Apparently Not a GT Believer!

We're 9-3, TCU is 10-2. I love GT too, but to discount overall record is ignoring the obvious.
 
There shouldn't be any at-large bids. Win your conference or STFU.
 
My belief is that if the NCAA ever sanctions a playoff for I-A, they will eventually have to include the conference champs of all 11 I-A conferences, just as March Madness includes all 34 conference champions. Any attempt to exclude a conference would probably not survive a legal challenge. It might take a few years to get there, but it will.

Sixteen teams would give you a four-week playoff and five at-large bids. If the NCAA decides that it wants more at-large bids, the tournament would need to extend into a fifth week. That's a long tournament, but I-AA is going to a fifth week in the next year or two to expand to 24 teams, so it's not without precedent. I'd rather stick with 16, personally.

This guy's using that same assumption, so including Troy logically follows.

You could definitely argue including TCU as an at-large over teams like Oregon or GT. Going back to the March Madness, it's like deciding between a second team from a mid-major and a middle-of-the-pack ACC team. Would GT's strength of schedule overcome the extra loss on their record?
 
beej1953 said:
Troy, for crap's sake??? TCU over GT for an at-latge??? Need to weed out some of the dinkier conferences and allow more at-large bids. I think we could take at least half of the teams in this bracket (Troy, Boise, Ball State, Cincy, Tulsa, Ohio St, TCU, Utah, BC).


http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff120208&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Click to expand...

Nope, I agree with the rationale for including the non-BCS conferences. There is a strong argument that part of the reason they fall behind the BCS conferences is because they are excluded from the BCS table and BCS money. True or not, easy enough to put to a test. And it would reward top seeds with easy first round games.

The automatic bids help the NCAAT and they would help a football championship.

If you read the entire article, it makes a lot of sense.
 
Allen Koholic said:
We're 9-3, TCU is 10-2. I love GT too, but to discount overall record is ignoring the obvious.
Click to expand...

Uh, I hope this post is TIC.

Anyway, I doubt we'll ever have a full-blown NCAA-officially-declaring-a-champion D-IA playoff. The "+1" idea, for example, would just be another "exhibition" game, like the bowl games currently are.

My proposal is still having 8 conference chamions, BCS conferences + MWC and WAC, fight it out. A total of 6 extra games and at most two extra games for 4 schools out of 119, declaring a mythical champion.

A full-blown champion would require all conference champions, because they are legally set up like regions and districts are at the high school level.
 
lonestarjacket said:
Nope, I agree with the rationale for including the non-BCS conferences. There is a strong argument that part of the reason they fall behind the BCS conferences is because they are excluded from the BCS table and BCS money. True or not, easy enough to put to a test. And it would reward top seeds with easy first round games.

The automatic bids help the NCAAT and they would help a football championship.

If you read the entire article, it makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

The BCS money is just one of many sources of funding. For the average program in the SEC, the money doesn't come close to what they get from contributions, ticket sales and merchandising. Outside of a handful of good programs, Utah, Boise State, etc., the prospects for non-BCS schools are extremely dim even if they had BCS money.
 
16 teams is the absolute maximum number of teams that I EVER want to see in a college football playoff. Anything more, and you get some truly undeserving teams in the mix (that includes us...yeah, I said it.) I don't think someone like Troy is exactly the most qualified team to get in, but as someone said earlier, including all 11 conference champions is probably going to end up being a necessary evil if a playoff is ever to come to fruition.

My biggest concern is how each conference determines it's champion. I don't think it is fair at all for there to be different standards, and I damn sure don't want that to be the case if every conference champion is going to have a chance to play for a title. Either have everyone play a conference championship game, or have everyone not play one, but play everyone in the conference once (i.e. Pac-10). That's something that will have to change if there is a playoff. Screw the Big-10. If they want OSU/UM to be important, put them in the same division, or just make them yearly rivals like the ACC does with f$u and miami. It's presumptuous of them to think they the conference will always go through those two schools anyway. Case in point, this year. The conference was decided by the OSU/Penn State game, and the OSU/UM game was a joke.
 
I'm beginning to back off my 8 team playoff and go to the 4 team playoff.

UF beats Bammer
Texas beats Sooners
UF beats Texas
 
refrigeratormover said:
I'm beginning to back off my 8 team playoff and go to the 4 team playoff.

UF beats Bammer
Texas beats Sooners
UF beats Texas
Click to expand...

How do you eliminate PSU and especially USC?

USC would be favored over every team except Florida and Oklahoma.

[ducks standard west coast bashing]

Seriously, I'd like to see those Big 12 teams play against a real defense.
 
That is the playoff problem.

To avoid legal trouble, the current BCS system had to allow for teams for Utah, Boise, etc. to get a piece of the pie. Hence...the top 12 bcs ranking thing.

In a playoff situation, if every conference champion did not get in...there would be lawsuits galore.

So...there is no way a playoff happens without every conference champion getting in. There could be a couple of at-large bids to round it out.

That is what scares me...would anyone beyond the ACC champion ever get in from our conference with all of the bias out there?

btw...BCS contract just extended for television through 2013. Nothing happening before then anyway.
 
I think it's stupid to only have an 8 or 16-team playoff. Why can't the #23 team in the nation get a shot at the title? This isn't the 70s, there aren't any amazingly dominant teams anymore. It would be very lame if only the conference champions got to be in the playoff. Make it 32 teams, and it would be amazing.
 
Ish said:
I think it's stupid to only have an 8 or 16-team playoff. Why can't the #23 team in the nation get a shot at the title? This isn't the 70s, there aren't any amazingly dominant teams anymore. It would be very lame if only the conference champions got to be in the playoff. Make it 32 teams, and it would be amazing.
Click to expand...
Just no. Though the BB tournament has 64 teams (for 324 schools I think), the only teams that have a realistic shot at winning the title are the top 4-5 (top 16-20 overall) from each region - the first round games are pretty much there to eliminate the single-bid conference winners and to let Vegas make more money :P
 
hiveredtech said:
That is the playoff problem.

To avoid legal trouble, the current BCS system had to allow for teams for Utah, Boise, etc. to get a piece of the pie. Hence...the top 12 bcs ranking thing.

In a playoff situation, if every conference champion did not get in...there would be lawsuits galore.

So...there is no way a playoff happens without every conference champion getting in. There could be a couple of at-large bids to round it out.

That is what scares me...would anyone beyond the ACC champion ever get in from our conference with all of the bias out there?

btw...BCS contract just extended for television through 2013. Nothing happening before then anyway.
Click to expand...

I don't understand, what legal obligations does the BCS have to the mid-majors? I was under the understanding that the BCS was just some agreement between conferences for a system of bowl bids which happens to declare a "BCS champion." A legal challenge from the MWC seems like the MWC complaining they don't have a shot to have a team in the Peach bowl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top