I'm saying get rid of the committee and go back to computer rankings. No one outside the top 16 is going to win a national championship. The only concern I have is that Indiana played 16 games this season. Going to 16 teams would have made it 17 games. That's a crazy long schedule.
The committee isn't going away and won't be replaced by computer models, which are just as imperfect (if not moreso). That's a complete non-starter for both the B1G and SEC if I'm not mistaken. With or without an increase from 12 to 16 teams, I believe conference title games should be eliminated. Problem is, every conference loves them. However, the B1G's 24-team proposal does include eliminating conference title games.
Under the old rules yes, but ND would’ve in over Miami under the new rules I believe. Money is and will be the biggest reason so I expect schools to still schedule them. But from a pure CFP standpoint, a loss hurts you obviously but a win may not necessarily help which should never be the case. I don't know how often it will happen, but this past season is the perfect example. A win wouldn't have gotten Miami in over ND and a loss would've assuredly killed any chance they had (see Texas).
The losers aren't fully protected (see BYU) so it seems like it's just a matter of when the committee decides to protect them or not. Computer models aren't perfect but they could eliminate inherent biases and inconistency when applying the CFP qualifications.
Nobody gives a flip about the Big 12. It's only the SEC losers that are protected because of Greg Sankey's intimidation. It's one of the reasons why the SEC finally moved to a 9-game conference schedule. Sankey had previously made it clear they would not do so if the loser of THEIR championship game was punished. To @rockbox , this is also why computers will never replace the CFP committee. The B1G and the SEC commissioners want to be able to pull strings and rattle cages when they please.
What I think should happen and what they will do are totally different things. I know they will do what is in their best interest monetarily. It's the SEC and B1G's world and everyone else is just living in it. Until a team outside of those 2 conferences wins championships regularly, it's not going to change and that is not going to happen because there is too much money in those two conferences.
Precisely the reason why I prefer a computer model vs a committee. I will say that with all the perceived power Sankey has, he might have backed the whole conference into a corner. He has essentially made the path to the CFP harder than any other conference while also losing out on one CFP spot.
Lane conveniently leaves out the semifinal round on Jan 8th & 9th. The one redeeming aspect of the B1G's proposed 24-team playoff is it eliminates conference championship games.
Somehow, they are making the semis 2 weeks after the quarterfinals, and the finals are like 10 days after that. It's all nonsensical. People will be focused on NFL playoffs by the time the final rolls around.
