Play Off

[CAARHawk]

Exactly. The reason I call people out for making this argument is because they think somehow you can get apples out of oranges by using more apples.

The basic flaw is still the same. You use polls to decide who gets to play for the championship. However, when you increase the number of teams, you increase the likelihood that a team that could beat another gets left out of the system.

Seriously, this isn't a matter of opinion, it is a matter of basic logic.

 

[CAARHawk]

Oops. Apples out of oranges, by using more oranges. Someday they will fix this app to allow edits.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

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.

The NBA and NHL playoffs don't compare to the NCAA tournament. In a best of 7 series, the best team wins about 98% of the time. Having a final four like you had last year is the downside to the NCAA tournament, you end up with fluke teams there rather than the best teams in the country. I'm for a four team playoff but I wouldn't want anything more than that.

 

[ssckelley]

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.

More is not better and baseball is the perfect example of it. Neither the Cardinals or the Rangers are the best teams in baseball. But because they now have divisions and a wild card any team can get hot at the end and win the World Series. Back in the day winning the pennant had more meaning as it proved who the best was after a 162 (once 144) game regular season.

 

[ssckelley]

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.

Couple different ways you could do it. One way is to have the #1 play the #4, #2 vs #3, and the winners meet. But another way would be to let the bowls play their natural tie in games. After the bowls are played the #1 would play the #2 based on the BCS poll. It is not a perfect system but it would take an act of congress to get rid of the bowl system.

 

[DwayneTwill]

But another way would be to let the bowls play their natural tie in games. After the bowls are played the #1 would play the #2 based on the BCS poll.

That's the least-sucky of all the playoff scenarios.