I love it.

I thought 8 was a good number but I’m fine with 12.

I don’t think much will change in terms of what teams win. I can’t really see anything lower than a 6 seed competing with the top 2 or 3 teams, but if you’re in it, you’ve got a chance…

This is great for the fans and gives teams who drop a game early in the season a little more to fight for. I’m all for it!

Can't happen soon enough. 

And people will still complain about who is in, who is out, the seeding process, venues for games, and on and on. Bottom line.....$$$$s......real BIG $$$$s.

I always wanted 16 but I will take it!

Good for "The Alliance" playing hardball and not allowing ESPN to gain total rights to an expanded CFP....even if it did cause things to get held up for a few months. 

Article mentioned that ESPN willing to bring in a second partner also played a role in moving forward with this. Still some things to work out with the locations and bowl contracts (Rose Bowl has been a major obstacle) but things look much better now than a month ago. 

6 hours ago, theguru said:

I always wanted 16 but I will take it!

I like 8 or 16, I'm not a fan of byes in any playoff.

I can live with 12 though.

4, 6, 8, 12, 16 whatever the number I'll still be against automatic qualifiers. I'll never like putting a possible 9-4 conference champ in over clearly more deserving teams with only 1 or 2 losses.

Maybe require Conference Champs to have at least 10 or 11 wins (including conference title gane), or force them to get an at-large bid to get in.

19 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

I like 8 or 16, I'm not a fan of byes in any playoff.

I can live with 12 though.

 

13 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

4, 6, 8, 12, 16 whatever the number I'll still be against automatic qualifiers. I'll never like putting a possible 9-4 conference champ in over clearly more deserving teams with only 1 or 2 losses.

Maybe require Conference Champs to have at least 10 or 11 wins (including conference title gane), or force them to get an at-large bid to get in.

Agree, make it 16 and use a computer system to decide the 16 period.

34 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

4, 6, 8, 12, 16 whatever the number I'll still be against automatic qualifiers. I'll never like putting a possible 9-4 conference champ in over clearly more deserving teams with only 1 or 2 losses.

Maybe require Conference Champs to have at least 10 or 11 wins (including conference title gane), or force them to get an at-large bid to get in.

With the new system, 6 highest ranked conference champions would get in as AQ and then 6 at large selections. CFP committee will rank those 12 teams. 

So... You could have a 9-4 conference champ get in with an auto bid but be a 10-11 seed. I don't see anything wrong with that. 

1 minute ago, Walter said:

With the new system, 6 highest ranked conference champions would get in as AQ and then 6 at large selections. CFP committee will rank those 12 teams. 

So... You could have a 9-4 conference champ get in with an auto bid but be a 10-11 seed. I don't see anything wrong with that. 

If they aren't a top 12 team, it would suck. I could see the new Big 12 struggling to field a top 12 team in the near future, yet getting a free ride and knocking out a deserving team.

33 minutes ago, theguru said:

 

Agree, make it 16 and use a computer system to decide the 16 period.

I thought "the EYE TEST" was the committee's new criteria lol.

1 minute ago, 9068 said:

I thought "the EYE TEST" was the committee's new criteria lol.

I have no clue.  We know however it is done, it will be some other way than total merit. 

14 minutes ago, Jumper_Dad said:

If they aren't a top 12 team, it would suck. I could see the new Big 12 struggling to field a top 12 team in the near future, yet getting a free ride and knocking out a deserving team.

Teams should be rewarded for winning their conference and taking care of business against the part of their schedule that is out of their control. 

And considering both UC and BYU (even though they're crapping down their leg against Boise as I type this) are top 10 right now and Oklahoma State is at #12, not sure your argument is valid that the new Big 12 will struggle to field a top 12 team. 

Conferences with the most teams in the top 12 right now:

B1G- 5

New B12- 3

SEC- 2

22 minutes ago, Walter said:

Teams should be rewarded for winning their conference and taking care of business against the part of their schedule that is out of their control. 

And considering both UC and BYU (even though they're crapping down their leg against Boise as I type this) are top 10 right now and Oklahoma State is at #12, not sure your argument is valid that the new Big 12 will struggle to field a top 12 team. 

Conferences with the most teams in the top 12 right now:

B1G- 5

New B12- 3

SEC- 2

I'd love to see UC stay at this level beyond this current run. Honestly I forgot about them moving over there. 

But mark my word there will be a crap champ that doesn't deserve to get in, that will.