OT: Group of 5 officials considering playoff for non-Power 5 teams
To take it one step further, it would be cool if the winner of the CFP played the winner of the G5 playoff as the opening game of the following season. Similar to the UEFA Super Cup where the winner of the Champions League plays the winner of the Europa League (yes, I made a soccer analogy)
December 29th, 2016 at 3:33 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 3:36 PM ^
People would watch...imagine a Houston v WMU matchup? Not every year would have a great matchup, but I would watch that game. Why should they be ok with never having a chance to win a title?
Plus there would be plenty of cash for those schools as they already have interested TV partners.
December 29th, 2016 at 3:59 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 6:30 PM ^
That's why all the P5 teams schedule G5 games. The proposed matchup would be legit enough that it wouldn't hurt SoS. Kinda like App St coming off their championship.
December 29th, 2016 at 3:33 PM ^
Great idea.
December 29th, 2016 at 3:34 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:38 PM ^
so that would mean WMU in the CFP over UM this year? I can get expansion, but why not just keep it the best teams, not special access for those that aren't as good because they don't play in good conferences?
December 29th, 2016 at 4:02 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 6:08 PM ^
Eh that's not the reason most times. I mean yeah, Western's is pretty awful this year, but so was teams like Baylor. Plenty years, a team would make the bcs final without playing a single top 25 opponent. Their inherent disadvantage is simply not being part of the cartel
December 29th, 2016 at 6:54 PM ^
I don't think it has to do with the cartel - Baylor was left out of the CFP for having that weak schedule, and I'd wager it was much tougher than WMU (keep in mind that even with a bad OOC schedule, playing in the Big 12 is much harder than the MAC).
No offense to WMU, but G5 schools don't need an auto-bearth. Teams like Boise and TCU (pre-Big 12) entered bow season in the top 4, and would have been included.
December 29th, 2016 at 8:11 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 8:29 PM ^
its actually berth in this context, but thanks for correcting incorrectly. I admit my initial error of including the "a" while multi tasking.
December 29th, 2016 at 4:04 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 4:26 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 4:17 PM ^
Even with our pain so fresh, I still don't like the idea of playoff exapansion. College football's win every game importance is special and unique to all sport.
I could be swayed if quarterfinal games were played on campus, because damn that would be so fun and it makes the seeding (winning) important.
December 29th, 2016 at 6:06 PM ^
The way this has gone, the cartel always ensures the outsiders have no chance. I suspect with 8 team playoff you'd just see unbeaten teams like Western outside the top 8...wait they already are!
What i mean is if it went to 32 teams Western would not be allowed higher than #33
December 29th, 2016 at 7:21 PM ^
Don't be ridiculous. TCU and Boise getting matched up the year they both went undefeated was just the way it worked!
December 29th, 2016 at 3:35 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:36 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:38 PM ^
This is an awful thing. They might as well just create another league. No one (except the teams involved) would ever recognize this other playoff title.
December 29th, 2016 at 3:45 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 6:16 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:40 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:41 PM ^
It seems to me that the old Division 1-A is just too bloated for football. Would it be considered regression if the "Power 5" and "Group of 5" schools had a split of this degree?
December 29th, 2016 at 3:44 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:46 PM ^
Do it. Also, I think when they expand the playoffs, they should shorten the season to 11games.
December 29th, 2016 at 6:11 PM ^
Nah get rid of "CCG", already inviting the wrong teams entirely (#3 and 4 in BIG) and encouraging terribly imbalanced schedules
December 29th, 2016 at 3:47 PM ^
He was the last coach from a Group of 5 team to win a national championship - BYU in 1984 (although they didn't call it the Group of 5 back then, of course).
When Edwards' BYU team beat a bad 6-5 Michigan team to win the NC, the feeling back then was that we can never let this happen again - we can never let a non-Power 5 team win a national title. They began stacking the deck against the BYUs of the world after that, and the deck remains stacked.
December 29th, 2016 at 3:51 PM ^
That would be a bloodbath year in and year out. Imagine Alabama playing Western Michigan every opener...
I do not feel sympathy for the G5 teams. Most don't schedule top P5 teams and when they do they get crushed more often than not. If they want to play in a playoff, all of the G5 teams should drop down to FCS as the top FCS teams are just as good as anyone in the Group of 5.
December 29th, 2016 at 4:34 PM ^
I think this works both ways for a lot of programs. I'm guessing not a ton of P5 schools are calling the Boise St AD to try and schedule games.
When you say they get crushed do you mean like Houston beating Oklahoma and Louisville? or Boise St beating Washington St? Georgia St losing 23-17 to Wisconsin? Temple losing 34-27 to Penn St? Troy losing in OT 30-24 to Clemson?
December 29th, 2016 at 3:51 PM ^
with a 64 team playoff. National champ would play 15 games.
December 29th, 2016 at 3:52 PM ^
As soon as they intrpoduced the CFP, I have been waiting for bowls to team up into groups of 4 and have several llittle tournaments. I haven't watched all the bowl games this year, but the ones I have watched could have been played at a high school field and still had empty seats. So the idea of having one more game for the fans to not go to sounds like a great idea. /s
December 29th, 2016 at 3:52 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 3:55 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 4:01 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 3:59 PM ^
I don't see any reason why a non-Power 5 team can't make the CFP. Houston would have made it this year if Tom Herman had stayed focused enough to win the games he should have won instead of dreaming about the Texas job. Winning the CFP is another matter of course, but a Group of 5 team being in the conversation is certainly conceivable.
December 29th, 2016 at 4:05 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 4:18 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 4:37 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 5:30 PM ^
I almost feel like the CFP got battle fatigue or something. How a 4-loss team is ranked in the top 15 of anything is mind boggling. They have one ranked win. Once again, losing to Alabama is considered like a win to the CFP committee.
December 29th, 2016 at 6:48 PM ^
Computer Polls also have Auburn ranked ahead of WMU and by bigger margin's than the CFB Playoff committe, which only has them 1 spot ahead.
Is WMU's 0-0 record against top 40 teams that much better than Auburn's 2-3 record against top 40 teams?
If Auburn and WMU played on a neutral field and you had to bet your entire 401K, who would you pick?
December 29th, 2016 at 4:01 PM ^
December 29th, 2016 at 4:08 PM ^
So...I've got...
- (8) 10-team conferences.
- 8-team playoff.
- Automatically qualify for playoff IF you win your conference AND finish the regular season ranked in the top 12 by the selection committee that already exists.
- If a champion is ranked 13 or below, that conferences automatic bid becomes an at-large bid. This way a #4 Stanford who only lost to #2 USC in OT would make the playoff over conference champion #17 Pitt. So it doesn't really matter if you're in a weak conference.
- Bowls are decided AFTER the quarterfinal round of the playoff - quarterfinal losers, plus the other bowl eligible teams (winning records or above) go to regular bowls.
- Teams are seeded #1 - #8 by committee based on final rankings.
- Quarterfinals are played at home site of higher seed (making the end of the season valuable for teams who may have their conference locked up...you want to be #4 rather than #5). You can't sit guys at the end of the year and take a loss because you may lose the home field advantage for the quaterfinals.
- No conference championship games! Army/Navy moved up one week to what is currently Championship Weekend. Quarterfinals are played first week of Decemeber what is currently Army/Navy weekend. Bowl selection show is the Sunday after the quarterfinals.
- Semifinals and finals are played at neutral bowls like they are now.
- Sucks I had to split Kansas/KSU and Ole Miss/Miss St. All 3 service academies are in.
Here are my conferences...
Northeast |
East |
Southeast |
South |
North |
Midwest |
Plains-Rockies |
West |
Army |
Cincinnati |
Air Force |
|||||
Fresno St. |
|||||||
Houston |
|||||||
Navy |
Boise St. |
||||||
Penn St. |
BYU |
SDSU |
|||||
South Carolina |
SMU |
Memphis |
|||||
Rutgers |
Tennessee |
Colorado St. |
|||||
Syracuse |
Virginia |
Notre Dame |
Kansas St. |
||||
UConn |
Virginia Tech |
UCF |
Texas A&M |
Purdue |
Washington |
||
Wake Forest |
USF |
Wisconsin |
Vanderbilt |
Washington St. |
December 29th, 2016 at 4:17 PM ^
My problem with radical conference realignment is it's football-specific nature and that just doesn't feel right.
December 29th, 2016 at 4:23 PM ^
This year could've looked something like this
#8 Penn St. (Northeast champ) @ #1 Alabama (Southeast champ)
#7 Colorado (Plains-Rockies champ) @ #2 OSU (North champ)
#6 Oklahoma (Midwest champ) (@ #3 Clemson (East champ)
#5 Michigan (at-large) @ #4 Washington (West champ)
Theoretically. OSU doesn't have the loss to PSU, Clemson doesn't have the loss to Pitt, Michigan doesn't have a loss to Iowa. The South division is out, but LSU, Texas A&M and/or Houston likely has a better record and ends up in the top 12...thus knocking Michigan out for not winning the North division.
HOWEVER, PSU's strength of schedule would be terrible and they loss to Pitt who's in their division. It's more likely that PSU would be out...the south division winner would be in and Michigan would still be in as an at-large.
#8 Colorado (Plains-Rockies champ) @ #1 Alabama (Southeast champ)
#7 LSU/TAMU/Houston (South champ) @ #2 OSU (North champ)
#6 Oklahoma (Midwest champ) (@ #3 Clemson (East champ)
#5 Michigan (at-large) @ #4 Washington (West champ)
Those would be AWESOME quarterfinal matchups for schools to host before teams left for the warm weather states and the big bowls as they do now.
December 29th, 2016 at 4:24 PM ^
Shit Yo(st). I like this. Except for that weak-ass Northeast that Penn St. would probably win all the time. But yeah, I like the rules.
December 29th, 2016 at 4:31 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 29th, 2016 at 6:07 PM ^
This is more of an alternate reality than a realistic proposal. The Power 5 conferences (and their most influential schools) basically run college athletics, and they're not going to dissolve and re-align under a single banner just for the sake of streamlining the manner in which a college football national champion is selected.
December 29th, 2016 at 6:27 PM ^
I never said it was happening.
Just what I'd like to see happen.