Started By
Message
It appears the CFPC will go to a straight-seeding format for the playoffs
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:38 am
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:38 am
There's strong support to "move to a straight seeding model this fall" while continuing to include the five highest-ranked conference champions, and give them an automatic bid to the playoff.
This means that instead of giving the highest-ranked conference champions first-round byes, they would simply get them into the playoff, but reward the top-ranked teams with automatic byes.
Last year was a mess. This is a step toward getting it right.
This means that instead of giving the highest-ranked conference champions first-round byes, they would simply get them into the playoff, but reward the top-ranked teams with automatic byes.
Last year was a mess. This is a step toward getting it right.
5
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:41 am to JetDawg
quote:
This is a step toward getting it right.
what may be "right" for now will be undone when those "substative talks" about the format in 2026+ take place and they decide that even more money is there for the taking and it expands yet again.
What would be "right" is having no more than 6 teams. Anything beyond that is stupid.
But I do agree that the info in the OP is at least moderately less dumb than what happened last year.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:41 am to JetDawg
“Heather.”
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:42 am to JetDawg
Who could have ever seen the debacle that was last year coming?
Our sport is run by idiots.
Our sport is run by idiots.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:42 am to JetDawg
Why do the conference champions have to be included?
Rank the teams 1-12 and those are your seeds. Who cares about a conference championship for a bad conference?
Rank the teams 1-12 and those are your seeds. Who cares about a conference championship for a bad conference?
Posted on 4/3/25 at 11:43 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
But I do agree that the info in the OP is at least moderately less dumb than what happened last year.
Better than just being dumb. But, that's the best you'll ever attain, WG.
Sad.
So sad.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 12:31 pm to JetDawg
Stupid. There should be a reward for winning a conference not a punishment.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 12:38 pm to Stidham8
I think it's high time that the bigger schools tell these dweebs to fend for themselves and the SEC/BIG form their own division.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 12:50 pm to WG_Dawg
What would be "right" is having no more than 6 teams. Anything beyond that is stupid.
Still havent seen a season where I saw even 8 legitimate title contenders.
Still havent seen a season where I saw even 8 legitimate title contenders.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:02 pm to bamabaseballsec
Yes, 12 is too many. 6 or 8 is about right.
Go with 8 and have all games at neutral sites. Conf champs get auto bids. And don't cap the number of at-large participants from a single conference.
Go with 8 and have all games at neutral sites. Conf champs get auto bids. And don't cap the number of at-large participants from a single conference.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News