[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Big Ten information. College football fan @Genetics56 on x 16.4K followers
Created: 2025-07-28 23:08:40 UTC
Why the 4-4-2-2-1-3 CFP model is good for everyone in college football.
Yes, this AQ model is good for everyone in college football. You will not find a national sports media member giving you the reasons why this AQ model is good for everyone in college football because it doesn't benefit their enterprise - narratives and propaganda.
As you read this post, the benefits are not listed in any specific order, but I do provide a number next to the benefit to give you all a complete view on the number of benefits that the AQ model has and there are a lot of them.
As you read below, realize that MLB, NHL, NBA, and the NFL do not use a committee to select who plays in the post-season. All criteria is in placed and everyone knows what has to get done to make the post-season.
And, secondly, as you read below, you will not find a college football media member (national) mention that college wrestling uses an AQ model very similar to what the 4-4-2-2-1-3 is. Thus, the model already exists in college athletics.
Now for the benefits (in no order):
1: It reduces the subjectivtiy and dependency by the committee to decide who makes the CFP. College football should not be using a committee to determine who makes the CFP.
2: It ensures the teams that are playing the best football at the end of the season make the CFP as long as they finished the regular season high enough in the conference standings to qualify for the play-in game or the conference championship.
3: Broader representation across the country and for all conferences. Meaning, more teams around the country can make the CFP. For the benefits of that, keep reading.
4: It allows the CFP to have more diverse matchups. Meaning, more teams from more conferences, more diverse type of teams.
5: It provides a historical opportunity for providing the ability to have more teams across all P4 conferences have a chance at a CFP spot. Data shows from the 2020 to 2024 season that XX% of all P4 schools would have played in a play-in game. Thus, XX% of all P4 schools would have been able to have had the chance to win and be in the CFP. No committee telling them they are not good enough or not worthy enough or because you play in X conference you don't deserve a CFP spot.
6: It puts an increased importance on every conference game. Meaning, every conference came becomes more meaningful and that translate to more fan interest across the entire conference.
7: Because XX spots (14 if ND ranked high enough) are an AQ for the CFP, it provides the opportunity to tie non-conference games into the at-large pool analysis for who gets those at-large spots while also still taking into account season long performance. Meaning, you schedule a good non-conference game and win, you get more credit for that game than a team that played a weak non-conference schedule. The AQ is Group A and the at-large is Group B. The Group B teams are from the losers of the play-in games and maybe X or X other teams that are worth including in the Group B category. This increases the quality of non-conference games.
8: If you don't do a hybrid approach for the CFP, you will have non-conference games that do not keep you from making the CFP. In return, schools can schedule tougher non-conference games with decrease risk. The larger the at-pool volume is for total amount of spots for the CFP, the fewer P4 vs P4 non conference games there will be.
9: Play-in games. This is a conference based playoff. Don't confuse it with anything else. When people say "but you can get more teams into the CFP with more at-large spots," that is a failure to understand the AQ model. The AQ model forces the best teams from the conference at the end of the season to make the CFP. That increases the overall quality of the CFP field. Thus, a school that can't win their own conference play- in game shouldn't be in the CFP at the at-large spot anyways until they are a top team in Group B. Play-in games will become more popular than conference title games because people will already know that the winner and loser of the conference title games will be in the CFP. The play-in games is the drama is. The conference title games will be more about who is the champion and who gets the higher seed. This model forces the importance of a conference title game to still hold value because you can't say "I'd rather not play that weekend and hop the committee picks us" since you still have to play a play-in game if you don't make the conference title game. Therefore, the value of a conference title game from a competitive perspective is saved.
10: Larger at-large models dilute regular seasons and the conference title games become meaningless and hold no competitive value. Coaches will prefer to not play in the conference title games and sit at home that weekend and pray all weekend that a committee selects them.
11: Schools, networks, and conferences make more revenue. Yes that is a good thing, not a bad thing.
12: The AQ gives more cities the potential opportunity to have a home CFP game. That gives the potential opportunity for a small town to have more outside economic activity for a weekend.
13: Opportunities for more fans to be more engaged throughout the entire season, especially in the month of November. As a result you see more ticket sales, more people buying a shirt or hoodie, and the like.
14: It grows the fanbase of causuals for college football across the country because more schools have a shot at the CFP.
15: There is a more meaningful month of November games.
16: The X at-large spot provides the opportunity for when a team gets upset in a play-in game to still get into the CFP via one of the X at-large spots. Thus, the uspet nature of a play-in game is providing the opportunity for a team that earned the win by winning in an upset fashion and a great/good team that got upset can still have the opportunity to make the CFP.
17: There is reduced subjectivity across the entire sport for anything that leads to subjectivity.
18: The Big XX and ACC can remain as viable and relevant conferences since they will have a clear, non subjective path to the CFP every season. Yes the number of AQ spots allotted can be up for discussion, but securing a spot keeps every team in every conference relevant as a result.
19: Because every team and every conference remains relevant, you get more schools who will try to win and invest in the sport of football. That is a great and healthy thing for the sport of college football.
20: There is clear transparency for why someone makes the playoff and why someone doesn't. No changing criteria every year. You don't have to ask why someone got picked over another school.
21: No college football coach (assistant, coordinator, HC) should spend the last month politicking their way into the CFP. Nor should we have any college commissoner doing it. The NBA, NFL, WNBA, MLB etc do not have coaches or a commissioner going on TV trying to politic a team into the playoff. Nor should college football.
22: Fewer snubs.
23: Humans have bias. There is no possible way to eliminate bias from a human. Every choice a human makes has an element of bias built into it. The closest way we can eliminate bias in the CFP procress is requiring teams to win a play-in game. Yes the AQ formula itself is biased, but so would any playoff format. The NFL playoff system is built on a bias - why should it be that way instead of another way. But it works with the bias that was used when creating the playoff system.
24: Upsets in the play-in games. Sports thrives off of upsets. If we didn't have upsets, then sports would be boring. You increase the chances for upsets in an AQ model with the play-in games that is a good thing, not a bad thing.
25: There are more programs across the country engaged every season.
26: Recruiting redistribution. Because more schools are relevant, more schools have a shot at a CFP spot, more talent gets spread around the country.
27: It provides the opportunity for more home playoff games if this model is implemented since it would involve XX teams.
28: Broader storylines across college football that span the entire country.
29: With the AQ model, you can include a European Soccer coefficient aspect to it to adjust the AQ spots for a conference.
30: The AQ alottment per conference is not a forever thing.
At the end of the day, the AQ model is a good thing for everyone in college football.
XXXXX engagements
Related Topics narratives coins sports