to think the P1 is probably dying. If so, I am glad, but never say never. ** Edited by Stech at 5/7/2026, 8:47:22 PM

Are happening. The coaches are saying what they'd prefer. They're not the decision-makers though, so it's fairly meaningless. This is like a vote in a TSL article for "who would you like as the next VT AD?"

Coaches are still the highest paid employees at many (most? All?) universities. They are a large investment. So their voices carry weight and will help influence what AD’s and presidents do on a national scale. So yes you are right that this vote means nothing at the moment. But it does indicate where the winds may be blowing in the future. ** Edited by HokieAl at 5/7/2026, 10:20:55 AM

tiebreaker doesn't go his team's way which costs them a playoff bid and/or 1st Round bye.

Guess that ensures ND makes it every year...lol

Obviously the game is meaningless for the P2s because both teams have already qualified before the game is played. Although a P2 coach could complain about not getting a 1st Round bye because the other team received it for finishing higher in the final poll and they didn't have an opportunity to leapfrog them. The same may not be true for the ACC and Big XII though. For the ACC and Big XII, the game can serve as an opportunity for 1 more team to play its way into the field because the team won the CCG. It could matter if Team A and Team both finish with the same conference record and they didn't play each other during the regular season. If Team A is ranked in the Top 24 going into what would be Conference Championship Week and Team B is not, then Team A will be the only team to represent the conference in the Playoffs that year because Team B didn't have the opportunity to play its way into the field.

If there are no more conference championship games then it really leaves us with two clear outcomes. 1. Conferences will determine their “champion” based on some computer criteria of wins, rankings, points, etc. 2. Playoff selection will be 90% what the playoff rankings are and will not matter who finished second or fifth or eighth in a conference.

identify its champion or co-champion and who will receive the conference's automatic bid in a co-champion situation. FWIW the Yankee/Atlantic 10/CAA had 2 divisions, never played a conference championship game, and still found a way to determine who should receive the conference's automatic bid to the NCAA DI Playoffs. Fortunately the CAA was considered 1 of the more stronger DI-FCS conferences so all the co-champions managed to receive a bid of some kind to the NCAA DI Playoffs. Given the politics that seem to exist with the FBS Playoffs and how the networks seem to want to maximize the number of at-large bids for the P2s, I am not sure if things will play out that way for the ACC, Big XII, and even G6s. Particularly when the money is tied to the number of teams that make the field. WRT to your second point, it may matter depending on what biases exist with the playoff ranking. I say that because it is possible the final playoff ranking has the ACC's third team (based on conference standing) ranked ahead of the ACC's second team (based on conference standing). The only logical explanation for that quirk is the ACC's third team's name has a higher value than the second team (i.e. Clemson vs. Wake or BC). Particularly if the second team has a better overall record than the third team (i.e. 9-3 vs. 8-4 or even 7-5). If these quirks happen enough times, then the schools could use it as justification to either expand the field again to 32 teams or potentially create a NIT-like tournament just so more teams can participate in the tournament(s). If the winner of the NIT-like tournament is guaranteed an automatic bid in next year's FBS Playoffs, then people may decide to watch those games too.

at-large selections based on national ranking of some sort. At least that is how I read it.

receive 1 automatic bid to the highest ranked team like now. The remaining 19 slots would be at-large bids unless the P2s or P4s expand the number of automatic bids they receive. If the field is truly an at-large field, then the Playoffs may run the risk of violating antitrust laws because the P6 teams are "strategically" excluded from making the field every year.

like a de facto automatic bid. If the highest ranked P6 team is unranked, then it is still making the field over whomever is ranked #24 in the final poll. Some coaches are even suggesting if it expands to 24 teams, then might as well use the same blueprint that the FCS Playoffs currently uses now. No need to re-invent the wheel.