CFP committee to present 5+7 model to board

[NT80]

This basically kicks the Pac-(2) out of their automatic entry into the CFP.

The 5+7 model, which was agreed upon at Thursday's in-person meeting in Dallas, is a change from the previous 6+6 proposal and still requires unanimous approval by the 11 presidents and chancellors who control the CFP.

 On Thursday, the group also established a new policy requiring a league to have eight members to be eligible for an automatic qualifying spot in the 12-team field.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38865936/cfp-committee-present-5+7-model-board

[Mean Green 93-98]

This will make it a little harder for the AAC champ to get a spot in the playoff.  If the SEC, B1G, ACC, B12, and one other conference all have conference champions ranked ahead of the AAC champ, we're out of luck.

Edited November 11, 2023 by Mean Green 93-98

[NT80]

3 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

This will make it a little harder for the AAC champ to get a spot in the playoff.  If the SEC, B1G, ACC, B12, and one other conference all have conference champions ranked ahead of the AAC champ, we're out of luck.

It's really no different for us (AAC) from the previous 6 + 6 proposal.  It still allows the highest G5 champ to be in the CFP; that's all we had in the other proposal.  

[outoftown]

What this primarily does, because of the 8 conference member minimum, is f OSU/WSU pac2. They now need to get an agreement with the MWC even more urgently, as they can only get at larges otherwise next year. And I am very skeptical this will work by 24. Not unless they open the wallet and give the MWC membership that is supposed to play them some of that leftover PAC money that they are still fighting for in court. The leverage in that negotiation is now much more firmly with the MWC.

Edited November 12, 2023 by outoftown

[NT80]

10 hours ago, outoftown said:

What this primarily does, because of the 8 conference member minimum, is f OSU/WSU pac2. They now need to get an agreement with the MWC even more urgently, as they can only get at larges otherwise next year. And I am very skeptical this will work by 24. Not unless they open the wallet and give the MWC membership that is supposed to play them some of that leftover PAC money that they are still fighting for in court. The leverage in that negotiation is now much more firmly with the MWC.

OSU/WSU still have the PAC brand, which has more value as a P5 entity than the MWC as a G5.  I would not be surprised to see them merge the MWC into the PAC brand to keep all the P5 automatic accesses.  They would just need to re-do media contracts and settle PAC liabilities then they keep whatever is left from the $200mil in assets.

[outoftown]

33 minutes ago, NT80 said:

OSU/WSU still have the PAC brand, which has more value as a P5 entity than the MWC as a G5.  I would not be surprised to see them merge the MWC into the PAC brand to keep all the P5 automatic accesses.  They would just need to re-do media contracts and settle PAC liabilities then they keep whatever is left from the $200mil in assets.

That may all be true. But to do it before the start of the 24 season would be an enormous race at this point. I would bet against them getting that done in time.

[NT80]

13 hours ago, outoftown said:

That may all be true. But to do it before the start of the 24 season would be an enormous race at this point. I would bet against them getting that done in time.

The NCAA gives them 2 years.

[keith]

On 11/11/2023 at 4:41 PM, NT80 said:

It's really no different for us (AAC) from the previous 6 + 6 proposal.  It still allows the highest G5 champ to be in the CFP; that's all we had in the other proposal.  

I'm not sure it does get the highest G5 in.  Didn't the 6+6 model guarantee a G5 champion a spot in the playoff?  It was the conference champions of the B1G, SEC, ACC, B12 and PAC conferences plus the highest ranked G5 champion.  That's the 5+1 guaranteed to make the playoff.  I don't think the 5+7 guarantees a G5 champion a spot.  Assuming OSU and WSU keep the PAC together by pulling in most or all of the MWC and maintains its "P" status and either OSU or WSU win the conference for a few years, they will most assuredly be ranked higher than any of the G5 conference champions.  In the 5+7 model it's just the 5 highest ranked conference champions regardless of conference (P or G) designation.  It will always be B1G, SEC, ACC, B12 and probably the PAC-whatever.  Then the next 7 will come from some combination of teams from the B1G, SEC, ACC and B12.  The 5-7 will effectively lock-out all current G5 schools from the playoff except those that either join with OSU and WSU to keep the PAC afloat or are lucky enough to move up into one of the other 4 conferences.  

[outoftown]

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

The NCAA gives them 2 years.

The NCAA yes. But with this new decision the CFP does not. It is installing a minimum of 8 teams for conference champions to be eligible for the 5 in the 5+7 equation.  In 24 they would only be eligible for the at large if they are a two team conference. And considering they don't have a schedule yet, the assumption is that they will not be playing enough strong teams to make any kind of case for such an at large.

Edited November 13, 2023 by outoftown