How ****** will you be if we get a Plus One?

TecmoSuperHawk

TecmoSuperHawk

Well-Known Member
With the new Big 12/SEC "Champions Bowl" being announced, there has been some renewed energy regarding the original Plus One idea that the SEC and ACC tried to get instituted in 2008. This format is you play the bowls as normal and then take the top 2 teams after for the NCG. No attempt is made to match #1 vs. #4 and #2 vs. #3 in this format.

If this gets implemented after we have basically been told we are getting a 4 team playoff, I will be irate. I would probably rather have the current system than a Plus One. What says you?
 
I'd be fine with it. A plus one with two pseudo semi-finals will more or less work while the big four conferences continue to get their money. ACC and ND continue to fade.
 
I would be completely thrilled. For my money, this would basically fix it - a 4 team playoff.

I could live with an 8 team playoff if I had to. When people start talking 16, I start getting real nervous, because in my mind you're trying to manufacture "march madness for college football" once you get to that point.

Don't get me wrong - I love march madness, but you have to understand what it is: college bball is trading in the integrity of the regular season for a nice little popularity boost at the end...which continues to be a really solid strategy for college bball. But bball is and always has been 2nd fiddle to football - there's no way in hell college football needs to resort to gimmickry.

In my mind, there are 3 things college football needs to do to stay healthy:

1. Address the BCS (a +1 would go a LOOOONG ways towards this)
2. Address player safety (I think strides have been made in this direction, hopefully it will continue to evolve. Oh, and go ahead and call me a communist weenie - I don't care)
3. Clamp down on the cheaters (precious little has been done in this area. The big boys hold way too much clout in the current environment - the NCAA's weak punishments of late illustrates this well).
 
I would be fine with it as long as conference SOS is built in. Wouldn't want a BE team that beat an ACC team in a bowl game jump the winner of a B1G team that beat a P12 team just be because they cruised through an easy conference schedule.
 
CAARHawk said:
I would be fine with it as long as conference SOS is built in. Wouldn't want a BE team that beat an ACC team in a bowl game jump the winner of a B1G team that beat a P12 team just be because they cruised through an easy conference schedule.
Click to expand...

I assume there'd be a BCS-type ranking/formula to determine the two in the plus-one.
 
A "plus one" has all the potential to cause more controversy than a playoff system. Wins and losses are weighted more heavily at the end of a season, which could lead to a lot of whining after a bowl blowout (see 2012 Orange Bowl). I used to be very skeptical about polls and rankings, but after putting my own ranking system together this last season, I'm much more comfortable with a playoff for the National Championship between the top four teams.
 
BlondeTuco said:
A "plus one" has all the potential to cause more controversy than a playoff system. Wins and losses are weighted more heavily at the end of a season, which could lead to a lot of whining after a bowl blowout (see 2012 Orange Bowl). I used to be very skeptical about polls and rankings, but after putting my own ranking system together this last season, I'm much more comfortable with a playoff for the National Championship between the top four teams.
Click to expand...

The bowls would be the playoff. If you don't want to not play in the championship game, don't lose in the Rose Bowl or the new SEC/BigXII Suck Bowl. Those losses *should* be weighted.
 
DwayneTwill said:
I assume there'd be a BCS-type ranking/formula to determine the two in the plus-one.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. I am just saying the current system sucks. Too much emphasis on any win. More emphasis needs to be out on SOS.

Plus, if the ACC stays viable, they need a bowl game between their champ and the BE champ. No more at large teams playing major conference champs. Now, they would have to be smart with that game as neither conference travels.
 
DwayneTwill said:
The bowls would be the playoff. If you don't want to not play in the championship game, don't lose in the Rose Bowl or the new SEC/BigXII Suck Bowl. Those losses *should* be weighted.
Click to expand...

That's all fine and dandy unless you're Boise State or another team in one of the other seven conferences. Take away a BCS Bowl opponent for these smaller schools, while bulking up the SOS for major-conference schools, and you're going to see an outstanding gap between conferences.
 
BlondeTuco said:
That's all fine and dandy unless you're Boise State or another team in one of the other seven conferences. Take away a BCS Bowl opponent for these smaller schools, while bulking up the SOS for major-conference schools, and you're going to see an outstanding gap between conferences.
Click to expand...

Boise State has never deserved to be in the championship game. I don't know why that'd change now.
 
BlondeTuco said:
That's all fine and dandy unless you're Boise State or another team in one of the other seven conferences. Take away a BCS Bowl opponent for these smaller schools, while bulking up the SOS for major-conference schools, and you're going to see an outstanding gap between conferences.
Click to expand...

As it should be. Sorry, but when you go to war week after week and end up having to play some team who cruised through a walk in the park schedule, it just isn't a level field. Plus, compliance in smaller conferences is a joke. Seriously, people love to talk about Boise, but I know a little more about the academics, etc. It isn't as Rosie a story as people would like to think.
 
Looks like we're all in agreement that only four conferences are capable of producing a national champion. I'm not going to complain about a system that helps bring titles to Big Ten Country; it's less exhausting having to cheer against undefeated WAC schools to maintain some class in the BCS.
 
I am all good with it.
Big Ten,Pac 12 champs play in the Rose Bowl.
Big 12 ,SEC champs play in the Sugar bowl.
Big East,ACC Champs play in the Orange Bowl.

Normally, the Rose bowl and Sugar bowl winner will play for the title.
Occasionally, if an undefeated team gets all the way thru the orange bowl from the ACC or Big East,and the winners of the Rose and Sugar are not undefeated or one loss,mayb they slip in.

I would be fine with just a Rose bowl vs Sugar bowl winner game and let the polls vote whoever they want....the controversy never hurt the game.
 
I won't be any more excited over it than the current system it doesn't address the root issue and at the end of the day people are still going to be complaining when there are multiple teams with conflicting 0 loss or 1 loss records.
 
JHHawk said:
I am all good with it.
Big Ten,Pac 12 champs play in the Rose Bowl.
Big 12 ,SEC champs play in the Sugar bowl.
Big East,ACC Champs play in the Orange Bowl.

Normally, the Rose bowl and Sugar bowl winner will play for the title.
Occasionally, if an undefeated team gets all the way thru the orange bowl from the ACC or Big East,and the winners of the Rose and Sugar are not undefeated or one loss,mayb they slip in.

I would be fine with just a Rose bowl vs Sugar bowl winner game and let the polls vote whoever they want....the controversy never hurt the game.
Click to expand...

Looks good, but that would be one empty Orange Bowl. Might have to move that game north a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top