since P5s can & will schedule a couple of G5s, good G5s like Memphis, ULL or CCU aspiring to reach the top-6 can find 3-4 good P5s seeking a quality G5 opponent to strengthen their resumé. Teams without CFP expectations don't have to schedule out-of-conf P5s; instead they can aim for bowl eligibility.
Conf realignment to bolster rivalries & balance: 14 teams in each P5 conf & 12 in each G5 conf.
-- P5 conf cross-div: 1 fixed; 6 rotate in 2 slots.
-- G5 conf cross-div: 0 fixed; 6 rotate in 3 slots.
6 G5 (UCF, Cin, Houston, SMU, Boise, SDS) move to P5, likely enabling better hiring and recruiting.
2 small private schools Vandy & Wake go to G5. Conf TV revenue split equally among its teams; Big12 lost Neb, Col, ATM & Miz due to unequal.
Division 1A (FBS P5) = 70 teams:
(moves underlined; cross-div rivals paired)
ACC (14) - Atlantic
N: BC, Syr, Pitt, WVU, VT, VA, MD
S: Mia, DU, NC, NCS, CL, SC, UCF
B1G (14) - Northern
E: UM, MS, Ind, Cin, OSU, PSU, Rtg
W: ND, NW, Pur, Illn, Iowa, Wis, MN
B12 (14) - Central
N: OU, OSt, Neb, Miz, Kan, KSt, ISU
S: Tex, Bay, Col, Hou, SMU, TT, TCU
PAC (14) - Pacific
N: OR, BYU, UT, OS, WA, WS, Boise
S: SC, Ucla, AS, AZ, Stn, Cal, SDSt
SEC (14) - Southeastern
E : TN, GA, FLA, FSU, UK, Lou, GT
W: UA, AU, LSU, aTm, AR, OM, MS
Bama's out-of-conf & cross-div rotations:
9th SEC replaces FCS; 6 SEC-West games
in 2nd half of season; 7 homes & 5 aways.
'22: vs G5, vs P5, vs G5; at UK, vs FS, at TN
'23: vs G5, at P5, vs G5; vs UL, at Ga, vs TN
'24: vs G5, vs P5, vs G5; at GT, vs UF, at TN
'25: vs G5, at P5, vs G5; vs UK, at FS, vs TN
'26: vs G5, vs P5, vs G5; at UL, vs Ga, at TN
'27: vs G5, at P5, vs G5; vs GT, at UF, vs TN
Consistent schedule grids for all conferences would simplify in- and out-of-conf scheduling.
Division 1B (FBS G5) = 60 teams:
(moves underlined)
AAC (12) - Eastern
N: Tem, Mass, Con, Army, Navy, Lib
S: Mrsh, Chrlt, ECU, Appn, CCU, WF
CUSA (12) - Mid South
E: Mem, ArSt, ULL, ULM, LaTc, Tuln
W: Tuls, UNT, TxSt, Rice, UTSA, UTEP
MAC (12) - Northern
E: Buf, Kent, M-OH, OH, Akrn, BGS
W: Ball, Tol, WMU, EMU, CMU, NIU
MWC (12) - Western
S: Haw, NMS, NM, FrSt, SJS, UNLV
N: Nev, UTSt, AFA, CSU, Wyo, IDSt
Sun Belt (12) - Southeast
E: GaSt, GaSo, Troy, USF, FAU, FIU
W: WKy, USM, USA, UAB, Van, MTS
Pitt, WV, VT, VA, MD and NC schools, along with SC and UCF, are regional rivals that belong in the ACC. Miz, Neb, Col, Hou and SMU belong in the Big12. ND and Cincy belong in the B1G. Boise, BYU and SDS belong in the PAC. FSU, Louisville and GT are better fits in the SEC-E than Miz, SC and Vandy. It appears all realigned conferences, including regional G5, would gain net increases in TV ratings and attendance. Perhaps ESPN could also provide G5 conference TV networks.
There are good reasons smart people chose a Top-4 CFP model. The Top-6 CFP model above supports those same good reasons even better. It enables all 5 P5 conf champs and a G5 conf champ to earn a top-6 ranking. And it inherently encourages teams to enhance their resumés by scheduling good out-of-conf teams.
CFP expansion to 6 teams, benefits/incentives for higher seedings, scheduling criteria, and conference realigment will produce schedules with more competitive games that will improve clarity of the true top 6. The regular season will become a better "initial playoff" filled with more appealing games that matter. TV ratings and attendance should improve significantly.
This post was edited on 2/1/21 at 9:34 am
5
Posted on 1/21/21 at 4:51 pm to TidalSurge1
It’s solid to be honest from a fan’s perspective but no way would that SEC agree to equally share TV money. I mean that SEC has 6 programs with national titles post BCS formation + Georgia and Texas A&M who have the resources to win a national title.
I appreciate the regional conferences. I’m hopeful that one day we will see a return to smaller, regional conferences. There were more good teams and interesting games in those days.
I appreciate the regional conferences. I’m hopeful that one day we will see a return to smaller, regional conferences. There were more good teams and interesting games in those days.
This post was edited on 1/21/21 at 4:53 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 5:06 pm to TomRollTideRitter
I was only referring to each conference splitting its own regular season TV contracts revenue equally among its member schools. I think all conferences already do it except for the Big12.
Conf realignment might be easier than it seems, since it would be financially beneficial via better TV ratings and attendance. The commissioners could cooperatively make it happen.
Conf realignment might be easier than it seems, since it would be financially beneficial via better TV ratings and attendance. The commissioners could cooperatively make it happen.
This post was edited on 1/22/21 at 8:06 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 5:35 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
Pulling off the conf realignment might not be as difficult as it seems at a glance. It'd be financially beneficial via better TV ratings and attendance. The commissioners could cooperatively make it happen
I think it’ll be hard to go back to regional conferences until streaming truly overtakes cable. Adding an additional state for your cable network is currently considered more important than attendance or ratings.
However, UConn leaving the American for the Big East may show that trend is changing. UConn paid big bucks and took a smaller TV payout just to play traditional opponents in basketball and lower travel costs to increase attendance.
I think these true misfits like Pitt aren’t going to be able to last in their conferences. There just isn’t much draw for fans if you play random teams and aren’t a contender.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 6:01 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
I think it’ll be hard to go back to regional conferences until streaming truly overtakes cable. Adding an additional state for your cable network is currently considered more important than attendance or ratings.
Streaming is rapidly taking over. Even the cable companies are going to streaming. I've switched to T-Mobile 5G phone, internet and TV streaming. 5G essentially makes cable connection obsolete.
quote:
I think these true misfits like Pitt aren’t going to be able to last in their conferences. There just isn’t much draw for fans if you play random teams and aren’t a contender.
Pitt, WV, VT, VA, MD and NC schools are regional rivals that belong in the ACC, along with SC and UCF. Miz, Neb, Col, SMU & Houston belong in the Big12. ND and Cincy belong in the B1G. Boise, BYU and SDS belong in the PAC. FSU, Louisville and GT are better fits in the SEC-E than Miz, SC and Vandy. It appears all of the conferences will gain net increases in TV ratings and attendance via the realignment I've depicted.
This post was edited on 1/24/21 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 8:57 pm to TidalSurge1
Reduce FBS to 80 teams. Create 8 conferences of 10 teams each. First 3 weeks of the season, only OOC games. The next 9 games is only conference games. Round robin conference schedule. If you still want to have CCGs, just take the two teams at the top of the standings. Winner of each conference and only the winner of each conference goes to the CFP. 8 team playoff with only conference champs.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 9:41 pm to pvilleguru
At least list the 8 10-team FBS conferences and members, tell us what happens to the other 50 former FBS teams and how/why your renovation plan makes CFB better.
This post was edited on 1/25/21 at 11:34 am
Posted on 1/21/21 at 9:56 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:Don't really have an opinion on specific teams.
At least name the 8 conferences and their members
quote:Drop down for FCS, create a new division, drop football, don't really care.
tell us what happens to the 50 former FBS teams
quote:Expanded playoff, not just the same 6 teams from 3 conferences every year. Pretty much guarantees at least one team in the playoff from each region of the country.
how/why your renovation plan makes CFB better.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 10:01 pm to pvilleguru
Your plan is harmful to 50 FBS programs and also makes it fairly likely some of the best FBS teams will be excluded from the CFP. Tbh, I don't see any benefits, only negative consequences, resulting from your crappy plan. It appears you're falling for the stupid BS narratives out there.
This post was edited on 1/25/21 at 11:27 am
Posted on 1/21/21 at 10:02 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
Your system makes it fairly likely some of the best teams are excluded from the playoff
Ok? Win your conference.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 10:06 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
P5 must schedule 9 in-conf, 1 other P5, 0 FCS.
G5 must schedule 8 in-conf, 3 to 4 P5s, 0 FCS.
How would a G5 ever find 3-4 P5 games if you have the P5 teams schedules gobbled up by conference games and 1 addition OOC P5 game?
Posted on 1/21/21 at 10:12 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
Your plan is harmful to 50 FBS programs
50 FBS teams that shouldn't be in it in the first place.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 10:17 pm to droliver
quote:
How would a G5 ever find 3-4 P5 games if you have the P5 teams schedules gobbled up by conference games and 1 addition OOC P5 game?
Since P5s can & will schedule a couple of G5s, any G5s aspiring to compete in the CFP should be able to schedule 3-4 P5s. A good (top 25) G5 like Memphis, Tulsa or CCU can find 3 good P5's wanting a quality home game opponent. Beating a ranked G5 who wins most of it's games would boost the P5's resumé.
This post was edited on 1/26/21 at 9:40 pm
Posted on 1/24/21 at 12:54 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
Teams with no expectations of reaching the CFP don't have to schedule out-of-conf P5s.
So Tennessee and Auburn?
Posted on 1/24/21 at 1:16 pm to TideSaint
and LSUPosted on 1/24/21 at 8:18 pm to TidalSurge1
If it expands it will be 8 teams.
P5 conf champs auto bid
G5 auto bid
2 at large
Divisions will go away so that best 2 play in CCG.
First round will be home games for high seeds. Logistics for making them bowl games will be tough.
Then final four happens like it does now.
There will never be a true 16 team tournament with realigned conferences. The conferences would never allow it.
P5 conf champs auto bid
G5 auto bid
2 at large
Divisions will go away so that best 2 play in CCG.
First round will be home games for high seeds. Logistics for making them bowl games will be tough.
Then final four happens like it does now.
There will never be a true 16 team tournament with realigned conferences. The conferences would never allow it.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 8:40 pm to XenScott
quote:
If it expands it will be 8 teams.
P5 conf champs auto bid
G5 auto bid
2 at large
Tbh, I really doubt any of that will ever happen.
The 6-team model w/o auto-bids is much better than 8 teams with 6 auto-bids. Auto-bids for P5 conf-champs discourages scheduling good out-of-conf teams. The 6-team model with round-1 byes for #1 & #2 and home field for #3 & #4 encourages it, in order to achieve higher seeding. Also, those #8 at #1 and #7 at #2 games would probably be over by halftime. Worst of all, 6 of 8 as auto-ins will result in multi-loss conf champs getting in over much better 1-loss non-champs.
quote:
Divisions will go away so that best 2 play in CCG.
Then the 14-team conferences would need conference-only schedules.
There are good reasons smart people chose the 4-team model. The 6-team model w/o auto-bids that I depicted above supports those reasons and provides a viable means for a G5 to get in.
This post was edited on 1/27/21 at 7:31 pm
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:37 pm to TidalSurge1
frick committee involvement. Period. Winn your conference, you play... No matter your record. Take that shitty committee away.
Posted on 1/24/21 at 10:55 pm to bogeypro
quote:
Nah.
This post was edited on 1/25/21 at 11:53 am
Page 1 of 1
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News