Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Last year's UGA was probably the best 5-seed....or possibly 83 Miami.  I want to say 77 ND was a 5-seed.  I'd have to look it up. 

What would 1993 Wisconsin look like as a seed?

I guess the SEC and B1G were considered kinda weak back then?

Wisconsin was 10-1-1 (OSU tie).

No PAC teams at all.

I guess the SEC and B1G were considered kinda weak back then?

The SEC was not viewed (by many) as some juggernaut back then.  Folks had debates about the "best conference" thing as I recall, and the best would bounce around year over year.  

Oddly enough, IF the SEC were dominated say by Missouri and Kentucky and South Carolina some year, it would be an argument they aren't very good overall because of the helmets.  A conference looks stronger when the helmet teams are elite or very good, not the reverse, even if in reality it's the same.

 But there is absolutely no advantage to playing an extra game. 

In a vacuum, I don’t think you would get an argument on that statement.  By adding context, you might.  The context I was adding was the quality of the opponent.  If the 5 seed gets to  play two pretty good teams instead of one great team to get to the semifinals is that an advantage?  If the 5 seed plays two top 25 teams and two top 10 teams to win a NC is that an advantage over playing 3 top 10 teams?

That was basically the question I was asking.  Does the potential quality of the opponents negate the disadvantage of the extra game?

It could, I guess, but remember, this is basically one end of the bell curve - the best teams.  But sure, the inclusion of a less-talented team does skew things a bit.

But for the 4/5, they still likely have to face the 1 seed before even getting to the final, so neither has an easy road.

As for 5 seed versus 4 seed. I think USUALLY being a 4 is better, but I can contrive scenarios where being a 5 is arguably better.  It's not that hard the way things are constructed today. 

But I don't think you can really tease out the structure of the playoff and the understanding of exactly who that 5 seed might be. 

That 5 seed might be squarely in the discussion of the #1 or #2 team in the country. Think of 2011 Alabama. Smoked literally everyone on their schedule except LSU, to whom they lost in a very narrow OT game. So close that despite the H2H loss, they ended up in the BCSCG. 

They were not the #5 team in the country, but in this scenario they'd assuredly be the #5 seed. I could argue that facing the weakest P4 conf champ and the strongest G5 conference champ is an easier path to the semis than facing the #7 seed in the CFP (which arguably could also truly be a top 4/5 team in the country who just didn't win their conference). There's a good chance those two teams they face could be outside the top 10, when actual talent and rankings are considered. 


And then you have to think about who that #4 seed would be in our structure. Most years, it will be the weakest P4 conference champion. It's tough to look back at 2011 as an example here, because we still had 6 power conferences, but it is still instructive because 3-4 of their conference champs were fairly weak. Sure, LSU and OkSU were locks. But who comes next? 

You had #6 Oregon at 11-2 (behind #4 Stanford who didn't win the conference). You had #8 Boise State (11-1) who wasn't even P6 champ next up. Then #9 Wisconsin (11-2). Then #14 Clemson (11-2). Finally #23 WVU (9-3). 

If we take the rankings at face value with the top 5 conference champs, you'd get the below CFP seeding:

• LSU
• Oklahoma State
• Oregon
• Boise State
• Alabama
• Stanford
• Arkansas (slots in where USC would be as they were ineligible)
• Wisconsin
• USCe
• KSU
• MSU
• Michigan
• Clemson
• Baylor

So completely ignoring structure, if I'm Boise State, I don't really want to be the 4 here and face Alabama. But as the 4, I can at least hope that somehow Baylor upsets Alabama, or Alabama loses key players to injury, or something else. If Boise and Alabama swap, then Boise has to first of all beat Baylor, and then they're guaranteed to face a healthy & rested Alabama. 

I think the point stands. Even with the extra game, the team that will most likely be in the 5 seed position is going to have just about the best possible path to the quarterfinals of any seed in the playoff. 

I think the point stands. Even with the extra game, the team that will most likely be in the 5 seed position is going to have just about the best possible path to the quarterfinals of any seed in the playoff.

Please clarify this.  I'm worried it's the dumbest thing I've ever read.
4 teams don't have to play any games to get to the quarterfinal.
.
If you meant through the quarterfinals, the 1 seed, playing the 8/9 winner, had an easier path, and you don't even need to bother with any math for that.