Started By
Message
4 not enough?
Posted on 5/17/12 at 2:42 am
Posted on 5/17/12 at 2:42 am
I feel like I've seen alot of articles/posts/writings talking about the inherent problems with the selection process for a four team play off.
My thought (for what it's worth) is to just go straight to a 8 team playoff (maybe less). Take the Champs of 6 AQ conferences plus two "wild Cards"
I personally would vote for taking away the Big East's AQ status. Idk who I'd give it to though.
What do you guys think? (of the idea over all, and who you think should get the Big East's AQ status if you would take it away)
I know it probably wouldn't get implemented anywhere in the near future, but I can dream can't I?
My thought (for what it's worth) is to just go straight to a 8 team playoff (maybe less). Take the Champs of 6 AQ conferences plus two "wild Cards"
I personally would vote for taking away the Big East's AQ status. Idk who I'd give it to though.
What do you guys think? (of the idea over all, and who you think should get the Big East's AQ status if you would take it away)
I know it probably wouldn't get implemented anywhere in the near future, but I can dream can't I?
14
Posted on 5/17/12 at 2:46 am to SemperAuburn
I concur
Posted on 5/17/12 at 2:57 am to SemperAuburn
Its a slippery slope. That team just outside the top whatever you make it, is going to be pissed they didnt get in
I would take 8 but there should be some way to cut it to 4 if there arent 8 worthy teams that season.
I would take 8 but there should be some way to cut it to 4 if there arent 8 worthy teams that season.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 3:00 am to SemperAuburn
quote:
My thought (for what it's worth) is to just go straight to a 8 team playoff (maybe less). Take the Champs of 6 AQ conferences plus two "wild Cards"
I've always thought that would be the cleanest way. That ensures that each conference gets their money. Winning a major conference gets you in. Being a top team in a smaller conference or the second best team in an AQ gets you in.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 3:35 am to SemperAuburn
While there will never be a perfect system. I do believe if they are going to increase from the current system to do more than 4 teams. My personal opinion is that it should be 12 teams. Top 8 conference champs(no automatics, but maybe based on the BCS or something) and 4 At-large bids. Top 4 conference champs get a bye, and play all games at the higher seeded teams home field till the championship game. Winning your conference and being highly ranked still means something, but it still allows great teams that may of had one bad game a chance to prove on the field they are the best.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 3:53 am to arwicklu
quote:
My thought (for what it's worth) is to just go straight to a 8 team playoff (maybe less). Take the Champs of 6 AQ conferences plus two "wild Cards"
I've always thought that would be the cleanest way. That ensures that each conference gets their money. Winning a major conference gets you in. Being a top team in a smaller conference or the second best team in an AQ gets you in.
I would agree with one change. You have to be in the top 10 in rankings and win your conference to qualify. I could see a Big East team ranked 14 going in front of an SEC team ranked top 5 possibly. No system is perfect. Basketball rewards its toughest conference with numerous bids to the 'ship. Big ten is trying to screw the current toughest conference my minimizing their bids to a 'ship---think they are scared?
Posted on 5/17/12 at 6:51 am to arwicklu
quote:
or the second best team in an AQ gets you in.
Think about it, why should a "second best" team get consideration for the best team in the country?
I am AGAINST 'wild cards'.
8 team playoff?
6 BCS champions, 2 champions of highest rated non-BCS conferences based on SOS.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 6:57 am to WildTchoupitoulas
I would say no AQ and the top 8 or 12 ranked teams play in a playoff system
Posted on 5/17/12 at 6:57 am to WildTchoupitoulas
this conference champions thing is a pile of crock. The goal is to find the best team and you could easily have a conference winner with 3 losses but an sec team with one loss not make it based on things I am reading on this thread. I want to see the best teams face off, however many we start with.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:00 am to mrbroker
What if the SEC champ has 3 losses? they get in too
I mean everyone in the SEC rant keeps explaining how it "screws" the SEC. It doesn't. It takes all the subjectivity out of it, and gives a brightline way of getting in.
The first Bama/LSU game is played differently if this is in place
I mean everyone in the SEC rant keeps explaining how it "screws" the SEC. It doesn't. It takes all the subjectivity out of it, and gives a brightline way of getting in.
The first Bama/LSU game is played differently if this is in place
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:03 am to SemperAuburn
You could do 6. The top 2 teams get a bye.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:08 am to SemperAuburn
It will never be "enough"
Some people think 68 teams in the basketball tourney isn't "enough"
Some people think 68 teams in the basketball tourney isn't "enough"
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:10 am to mrbroker
dachsie:
IMO, if you're going to have a playoff, get rid of relying on the polls. If you use conference champions you get two things, conference races that are still meaningful, and getting rid of opinion polls.
mrbroker:
First of all any Alabama fan saying that the conference champion is a crock of shite should be ashamed of themselves.
But if you're going to rely on polls, why have a playoff at all?
Alabama sitting there with twice as many SEC championships than the team with the next most...?
Last year was a fluke, 9 times out of 10, Alabama is going to be the one with the SEC title. The argument of 'next best conference team' smacks of Auburnism.
You want to go to the playoffs? Win your conference. The advantage for the SEC team there is that they will be bettter prepared for the playoffs after having played a tougher schedule.
quote:
I would say no AQ and the top 8 or 12 ranked teams play in a playoff system
IMO, if you're going to have a playoff, get rid of relying on the polls. If you use conference champions you get two things, conference races that are still meaningful, and getting rid of opinion polls.
mrbroker:
quote:
this conference champions thing is a pile of crock. The goal is to find the best team and you could easily have a conference winner with 3 losses but an sec team with one loss not make it based on things I am reading on this thread. I want to see the best teams face off, however many we start with.
First of all any Alabama fan saying that the conference champion is a crock of shite should be ashamed of themselves.
But if you're going to rely on polls, why have a playoff at all?
Alabama sitting there with twice as many SEC championships than the team with the next most...?
Last year was a fluke, 9 times out of 10, Alabama is going to be the one with the SEC title. The argument of 'next best conference team' smacks of Auburnism.
You want to go to the playoffs? Win your conference. The advantage for the SEC team there is that they will be bettter prepared for the playoffs after having played a tougher schedule.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:11 am to mrbroker
quote:
this conference champions thing is a pile of crock. The goal is to find the best team and you could easily have a conference winner with 3 losses but an sec team with one loss not make it based on things I am reading on this thread. I want to see the best teams face off, however many we start with.
in principle having only conference champions is the right thing to do. How can you claim to be the best team in the nation if you can't prove you're the best team in your section of the nation?
That said, I don't want to see that rule implemented because one day we can't back into the playoffs when we have no business being there and knock out Alabama.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:14 am to The Mick
quote:
You could do 6. The top 2 teams get a bye.
Why a 'bye'?
Why 'wildcards'?
Why opinion polls?
Why not just use the simplest, most straightforward approach?
6 BCS champs, 2 highest non-BCS champs based on SOS. 3 rounds of games. Easy, clear, simple.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:14 am to WildTchoupitoulas
all conferences are not created equally..therefore given the big east or the Acc a pass to the playoff but not considering say the other major conference who has a team ranked in the top 4 but not a conference champ means you aint bringing in the best 4 or 8 or how ever many.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:16 am to SemperAuburn
no AQs.... take the top 8 of the BCS
last year would have been:
LSU vs. K-State
Alabama vs. Boise St
Okie St. vs. Arkansas
Stanford vs. Oregon
SEC: 3
Big 12: 2
Pac 12: 2
Non AQ: 1
last year would have been:
LSU vs. K-State
Alabama vs. Boise St
Okie St. vs. Arkansas
Stanford vs. Oregon
SEC: 3
Big 12: 2
Pac 12: 2
Non AQ: 1
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:19 am to SemperAuburn
Just take the top 8 ranked teams, regardless of whether they won their conference or not.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:19 am to mrbroker
quote:
all conferences are not created equally
So what? The best team from the best conference will probably win most of the time. Why should the second best team get a chance to claim they are the best team?
quote:
who has a team ranked in the top 4
Who cares what the opinion polls say? Why should we let 'favorites' like USC get a pass just because they're popular but may not have won their conference?
quote:
you aint bringing in the best 4 or 8 or how ever many.
If that's how you see it, why have a playoff at all? Why not just keep the present system of pairing up the top TWO teams?
Posted on 5/17/12 at 7:21 am to USMC Gators
quote:
Just take the top 8 ranked teams, regardless of whether they won their conference or not.
If you're going to take the 'top 8' based on opinion, why not just take the top ONE?
If opinion polls are that important, why not just let them decide the champion regardless of if they've won their conference?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News