“Wait a second,” you’re thinking. “How in the heck would 9 teams fit into a playoff bracket?”
This is how:
“Semi-automatic” bids go to the top 7 conference champions. This ensures that at least 2 G5 programs get in every year AND that conferences will make sure that their 2 best teams are in the CCG. No more silly imbalanced divisions where you risk an upset by a mediocre team.
How do you fit in the other 2 at large bids?
These 2 schools are selected immediately after the regular season and will square off during CCG week at a neutral site. This will ensure that at-large teams played the same number of games as their playoff opponents.
Criteria for at-large:
1) tied for spot in CCG, or one spot behind CCG qualifier, but lost to qualifying team on the road AND ranked higher than half of the teams in CCG.
2) have to have played a true road game out of conference
Criteria #2 should also make the regular season more interesting. If you lose your CCG, you cannot make it in as an at-large, as the at-large play-in game occurs on the same weekend.
If not enough teams qualify for at-large bid, then select another conference champion.
There is still a degree of subjectivity to selecting teams, but the criteria are rigid enough to mitigate that in most years. Teams would be seeded and paired 1-8, with matchups rearranged after upsets, like the NFL.
I read the arguments for a larger playoff in other threads, but I believe this idea is most realistic, by only adding one more game to the schedule for the championship participants, and more fair by including G5.
I know the P5 want more teams to get in so they can hog all the cash, but they will kill the golden goose. If you continue to shut out most of the country, people will lose interest and the money will stop coming in.
This is how:
“Semi-automatic” bids go to the top 7 conference champions. This ensures that at least 2 G5 programs get in every year AND that conferences will make sure that their 2 best teams are in the CCG. No more silly imbalanced divisions where you risk an upset by a mediocre team.
How do you fit in the other 2 at large bids?
These 2 schools are selected immediately after the regular season and will square off during CCG week at a neutral site. This will ensure that at-large teams played the same number of games as their playoff opponents.
Criteria for at-large:
1) tied for spot in CCG, or one spot behind CCG qualifier, but lost to qualifying team on the road AND ranked higher than half of the teams in CCG.
2) have to have played a true road game out of conference
Criteria #2 should also make the regular season more interesting. If you lose your CCG, you cannot make it in as an at-large, as the at-large play-in game occurs on the same weekend.
If not enough teams qualify for at-large bid, then select another conference champion.
There is still a degree of subjectivity to selecting teams, but the criteria are rigid enough to mitigate that in most years. Teams would be seeded and paired 1-8, with matchups rearranged after upsets, like the NFL.
I read the arguments for a larger playoff in other threads, but I believe this idea is most realistic, by only adding one more game to the schedule for the championship participants, and more fair by including G5.
I know the P5 want more teams to get in so they can hog all the cash, but they will kill the golden goose. If you continue to shut out most of the country, people will lose interest and the money will stop coming in.