Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sactowndog

Play-off Committee Jan Meeting

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Spaztecs said:

I would prefer an 8 team Tourney. The Five Conference Winners. The best G5. Two best at large. Sixteen is to many because you would have to start right after the CCG.

This Years Tourney based on final CFP rankings would have been:

1 alabama v 8. Utah

2 Michigan v 7 Baylor

3 Georgia v 6. tOSU

4 Cinci v 5 Notre Dame

I'm pretty sure they're going to expand the playoffs next season.  Having one conference splitting the national championship game money again is bad for college football.  With expansion I think the highest ranked G5 team will get an automatic playoff berth which will be good for us.  That also means a G5 won't have to be undefeated to get a shot in it. 

To be fair Cincinnati should have been the lowest seed in an expansion playoff.  Having to play Alabama was a farce.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Well the conference managers are going to meet again during the Championship game to decide on a model to expand the play-off.  We shall see if we get agreement.  The plan on the table is top 6 conferences get an auto bid and 6 at large teams for a 12 team play-off.  

I suspect the PAC-12 to push to maintain preferred status with P5 auto-bids and throwing a bone to the top ranked G5 team.  Basically the PAC-12 sucks and would not have been a top 6 conference this year.   Instead of earning it on the field expect them to politically flex their muscle.   

I think this is good for the MWC and all G5 schools. Even if BSU gets poached the conference should be in good shape to get in from time to time.

 

The Masters 5k road race All American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, robe said:

I think this is good for the MWC and all G5 schools. Even if BSU gets poached the conference should be in good shape to get in from time to time.

 

It would be.  All the G5 commissioners want to remove 2nd class status and want 6 + 6 versus 5 + 1 + 6.  We shall see if they prevail.  They have the SEC on their side now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

It would be.  All the G5 commissioners want to remove 2nd class status and want 6 + 6 versus 5 + 1 + 6.  We shall see if they prevail.  They have the SEC on their side now. 

SEC is in league of its own

B10 is 2nd but is still overrated

ACC hasn’t had much dept outside of Clemson and before that FSU

B12 not sure about them once OU leaves

PAC hasn’t been good for years. MWC was a better conference this year. 

MWC competes with all of these conference except for the SEC and the top of the B10 and Clemson. Not better but competitive. 
 

AAC/ Sunbelt I think these 2 conference are going to compete. 
 

Conf USA who knows, Liberty pays P5 money to its head coach

 

The Masters 5k road race All American.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, aztech said:

I'm pretty sure they're going to expand the playoffs next season.  Having one conference splitting the national championship game money again is bad for college football.  With expansion I think the highest ranked G5 team will get an automatic playoff berth which will be good for us.  That also means a G5 won't have to be undefeated to get a shot in it. 

To be fair Cincinnati should have been the lowest seed in an expansion playoff.  Having to play Alabama was a farce.    

 

The current football playoff contract runs until 2025, I think that will be the year that the expansion will happen as it will give them time to give ESPN the contract again, then they can figure out which bowls are going to be part of the playoff system, then some of the other bowls contracts come up around the same time so will give them that. Then we also know for sure Texas and Oklahoma will be in SEC for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/2/2022 at 12:20 PM, sactowndog said:

Well the conference managers are going to meet again during the Championship game to decide on a model to expand the play-off.  We shall see if we get agreement.  The plan on the table is top 6 conferences get an auto bid and 6 at large teams for a 12 team play-off.  

I suspect the PAC-12 to push to maintain preferred status with P5 auto-bids and throwing a bone to the top ranked G5 team.  Basically the PAC-12 sucks and would not have been a top 6 conference this year.   Instead of earning it on the field expect them to politically flex their muscle.   

The PAC-12 has already said that they are fine with either the "6 best conference champions" or the "5 P5 champions+best G5 champion" model. Oddly I think it is the B1G is most adamantly in favor of the "5 P5 champions+best G5 champion" approach. Also, supposedly Mike Aresco was threatening to veto any proposal that didn't guarantee a bid for the AAC, because they are "P6" in his world. I really hope that he's just doing a bizarre marketing stunt for his conference and he doesn't actually believe his own BS. I'm going to be beyond furious if we don't get playoff expansion because of that clown.

Now I will wait for Woosh to come in and tell me that the AAC deserves an automatic playoff bid and that Aresco's position is completely reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, StanfordAggie said:

The PAC-12 has already said that they are fine with either the "6 best conference champions" or the "5 P5 champions+best G5 champion" model. Oddly I think it is the B1G is most adamantly in favor of the "5 P5 champions+best G5 champion" approach. Also, supposedly Mike Aresco was threatening to veto any proposal that didn't guarantee a bid for the AAC, because they are "P6" in his world. I really hope that he's just doing a bizarre marketing stunt for his conference and he doesn't actually believe his own BS. I'm going to be beyond furious if we don't get playoff expansion because of that clown.

Now I will wait for Woosh to come in and tell me that the AAC deserves an automatic playoff bid and that Aresco's position is completely reasonable.

Yeah though I don’t believe what the PAC is putting out for public PR consumption and what they are doing behind closed doors. They would benefit the most by AQ status.  I always look at who has the most to gain not by what their PR firms say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StanfordAggie said:

The PAC-12 has already said that they are fine with either the "6 best conference champions" or the "5 P5 champions+best G5 champion" model. Oddly I think it is the B1G is most adamantly in favor of the "5 P5 champions+best G5 champion" approach. Also, supposedly Mike Aresco was threatening to veto any proposal that didn't guarantee a bid for the AAC, because they are "P6" in his world. I really hope that he's just doing a bizarre marketing stunt for his conference and he doesn't actually believe his own BS. I'm going to be beyond furious if we don't get playoff expansion because of that clown.

Now I will wait for Woosh to come in and tell me that the AAC deserves an automatic playoff bid and that Aresco's position is completely reasonable.

Remember stuff like that doesn't matter to sactowndog, everything that is wrong with college football today is pac-12's fault and will always be their fault no matter what. I thought we had already established that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, wolfpack1 said:

The current football playoff contract runs until 2025, I think that will be the year that the expansion will happen as it will give them time to give ESPN the contract again, then they can figure out which bowls are going to be part of the playoff system, then some of the other bowls contracts come up around the same time so will give them that. Then we also know for sure Texas and Oklahoma will be in SEC for sure. 

Depending on how many teams they expand with, that 2025 contract shouldn't affect the playoffs.  They could televise a minimum of 4 games by themselves, back-back on Friday and Saturday during the Winter break.  So it's in their best interest to see expansion.

    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aztech said:

Depending on how many teams they expand with, that 2025 contract shouldn't affect the playoffs.  They could televise a minimum of 4 games by themselves, back-back on Friday and Saturday during the Winter break.  So it's in their best interest to see expansion.

    

 

But that contract is for the playoffs and any expansion would affect it because again it comes down to money. Schools aren't going to expand the playoffs without increasing the TV money which is what this is all over. But they have even said there are a lot of small things that will take a while to figure out as well and they know potential lawsuits would be coming in as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wolfpack1 said:

But that contract is for the playoffs and any expansion would affect it because again it comes down to money. Schools aren't going to expand the playoffs without increasing the TV money which is what this is all over. But they have even said there are a lot of small things that will take a while to figure out as well and they know potential lawsuits would be coming in as well.

Are you saying ESPN would bitch about getting to televise the additional playoff games?  I'd say it's more about the other networks fighting ESPN for a piece of the action.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aztech said:

Are you saying ESPN would bitch about getting to televise the additional playoff games?  I'd say it's more about the other networks fighting ESPN for a piece of the action.    

No ESPN will get the contract we know that but I think they would want to have this deal and everything ironed out first before doing a new contract that is going to be billions of dollars. But just saying we probably wouldn't see any expansion of the playoff happen until the 24-25 season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, sactowndog said:

It would be.  All the G5 commissioners want to remove 2nd class status and want 6 + 6 versus 5 + 1 + 6.  We shall see if they prevail.  They have the SEC on their side now. 

As well as the Big 12 and ND. Bowlsby did say they came up with that format to avoid antitrust lawsuits etc… 

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what they would have to agree on is that the Rose Bowl will have to be a lock as a Semi Final spot. Hearing they are not willing to budge and wants their parade and stuff to remain status quo 

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/2/2022 at 12:08 PM, sactowndog said:

No they weren’t. The PAC’s OOC winning percentage was abysmal.   

Which counts for exactly nothing in the proposed expanded format.  It's done by the ranking of the conference champion.

Bama, Michigan, Cincinnati and Baylor would get byes.  Utah (10) and Pitt (13) would get the last two auto-bids.

At large teams would have been georgia, domers, buckeyes, ole miss, okie state and sparty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wolfpack1 said:

Remember stuff like that doesn't matter to sactowndog, everything that is wrong with college football today is pac-12's fault and will always be their fault no matter what. I thought we had already established that. 

Why because I don’t believe their PR🤷🏼‍♀️. Do you believe everyone’s PR? Or do you consider who seems to benefit the most from a proposal?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Why because I don’t believe their PR🤷🏼‍♀️. Do you believe everyone’s PR? Or do you consider who seems to benefit the most from a proposal?  

No I don't but you have made in known time and time again Pac-12 is evil and responsible for all evil things in football. We could have the commish from ACC and Big 10 sit in front of you, tell you they are the ones pushing for changes on the playoff system and you would still say no you aren't its the Pac-12 that is pushing it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wolfpack1 said:

No I don't but you have made in known time and time again Pac-12 is evil and responsible for all evil things in football. We could have the commish from ACC and Big 10 sit in front of you, tell you they are the ones pushing for changes on the playoff system and you would still say no you aren't its the Pac-12 that is pushing it. 

No let’s be clear, Cal is evil. The rest not so much 😁

BTW, my dislike of Cal mostly and UCLA has way more to do with their politicking to prevent the Cal States from offering doctoral degrees in the applied sciences than football.   It’s one reason the Central Valley has some of the highest poverty rates in the country.  
 

But if your point is I don’t take what they are saying at face value you would be correct. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...