A potential solution for the CFP / Power 5 / Group of 5 angst...

[uafan4life]

Ok, so I think I've come up with a potential solution for the CFP / Power 5 / Group of 5 angst. As an added bonus, at least from a certain perspective, it might be easier to get many in the media on board because it actually gives a little power back to the AP poll.

The basic premise is that the College Football Playoff Committee would no longer rank the Top 25 teams but would, instead, give a weekly seeding of up to the Top 10 CFP-Eligible teams. If your team is ineligible, it isn't seeded - regardless of your team's record, AP-poll ranking, etc.

So, what makes a team eligible for the College Football Playoff?

1. At least 50% or six, whichever is lesser, of your opponents must be FBS teams with winning records or having at least six wins.
2. You must have wins over either
- A: at least three AP Top 25 teams - either currently ranked or ranked when you played.
- or -
- B: at least two AP Top 25 teams - either currently ranked or ranked when you played - provided at least one is currently ranked in the AP Top 10.

The CFP Committee would use their current methodology and criteria to seed the teams but would just seed up to the Top 10 among CFP-eligible teams. If your schedule this season doesn't avail you of the opportunity to play in the CFP this season, sorry, there's no debate because you knew the rules going into the season; you should have given yourself a better schedule.

And while the AP Poll doesn't have a direct bearing on which eligible teams actually make the playoff, their rankings do help determine which teams are eligible, so that's a bone thrown to them.

Bear in mind, this is simply a bare-minimum requirement and you might have more or less than 10 eligible teams at any point in the seedings, including the final one.

So, what do you guys think about this proposed solution?

Are there any past CFP or BCS Championship participants which didn't meet these minimum requirements?

 

[81usaf92]

One real problem from the start... scheduling is about 4+ years in advance so getting AP ranked teams on your schedule could prove to be difficult.

 

[uafan4life]

One real problem from the start... scheduling is about 4+ years in advance so getting AP ranked teams on your schedule could prove to be difficult.

That's why, if you're a Power 5 school, you make sure to schedule at least a couple of Power 5 teams for your OOC games. Generally, each Power 5 conference has at least two or three ranked teams at the end of the regular season, so each team should usually get at least two ranked teams from their conference slate alone.

If you're a Group of 5 team with aspirations, you basically schedule three or four Power 5 teams for your OOC games - as many as your conference schedule allows.

It could effectively penalize any team - eschewing any and all debate on an undefeated team's worthiness - for employing the Baylol scheduling method or a good-or-lucky undefeated run by a school who hasn't actually played a worthy schedule.


Finally, it also adds an extra potential benefit to conference championship games, as those are usually against ranked teams.

 

[RT27]

I do not see the problem, they have gotten it right so far, the top teams are getting in and playing for the title. People want perfection, it is not possible, and also most whining are from schools left out, and they are left out for good reason. Lose big to unranked teams and you lose any right to whine. Win out then get left out and you can whine, unless you are UCF laying nobody teams all year, so undefeated means a lot less when all wins are cupcakes and sometime close wins to cup cakes.

 

[B1GTide]

My only problem - what if you are a dominant team in a terrible P5 conference? I could easily see a season in the ACC, PAC or Big 12 in which you never get a chance to play 3 ranked teams in a season.

Any undefeated P5 teams should qualify, no matter what. They have all scheduled at least 8 games against teams capable of being very good in any given season. They should not be held responsible for a season in which their opponents stink when they cannot remove those opponents from their schedule.

All that said, i really don't care about the group of fans who feel like the system isn't fair. Life isn't fair. Grow up.

 

[uafan4life]

I do not see the problem, they have gotten it right so far, the top teams are getting in and playing for the title. People want perfection, it is not possible, and also most whining are from schools left out, and they are left out for good reason. Lose big to unranked teams and you lose any right to whine. Win out then get left out and you can whine, unless you are UCF laying nobody teams all year, so undefeated means a lot less when all wins are cupcakes and sometime close wins to cup cakes.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the system as it is, either. However, the cacophonous whining - especially this season - does become grating.

 

[uafan4life]

My only problem - what if you are a dominant team in a terrible P5 conference? I could easily see a season in the ACC, PAC or Big 12 in which you never get a chance to play 3 ranked teams in a season.

Any undefeated P5 teams should qualify, no matter what. They have all scheduled at least 8 games against teams capable of being very good in any given season. They should not be held responsible for a season in which their opponents stink when they cannot remove those opponents from their schedule.

All that said, i really don't care about the group of fans who feel like the system isn't fair. Life isn't fair. Grow up.

Show me one example of a playoff/championship-game team in the CFP/BCS era that would have failed to meet these minimums.

 

[B1GTide]

Show me one example of a playoff/championship-game team in the CFP/BCS era that would have failed to meet these minimums.

The Sooners are close right now, as is Washington State. Both will eek in a 3rd if they win out, but it could easily have gone the other way for either this year. It may turn out that neither make the playoff, but I don't have Selma's memory so I am just thinking of this year

 

[81usaf92]

Show me one example of a playoff/championship-game team in the CFP/BCS era that would have failed to meet these minimums.

Clemson this year. They would be on pins and needles hoping LSU loses to aTm this year.

 

[B1GTide]

Clemson this year. They would be on pins and needles hoping LSU loses to aTm this year.

Pitt might be ranked when they play them. aTm would be ranked if they beat LSU. But this is a great example of the problem. If both Pitt and Miami lose this week, Clemson is out of the playoffs even though they are undefeated in P5 play, with two SEC teams on their OOC schedule.

 

[uafan4life]

Clemson this year. They would be on pins and needles hoping LSU loses to aTm this year.

Actually, all they would need would be for Pitt to beat Miami this week and remain ranked for the ACC Championship Game.

 

[B1GTide]

Actually, all they would need would be for Pitt to beat Miami this week and remain ranked for the ACC Championship Game.

And if Pitt loses?

 

[uafan4life]

And if Pitt loses?

Then they would have better hoped A&M beat LSU.

Still, I'm pretty sure that's one possible example in 20+ years which I highly doubt will come to fruition. And it says something about how relatively easy these parameters are to meet since Clemson this year is pretty much a perfect storm of the dominant Power 5 team in a horribly down year for their conference where their best OOC opponent just happened to not be ranked when they played them or [potentially] at the end of the season and they're still most likely going to have at least three wins against ranked teams.

 

[KrAzY3]

Nope, no arbitrary criteria. That's as bad as trying to make conference championships matter. So, if you play a bunch of 5 win teams you are excluded. If you play a bunch of 6 win (woops typed losses heh) teams you're in. If you play 5 teams in the top 35 but all outside of the top 25, you can be excluded, but you play 3 ranked 20-25 you're in. You can't be that specific.

 

[TideEngineer08]

I'm not a fan because I do not want to appease the group of 5. But I understand what you're trying to accomplish.

My plan is actually to have a separate postseason for the group of 5. They can establish their own playoff, as they see fit. 4 teams, 6 teams, 16, whatever. Whatever bowls they "own", such as the bowl game in Mobile, can go with them for their playoff. In fact, they can establish the playoff and still have bowl games in addition, if they see fit. And at the end, they crown their own national champion. So we have a P5 national champion and G5 national champion.

Caveats: They give up their guaranteed New Year's 6 bowl game. Mind you, the New Year's bowls are still free to invite one of the group of 5 teams, and that team could accept the invite, but it's no longer a rule. Our regular season schedules proceed as normal. Power 5 teams can still schedule Group of 5 teams, just as they currently schedule FCS teams.

Yes, separate the 2 divisions. They are so far apart in every way, it is the only thing that makes any sense.

 

[81usaf92]

I think getting rid of the Group of 5 altogether would cure a lot of ills.

 

[UntouchableCrew]

I think getting rid of the Group of 5 altogether would cure a lot of ills.

I've thought about this too.

Let's be real here -- they pretend there are four levels of NCAA football: DI FBS, DI FCS, DII, and DIII. But in reality there are five. Power 5 level football is simply a higher level that Group of 5. Of course there are G5 teams like UCF, Boise State, Utah State, etc. that are better than many of the Rutgers and Kansas' of the world, but their records and accomplishments are done on a different playing field.

The real move, which will never happen, is a system of relegation. Link various conferences:

ACC -- American
Big XII -- Conference USA
B1G -- MAC
Pac-12 -- Mountain West
SEC -- Sunbelt

The two best teams in each G5 conference get promoted to their P5 equivalent. The two worst P5 teams get demoted to their G5 sister conference. Allows teams to determine their own fate. Why are UCF and Boise State locked out every year while Rutgers, Kansas, and Oregon State get free passes?

 

[The Ols]

I know that it works across the pond for soccer, and I like the idea, but scheduling won't allow it.

I've thought about this too.

Let's be real here -- they pretend there are four levels of NCAA football: DI FBS, DI FCS, DII, and DIII. But in reality there are five. Power 5 level football is simply a higher level that Group of 5. Of course there are G5 teams like UCF, Boise State, Utah State, etc. that are better than many of the Rutgers and Kansas' of the world, but their records and accomplishments are done on a different playing field.

The real move, which will never happen, is a system of relegation. Link various conferences:

ACC -- American
Big XII -- Conference USA
B1G -- MAC
Pac-12 -- Mountain West
SEC -- Sunbelt

The two best teams in each G5 conference get promoted to their P5 equivalent. The two worst P5 teams get demoted to their G5 sister conference. Allows teams to determine their own fate. Why are UCF and Boise State locked out every year while Rutgers, Kansas, and Oregon State get free passes?

 

[AlexanderFan]

But what if you're UCF and everybody is scared to play you?









[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UntouchableCrew]

I know that it works across the pond for soccer, and I like the idea, but scheduling won't allow it.

I agree, it'll never happen for many, many reasons.

But it's really the only reasonable solution to the farce idea that Group of Five teams are playing the same level of football as Power Five teams. You basically have 60 teams competing at a level of football where they're never taken seriously or given a chance to play for a championship. They should have a Group of 5 playoff, IMO. Would be cooler to win the Group of 5 playoff then get a chance to upset a P5 team that doesn't want to be there.