with larger conferences

[smazza]

teams need to play more conference games or make conferences larger like 18  or 20  team and you only play your division teams to maintain a fair and balanced scheduling system

the aac should be playing at least one more conference game

the big 10 situation is ridiculous

[NewEnglandBull]

2 hours ago, Ned A Starr said:

22 team conference

2 - 11 team divisions

10 games against division teams and 2 OOC games vs FBS teams.

Division winners play in Conference Championship Game.

 

Merge with MWC then...

[79 Bull]

2 hours ago, Ned A Starr said:

22 team conference

2 - 11 team divisions

10 games against division teams and 2 OOC games vs FBS teams.

Division winners play in Conference Championship Game.

 

Not sure what the point of being a conference is if you're never going to play the other division.  I vote for 16 teams, 2 8-team divisions.

9 conf games - 7 games against division, 2 games against other division rotating every 4 years.

3 OOC games - 1 home against payday opponent (minor FBS, major FCS), plus 2 games vs. major FBS teams (1 home, 1 away).

CCG.

6 16-team conferences = 96 FBS teams.  No P5, G5,etc.  8 team playoff with 6 conference champions and 2 highest ranked non champions.  Conferences responsible to negotiate own TV conracts and bowl tie ins beyond the 4 CFP games.

Done.

Go Bulls!

 

Edited November 28, 2016 by 79 Bull

[WoolyBully]

18 minutes ago, 79 Bull said:

6 16-team conferences = 96 FBS teams.  No P5, G5,etc.  8 team playoff with 6 conference champions and 2 highest ranked non champions.  Conferences responsible to negotiate own TV conracts and bowl tie ins beyond the 4 CFP games.

...remind me to put you in for an award. 

[beastiebull]

2 hours ago, 79 Bull said:

Not sure what the point of being a conference is if you're never going to play the other division.  I vote for 16 teams, 2 8-team divisions.

9 conf games - 7 games against division, 2 games against other division rotating every 4 years.

3 OOC games - 1 home against payday opponent (minor FBS, major FCS), plus 2 games vs. major FBS teams (1 home, 1 away).

CCG.

6 16-team conferences = 96 FBS teams.  No P5, G5,etc.  8 team playoff with 6 conference champions and 2 highest ranked non champions.  Conferences responsible to negotiate own TV conracts and bowl tie ins beyond the 4 CFP games.

Done.

Go Bulls!

 

The blue bloods will never allow their dough to be split with the unwashed masses.

[Bear]

OR!!! We can expand the CFP to 8 teams

Standard top 4 (#1 and #2 get a bye week)

With two spots guaranteed to the G5 (best conference champs); and 2 Wild card slots (can also go to a G5 team that sits in the CFP top 10)

 

[Apis Bull]

My 8-team playoff would look like this:

5 spots for P5 champions

1 spot for highest ranked G5 champion

2 wild card spots based on ranking

This year, we might have something like:

8 Navy at 1 Alabama

7 Oklahoma at 2 Ohio State

6 Penn State at 3 Clemson

5 Michigan at 4 Washington

I would also have it where after the first round, the highest remaining seed plays the lowest remaining seed, and so on.

[WoolyBully]

I was watching a game last week, can't remember which one (Houston? Can't remember), but one of the commentators made a statement to the effect of "I'll go out on a limb here and say that there will never be a G5 school in the playoffs. Strength of schedule and not making it into the top ten makes it impossible."  I don't know that I've heard anyone - media wise - emphatically make that claim. And then there's this...

Quote

The first reason is that the G5 is at a massive disadvantage when it comes to scheduling power programs. The CFP Committee is actively encouraging G5 teams to play more P5 teams while simultaneously telling the P5 to play less G5 teams. That translates into the G5 having less options for playing the P5. Even when a G5 team is able to schedule a series with a P5 program it is rarely on equal terms. So G5 athletic directors are at the mercy of the P5 and have a limited ability to find a quality P5 matchup.

The second reason is that when we say “play tougher teams” there is no specific benchmark as to what that means. In 2016 Western Michigan played two P5 programs and was still given an unfavorable ranking. In 2015 Houston not only played two P5 programs, but played in the most respected/strongest G5 conference. That year Houston’s conference (AAC) did incredibly well with Temple, Memphis, and Navy all earning rankings in the AP poll. But Houston was still given a lackluster CFP ranking despite having one of the better schedules a G5 school could be expected to have. If Houston couldn’t get a favorable ranking, then it’s hard to expect any G5 school would under normal circumstances. Meanwhile Marshall’s case is even more extreme as it is highly unusual for an 10-0 team to not be ranked.

https://sportspolitico.com/2016/11/21/the-college-football-playoff-committee-has-made-things-worse-for-the-g5/

[Bear]

44 minutes ago, Apis Bull said:

My 8-team playoff would look like this:

5 spots for P5 champions

1 spot for highest ranked G5 champion

2 wild card spots based on ranking

This year, we might have something like:

8 Navy at 1 Alabama

7 Oklahoma at 2 Ohio State

6 Penn State at 3 Clemson

5 Michigan at 4 Washington

I would also have it where after the first round, the highest remaining seed plays the lowest remaining seed, and so on.

I like that, except, I think Team 1 and 2... Should get a BYE week... and not have to take a risk with a #8 or #7 team

[Bear]

23 minutes ago, WoolyBully said:

I was watching a game last week, can't remember which one (Houston? Can't remember), but one of the commentators made a statement to the effect of "I'll go out on a limb here and say that there will never be a G5 school in the playoffs. Strength of schedule and not making it into the top ten makes it impossible."  I don't know that I've heard anyone - media wise - emphatically make that claim. And then there's this...

https://sportspolitico.com/2016/11/21/the-college-football-playoff-committee-has-made-things-worse-for-the-g5/

 

And this is a problem that will makes FBS intrinsically unfair...

 

strength of schedule is determined by money... not talent

 

e.g. Miami being ranked #10 with cupcake wins (and then loses 4 straight)