2024 BYU Football - Year 2 in the Big 12

[Omaha 680]

I'd rather face a nonconference opponent in the bowl game, but at least it's been a long time since playing Colorado.

Also, nice to finally be in a post-Christmas bowl game.

Who's going to San Antonio?

I toyed around with it but probably won't. I have more than exceeded my football budget for the year (especially when you include the money I lost reselling B12 championship tickets ). I'm going to save sports travel budget for March and hope KY gets things pulled together.

I will say that I'm happy about the game. Really the playoff is all that matters but Colorado is a fun matchup and Deion currently is claiming all their stars will play.

[Omaha 680]

I liked that idea (16 teams) when we had 13 FBS conferences and could have had AQ for each conference champion plus three at-large (or byes). Now, the B1G and SEC will get a disproportionate number of bites at the apple. For example, the B1G has 1/3 of the teams in the entire pool this year.

Of course, I come from a perspective of wanting every team to start the year with the ability to win a championship if they win all of their games. I also value conference championships. The current model is more about maximizing viewers/revenue.

One can imagine a scenario in which the SEC and B1G each have three strong teams, the ACC and Big 12 each have two, and the AAC, MWC and Sun Belt all have undefeated champions. An undefeated Sun Belt champion, e.g., could easily get left out of the 12-team playoff.

I agree with the bolded and I'm ok with that. The reality is the schedules are so much easier in the G5 (especially in conferences like the Sun Belt) that teams who really want to get into the playoff need to schedule 1-2 P5 non-conference games and probably win. Boise is where they are partially because of how they took Oregon to the wire. If Army had beaten ND they would probably be in.

I like the 12-team format and don't want to add more to make November less exciting just to make sure a Sun Belt champion can get in if they win all their games.

[Moliere]

I'd rather face a nonconference opponent in the bowl game, but at least it's been a long time since playing Colorado.

Also, nice to finally be in a post-Christmas bowl game.

Who's going to San Antonio?

Looks like I’ll be there

[Pelado]

I'd rather face a nonconference opponent in the bowl game, but at least it's been a long time since playing Colorado.

Also, nice to finally be in a post-Christmas bowl game.

Who's going to San Antonio?

[Joe Public]

I was thinking 16 would be a good number. As is, I think we're in a pretty good spot. Everyone controls their own destiny. You'll note the committee bias largely follows the same bias of the polls. I have seen that bias moderated over the years. Hopefully that continues.

I liked that idea (16 teams) when we had 13 FBS conferences and could have had AQ for each conference champion plus three at-large (or byes). Now, the B1G and SEC will get a disproportionate number of bites at the apple. For example, the B1G has 1/3 of the teams in the entire pool this year.

Of course, I come from a perspective of wanting every team to start the year with the ability to win a championship if they win all of their games. I also value conference championships. The current model is more about maximizing viewers/revenue.

One can imagine a scenario in which the SEC and B1G each have three strong teams, the ACC and Big 12 each have two, and the AAC, MWC and Sun Belt all have undefeated champions. An undefeated Sun Belt champion, e.g., could easily get left out of the 12-team playoff.

[Green Monstah]

I’m glad he got extended.

[Maximus]

Kalani extended again. Sigh. No reason to do it now

[Bo Diddley]

DH's idea that no polls should be released until mid Oct is a great one. I don't think it's workable because the bias largely follows the AP and you can't really direct them not to do their polls. But this year especially teams in the ACC and Big 12 were crippled by that preseason bias that did not wear off at all as the season went on.

Totally agree. I doubt you could ever get them to stop polling for six weeks though. And even if they did, someone else would step up to fill the vacuum and bridge the gap and perpetuate the perceptions built early on.

[Omaha 680]

I was thinking 16 would be a good number. As is, I think we're in a pretty good spot. Everyone controls their own destiny. You'll note the committee bias largely follows the same bias of the polls. I have seen that bias moderated over the years. Hopefully that continues.

DH's idea that no polls should be released until mid Oct is a great one. I don't think it's workable because the bias largely follows the AP and you can't really direct them not to do their polls. But this year especially teams in the ACC and Big 12 were crippled by that preseason bias that did not wear off at all as the season went on.

[Bo Diddley]

No one will be left out that absolutely deserved to be in based on performance. The issue is the SEC/Big Ten bias that will put 3 loss SEC teams ahead of 2 loss ACC/Big 12 teams that would deserve it more. The committee needs to define the metrics better and follow them in the ranking and defense of their rankings. Too often they default to the "eye test" which really means this team plans in the SEC so I think they are better just because of that.

I think 12 is a fantastic number for the playoff. The excitement in October/November was great because of it. I don't want it to expand so the blue bloods aren't in danger of missing out until their 4th loss. That would devalue the regular season games beyond what I would want. I also think I'm in the minority in that I like conferences and want to keep them intact including automatic bids and first round byes for champions.

I was thinking 16 would be a good number. As is, I think we're in a pretty good spot. Everyone controls their own destiny. You'll note the committee bias largely follows the same bias of the polls. I have seen that bias moderated over the years. Hopefully that continues.

[Omaha 680]

I think the playoffs need to expand, but this is the most equitable it's ever been. There is still work to be done. Is there anyone in particular you feel was left out?

No one will be left out that absolutely deserved to be in based on performance. The issue is the SEC/Big Ten bias that will put 3 loss SEC teams ahead of 2 loss ACC/Big 12 teams that would deserve it more. The committee needs to define the metrics better and follow them in the ranking and defense of their rankings. Too often they default to the "eye test" which really means this team plans in the SEC so I think they are better just because of that.

I think 12 is a fantastic number for the playoff. The excitement in October/November was great because of it. I don't want it to expand so the blue bloods aren't in danger of missing out until their 4th loss. That would devalue the regular season games beyond what I would want. I also think I'm in the minority in that I like conferences and want to keep them intact including automatic bids and first round byes for champions.

[Bo Diddley]

My interest in CFB appears to end with the regular season. The whole CFB playoff committee and SEC/B1G browbeating and entitlement is lame. If the 12 team playoff doesn't excite me, this certainly wouldn't.

I think the playoffs need to expand, but this is the most equitable it's ever been. There is still work to be done. Is there anyone in particular you feel was left out?

[USUC]

Who's in?

Screenshot_20241207_091721_Facebook.jpg

My interest in CFB appears to end with the regular season. The whole CFB playoff committee and SEC/B1G browbeating and entitlement is lame. If the 12 team playoff doesn't excite me, this certainly wouldn't.

[byufan4ever]

Who's in?

Screenshot_20241207_091721_Facebook.jpg

[Bo Diddley]

Not sure, but he seems to have chutzpa.

Well played.