Interesting article by Dan Wetzel about the CFP.

[PhilSimms11]

These teams won their regular season conference outright:
P5
ACC--Clemson (12-0)
Big XII--Oklahoma (11-1)
SEC--Alabama (12-0)
----------
These teams did not:
Big Ten--Ohio St (11-1), Michigan (10-2), and Northwestern (8-4) are in a 3-way tie at 8-1
Pac-12--Washington (9-3) d. Washington St (10-2) head-to-head, but tied in conference at 7-2
_______________
G5
AAC--UCF (11-0)
MAC--Buffalo (10-2)
----------
C-USA--Middle Tenn (8-4) d. UAB (9-3) head-to-head, but tied in conference at 7-1
MWC--Boise St (10-2), Fresno St (10-2), and Utah St (10-2) all tied in conference at 7-1, however, Boise St d. Fresno St and Utah St head-to-head
SBC--App St (9-2) d. Troy head-to-head, but tied in conference at 7-1

If Dan Wetzel's idea came to fruition and CCGs were eliminated the conference champions could be determined quite easily for the most part. The Big Ten would be a bit more complicated, but I suppose you'd give it to Ohio St with their win over Michigan and Northwestern having four losses overall. Now, for the exciting conclusion...

P5
(1)Alabama (12-0) vs (8)Washington (9-3)
(4)Georgia (11-1) vs (5)Oklahoma (11-1)

(2)Clemson (12-0) vs (7)Michigan (10-2)
(3)Notre Dame (12-0) vs (6)Ohio St (11-1)
----------
G5
(1)UCF (11-0) vs (8)App St (9-2)
(4)Utah St (10-2) vs (5)*Army (10-2)

(2)Boise St (10-2) vs (7)Middle Tenn (8-4)
(3)Fresno St (10-2) vs (6)Buffalo (10-2)
(*)contingent upon them d. Navy (3-9)

Hard as hell leaving Cincinnati (10-2) out, but there's only 3 at-large spots. This would be utmost epic in regards to awesomeness. I expect absolutely no push back on this.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I thought the initial idea was interesting and after giving it some thought I think I am in favor of this. A concern I have is that you from time to time have conferences so large that teams play each other infrequently. If there was some language to ensure better OOC scheduling I'd be 100% onboard.

 

[belcherboy]

I don't understand what he is saying here:

No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 4 Georgia: Alabama only has to not lose by, say, 50 points and they advance. Georgia either has to win, or maybe just lose by a couple points, to advance.

So is he actually saying that if Georgia loses a very close game, they will be in the playoffs? If that were the case then it would be Alabama vs. Georgia as the 1 and 4 seeds. Even in a close defeat, I don't want to see them play back to back games.

 

[PhilSimms11]

I thought the initial idea was interesting and after giving it some thought I think I am in favor of this. A concern I have is that you from time to time have conferences so large that teams play each other infrequently. If there was some language to ensure better OOC scheduling I'd be 100% onboard.

1991 was the last season with a conference no larger than 10 teams. In 1992, the SEC expanded to 12 and had the inaugural conference championship game.

1991
ACC--8 (teams)
Big East--8
Big 8--8
Big Ten--10
Pac-10--10
SEC--10
SWC--9
----------
Big West--8
MAC--9
WAC--9

In 1991, what would an 8-team playoff look like using the same criteria as today? Would've been pretty sweet.

(1)*Miami (11-0) vs (8)Clemson (9-1-1)
(4)Michigan (10-1) vs (5)*Florida St (10-2)

(2)Washington (11-0) vs (7)Nebraska (9-1-1)
(3)Florida (10-1) vs (6)Texas A&M (10-1)
(*)at-large