Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[TallyBull]

6 minutes ago, Sellular1 said:

what if that G5 team isn't even ranked in the top 25?  Do they still "deserve" it?

What if a "Money 5" champion isn't ranked in the top 25, or ranked below a G5 champion? Do they?

There is and never will be a perfect system. Keeping that in mind, I prefer a system based on slots because it is more objective than one based on comparisons by coaches/media who demonstrate week in and week out that they bring their own prejudices to the table.

Edited October 12, 2016 by TallyBull

[Triple B]

46 minutes ago, Apis Bull said:

I agree, one spot for each of the P5 champions, one spot for the highest ranked G5 team, and two at-large spots.

 

5 minutes ago, Sellular1 said:

what if that G5 team isn't even ranked in the top 25?  Do they still "deserve" it?

I'd say no ................. although, you'd be adding a little bit of the flavor of the Big Dance to CFB. Most likely, though, it would more like a bye for the top ranked team going in.

[Triple B]

2 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

What if a "Money 5" champion isn't ranked in the top 25, or ranked below a G5 champion? Do they?

There is and never will be a perfect system. Keeping that in mind, I prefer a system based on slots because it is more objective than one based on comparisons by coaches/media who demonstrate week in and week out that they bring their own prejudices to the table.

The rankings should still be by the Committee like it's doing now ....

[Bullrush33]

I appreciate Aresco being proactive and an advocate for his conference. I know the easy path is a invitation to the big 12 and probably more fans from Big 12 teams coming to our games.  However I like the teams in our conference.

[TheUpperHand]

18 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

What if a "Money 5" champion isn't ranked in the top 25, or ranked below a G5 champion?

HAHAHAHA!

[TallyBull]

4 minutes ago, Triple B said:

The rankings should still be by the Committee like it's doing now ....

Understood. I just don't like rankings of any kind, even by committee, even if based in part upon numbers. Instead, I prefer a system where if you win your conference, you get a crack at the whole thing, and rankings/SOS apply to sort out the at-large bids.

While I recognize this gives teams who might not stack up to other conference champions a coveted slot - if it's true they don't stack up, it effectively ends up being a bye week for the stronger team.

Interestingly, such a system might also effectively punish conglomerations of strong teams who originally conglomerated for more TV money (e.g. the SEC). A team like USF would have an easier pathway to the playoffs than, say, Vanderbilt.

My response? - you made your bed o' money - now lie in it. But this is also why CFB won't make this change, unless Congress forces them to.

[Dogma]

20 minutes ago, Sellular1 said:

what if that G5 team isn't even ranked in the top 25?  Do they still "deserve" it?

 

12 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

I'd say no ................. although, you'd be adding a little bit of the flavor of the Big Dance to CFB. Most likely, though, it would more like a bye for the top ranked team going in.

 

However problem will then shift to the whole ranking system method. G5 teams start off the season already heavy biased ranking-wise and get hurt a great deal more by any loss.

 

[Apis Bull]

42 minutes ago, Sellular1 said:

what if that G5 team isn't even ranked in the top 25?  Do they still "deserve" it?

I would say no, then it would revert to another at-large slot

[BurghBulltoo]

34 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

I'd say no ................. although, you'd be adding a little bit of the flavor of the Big Dance to CFB. Most likely, though, it would more like a bye for the top ranked team going in.

I'd say yes, the Big Dance flavor to the CFB would add excitement. can't hurt to have a Boise State or a Northern Illinois added to the mix.

[BurghBulltoo]

43 minutes ago, Triple B said: