GhostofBTT
Banned
Isn't this a topic for July?
Play Off
- Thread starter twinlaker
- Start date
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
Hopefully not. Playoffs would suck.
IATrainMaster101
Well-Known Member
The biggest problem with playoff system is that it never quits expanding once it gets started. the controversy simply changes from who is the true national champion 2 who deserved to get in but didn't.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
Yup....this keeps all that "big-bowl" money in the college towns and not in some chamber of commerce coffers.
The other minor bowls could keep on keepin on. That wouldn't change.
No super conferences you say? Easy....use the rankings now to seed the top (8, 16?) teams instead of placing them in the various bowls. Then let the teams DECIDE IT ON THE FIELD.
BigRedPowrWagon
Well-Known Member
So how would it work, take the top 8 teams from the top 25. Wouldnt that mean that the pre season top 25 was even more important. Alot of people dont like the pre season polls anyways. Do you just base it on record or strength of schedule in the end. Bad thing is that even if you started out 20-25 or even just outside the top 25 you wouldnt have a chance in hell of getting to the playoff games. So what then, do we still have bowl games for other teams. I dont know it sounds complicated to transition over to.
Seriously. You people are so freaking stupid if you think a playoff system with the current conference make up will work at any number of teams.
Seriously. You are then leaving it up to a totally subjective system. Beyond perhaps a couple of obvious choices, it is hard to determine who is more worthy to be in a playoff probably up to number 30 or so. I mean how many times has a Hawkeye bowl team beat a higher ranked team?
How many times have leagues been exposed in bowls, including the Big Ten?
Right now you have 2 or 3 teams that think they got robbed from a shot at the NC.
Go to a 16 team subjective choice playoff system and that number goes up exponentially.
There is only one way to get to an objective playoff and that is to fix the conferences.
Not saying I want this, but if you want a playoff it is the only truly sound option.
Seriously. You are then leaving it up to a totally subjective system. Beyond perhaps a couple of obvious choices, it is hard to determine who is more worthy to be in a playoff probably up to number 30 or so. I mean how many times has a Hawkeye bowl team beat a higher ranked team?
How many times have leagues been exposed in bowls, including the Big Ten?
Right now you have 2 or 3 teams that think they got robbed from a shot at the NC.
Go to a 16 team subjective choice playoff system and that number goes up exponentially.
There is only one way to get to an objective playoff and that is to fix the conferences.
Not saying I want this, but if you want a playoff it is the only truly sound option.
Nobody minds it because it is 64 freaking teams and is going higher.
SD, you are better than this. Don't you think if they went to that system that it would favor weaker conferences?
What would stop conferences like the B12 from stripping themselves down to like OU, Texas, OSU, and Tech and then scheduling so each of these teams only played one other of the rest?
What's to stop Boise from dropping their one decent BCS conference game each year?
What is to say that a team ranked 16 from a tougher conference couldn't kill number 8 from a weak conference?
Seriously, you solution just increases the problem exponentially.
SD, you are better than this. Don't you think if they went to that system that it would favor weaker conferences?
What would stop conferences like the B12 from stripping themselves down to like OU, Texas, OSU, and Tech and then scheduling so each of these teams only played one other of the rest?
What's to stop Boise from dropping their one decent BCS conference game each year?
What is to say that a team ranked 16 from a tougher conference couldn't kill number 8 from a weak conference?
Seriously, you solution just increases the problem exponentially.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
The Bowl system will never go away as there is to much money tied to them. Which eliminates any kind of 8+ team format as a playoff like that would pretty much ruin the bowls. But something has to be done as teams that finish in the top 4 and finish undefeated should have a chance to prove they are #1 on the field. I think the best solution is a plus one system, play all the bowl games and have 1 more BCS game played 2 weeks after the bowls to determine the champion.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
No need to insult please. Calling out people as stupid or dumb who happen to have a different opinion isn't necessary.
I've read Wentzel's two books and I happen to agree with his premises.
Use a selection committe if you don't like the current poll system of ranking teams into a playoff.
SOS has to come into play. You play a panzy schedule and you get penalized.
Look, give the playoffs a 5-year trial and if it totally flops, you can always go back to the current format.
My monikar is simple....decide it on the field.
Last edited:
I'm not a fan at all of bowls so I would love to see this. Makes a lot of sense, too much for the powers that be to adapt it.
As for the supporters of the current format, I understand. Its simply a difference of opinions. It does make the regular season meaningful.
I would prefer 15 win or go home games at various sites. I would love to see LSU or Alabama have to go to Oregon or Ohio St in late December or January. Or travel out to LA to take on USC instead of playing bowl games in their own backyard every year.
olivecourt
Well-Known Member
I see this mentioned a lot and I really don't understand it.
So last year, Auburn beats Oregon. Would they then have to go play TCU? Who decides which team they play? What if it's a year like 2007, where there's a pretty good consensus on the national title game and there are no undefeated teams? Do you make LSU go back and play Georgia, who finished #2 in the AP poll but had two losses?
To me, the +1 creates as many problems as it solves. Sure, there are years when there is an additional game that everyone would like to see played. But there are other years when the national championship game does what it is supposed to. If we want a playoff, we should go to a playoff, but the +1 seems like a compromise in which no one wins.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
And to quote an excellent post by OldtownHawkFan from another board....
"Good example why there should be a college playoff. I'm tired of the factors outside of the football field that determine who goes to the NC game. If other major sports leagues did determine their championship games the way college football does, no way Green bay would have been in the super bowl. Same goes for the STL Cards this year.
The system should be changed so that all 120 D-1 schools have a chance to play for the NC at the beginning of the season. You win on the football field, you have a chance and don't have to put on a PR campaign to influence a few voters."
"Good example why there should be a college playoff. I'm tired of the factors outside of the football field that determine who goes to the NC game. If other major sports leagues did determine their championship games the way college football does, no way Green bay would have been in the super bowl. Same goes for the STL Cards this year.
The system should be changed so that all 120 D-1 schools have a chance to play for the NC at the beginning of the season. You win on the football field, you have a chance and don't have to put on a PR campaign to influence a few voters."
Add the Mavs in the NBA(3rd seed in the West), Bruins in the NHL(3rd seed in the East), & UConn (3 seed in their region)in NCAA BB to that list.
Under a BCS type format none of these teams even play for their respective championships.
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
And yet, many people don't think that StLouis deserves to be in the World Series this year, and didn't deserve to win it in 2006. Two sides of that coin.
A playoff would suck, though.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
Those are just the haters.
And the beauty of it is you don't have to be perfect or even win your division. You simply have to be good enough to get into one of the eight playoff slots.
In other words, the format allows the teams to decide it on the field. Unlike the BCS.
Nuff said.
Cover3
Well-Known Member
I don't quite follow. A few posts ago, you advocate having a selection committee for a playoff, and now you say you want everything solely decided on the field. Whether it ends with two teams or sixteen, there ends up being a judgment as to whose wins were more valuable. In 2009, we saw a 12-0 BCS conference team left out of the NCG (Cincinnati), along with a 12-0 Boise State team.
The first time the #16 seed wins a playoff after three regular-season losses, there will just be a handful of other 2- and 3-loss teams waiting around for reasons they didn't get in.
I just prefer the system where we still have a Rose Bowl and a champion has a record like 13-0 or 12-1. I think 14-0 is starting to get a little goofy, but the first 14-3 will ruin the game for me.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
My thought is a selection committee is one of a couple of options of choosing which teams get into the playoff....not determining who "wins" the NC.
Once the teams are selected, the champion is crowned by demonstrating it on the field.....not by hack voters, a bogus computer, etc.
And as I've stated, #9 or #17 is always going to complain, just like #65 does. Bottom line is, the champion is determined on the field.
Last edited:
Cover3
Well-Known Member
Same as now, just with more teams.
