Cotton, Camping, Peach, Fiesta - "So long, losers!" Edition

[18in32]

Ummm...they were rated #8 by the um.....the committee....the very same all-knowing wise ones used to pick the top 4.

How slowly can I say it? I want to limit the committee's discretion by instituting rules they are required to follow.

 

[daBuzz]

It's the Communists who want to take everything a team has worked for all season long, and redistribute the credibility so that everyone gets a chance again.

OK that made me laugh. Well done.

 

[daBuzz]

How slowly can I say it? I want to limit the committee's discretion by instituting rules they are required to follow.

And how slowly can I say it? I want to limit the committee by letting the players play on the field instead of a bunch of Condi Rice's in a room picking them. (Nothing against Rice...I actually admire the heck out of her politically....I just don't want her telling me who should be my national champion in football)

 

[18in32]

And how slowly can I say it? I want to limit the committee by letting the players play on the field instead of a bunch of Condi Rice's in a room picking them.

But you're not doing that! You're still letting them (or the coaches, or the journalists, or some humans somewhere) pick the teams. They're just picking more teams.

I still can't tell what your objection is.

If it's to undefeated G5 being left out in favor of "media favorites," just change the rules to keep them in, so that undefeated teams always get the nod over teams with losses. Then your problem only exists if we have 5 undefeated FBS teams, which I don't think has happened in my memory.

If it's to one conference getting two teams in, just change the rules so only conference champs get in.

If it's to one one-loss conf-champ getting excluded in favor of another one-loss conf-champ, then we can create "on the field" metrics to determine which is the better team (wins over ranked opponents, margin of victory, offensive and defensive squad rankings, etc.).

There's like a million solutions to these problems, other than giving Wisconsin get a third chance to beat the same Ohio St team!

 

[ClubSeats]

More to the point, it's not like a 16 team should win the tournament.

No nine seed or worse has ever made it to the final. But the first round format is lots of fun and a great moment for teams to be in the tournament who have no expectation of winning it. Just winning a game would be their championship.

 

[GT76]

The NCAA tournament expanded to 65 games because teams whined they were better than #64. Then they expanded to 68 because somebody thought they were better than 65. Ok, it’s all about the money but when does the silliness stop?

It’s the same thing for the CFP. They have to cut it off somewhere. I’d be alright with saying all P5 champs are in. Maybe you get a 7-6 P5 champ, maybe not, but they played their way in by winning their conference. Then let the committee/polls/computers pick the “best” of three G5 champs or two G5’s and an Independent (more rules - ND has to have a better record than the G5 champs because otherwise ND would get in every year). Seed them, tell everybody else to STFU, and play ball.

 

[WracerX]

The NCAA tournament expanded to 65 games because teams whined they were better than #64. Then they expanded to 68 because somebody thought they were better than 65. Ok, it’s all about the money but when does the silliness stop?

It’s the same thing for the CFP. They have to cut it off somewhere. I’d be alright with saying all P5 champs are in. Maybe you get a 7-6 P5 champ, maybe not, but they played their way in by winning their conference. Then let the committee/polls/computers pick the “best” of three G5 champs or two G5’s and an Independent (more rules - ND has to have a better record than the G5 champs because otherwise ND would get in every year). Seed them, tell everybody else to STFU, and play ball.

I want whole scale reordering of the system. Four 16 team conferences. Win your division, then you conference, four team playoffs. Only divisional games count.

Then a four 16 team relegation system. Same playoff structure. Top team from each division moves up. Bottom team moves down.

Will never happen.

 

[daBuzz]

But you're not doing that! You're still letting them (or the coaches, or the journalists, or some humans somewhere) pick the teams. They're just picking more teams.

I still can't tell what your objection is.

If it's to undefeated G5 being left out in favor of "media favorites," just change the rules to keep them in, so that undefeated teams always get the nod over teams with losses. Then your problem only exists if we have 5 undefeated FBS teams, which I don't think has happened in my memory.

If it's to one conference getting two teams in, just change the rules so only conference champs get in.

If it's to one one-loss conf-champ getting excluded in favor of another one-loss conf-champ, then we can create "on the field" metrics to determine which is the better team (wins over ranked opponents, margin of victory, offensive and defensive squad rankings, etc.).

There's like a million solutions to these problems, other than giving Wisconsin get a third chance to beat the same Ohio St team!

My objection is that there have been times since the playoff was created that I'm fairly certain the best four teams weren't put into the playoffs. So even if just one is wrong, an error rate of 25% is pretty damn egregious.
And you don't honestly believe that a five through 8 seeded team wouldn't beat some of the one through fours, do you? Because I can assure you it will happen pretty much each year that one of the 5-8 beats a 1-4. Which means....that team deserved to be there.

Just let them play it off. If you're right and I'm wrong, those top 4 teams will win every single year and we can go back to the 4-team playoff. But when I'm correct, we get to see living proof that the playoff committee wasn't infallible.

 

[KrazieJacket]

Dump half the teams in FBS back down for football only and force the rest to schedule only one game below FBS. Force the conferences to create opening days like the ACC/Big tourney. Anything except the same teams playing over and over in the same season. Don’t want to see LSU play Bama or ugag again. Don’t want to see Oklahoma Baylor again. Don’t want to see Wisconsin OSU again. Don’t want to see Oregon Utah play again. FWIW I don’t want to see LSU/Memphis, Clemson/app state, Ohio State/FAU either

 

[KrazieJacket]

My objection is that there have been times since the playoff was created that I'm fairly certain the best four teams weren't put into the playoffs. (Four best teams at the moment or over the year is two different things. A team can have multiple losses and be great at the end, don’t agree they should be there. This is simply a longing for the NFL) So even if just one is wrong, an error rate of 25% is pretty damn egregious.
And you don't honestly believe that a five through 8 seeded team wouldn't beat some of the one through fours, do you? Because I can assure you it will happen pretty much each year that one of the 5-8 beats a 1-4. Which means....that team deserved to be there.... that day, maybe not the week prior or week after and who is to say 9 isn’t better than 7?

Just let them play it off. If you're right and I'm wrong, those top 4 teams will win every single year and we can go back to the 4-team playoff. (It’s about money, they would never go back if it was proven better the other way) But when I'm correct, we get to see living proof that the playoff committee wasn't infallible. They are going to increase the playoff and it won’t mean anyone in this thread is right or wrong. It is for the same reason SEC teams get all the breaks and why players that are openly paid can still play. .