Started By
Message
re: 16 Team Playoff, with no CCG
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:29 am to bamabonners
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:29 am to bamabonners
quote:
LESS TEAMS IN PLAYOFF.
But you were fine with the old system: 4 spots for 5 conferences AND allowing any conference have multiple spots?
0
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:33 am to Jake81
quote:
(i) reward the top 4 from reg season with spot in the quarters and a home game to start
HOW do you determine Top 4?
& is that 1 team/conference?
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:35 am to Jake81
12 is already 4 too many imo, but since we won't ever go to 8 I say it should work like this..
Either eliminate CCG's or disqualify ND. Since the latter will never happen, there ya go.
No first round byes, all 12 start playing each other after the regular season is done, the teams that would normally get the bye hosts a first round game instead, committee can decide who hosts the others.
I'd really like all playoff games played in college stadiums except for the Championship which should be neutral field. That said it may be difficult to determine who gets to host after the first round games are done
Either eliminate CCG's or disqualify ND. Since the latter will never happen, there ya go.
No first round byes, all 12 start playing each other after the regular season is done, the teams that would normally get the bye hosts a first round game instead, committee can decide who hosts the others.
I'd really like all playoff games played in college stadiums except for the Championship which should be neutral field. That said it may be difficult to determine who gets to host after the first round games are done
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:35 am to southernboisb
no 1 team per conference rule, Ohio State and Indiana both get top 4 spots
I would bring back the computer average as at least a part of the system possibly combined with committee ranking
I would bring back the computer average as at least a part of the system possibly combined with committee ranking
This post was edited on 11/30/25 at 11:42 am
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:37 am to 49 to nada
quote:
No first round byes, all 12 start playing each other after the regular season is done
12 teams play in first round (check)
6 first round winners play in second round (check)
3 second round winners play (wait WTF.....)
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:39 am to Jake81
Conference Champion could just be highest finishing playoff team. And if you are both good enough you will meet up somewhere along the 4 game road.
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:40 am to Jake81
quote:Good catch, I didn't think that one through..
12 teams play in first round (check)
6 first round winners play in second round (check)
3 second round winners play (wait WTF.....)
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:43 am to Jake81
quote:
I would bring back the computer ranking average as at least a part of the ranking system
The committee has minimal differences with the BCS
I know Sankey wants 16 so that teams like Mizzou or Vandy have a shot at the playoffs most years, but 12 is the perfect number if they are going to insist on giving auto bids to G5 / ACC
Realistically no one outside of the top 10 is going to be competitive for more than a game in a expanded playoff system. Most years there will only be 5 or 6 teams at most who are good enough to go all the way
Posted on 11/30/25 at 11:45 am to Jake81
I like your approach conceptually (more playoff games on campus and no unnecessary CCG's), but too many byes in your scenario. Let the top 4 have a bye (nobody wants to watch #1 play #16), but no one else.
Posted on 11/30/25 at 1:18 pm to giveemhell
quote:
I like your approach conceptually (more playoff games on campus and no unnecessary CCG's), but too many byes in your scenario. Let the top 4 have a bye (nobody wants to watch #1 play #16), but no one else
This would limit to 12 teams, and only 4 rounds total
I think we can go 5 and let a few more teams in (texas this year..) with no CCG
Posted on 11/30/25 at 1:24 pm to 49 to nada
Hince why things need to be in multiples of 4 (unless you use byes).
& yes, I see 12 is a multiple requiring byes.
& yes, I see 12 is a multiple requiring byes.
Posted on 11/30/25 at 2:55 pm to GeauxBurrow312
quote:
Realistically no one outside of the top 10 is going to be competitive for more than a game in a expanded playoff system.
Still better than a meaningless bowl game
Even if they are not going to win it all-system allows many teams to play meanfull games and 12 teams to host a playoff game, there may be a few supring runs every now and then but most teams will play a game or 2
and the top 4 only need 3 wins to win it all, and no CCG game in the way either
Posted on 11/30/25 at 3:00 pm to bigDgator
24 teams really makes the regular season irrelivant
Posted on 12/3/25 at 10:22 pm to Mosnowman
The main point to me is getting the top 6 or 7 SEC teams in, and 16 teams will tend to do that. Vandy should be in this year.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 11:15 pm to Jake81
Another try.
16 team playoff
Still have conf championships
Winner of Acc, big10, big 12, SEC get first rd bye
5 plays 16. Winner plays winner 10/11
6 plays 15. Winner plays winner 9/12
7 plays 14. Winner plays winner 8/13
8 plays 13
9 plays 12
10 plays 11
2nd rd
Top 4 winners are ranked after conf. Championship weekend.
No. 1 gets bye
Conf 2 plays winner of 8/13
Conf 3 plays winner 9/12
Conf 4 plays winner 10/11. These would be New Year’s Day
Semis 10 days later
Overall 1 plays winner of conf 4 and 10/11
conf 2 and 8/13 play winner of conf 3 and 9/12
Natty
Now, if you can understand then you realize this is the best solution
16 team playoff
Still have conf championships
Winner of Acc, big10, big 12, SEC get first rd bye
5 plays 16. Winner plays winner 10/11
6 plays 15. Winner plays winner 9/12
7 plays 14. Winner plays winner 8/13
8 plays 13
9 plays 12
10 plays 11
2nd rd
Top 4 winners are ranked after conf. Championship weekend.
No. 1 gets bye
Conf 2 plays winner of 8/13
Conf 3 plays winner 9/12
Conf 4 plays winner 10/11. These would be New Year’s Day
Semis 10 days later
Overall 1 plays winner of conf 4 and 10/11
conf 2 and 8/13 play winner of conf 3 and 9/12
Natty
Now, if you can understand then you realize this is the best solution
Posted on 12/3/25 at 11:18 pm to Jake81
I love arguing over what teams should be 12-16 when there has never and will never be 12-16 teams worthy or deserving of a national title in any given season
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News