National D1 League
6 - 10 team conferences

D2 - Everybody else

Play everybody in your conference…

Play 3 Non cons
2 against D2
1 against D1

1st or 2nd in your conference - CFP
No At Large

Pretty close to an NFL model… It's where it's heading, anyway…

D1 Non Con Foe - Rotating conference matchups based on position from previous year.

1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, etc…

No computers, no committees….

As Pate said: the expansionists got what they wanted and are now trying to "fix" it. THIS IS WHAT YOU ASKED FOR.

Why the disdain for conference championships? It's all coming from the desire to get into the playoff. So the poisoned pill here is a smotheringly large playoff.

Cut the thing in half. Heck; give a committee a variable playoff where they simply name the "contenders" whether there's just 2 or up to 5 - then rank and right-size the games to that.

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

Cut the thing in half. Heck; give a committee a variable playoff where they simply name the "contenders" whether there's just 2 or up to 5 - then rank and right-size the games to that.

---

This. They should have a formula that takes into account all the metrics and gets you to a grade out if 100. If your grade is above 90, you're in the playoffs.

Some years you have 12, some years 4, some years just 2.

My guess is fixed number of conference spots and the conference championship game becomes essentially a play in spot for the two teams on the fringes for the last spot. I.e. if top 3 teams go, two automatically qualify and 3/4 play for the last spot. Then the game matters and potentially increase viewership,

Make it 24 team and round 1 is when the CCG's are today.

Hot take: The BCS was fine, but flawed. The four team playoff was better, but flaw. The 12 team is worse.

The current CCG format is punitive…

You work all year long and then some imaginary, random champ game screws the loser due to recency bias…

If it can't be decided TOTALLY on the field, it's bogus…

Go to 6 - 12 team conferences with two divisions and have division champs play a CCG, as the first round of the CFP…

Either way… Decide it on the field - win or lose - or keep this biased BS committee…

It's not hard… It's still this way only because certain programs (we all know who they are) can't stand the thought of having their century-old, meaningless, helmet-reps being held accountable by their actual annual record…

…and because ESPN ruined CFB…

16 no ccg games power 4 each get teams one from g5 seven at large which will mostly be SEC and B1G

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

As Pate said: the expansionists got what they wanted and are now trying to "fix" it. THIS IS WHAT YOU ASKED FOR.

Why the disdain for conference championships? It's all coming from the desire to get into the playoff. So the poisoned pill here is a smotheringly large playoff.

Cut the thing in half. Heck; give a committee a variable playoff where they simply name the "contenders" whether there's just 2 or up to 5 - then rank and right-size the games to that.

---

Pate is right about a lot but he's been wrong on the playoff for a very long time. It should be and should have already been expanded. The new world is going to trend towards parity and a smaller playoff leads to helmet bias like it always did and that bias has significantly less impact with a larger pool of teams from which to choose.

conference championships should named that same way NFL conferences are decided

Something has to give. Either the SEC stays at 8 conference game schedule or the CCG goes away. Kirby Smart is correct here.

Kirby Smart jumps on his soapbox about the SEC's 9th conference game😳#GeorgiaFootball #UGA #UGAFootball #Dawgs #GoDawgs #GeorgiaBulldogs pic.twitter.com/d9VRyD2Pe3

— UGASports.com (@ugasportscom) December 7, 2025

And to expand further on why a 9 conference game schedule is a very bad idea just look how many teams the conferences have in the playoffs today. Who has the most?

And which conferences are already using a 9 game conference schedule. See any differences? It is called math.

aggiehawg said:

---

And to expand further on why a 9 conference game schedule is a very bad idea just look how many teams the conferences have in the playoffs today. Who has the most?

And which conferences are already using a 9 game conference schedule. See any differences? It is called math.

---

Big Ten had the most teams in last year with a 9 team schedule.

I don't think this is a hot take at all. Not as of today.

But, I do think once this gets figured out, the expanded playoff will be better.

I would have multiple divisions under one league umbrella (tell the NCAA to gtfo) based on historical competitiveness and financial commitment to football. 30 to 40 teams per division. So that way when the JMUs, UNTs, Tulanes of the world have great seasons it's not for nothing. Our Decembers and Januarys would be packed of meaningful games on TV instead of these glorified exhibition games.

maroonthrunthru said:

---

National D1 League
6 - 10 team conferences

D2 - Everybody else

Play everybody in your conference…

Play 3 Non cons
2 against D2
1 against D1

1st or 2nd in your conference - CFP
No At Large

Pretty close to an NFL model… It's where it's heading, anyway…

D1 Non Con Foe - Rotating conference matchups based on position from previous year.

1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, etc…

No computers, no committees….

---

Except that it's in no way headed in that direction.

Buzzkill said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

As Pate said: the expansionists got what they wanted and are now trying to "fix" it. THIS IS WHAT YOU ASKED FOR.

Why the disdain for conference championships? It's all coming from the desire to get into the playoff. So the poisoned pill here is a smotheringly large playoff.

Cut the thing in half. Heck; give a committee a variable playoff where they simply name the "contenders" whether there's just 2 or up to 5 - then rank and right-size the games to that.

---

Pate is right about a lot but he's been wrong on the playoff for a very long time. It should be and should have already been expanded. The new world is going to trend towards parity and a smaller playoff leads to helmet bias like it always did and that bias has significantly less impact with a larger pool of teams from which to choose.

conference championships should named that same way NFL conferences are decided

---

Parity?!? In what universe does this world of infinite pay produce parity?!?

If you lean on conference championships you'll see teams jumping to easier conferences and restoring some semblance of balance.

It's amazing how quickly some fell in love with a "playoff" which has done nothing but water down the season while ramping up helmet bias and girlish drama.

Your take is bad and you should get your IQ checked.

Keep it as is but eliminate the conference champion auto bids.

I like the current system. Looking at whether Alabama and Miami are better than 2-loss Notre Dame, Vanderbilt or BYU is a legitimate argument, but those teams did lose 2 games. Whoever wins this tournament will be a 100% legitimate champion that no one can dispute. The system works.