Could ACC be snubbed and SBC get in CFP?

[AppStFan1]

The only bowl spot open is versus Georgia Southern in Birmingham on Monday, Dec. 29.

We might be asked.

We don't deserve it. Hope we don't get asked or turn it down if we are.

How do you know what the players deserve? Seniors. Walk ons. Freshman. Backups. Would they not deserve an opportunity?

First of all any senior who is trying to play pro ball should not risk the injury for a meaningless game. Second, a 5-7 team should not be playing in the postseason. Giving everyone a participation trophy just deludes actual accomplishment. You see all the 5-7 teams who have declined bowls? They feel the same way I do. Notre Dame does not even see the point. If it is not the CFP then it is really pointless to be honest. So many players are in the portal, just decide to sit out, etc. Many of the star players don't play and I don't blame them.

Not a problem for us. No pro players.

I agree with you but I would expect most of our seniors to train and give it a shot. There will be around 3,000+ players who workout and pursue the NFL even though less than half of them will actually get a chance.

[moonshine]

Definitely don’t deserve a bowl game but any player that doesn’t want to play more ball should probably hit the portal. After what I observed this past season, this team needs reps together.

If you turn it down, it’s no longer “Anybody, Anywhere, Anytime.” I’d like to keep that tradition.

[kornegaylw]

Iowa St
Kansas St
Baylor
Notre Dame

All have opted out of bowls.
Bowl season might be toast.

A football NIT will come along if bowls go away...there will be too much dead TV air to fill

Players will still opt out. With the portal window and players needing time to take visits, bowl games are pretty stupid now. The best thing to do is expand the playoff to 24 teams, give every conference an auto-bid, and begin the playoffs in early December and just space the title game 2 weeks after the semis or something.

Fine...

Lets hope JMU beasts Oregon so the P4 homers can shut up about "G5s can't compete".

[AppStFan1]

Iowa St
Kansas St
Baylor
Notre Dame

All have opted out of bowls.
Bowl season might be toast.

A football NIT will come along if bowls go away...there will be too much dead TV air to fill

Players will still opt out. With the portal window and players needing time to take visits, bowl games are pretty stupid now. The best thing to do is expand the playoff to 24 teams, give every conference an auto-bid, and begin the playoffs in early December and just space the title game 2 weeks after the semis or something.

Fine...

Lets hope JMU beasts Oregon so the P4 homers can shut up about "G5s can't compete".

Really need JMU to beat Oregon or play close. If they lose badly then it will hurt the Sun Belt in the future without a team having some P4 wins. We need them to represent our league well.

[t4pizza]

I actually think the committee got the right teams in this year under the parameters that they work with. I have no problem with 2 G6 teams making the field. But I also don’t pretend that either could compete with any of the other team’s schedules. Nobody ever thought that 2 G6 teams would make it, but they just did. Everyone who thinks the rules will now change to prevent it in the future just remember that all conferences and Noter Dame have a vote. The Sun Belt gets a vote just the same as the SEC gets a vote, now the SEC clearly has more power to influence other votes but they only get a vote. If the other conferences all take a hard stand and stop being bullied by the SEC and BIG10 (18), then who knows what can happens. The Bug 12 and ACC need to realize that their interests align more with the G6 at the end of the day than with the big 2.

I'm not sure if any changes need to be unanimous anymore but I don't know the full details. My understanding is SEC and Big Ten now have a larger say but that's all I know.

From the proposals I have seen, they are still keeping at least spot open for the G5/G6 (when Pac-12 reforms).

The ACC and their members could have prevented this from happening in numerous ways. UVA could have beaten Duke. SMU could have beaten Cal. Duke could have beaten Uconn and Tulane. The conference could have selected better tiebreaks to give Miami or GT a spot in title game. The issue isn't necessarily with the playoff structure. It's because one of the power conferences dropped the ball. If they fix that and actually perform like they are supposed to given their reputation, then James Madison goes goes to New Orleans or Boca Raton and no one has to wring their hands over restructuring of the playoff format.

Pretty sure all conference and Notre Dame get equal votes. The SEC and Big10 tried to usurp more power but it didn’t pass. All the conferences are equal in votes.

Again I don't have full details but I think something has changed to give more weighting to Big Ten/SEC. Below is a sample quote from one article in the New York Times on future playoff formats.

"The new CFP contracts that go into effect after this season give the Big Ten and SEC the final say over the future of the format — though they do require the two richest conferences to seek input from the others"

The above is very vague so I don't know how much "input" is required from the other conferences even if somehow the Big Ten/SEC have final say.

I know what you are talking about, I remember hearing and reading about it as well, just not sure it got finalized. Looking at the College Football Playoff website, it shows the governance as all conferences and Notre Dame. It doesn't specifically say they all have equal votes but seems that way to me. I haven't found anything that specifically spells out that SEC and BIG10 have greater voting rights. It could be, I just can't find a concrete answer to that and there is no mention of it on the official website. Here is a link about the governance.

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/spor ... nance.aspx

[JTApps1]

Iowa St
Kansas St
Baylor
Notre Dame

All have opted out of bowls.
Bowl season might be toast.

This has been the endgame ever since opt outs for players became a normalized thing. And I'm for it. Make the threshold 8 wins.

Agreed. Have a 16 team playoff with 15-20 bowls at most. Make then actually mean something.

[AppInDC]

I actually think the committee got the right teams in this year under the parameters that they work with. I have no problem with 2 G6 teams making the field. But I also don’t pretend that either could compete with any of the other team’s schedules. Nobody ever thought that 2 G6 teams would make it, but they just did. Everyone who thinks the rules will now change to prevent it in the future just remember that all conferences and Noter Dame have a vote. The Sun Belt gets a vote just the same as the SEC gets a vote, now the SEC clearly has more power to influence other votes but they only get a vote. If the other conferences all take a hard stand and stop being bullied by the SEC and BIG10 (18), then who knows what can happens. The Bug 12 and ACC need to realize that their interests align more with the G6 at the end of the day than with the big 2.

I'm not sure if any changes need to be unanimous anymore but I don't know the full details. My understanding is SEC and Big Ten now have a larger say but that's all I know.

From the proposals I have seen, they are still keeping at least spot open for the G5/G6 (when Pac-12 reforms).

The ACC and their members could have prevented this from happening in numerous ways. UVA could have beaten Duke. SMU could have beaten Cal. Duke could have beaten Uconn and Tulane. The conference could have selected better tiebreaks to give Miami or GT a spot in title game. The issue isn't necessarily with the playoff structure. It's because one of the power conferences dropped the ball. If they fix that and actually perform like they are supposed to given their reputation, then James Madison goes goes to New Orleans or Boca Raton and no one has to wring their hands over restructuring of the playoff format.

Pretty sure all conference and Notre Dame get equal votes. The SEC and Big10 tried to usurp more power but it didn’t pass. All the conferences are equal in votes.

Again I don't have full details but I think something has changed to give more weighting to Big Ten/SEC. Below is a sample quote from one article in the New York Times on future playoff formats.

"The new CFP contracts that go into effect after this season give the Big Ten and SEC the final say over the future of the format — though they do require the two richest conferences to seek input from the others"

The above is very vague so I don't know how much "input" is required from the other conferences even if somehow the Big Ten/SEC have final say.

I know what you are talking about, I remember hearing and reading about it as well, just not sure it got finalized. Looking at the College Football Playoff website, it shows the governance as all conferences and Notre Dame. It doesn't specifically say they all have equal votes but seems that way to me. I haven't found anything that specifically spells out that SEC and BIG10 have greater voting rights. It could be, I just can't find a concrete answer to that and there is no mention of it on the official website. Here is a link about the governance.

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/spor ... nance.aspx

This article is from early 2024 but has more details than I have seen in other places. Paywall if not Athletic subscriber.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/534314 ... nue-split/

It still seems vague but it locked in some protections for ACC, Big 12, and the rest of he conferences through 2031 but SEC and Big Ten will basically have say to revise within that framework. My understanding since then is Big Ten and SEC aren't totally aligned so they may be unable to make changes in time for next year.