College Football Playoff

GTSaxophone said:
Scenario: some team from the Big 8 wins the conference by erroneously winning a game by virtue of an extra down. This team has one loss, but still gets enough votes to split the title with a team from the ACC that has no losses, only a tie.
Click to expand...

Jeez. Now that could never happen.
 
BarrelORum said:
midatlantech, I like the system, but no offense, any system that excludes teams like Texas Tech, Ohio St., TCU, Oklahoma St. Not to mention my personal bias of GT, for teams like Buffalo and ECU is flawed and does not promote playing the best competition.

Now if you expanded it to 16 teams, and apply your same logic, I think you may have a winner.
Click to expand...

(Anybody know how to do undo, I just typed a long response it and lost it.)

Anyway, to expand:

1) I'd rather not mess with the system. The reason is because Tier 1 teams (The Top 4 Sagarin and qualifying conferences) are extremely well taken care of right now. They get better seeds, home field advantages, the ability to get in a second at large team and play one less game in the playoffs. They deserve it but (for the reason of politics) can't have it all.
2) But if I have to, then I'd keep the 8 strongest conferences but bring in only the Top 12 teams. (If we go to 16, then Tier 1 conferences are not rewarded as well.)

This year, Runners Up: Texas, Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia Tech
Tier 2 Seeding:

Game 1: #5 (Texas) v. # 12 (Georgia Tech)
Game 2: #6 (USC) v. #11 (Cin)
Game 3: #7 (Alabama) v # 10 (Ohio State)
Game 4: #8 (Utah) v #9 (Boise State)

Tier 1:
Game 5: #1 (VPI) v Game 4 winner (Utah?)
Game 6: #2 (OU) v Game 3 winner (Alabama?)
Game 7: #3 (UF) v Game 2 winner (USC)
Game 8: #4 (PSU) v Game 1 winner (Georgia Tech)


Ah yes, this is a very good system. I have been convinced.

By the way, Okie State, TCU, et al, had their chances. The more you dilute the playoffs, the uglier it's going to get. Follow my system and the conferences that deserve the at large team get it.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, you have a GT team instead of Ohio St. or TT, both of which are more deserving than we are. And how about Okie St? Probably the best 9-3 team in the country. And what about lowly Buffalo and Troy? They were conference champions.

Ruling.... 16 teams, because your 12 team playoff doesn't work unless its 16 teams.
 
I wonder if this is what the real meetings on the BCS are like and this is why nothing ever gets done.
 
BarrelORum said:
Sorry, you have a GT team instead of Ohio St. or TT, both of which are more deserving than we are. And how about Okie St? Probably the best 9-3 team in the country. And what about lowly Buffalo and Troy? They were conference champions.

Ruling.... 16 teams, because your 12 team playoff doesn't work unless its 16 teams.
Click to expand...

Ohio State is in, they just lost the first game. Was there any doubt? (they don't deserve squat)

GT just happened to win their first game. (They deserve lots coming from the toughest conference.)

TT would make a third at large team from the Big 12. That's bush league.

Buffalo and Troy don't deserve it. Their conferences had the full opportunity to play their way into the top 8 conferences.

If you go to 16 teams, then you destroy the very important part about Tier 1 conferences and teams. Plus, let's be honest. The Top conferences are unlikely to allow the 7th and 8th best conferences in anyway. Allowing every conference a chance to get in is fair.


BUT, if I must give in some more:

When ranking the Tier 2 teams, instead of taking the Top conferences plus 4 at Large from the Tier 1 teams, take the Top Teams left plus 3 at large plus Top 4 conferences.

Now it would be:

This year, At Large: Texas, Alabama, Georgia Tech
Tier 2 Seeding:

Game 1: #5 (Texas) v. # 12 (GT)
Game 2: #6 (USC) v. #11 (Cin)
Game 3: #7 (Alabama) v # 10 (Ohio State)
Game 4: #8 (Utah) v #9 (Boise State)

Tier 1:
Game 5: #1 (VPI) v Game 4 winner (Utah?)
Game 6: #2 (OU) v Game 3 winner (Alabama?)
Game 7: #3 (UF) v Game 2 winner (USC?)
Game 8: #4 (PSU) v Game 1 winner (GT?)

Note that although nothing changed from before, something could have changed big time: If Ball State had not lost to Buffalo, then they would have take the #12 seeds spot. Their conference would not have qualified but as an individual team, they would have.

Sign the dotted line already.
 
I am going to start a thread on this later this week with my mock bracket after the rankings come out.

Essentially what I have set up is a 16 team playoff. You take the conference champion from all 11 conferences and then the next best 5 based off of rankings (you can use BCS rankings for that). You cannot bitch about being left out in that system. Anyone who thinks that it adds too many games is being unreasonable. The most games a team would have to play is 17 which is only 1 more game than the NFL regular season.
 
cajunjacket said:
The most games a team would have to play is 17 which is only 1 more game than the NFL regular season.
Click to expand...

You had me until you said this. This quite simply is THE most ignorant statement one can make in favor of a playoff. 17 games is HUGE. WAY TOO MANY. These are NOT professional ahtletes. They are STUDENT athletes, and asking them to survive a 17 game schedule is so unbelievably blind and insensitive its not even funny. The only way a 16 team playoff works, is if teams are forced to only play 11 games and that includes a conference championship. Everyone would need to go back to a ten game schedule.

To say that "its only one more game than the NFL regular season" is just ignorant. No offense.
 
Man, BOR the DOMINATOR. You're like Judge Dredd...judge, jury, executioner. You must be related to Sylvester Stallone.
 
WreckTheRest said:
Man, BOR the DOMINATOR. You're like Judge Dredd...judge, jury, executioner. You must be related to Sylvester Stallone.
Click to expand...
No, I see myself more like the Soup Nazi. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

The bottom line is if you are going to do a playoff system, you have to make it work. The problem is under any structure of a playoff, there are a lot of holes in it. I like the 16 team playoff version of Midatlantech's proposal, but you have to figure out a way to put a cap on the amount of games in the regular season teams can play. You can't expect a team to play 17 games. Even 16 is a stretch. The only way you can do it is either have ten game seasons or get rid of conference championships. The teams in the PAC 10 and Big 10 have a clear advantage not playing in a conference championship.
 
BarrelORum said:
You had me until you said this. This quite simply is THE most ignorant statement one can make in favor of a playoff. 17 games is HUGE. WAY TOO MANY. These are NOT professional ahtletes. They are STUDENT athletes, and asking them to survive a 17 game schedule is so unbelievably blind and insensitive its not even funny. The only way a 16 team playoff works, is if teams are forced to only play 11 games and that includes a conference championship. Everyone would need to go back to a ten game schedule.

To say that "its only one more game than the NFL regular season" is just ignorant. No offense.
Click to expand...

1. That number of games is not a ZOMG THE WORLD IS ENDING amount. As it stands now, if an FCS team makes it to the title game, they will have played approx. two more games than a BCS team. It's nowhere near as ridiculous and unheard of as you make it out to be.

2. The point of college athletics should be to prepare athletes for the next level of competition. That does NOT mean that it is a minor league (unless you're talking about college basketball, but that's a different argument). They're still going to class, and getting an education. However, kids go to college to either a.) Make themselves ready for the next level or b.) continue to play football, the game they love. Even for the latter, those kids are still getting bigger, and stronger, and you know they would love the chance to play in the NFL if they could. There are plenty of players from smaller schools who have been pretty damn successful (Can anyone name someone from University of Tennesee-Chattanoga? I can: everyone's favorite WR, Terrell Owens). My point is that the point of college athletics should be to help condition and prepare kids for the next level. Whether or not they make it has nothing to do with whether or not they are being prepared for that level.
 
Playoffs work in every other division. That should be evidence in and of itself that it can be don.
 
knoxjacket said:
Playoffs work in every other division. That should be evidence in and of itself that it can be don.
Click to expand...

NO! Are you an idiot?!?! If a playoff system is not perfect in every conceivable way, it would be the downfall of college football and far worse than the current BCS. Seriously, if it has even one hole there's no way it could be better than what we have now. Those other leagues are stupid for using playoff systems that screw over teams. I'm surprised the NBA is still around after last year's debacle, and I'm not sure the NFL will survive this year when the Broncos screw someone else out of a playoff spot. Look for them to move to a format similar to the current BCS if they want to survive beyond this season, lest someone sue.
 
BarrelORum said:
You had me until you said this. This quite simply is THE most ignorant statement one can make in favor of a playoff. 17 games is HUGE. WAY TOO MANY. These are NOT professional ahtletes. They are STUDENT athletes, and asking them to survive a 17 game schedule is so unbelievably blind and insensitive its not even funny. The only way a 16 team playoff works, is if teams are forced to only play 11 games and that includes a conference championship. Everyone would need to go back to a ten game schedule.

To say that "its only one more game than the NFL regular season" is just ignorant. No offense.
Click to expand...
and if BOR calls you insensitive, you're way beyond hope.:eek5:
 
gth816f said:
NO! Are you an idiot?!?! If a playoff system is not perfect in every conceivable way, it would be the downfall of college football and far worse than the current BCS. Seriously, if it has even one hole there's no way it could be better than what we have now. Those other leagues are stupid for using playoff systems that screw over teams. I'm surprised the NBA is still around after last year's debacle, and I'm not sure the NFL will survive this year when the Broncos screw someone else out of a playoff spot. Look for them to move to a format similar to the current BCS if they want to survive beyond this season, lest someone sue.
Click to expand...

This has to be sarcasm, right? You cannot honestly believe that playoffs are bad. Do you seriously think that the NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA Basketball, NCAA Baseball, The Olympics, etc., (every sport besides college football Division I-A) is wrong???
 
cajunjacket said:
This has to be sarcasm, right? You cannot honestly believe that playoffs are bad. Do you seriously think that the NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA Basketball, NCAA Baseball, The Olympics, etc., (every sport besides college football Division I-A) is wrong???
Click to expand...
I'm not sure he could have laid that on any thicker.
 
gth816f said:
NO! Are you an idiot?!?! If a playoff system is not perfect in every conceivable way, it would be the downfall of college football and far worse than the current BCS. Seriously, if it has even one hole there's no way it could be better than what we have now. Those other leagues are stupid for using playoff systems that screw over teams. I'm surprised the NBA is still around after last year's debacle, and I'm not sure the NFL will survive this year when the Broncos screw someone else out of a playoff spot. Look for them to move to a format similar to the current BCS if they want to survive beyond this season, lest someone sue.
Click to expand...

Thank you for understanding. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top