Potential new seeding format for 2025

[NDinNJ]

It looks like they are wanting to go with a straight seeding based on the CFP committee's ranking, giving the top 4 ranked teams a bye regardless of conference championship. This would open the door for ND to get a bye.

CFP leaders waiting on changes to seeding format

The CFP management committee is waiting on more information before deciding whether to change how teams are seeded in the 12-team playoff this fall.

www.espn.com

 

[echowaker]

It looks like they are wanting to go with a straight seeding based on the CFP committee's ranking, giving the top 4 ranked teams a bye regardless of conference championship. This would open the door for ND to get a bye.

CFP leaders waiting on changes to seeding format

The CFP management committee is waiting on more information before deciding whether to change how teams are seeded in the 12-team playoff this fall.

www.espn.com

I'd prefer a first round home game. It's a great momentum builder I believe. ND already has a built in bye by not having to play a conference championship game. It's why they were excluded from a 1st round bye originally. I think that's fair.

 

[FightingIrish44]

I'd prefer a first round home game. It's a great momentum builder I believe. ND already has a built in bye by not having to play a conference championship game. It's why they were excluded from a 1st round bye originally. I think that's fair.

Even without having to play a conference championship, you’d still rather play a first round game?

That’s a pass for me. A team that loses in the first round is still good enough to win the title. I’d rather avoid the risk of losing as well as injuries. Rylie Mills and ND would have been better off had they not played Indiana last year IMO. Now the lack of incentive to play the game is magnified if ND is a top 4 team.

 

[echowaker]

Even without having to play a conference championship, you’d still rather play a first round game?

That’s a pass for me. A team that loses in the first round is still good enough to win the title. I’d rather avoid the risk of losing as well well as injuries. Rylie Mills and ND would have been better off had they not played Indiana last year IMO. Now the lack of incentive to play the game is magnified if ND is a top 4 team.

All I know is that all 4 teams that had a bye lost their first playoff game. The 4 first round winners rode that momentum to wins in the 2nd round. In all honesty no team should get two byes which ND would. Not being eligible for a bye in the playoff is a small price to pay for their continued independence.

 

[FightingIrish44]

All I know is that all 4 teams that had a bye lost their first playoff game. The 4 first round winners rode that momentum to wins in the 2nd round. In all honesty no team should get two byes which ND would. Not being eligible for a bye in the playoff is a small price to pay for their continued independence.

I disagree with the premise that ND gets two byes. A conference title loser can still end up with a bye so they’re not automatically shut out. What about every other team not playing in the conference title game? Do you consider them as having received a “bye”? An 11-1 3rd place team from a conference could receive an actual playoff bye as well.

I was more addressing that you seem to think playing Round 1 is better.

Last year was just one season. I don’t think it’s prudent to use such a small sample size to be under the belief that playing in Round 1 is advantageous. No one actually thought Boise State and Arizona State were top 4 teams which is why a change is being made. Ohio State barely lost to Oregon in the regular season and could have easily found themselves with a bye. Georgia should have lost to Georgia Tech and been 10-3 (perhaps not a top 4 team). Georgia could have potentially lined up the next week and beat ND by three touchdowns.

In short, correlation does not equal causation. Also, it’s not ND’s fault that these conferences bloated themselves and are playing extra games for the purpose of money.

 

[echowaker]

I disagree with the premise that ND gets two byes. A conference title loser can still end up with a bye so they’re not automatically shut out. What about every other team not playing in the conference title game? Do you consider them as having received a “bye”? An 11-1 3rd place team from a conference could receive an actual playoff bye as well.

I was more addressing that you seem to think playing Round 1 is better.

Last year was just one season. I don’t think it’s prudent to use such a small sample size to be under the belief that playing in Round 1 is advantageous. No one actually thought Boise State and Arizona State were top 4 teams which is why a change is being made. Ohio State barely lost to Oregon in the regular season and could have easily found themselves with a bye. Georgia should have lost to Georgia Tech and been 10-3 (perhaps not a top 4 team). Georgia could have potentially lined up the next week and beat ND by three touchdowns.

In short, correlation does not equal causation. Also, it’s not ND’s fault that these conferences bloated themselves and are playing extra games for the purpose of money.

Bottom line for me is I consider not having to play or prepare for a conference championship game a bye. It's the exact reason why Swarbrick made the deal he did. The benefit of that home playoff game was immeasurable and I would bet every other team that hosted felt the same way. Ideally you have 16 teams and first rounds at home. The tweaking will continue I'm sure.

 

[Golson5]

All I know is that all 4 teams that had a bye lost their first playoff game. The 4 first round winners rode that momentum to wins in the 2nd round. In all honesty no team should get two byes which ND would. Not being eligible for a bye in the playoff is a small price to pay for their continued

A major reason for that was because 2 of the teams that got the bye actually weren't deserving of a bye and wouldn't have gotten it in the new format. So you can't really use that because Boise and Arizona State were inferior teams

 

[echowaker]

A major reason for that was because 2 of the teams that got the bye actually weren't deserving of a bye and wouldn't have gotten it in the new format. So you can't really use that because Boise and Arizona State were inferior teams

I deal in what actually occurred. Your opinion on two of the teams that received byes is not relevant. Bottom line for me is that I believe ND or any team hosting a 1st round game benefits more than they would if they had a bye under the current format. I would prefer a format where there are no byes at all.

 

[Golson5]

I deal in what actually occurred. Your opinion on two of the teams that received byes is not relevant. Bottom line for me is that I believe ND or any team hosting a 1st round game benefits more than they would if they had a bye under the current format. I would prefer a format where there are no byes at all.

Yeah it is relevant. Because 2 of those teams would not be there in the new format and they were inferior teams. So using that in your data is pointless. Penn State and Texas were better teams. The 1st rd bye status was irrelevant. Some years the bye would be beneficial. And other years it wouldn't.

There is no one size fits all. Every situation is different and will always be such

 

[Get Nasty]

I'd prefer 16 teams no byes.... That's just me. I love more games on campuses. I attended a first round game and it was electric!

 

[Patrish]

16 teams, no byes, neutral sites