Hypothetical situation once the 12-team playoff is here

[gamecockcat]

Let's say a 2-loss SEC Team, sitting 10th in the playoff order, plays an unbeaten SEC team, sitting #2 in the playoff order, for the SEC Championship. Pretty obvious that should the unbeaten team get upset, they'll still be in the playoffs albeit as a lower seed. However, the 2-loss team might very well not make the playoffs at all with a 3rd loss while the top G5 team (let's say they have 1-loss) makes it automatically. Does the 2-loss SEC HAVE to play for the SECC or can they decline and wait for playoffs assuming they'd still be included even opting out of the SECC game (which will have very little meaning except seeding for the 12-team playoff)? Would the unbeaten SEC team allow/encourage their stars to sit out the SECC game to avoid an injury which would torpedo their hopes of winning the NCAA championship?

Looking at this year's situation, if I know there is a 12-team playoff and I'm Georgia, I might very well hold out Bowers, my QB, my best RB, my best OL/DL, hell - most of my starters. Why risk losing a key player in a game that literally means nothing to them? Would you rather get beat in the SECC game and win the 12-team playoff or vice versa? Seems pretty obvious.

Very quickly, I believe conference championship games will become utterly meaningless in much the same way that minor bowls where many of the stars opt out of have become.

 

[cmallory4121]

I think the top 4 teams will have first round byes. So there is a lot to play for

 

[cathouse]

Let's say a 2-loss SEC Team, sitting 10th in the playoff order, plays an unbeaten SEC team, sitting #2 in the playoff order, for the SEC Championship. Pretty obvious that should the unbeaten team get upset, they'll still be in the playoffs albeit as a lower seed. However, the 2-loss team might very well not make the playoffs at all with a 3rd loss while the top G5 team (let's say they have 1-loss) makes it automatically. Does the 2-loss SEC HAVE to play for the SECC or can they decline and wait for playoffs assuming they'd still be included even opting out of the SECC game (which will have very little meaning except seeding for the 12-team playoff)? Would the unbeaten SEC team allow/encourage their stars to sit out the SECC game to avoid an injury which would torpedo their hopes of winning the NCAA championship?

Looking at this year's situation, if I know there is a 12-team playoff and I'm Georgia, I might very well hold out Bowers, my QB, my best RB, my best OL/DL, hell - most of my starters. Why risk losing a key player in a game that literally means nothing to them? Would you rather get beat in the SECC game and win the 12-team playoff or vice versa? Seems pretty obvious.

Very quickly, I believe conference championship games will become utterly meaningless in much the same way that minor bowls where many of the stars opt out of have become.

There would be absolutely no good reason for a 2 loss SEC team that is ranked in the top 12 to play a conference championship game.

It would be utterly insane to risk losing out on a playoff spot.

 

[gamalielkid]

Let's say a 2-loss SEC Team, sitting 10th in the playoff order, plays an unbeaten SEC team, sitting #2 in the playoff order, for the SEC Championship. Pretty obvious that should the unbeaten team get upset, they'll still be in the playoffs albeit as a lower seed. However, the 2-loss team might very well not make the playoffs at all with a 3rd loss while the top G5 team (let's say they have 1-loss) makes it automatically. Does the 2-loss SEC HAVE to play for the SECC or can they decline and wait for playoffs assuming they'd still be included even opting out of the SECC game (which will have very little meaning except seeding for the 12-team playoff)? Would the unbeaten SEC team allow/encourage their stars to sit out the SECC game to avoid an injury which would torpedo their hopes of winning the NCAA championship?

Looking at this year's situation, if I know there is a 12-team playoff and I'm Georgia, I might very well hold out Bowers, my QB, my best RB, my best OL/DL, hell - most of my starters. Why risk losing a key player in a game that literally means nothing to them? Would you rather get beat in the SECC game and win the 12-team playoff or vice versa? Seems pretty obvious.

Very quickly, I believe conference championship games will become utterly meaningless in much the same way that minor bowls where many of the stars opt out of have become.

I agree. I personally think the league championship games may go away - when the 16 team playoff happens- which will be very quickly in my opinion. Divisions are already gone. 15 playoff games are going to produce a huge pot of money for everyone!

Go Big Blue!

P.S. How will the playoff work to cause that. Well, the first Saturday in December all 16 teams play. The next Saturday the 8 winners play. Then we go back to the same format as now for the semi finals and championship game.

 

[gamecockcat]

I think the top 4 teams will have first round byes. So there is a lot to play for

Not for #10 who probably wouldn't move into the top 4 with a win but would surely lose their playoff spot with a 3rd loss.

Will teams 'load manage' championship games so that their stars are healthy and rested for the playoffs? NFL teams who've clinched a particular spot don't play their starters much in game 17, why would college teams do so?

Think the expanded playoffs will cause some of this type of behavior so that some games are reduced to a meaningless scrimmage between backups.

 

[warrior_SW]

Not for #10 who probably wouldn't move into the top 4 with a win but would surely lose their playoff spot with a 3rd loss.

Will teams 'load manage' championship games so that their stars are healthy and rested for the playoffs? NFL teams who've clinched a particular spot don't play their starters much in game 17, why would college teams do so?

Think the expanded playoffs will cause some of this type of behavior so that some games are reduced to a meaningless scrimmage between backups.

It’s the top 4 conference champs who get the bye. So maybe they could conceivably jump from 10–>6, but be the 4th ranked conference champ with 3 conference champs and 2 non winners (or ND) above them.


Just to demonstrate - Louisville could technically (a .1% chance) pull that off this year. If they were to beat FSU and Ok St beat Texas, they’d finish like 10-12th but be the 4th highest ranked champ behind PAC, B1G, SEC and ahead of Ok St.

 

[Docpath1972]

right now many opt out of a meaningless bowl game. Will this bleed into the regular season if a team is mathematically eliminated from a bowl game. Or even a meaningless non rival game. Why risk injury in that final game if you are skipping the bowl game?
when we expand the playoffs there will be howls of dissatisfactio. The regional bias of voters along with the hatred/envy of the SEC will probably keep no more than two teams in the playoffs. If the league expands to a nine game conference schedule I think it will be unlikely to see an undefeated champion.
just heard that when IU hired their new coach they announced a three million dollars pool for NIL for football players only.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Let's say a 2-loss SEC Team, sitting 10th in the playoff order, plays an unbeaten SEC team, sitting #2 in the playoff order, for the SEC Championship. Pretty obvious that should the unbeaten team get upset, they'll still be in the playoffs albeit as a lower seed. However, the 2-loss team might very well not make the playoffs at all with a 3rd loss while the top G5 team (let's say they have 1-loss) makes it automatically. Does the 2-loss SEC HAVE to play for the SECC or can they decline and wait for playoffs assuming they'd still be included even opting out of the SECC game (which will have very little meaning except seeding for the 12-team playoff)? Would the unbeaten SEC team allow/encourage their stars to sit out the SECC game to avoid an injury which would torpedo their hopes of winning the NCAA championship?

Looking at this year's situation, if I know there is a 12-team playoff and I'm Georgia, I might very well hold out Bowers, my QB, my best RB, my best OL/DL, hell - most of my starters. Why risk losing a key player in a game that literally means nothing to them? Would you rather get beat in the SECC game and win the 12-team playoff or vice versa? Seems pretty obvious.

Very quickly, I believe conference championship games will become utterly meaningless in much the same way that minor bowls where many of the stars opt out of have become.

I know people have been clamoring for the 12, which I think is awful. Every game is a playoff game. Last weekend was awesome because of the current posture. This weekend is the true first weekend of the playoffs. That does change as we move to 12 for the very reason you state. Should we even have conference championship games? The conference championship for each of the P4 conferences will have 2 teams slotted for the playoff. What is their motivation to go all out?

I suspect there will be a call just to pick the champions by season play and get rid of the championships, but the conferences want ALL of that money, so we will have some pseudo conf championship games between teams focused rightly on the NC.

 

[trueblujr2]

I agree. I personally think the league championship games may go away - when the 16 team playoff happens- which will be very quickly in my opinion. Divisions are already gone. 15 playoff games are going to produce a huge pot of money for everyone!

Go Big Blue!

P.S. How will the playoff work to cause that. Well, the first Saturday in December all 16 teams play. The next Saturday the 8 winners play. Then we go back to the same format as now for the semi finals and championship game.

Will be interesting to see how it works out. Will certain bowls align themselves with the playoffs like the semifinal rounds do now? or will some bowls disappear?

 

[trueblujr2]

Let's say a 2-loss SEC Team, sitting 10th in the playoff order, plays an unbeaten SEC team, sitting #2 in the playoff order, for the SEC Championship. Pretty obvious that should the unbeaten team get upset, they'll still be in the playoffs albeit as a lower seed. However, the 2-loss team might very well not make the playoffs at all with a 3rd loss while the top G5 team (let's say they have 1-loss) makes it automatically. Does the 2-loss SEC HAVE to play for the SECC or can they decline and wait for playoffs assuming they'd still be included even opting out of the SECC game (which will have very little meaning except seeding for the 12-team playoff)? Would the unbeaten SEC team allow/encourage their stars to sit out the SECC game to avoid an injury which would torpedo their hopes of winning the NCAA championship?

Looking at this year's situation, if I know there is a 12-team playoff and I'm Georgia, I might very well hold out Bowers, my QB, my best RB, my best OL/DL, hell - most of my starters. Why risk losing a key player in a game that literally means nothing to them? Would you rather get beat in the SECC game and win the 12-team playoff or vice versa? Seems pretty obvious.

Very quickly, I believe conference championship games will become utterly meaningless in much the same way that minor bowls where many of the stars opt out of have become.

It's doubtful the second best SEC team will be ranked #10 and have two losses. Yeah, it could happen, I suppose, but that would constitute a down year in the SEC. Once Texas and OK are in the mix, I expect no less than 3-4 SEC teams in the top 10-12.

 

[KYExtemper]

We need to go back to a BCS like system for playoff selection.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

We need to go back to a BCS like system for playoff selection.

You mean 2 teams?

Or just rank the 12 teams based on a computer model of multiple rankings?

The former hell no but the latter would never work because it would be mostly sec and big 18 teams and the little sister of the poor conferences woild cry foul.

 

[Bleedin Blue in Ohio]

I think the Big Ten faces a very similar scenario this year if there was a 12-team playoff this year. Penn State is rated 10th with 2 losses but Iowa is facing Michigan in the Conference Title game. Iowa is 16th. In a 12-team playoff Michigan and Ohio State would be safely in, but I would think Penn State would probably need to root for Michigan because and Iowa win would more than likely knock them out if the 12-team playoff was this year.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

I think the Big Ten faces a very similar scenario this year if there was a 12-team playoff this year. Penn State is rated 10th with 2 losses but Iowa is facing Michigan in the Conference Title game. Iowa is 16th. In a 12-team playoff Michigan and Ohio State would be safely in, but I would think Penn State would probably need to root for Michigan because and Iowa win would more than likely knock them out if the 12-team playoff was this year.

I agree. The championships still matter to someone.

It's important to be ranked 11th in the final committee rankings as well because of the 1 reserved cupcake bid to the Tulanes of the world. 100% disagree with the top group of 5 team getting an auto bid unless ranked in top 12.

 

[gamecockcat]

It's doubtful the second best SEC team will be ranked #10 and have two losses. Yeah, it could happen, I suppose, but that would constitute a down year in the SEC. Once Texas and OK are in the mix, I expect no less than 3-4 SEC teams in the top 10-12.

As someone pointed out above, that situation exists right now in the B10. If PSU were in the West, they'd be 10th and playing in the championship game.

With TX and OK joining the SEC, don't be surprised if there are several years where a 2-loss team is #2 in the conference.

Definitely could happen in the B10 with USC, UCLA, OR and WA joining.

 

[Bleedin Blue in Ohio]

That is a very good point. The standard must be adjusted for both e SEC and Big 10 because the conference slate next year looks more NFL than past college. The best teams may have a couple losses in both conferences' vs the Big 12 and ACC. Then if the ACC breaks up and FSU, Clemson and others join the SEC and Notre Dame and others join the Big 10 it will look even more NFL like schedule. Home field is usually a 3 to 4 loss team in the NFL.

 

[JHB4UK]

It all theoretical at this point, but when the SEC goes to 9 game conf sched I expect 3 loss SEC teams to be in the 12 teamer frequently

 

[truebluewildcat]

There won't be a lot of undefeated teams as super conferences form and schedules inevitably expand.

2-3 losses are going to become normal for even top 5-8 teams.

Bama, UGA, Oklahoma, Texas all playing one another in addition to the regular SEC schedule where there are plenty of potential upsets and losses via really good teams...LSU, Auburn, UT, Ole Miss... Florida won't be down forever. Missouri can obviously sneak up on people. UK will be solid and as soon as we get the QB and passing game in general figured out we can be in most games except UGA and Texas probably.

Same goes for B10...OSU, Mich, Washington, Oregon, USC will all beat up on one another then they have to play Penn St, Iowa, Mich St made a solid hire and like Florida won't be down forever.

 

[cathouse]

It's doubtful the second best SEC team will be ranked #10 and have two losses. Yeah, it could happen, I suppose, but that would constitute a down year in the SEC. Once Texas and OK are in the mix, I expect no less than 3-4 SEC teams in the top 10-12.

When the SEC goes to 9 league games which is after next year, I think, there will be multiple top SEC teams with 2 losses.

The top 5-6 teams can't play Vandy, UK, Miss State and USC 9 times.

Bringing Oklahoma and Texas into the conference is going to ensure more losses for everyone, including Bama and Georgia.

 

[KYExtemper]

You mean 2 teams?

Or just rank the 12 teams based on a computer model of multiple rankings?

The former hell no but the latter would never work because it would be mostly sec and big 18 teams and the little sister of the poor conferences woild cry foul.

I mean that there needs to be a BCS-like formula with polls + computers to determine playoff seeding for the 12 teams.

And for the record, I miss the BCS era a lot. I've never been a big fan of the 4-team playoff model since it was implemented. At worst, the BCS should've stayed and there should've been a +1 game if there were still unbeaten teams at the end like USC and Auburn.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

As someone pointed out above, that situation exists right now in the B10. If PSU were in the West, they'd be 10th and playing in the championship game.

With TX and OK joining the SEC, don't be surprised if there are several years where a 2-loss team is #2 in the conference.

Definitely could happen in the B10 with USC, UCLA, OR and WA joining.

If the big 10 did it right we would be getting osu and michigan part 2 this weekend. A bit silly but clearly the best 2 teams in the league.

 

[JHB4UK]

FWIW I doubt the SEC goes to 9 until 2027

 

[cathouse]

FWIW I doubt the SEC goes to 9 until 2027

If ESPN comes up with the additional $$$$ the conference is demanding for a 9th game, I believe they will play 9 in 2025.

It is all about the dollars and finding 3 permanent opponents that Alabama will agree on playing.

$$$ and keeping Bama happy=SEC FB .
It just means more.

 

[bthaunert]

Will be interesting to see how it works out. Will certain bowls align themselves with the playoffs like the semifinal rounds do now? or will some bowls disappear?

First round games played at the home stadium of the better seeded teams will not have a bowl tied to them. The quarterfinals and semifinals will have the same 6 bowls that rotate for the CFP semis right now (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Peach and Cotton) will have those 6 games. The national championship game will not have a bowl name just like this now.

 

[bthaunert]

There would be absolutely no good reason for a 2 loss SEC team that is ranked in the top 12 to play a conference championship game.

It would be utterly insane to risk losing out on a playoff spot.

Why would UGA, Michigan and FSU play in their conference championship game this year then? All 3 of those teams risk losing out, especially FSU. It happens every year with conference championship games already and they all play.

Teams will be playing for home feild advantage in the first round and byes. Hypothetically, if a 2 loss Bama beat an undefeated UGA in the SEC title game, they are either going to get a 1st round bye or most likely move into a slot to host the first round. If they don’t play, they risk moving back in the rankings or playing an away game in the first round.

 

[cathouse]

Why would UGA, Michigan and FSU play in their conference championship game this year then? All 3 of those teams risk losing out, especially FSU. It happens every year with conference championship games already and they all play.

Teams will be playing for home feild advantage in the first round and byes. Hypothetically, if a 2 loss Bama beat an undefeated UGA in the SEC title game, they are either going to get a 1st round bye or most likely move into a slot to host the first round. If they don’t play, they risk moving back in the rankings or playing an away game in the first round.

None of those teams have 2 losses.

Focus.

 

[Catfanlou]

Why not simply have the top six teams in the SEC , the top three teams in the BIG, and top two teams in the Big Whatever and one team from the ACC and b done with it . That will give you the best 12 teams in the country more often than not .

 

[cathouse]

Why not simply have the top six teams in the SEC , the top three teams in the BIG, and top two teams in the Big Whatever and one team from the ACC and b done with it . That will give you the best 12 teams in the country more often than not .

These committees will never offer a solution that makes sense.

Too much politics, hidden agendas, personalities, egos, money, power.....all those things influence the outcome of these discussions.

 

[bthaunert]

None of those teams have 2 losses.

Focus.

Every year, teams play in a conference championship game with nothing to gain and everything to lose. How is that different from the OP’s scenario of a 2 loss team who would be knocked out of a 12 team playoff with a loss?

 

[gamecockcat]

Every year, teams play in a conference championship game with nothing to gain and everything to lose. How is that different from the OP’s scenario of a 2 loss team who would be knocked out of a 12 team playoff with a loss?

I've asked this same question in previous years. My guess is their conference won't allow them to opt out. If it were me and opting out guaranteed a spot in the 4-team playoff, I'd certainly do it. If a loss wouldn't knock me out, I'd sit my starters and wait for the playoffs, same way the NFL teams do once they've clinched their spot. Why risk losing a key player in what is a meaningless game and have your shot at the national championship blown up?

 

[cathouse]

Every year, teams play in a conference championship game with nothing to gain and everything to lose. How is that different from the OP’s scenario of a 2 loss team who would be knocked out of a 12 team playoff with a loss?

Only 4 teams get in right now. Conference championship games are actually first round playoff games for some teams to be able to get in the 4 team playoff.

When the playoff goes to 12 teams, losing a 3rd game will automatically disqualify a team for the playoff whereas if they finish 2nd in a strong Conference with only 2 losses, they will most likely get one of the 12 playoff spots.

You are overthinking this. 12 team playoff much different than current 4 team playoff.

 

[bthaunert]

Only 4 teams get in right now. Conference championship games are actually first round playoff games for some teams to be able to get in the 4 team playoff.

When the playoff goes to 12 teams, losing a 3rd game will automatically disqualify a team for the playoff whereas if they finish 2nd in a strong Conference with only 2 losses, they will most likely get one of the 12 playoff spots.

You are overthinking this. 12 team playoff much different than current 4 team playoff.

I’m not overthinking. I understand what you’re saying. Losing for a 3rd time in a 12 team playoff will be similar to losing 1 or 2 games in a 4 team playoff. It’s all relative to the size of the playoff.

So, if teams don’t opt out of conference championship games now if a loss would put them out of the plaintiffs, why would they opt out when it expands to 12?

 

[The-Hack]

Will be interesting to see how it works out. Will certain bowls align themselves with the playoffs like the semifinal rounds do now? or will some bowls disappear?

I think Citrus is “next in,” when and if Play Offs expand.

A few others will survive, for Top 30ish teams.

What happens to the minor bowls that serve the G5, mostly? Heck, looking at the truly “minor” bowls, why won’t they survive . . . many draw fewer than 30K as it is, and the G5 conferences use them as measuring sticks.

 

[ganner918]

I think Citrus is “next in,” when and if Play Offs expand.

A few others will survive, for Top 30ish teams.

What happens to the minor bowls that serve the G5, mostly? Heck, looking at the truly “minor” bowls, why won’t they survive . . . many draw fewer than 30K as it is, and the G5 conferences use them as measuring sticks.

honestly, they need to come together and form an NIT style 2nd tier playoff for the G5

 

[CondorCat]

With divisions disappearing, I don't see the point of conference championship games anymore. The regular season should decide it. Do you want to see Michigan play Ohio State two weeks in a row?

 

[The-Hack]

Do you want to see Michigan play Ohio State two weeks in a row?

I don’t really want to watch them one week in a row.

 

[cathouse]

I’m not overthinking. I understand what you’re saying. Losing for a 3rd time in a 12 team playoff will be similar to losing 1 or 2 games in a 4 team playoff. It’s all relative to the size of the playoff.

So, if teams don’t opt out of conference championship games now if a loss would put them out of the plaintiffs, why would they opt out when it expands to 12?

No team with two losses have ever made the playoffs with the 4 team playoff.

Teams in the new playoff system with 2 losses, which is what the original post is about, would still have a chance at making the playoff unless they lose a meaningless game in the conference championship.

If a team opted out today, the conference champion would go to the playoffs, unless you are Alabama or Ohio State. They are treated differently than everyone else.