College Football Playoff Expansion?

[Trait Expectations]

To me this is all about money. The rich talented teams with still be there leading the pack. Let’s face it we struggle terribly against Clemson now and still will in this case. Clemson and us are close in recruiting but their skill players blow ours out of the water. So it’s unlikely that ND wins the championship in the first place. I love this football team as much as anyone but we have to face the facts. We talk about ND being every other teams super bowl and blah blah can you see us playing 10, 11, or 12 and them bringing their best and ND losing. That will be a worse case scenario. But if we join the acc we get to have a much easier schedule.

I'm not sure I understand your point? Join the ACC because we might lose to a lower seed in the playoffs? And somehow that makes it easier even though our skill players aren't as good as Clemson's? I still need my coffee, maybe I'm missing the pretext and the subtext.

 

[Irish#1]

To me this is all about money. The rich talented teams with still be there leading the pack. Let’s face it we struggle terribly against Clemson now and still will in this case. Clemson and us are close in recruiting but their skill players blow ours out of the water. So it’s unlikely that ND wins the championship in the first place. I love this football team as much as anyone but we have to face the facts. We talk about ND being every other teams super bowl and blah blah can you see us playing 10, 11, or 12 and them bringing their best and ND losing. That will be a worse case scenario. But if we join the acc we get to have a much easier schedule.

It's always about the money. Everything else is window dressing to try and cover up the fact it's about the money.

 

[IrishLion]

I think I like it, in general.

1. 90% chance to be in at 10-2 or better, unless it's a REALLY weird year with multiple worthy group-of-5 schools (like last year with Cincy, Coastal Carolina, and BYU) AND strong P5 runners up. If it's a close thing, expect the rankings to be friendly to ND because TV ratings and money.

2. Playing the lowest of the top seeds if you win your first-round home game (which will also likely be a favorable matchup).


The drawbacks:
- There will be a year in the near future where ND is clearly a top-2 team, but then not only misses the bye, but also gets screwed playing against whatever P5 team had a weird loss and then gets a superstar player back in time for the playoffs, followed by a game against Ohio State or Clemson, who got under-seeded for whatever reason.
- If you're always banking on shooting for the 5-seed, you're going to be in range for a home playoff game against the best group-of-5 champ or at-large, which means you're always fighting against an underdog with an 'on-the-road' mentality, and that emotional rollercoaster is going to go well for the little guys at some point.

 

[Trait Expectations]

I love the expansion, I want more games with that high intensity. This will be a boon for ND, it will bring in more big time teams to South Bend and it gives ND way more margin for error in early games. With the transfer rules and the changing landscape, there are going to be more stubbed toes out of the gate, this allows you to absorb a bad loss and still have something to fight for.

I'm actually thrilled with this idea, I was afraid they'd only expand to 6 teams. Hope this gets unanimous backing (can't find a scenario where a conference would vote against) and I hope it's ready to go for 2023 when Buchner is our QB

 

[greyhammer90]

I'm fine with the extra game, but automatically being the 5 seed at best makes this a fail for me from an ND perspective. Setting aside the fact that it's going to completely screw with ND's ability to make future historical arguments or recruiting pitches around average seeding level, or most often seeded in the top 4, it's just a much harder road. I would've much preferred that the extra games are played between the at-large teams, then there's a re-ranking to determine seeding. I think everyone is underestimating how much harder it will be to play #4 coming off playing a tough top 12 opponent versus #7 or #8 off a bye.

I also really hate Swarbrick trying to deflect this as being fair because it's like a make-up of a conference championship game. It's not like a make-up, because if Bama loses in the conference championship game, they're still in the playoff. If ND loses in their "conference championship game" season's over.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

IDK if this has been discussed much but this setup currently pretty much ensures the winner of the SEC East and West will be in the Top12 every year. Could be looking at 4 SEC teams in the Top 12 year in and out.

 

[greyhammer90]

One thing I'm unclear on: Are the brackets set once the initial rankings are made, or are they dependent on who wins? For example, if the No. 7 school beats the No. 2 school in the first round, and everything else is chalk, does the No. 7 school then have to play the No. 1 school? Or would the No. 7 school then get to play the No. 3 school, because that's who the No. 2 school would have originally played had they won?

I really hope the brackets aren't set, because then that would mean that a highly ranked ND's most likely path to a championship would be:

Play No. 12
Play No. 4
Play No. 1
Play No. 2

And that means we're not winning a chip ever again.

 

[Rogue219]

IDK if this has been discussed much but this setup currently pretty much ensures the winner of the SEC East and West will be in the Top12 every year. Could be looking at 4 SEC teams in the Top 12 year in and out.

Oh, that's a certainty, and I'd love nothing more than to see a couple of them get up on the winning side of the Mason Dixon line in December and see a few ass whippings.

Further, any two loss SEC Champion will be one of the four byes.

 

[IrishLion]

One thing I'm unclear on: Are the brackets set once the initial rankings are made, or are they dependent on who wins? For example, if the No. 7 school beats the No. 2 school in the first round, and everything else is chalk, does the No. 7 school then have to play the No. 1 school? Or would the No. 7 school then get to play the No. 3 school, because that's who the No. 2 school would have originally played had they won?

I really hope the brackets aren't set, because then that would mean that a highly ranked ND's most likely path to a championship would be:

Play No. 12
Play No. 4
Play No. 1
Play No. 2

And that means we're not winning a chip ever again.

There is no re-seeding, but as long as ND comes in at no.5 in a year where they would have otherwise been top-4, I can live with it.

You get the bottom seed, and then again the bottom seed of the top-4.

If you think you're a national-title worthy squad, you can use those games to get hot and build confidence right at the end of the year.

Of course, if you think you're a national-title worthy squad, the extra rest and letting other teams beat on each other is preferable... but it's looking more and more like ND is going to have to put together a magical run where they simply get into a good zone collectively as a team if they want to win a championship, so talking myself into this 'no bye' thing is getting easier.

 

[greyhammer90]

There is no re-seeding, but as long as ND comes in at no.5 in a year where they would have otherwise been top-4, I can live with it.

You get the bottom seed, and then again the bottom seed of the top-4.

If you think you're a national-title worthy squad, you can use those games to get hot and build confidence right at the end of the year.

Of course, if you think you're a national-title worthy squad, the extra rest and letting other teams beat on each other is preferable... but it's looking more and more like ND is going to have to put together a magical run where they simply get into a good zone collectively as a team if they want to win a championship, so talking myself into this 'no bye' thing is getting easier.

I think you just accidentally laid out my biggest problem with this. If it's true that ND is in support of this model then I would say this is the move of a program whose primary focus is to get into the playoffs, not to win a championship. I would understand that sort of desperation if we were in the Big 12, but we've been invited every year we had a legitimate case. Every year.

Just earlier this year, we were pointing to how Clemson slowly built to their run, and how they're doing it with culture, and how we're doing the same thing by winning year over year. Now we seem like we're just happy to be in included because it would need to be a magical run to actually win against the big boys.

 

[IrishLion]

I think you just accidentally laid out my biggest problem with this. If it's true that ND is in support of this model then I would say this is the move of a program whose primary focus is to get into the playoffs, not to win a championship. I would understand that sort of desperation if we were in the Big 12, but we've been invited every year we had a legitimate case. Every year.

Just earlier this year, we were pointing to how Clemson slowly built to their run, and how they're doing it with culture, and how we're doing the same thing by winning year over year. Now we seem like we're just happy to be in included because it would need to be a magical run to actually win against the big boys.

I mean that's kind of what it's going to take for anyone outside of the Bama/Clemson/Ohio State triumvirate, outside of lucking into a generational QB prospect that can carry the team.

ND needs to get hot at the right time, or get a QB that's going to make everyone better. That doesn't change, regardless of the playoff system, seeding, etc.

So making the playoff nearly every time you're 10-2 or better is decent tradeoff, imo, when the cost is an extra game against a low seed, especially in the context of needing to find a generational QB or have a team that gets super hot at the right time anyway.

 

[greyhammer90]

I mean that's kind of what it's going to take for anyone outside of the Bama/Clemson/Ohio State triumvirate, outside of lucking into a generational QB prospect that can carry the team.

ND needs to get hot at the right time, or get a QB that's going to make everyone better. That doesn't change, regardless of the playoff system, seeding, etc.

So making the playoff nearly every time you're 10-2 or better is decent tradeoff, imo, when the cost is an extra game against a low seed, especially in the context of needing to find a generational QB or have a team that gets super hot at the right time anyway.

I won't keep belaboring my point, but it's not just an extra game against a low seed. It's an extra game against a low seed, then we play 3 out of the top 4. Our chances of winning an NC as an independent took a huge hit today. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Trait Expectations]

I won't keep belaboring my point, but it's not just an extra game against a low seed. It's an extra game against a low seed, then we play 3 out of the top 4. Our chances of winning an NC as an independent took a huge hit today. I'll leave it at that.

Lol, completely disagree. I don't see the point you're trying to make.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

I won't keep belaboring my point, but it's not just an extra game against a low seed. It's an extra game against a low seed, then we play 3 out of the top 4. Our chances of winning an NC as an independent took a huge hit today. I'll leave it at that.

I get what you’re saying but I think there are benefits that will help ND close the talent gap. You’re right that it’s more important to the administration to be annual contenders than to be actual winners. I think that’s something which separates most every fan base from every school admin.

 

[greyhammer90]

Lol, completely disagree. I don't see the point you're trying to make.

I mean, it's not a difficult concept to grasp. Assuming chalk, 2018 ND had to play No. 1, then No.2 to win a championship. 2025 ND will need to beat No. 12, No. 4, No. 1, No. 2. Acting like this only adds one game against a low seed is wrong. We'll also be playing an additional game against a top 5 opponent.

 

[NDRock]

I mean, it's not a difficult concept to grasp. Assuming chalk, 2018 ND had to play No. 1, then No.2 to win a championship. 2025 ND will need to beat No. 12, No. 4, No. 1, No. 2. Acting like this only adds one game against a low seed is wrong. We'll also be playing an additional game against a top 5 opponent.

It only adds one game against a low seed when we’re discussing whether or not ND gets a bye (4 vs. 5). Obviously with the playoffs expanding you’re going to have to win more games than previously but that goes for everyone. The trade off is you will make the playoffs more often. Hasn’t really mattered what iteration it has been (BCS or 4 team playoff) we still haven’t been close to beating the big boys.

 

[Trait Expectations]

I mean, it's not a difficult concept to grasp. Assuming chalk, 2018 ND had to play No. 1, then No.2 to win a championship. 2025 ND will need to beat No. 12, No. 4, No. 1, No. 2. Acting like this only adds one game against a low seed is wrong. We'll also be playing an additional game against a top 5 opponent.

It only guarantees one game they will unnecessarily play if they are a top-4 team. Otherwise, they will deservingly play the extra play-in game like everyone else. Some teams will win their conference championship game, only to wind up a 5-12 seed and still have the extra 4 games after that.

ND will have to play one game extra compared to the field, if they are ranked 1-4, which really is basically a make-up game for not having a conference championship. The other 3 games are games all teams must play so they aren't prudent to the discussion. With our developing depth, I think we are built to last longer through a playoff now we just need to be more explosive.

I'm probably not winning you over so we can just agree to disagree.

 

[Armyirish47]

It only guarantees one game they will unnecessarily play if they are a top-4 team. Otherwise, they will deservingly play the extra play-in game like everyone else. Some teams will win their conference championship game, only to wind up a 5-12 seed and still have the extra 4 games after that.

ND will have to play one game extra compared to the field, if they are ranked 1-4, which really is basically a make-up game for not having a conference championship. The other 3 games are games all teams must play so they aren't prudent to the discussion. With our developing depth, I think we are built to last longer through a playoff now we just need to be more explosive.

I'm probably not winning you over so we can just agree to disagree.

I agree with this. And also it could turn out that the sweet spot is the ole 7 seed. Home game against the 10, neutral site against the 3, take down the 2 which isn't that good because Bama got upset in the SEC championship game, and bingo bongo Natty time.

Plus for me it sounds better for us to say we would have been a playoff team 6 out of the last 7 years, that's gotta get us a little closer to the generational QB that makes all this discussion seem comical in the rearview as we win 3 Heismans and multiple championship belts.

 

[phork]

Initially I was upset with ND missing a bye. And frankly if they are #1 then they shouldn't but I digress. Then I thought about it. The programs trajectory right now we are a top 10 program. I'd say ND, right now, would miss the top 12, one out of ten times. I'm all for it. And screw joining a conference.

 

[GATTACA!]

I'm fine with missing the bye. The alternative is joining the ACC and having to play an extra CCG against Clemson anyways. Even being overly optimistic and saying we win 50% of those games that still means 5/10 years we end up right back in the same 5-12 range and are then playing 2 extra games.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

The way I see it is that ND being relegated to always being no better than a 5-12 seed is that will always be our 13th data point. That puts that particular issue to bed as per Jack. Then we have to do what all other conference champs do from that point on and WIN

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Since 2017 (since the programs retooling) we would have made this playoff format every year.

 

[zelezo vlk]

Since 2017 (since the programs retooling) we would have made this playoff format every year.

I thought we would've missed in 2019.

Sent from my SM-J337U using Tapatalk

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Yeah I think you are right We were 11-2 and finished 12th but was like 15th last week of season.

 

[Irishize]

Initially I was upset with ND missing a bye. And frankly if they are #1 then they shouldn't but I digress. Then I thought about it. The programs trajectory right now we are a top 10 program. I'd say ND, right now, would miss the top 12, one out of ten times. I'm all for it. And screw joining a conference.

Agreed. Plus, they’ll technically have a bye while others are playing their 13th game in the Conf Champ. I do wish they would’ve limited when & how many FCS opponents those P5 schools could schedule b/c most years, they still end up w/ 12 data points once u deduct the FCS “Bye” right before their big rivalry game.

 

[Rogue219]

Maybe, but let's not pretend that it's not a disadvantage. The school loves exposure, but for a team that shits the bed every playoff game (and most big games), this is not an attractive layout.

I agree. I think it makes it more difficult, having to win more games in order to lift the trophy, and for ND that margin for error is already slim as it is. We just came off a season where that post season narrative reared it's ugly head yet again.

It's all about money. There will never be less games.

At the same, the hypocritical "they're amateurs" diatribe just died a bit more with this new format.

 

[Irishize]

I agree. I think it makes it more difficult, having to win more games in order to lift the trophy, and for ND that margin for error is already slim as it is. We just came off a season where that post season narrative reared it's ugly head yet again.

It's all about money. There will never be less games.

At the same, the hypocritical "they're amateurs" diatribe just died a bit more with this new format.

Agreed on the amateurism which gets us that much closer to paying players and the “student-athletes” forming unions. I do not believe ND will go down that path with the “factories”. I think they’ll split off into the original model of student-athlete and a new professional model where the P5 conferences (w/ few exceptions) will form their own pro league. We are putting off the inevitable so I wish they’d get on with it so we can see what other schools would join ND in the original model. I suspect it would include the academic schools like Vandy, Stanford, Northwestern, Virginia, WF, Duke, etc.

 

[IrishLax]

Initially I was upset with ND missing a bye. And frankly if they are #1 then they shouldn't but I digress. Then I thought about it. The programs trajectory right now we are a top 10 program. I'd say ND, right now, would miss the top 12, one out of ten times. I'm all for it. And screw joining a conference.

This is basically where I'm at. With this staff, I think ND is a top 25 team on a yearly basis now barring "catastrophe"... so let's call it 4 out of every 5 years. They're going to be a top 15 team 3 out of every 5 years. And a top 5 team probably 1 out of every 5 years (in particular because of the increasingly difficult schedules in coming years with Bama, Ohio State, etc. on them it makes it very hard to go undefeated and we don't have a conference championship game so it would take "help" to get in over a 1-loss conference champion). Given all of that, this system ensures that a "good" Notre Dame team is not going to get screwed by a biased committee. A 2-loss Notre Dame with quality wins will almost always be in, and if they aren't it's because they weren't actually good enough to win a championship anyways.

I think back to the 2015 Notre Dame team that was LOADED with a great resume and should've finished 11-1... and was almost surely going to get left out of the playoffs at 11-1 in favor of a bad-but-lucky Michigan State team and a typical-one-dimensional-garbage Oklahoma team. Their only loss was on a 2-point conversion to an elite Clemson team on the road and they were going to get boxed out of the playoffs. That's the moment I realized this system was fucked beyond redemption because of 5 conference champs jockeying for 4 spots, and that there was always going to be a squeeze on any Notre Dame team that wasn't undefeated. We saw this again last year, where the primary reason Notre Dame made the playoffs was simply that Oklahoma lost 2 games and the PAC12 went full PAC12. If either of those don't happen, Notre Dame is sitting at home because they didn't win a conference championship... and you can extrapolate that out to literally any season that ND would play as an independent.

Tangential to all of this -- the biggest benefit is that with AQs for conference champs you aren't going to see as much coward scheduling from certain teams. We all know who they are, and it's terrible for the sport. Those teams are going to be playing themselves out of "at large" selections with weak resumes and you will see scheduling paradigms shit moving forward.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

2019 BCS rankings from week 16. I believe this is the set that determined bowl bids:

1. LSU
2. OSU
3. Clemson
4. Oklahoma
5. Georgia
6. Oregon
7. Baylor
8. Wisconsin
9. Florida
10. PSU
11. Utah
12. Auburn
13. Alabama
14. Michigan

24. Virginia

In every single case the committee ranked the CCG loser as the second best team in their conference; even after the CCG.

It's just one year (so not enough to declare a pattern) but I think the current system won't change incentives at all. Teams will schedule to maximize their chances of winning their conference games. And that means avoiding tough OOC games until there are rewards commensurate with the costs of playing them.

Baylor's OOC schedule in 2019 was Stephen F. Austin, UTSA, and Rice. They beat zero ranked teams and got the 7th spot.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Let's do the 2018 rankings (again, post CCG but pre-bowls):

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. ND
4. Oklahoma
5. Georgia
6. OSU
7. Michigan
8. UCF
9. Washington
10. Florida
11. LSU
12. PSU

15. Texas (9-4)

17. Utah (9-4)

22. Northwestern (8-5)

The ACC CG loser was 7-6 Pittsburgh who was not ranked. Syracuse (9-3) was ranked 20th.

Michigan (10-2) was ranked ahead of CCG loser Northwestern (8-5).

Otherwise the pattern continues to be the CCG winner as the top ranked team in conference and the loser as the second ranked team in the conference.

In 2018 we are seeing CCG losers get left out but these are all teams who walked into the CCG with 3+ losses. Did the teams ahead of them have better wins or just fewer losses? Without diving deeper I'm pretty sure it's the latter. But without looking I can't be sure.