• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2024 College Football Playoffs Discussion (12 Team Format)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
RB07OSU said:
I'm not saying they should end up in the playoffs, but they have been surprisingly good this year relative to talent and the implosion of their conference. Very weak schedule

In terms of the "new playoff model" @LordJeffBuck is right, who was that high to suggest that type of model. BGSU, Army, WKU, etc. make it in? I did get a chuckle though, maybe it was satire and I missed that.
Click to expand...
With regard to your question, “who was that high”…

For cases like this I prefer to believe the best in people. Kind of an extension of Hanlon’s Razor, which says, “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”… My usual principle here is, never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by satire

Then there’s Reddit. If it’s Reddit it’s probably just dumb
 
Upvote 0
Just make 8 10-team conferences, split however. 9 conference games 2/3 OOC every season. No conference championship game (that game already happened, since everyone played everyone). Conference winner to the playoffs. Add fucking 4 at large spots if you must keep it 12 teams, but I'd vote against it, personally. Win your conference, you're in. Otherwise, go play for some Mayo, or something. First round(s) at higher seed home. Final 4 can go to whichever bowl location pays the most, or however that's decided.

That's my dream.
 
Upvote 0
Tomateaux Quinoa Gumbeaux said:
I think G5 should have their own playoff
Click to expand...
See above. 80 teams, relegate the rest to FCS or something. Hell, finish last in your conference, get relegated down. Bring the best 10 FCS teams up to fill the gaps next season. It's all a shitshow already, so I don't see this as being worse. At least we can keep things more regional.
 
Upvote 1
Gizmo said:
Just make 8 10-team conferences, split however. 9 conference games 2/3 OOC every season. No conference championship game (that game already happened, since everyone played everyone). Conference winner to the playoffs. Add fucking 4 at large spots if you must keep it 12 teams, but I'd vote against it, personally. Win your conference, you're in. Otherwise, go play for some Mayo, or something. First round(s) at higher seed home. Final 4 can go to whichever bowl location pays the most, or however that's decided.

That's my dream.
Click to expand...
Cut 80 teams down to 40, and 8 conferences down to 4, and now you're talking.

If you want to pander to the Northwesterns, Purdues, and Rutgerses of the CFB world, then make 4 conferences of 20 teams each, with each conference having an "A" tier and a "B" tier of ten teams each – teams in the "A" tier are eligible for the playoffs; teams can move up or down based on past performance.
 
Upvote 0
LordJeffBuck said:
Cut 80 teams down to 40, and 8 conferences down to 4, and now you're talking.

If you want to pander to the Northwesterns, Purdues, and Rutgerses of the CFB world, then make 4 conferences of 20 teams each, with each conference having an "A" tier and a "B" tier of ten teams each – teams in the "A" tier are eligible for the playoffs; teams can move up or down based on past performance.
Click to expand...
Big time college football fanbases aren't wired to an NFL type world where 8-4 would be successful. They won't give up their bottom feeder wins.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
Big time college football fanbases aren't wired to an NFL type world where 8-4 would be successful. They won't give up their bottom feeder wins.
Click to expand...
I have been saying this to anyone that says the want all the power teams to shed the Purdue, Baylor, Kentucky weight to create a power league. Buckeyes, Tide, Ducks, etc. are either not used to constant 3-4 loss seasons or don't want to go back to those.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
Big time college football fanbases aren't wired to an NFL type world where 8-4 would be successful. They won't give up their bottom feeder wins.
Click to expand...

I've always thought 80 was the perfect number, advances things but still keeps college football similar enough to what everyone recognizes. 5 conferences, 16 teams each, no divisions, 10 conference games, 12/16 team playoff, also get rid of conference championship games. One can dream.
 
Upvote 0
As long as we’re dreaming, mark me down in the smaller conferences camp. A conference where everyone plays each other is infinitely preferable to me than a conference where one team has our schedule and another team has Rutgers’ (or Indiana’s) schedule. Make it crystal clear who the champions are. Then let them sort it out on the field.

As for the number of teams: you could restrict it to a lot less than 80 teams and be in no danger of leaving out anyone who has a legitimate shot
 
Upvote 0
My idea was to go with 9-team conferences. You play 4 home games, 4 away games. 4 OOC games, 2 of which are scheduled by the NCAA (or whoever the governing body is) so that the top teams have to play 1 big-name game at home, and 1 on the road. Then you get to schedule 2 chump home games against Western Idaho or South Central Alaska or something. That's 7 home games, 5 away games. You still get to pay for another team's athletic department. You get big-name teams coming in, and you play everyone in your conference.

The problem with no at-large games is that you are no longer incentivized (is that a word?) to play and try in those big OOC games. You can lose all of your OOC games - they mean nothing, if all you have to do is win your conference.

Also, if you still want to play FCS-level teams, you can play one scrimmage the week before Week 1 (stats and records don't count), and you can also play one scrimmage in the spring, if you want. Other than that, schedule cool games.

If you go with 8 of those conferences, you should be able to make 8 pretty good champions out of them, plus 4 at-large teams. Maybe 8 at-large teams.

Or hell - go with 6 of those conferences, and add 6 at-large teams to make a 12-team playoff.
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks said:
As long as we’re dreaming, mark me down in the smaller conferences camp. A conference where everyone plays each other is infinitely preferable to me than a conference where one team has our schedule and another team has Rutgers’ (or Indiana’s) schedule. Make it crystal clear who the champions are. Then let them sort it out on the field.

As for the number of teams: you could restrict it to a lot less than 80 teams and be in no danger of leaving out anyone who has a legitimate shot
Click to expand...
I think there might be a move towards that as the whole shitshow of tiebreaking teams who don't play each other in 16-18 team conference begins to wear thin.

The other thing that I could see would be larger conferences with 3 or 4 divisions and a two stage conference championship playoff. SEC does the same, and the two champions meet for the NC.

B1G
Pacific: USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, UW
Lake Superior: Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois
Lake Erie: Indiana, Purdue, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Sparty, tcun
Atlantic: Pedsters, Rutgers, Maryland, UNC, UVA, Miami/GaTech

While that lines up perfectly geographically, it does create some problems. You recreate both the overloaded B1G East and little brother B1G West. Plus, you give the pedsters the easiest path to the conference playoffs.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top