Started By
Message
Need an 8 Team Playoff
Posted on 12/7/14 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 12/7/14 at 12:52 pm
Make the winners of the power 5 conferences an automatic qualifier and sees them by their ranking. That leaves 3 spot as "wild cards". Highest ranked teams, outside of the conference winners go.
19
Posted on 12/7/14 at 12:55 pm to GAFF
No
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:00 pm to GAFF
I totally agree. Only fair way to do it.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:00 pm to GAFF
:kige:
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:02 pm to GAFF
quote:We would get a rematch vs Alabama (at least I think we come in at #8).
Need an 8 Team Playoff
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:02 pm to GAFF
Agree with a Gump for once. 8 teams would be perfect, there will always be controversy, but 8 teams would be the most fair without down playing the importance of the regular season
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:02 pm to GAFF
Then there will be even more teams complaining about deserving to be in. The more teams you add the worse it gets. This year only 3 teams had a legit argument for top 2 but 6 for top 4. There's no telling how many believe they are top 8.
This post was edited on 12/7/14 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:04 pm to Rabern57
I think a great solution is to have play in games when necessary. Some years it will be clear cut who the 4 top teams are. Other years their maybe discussion between 5-8. When there's a discussion, you have a play in at the higher teams home venue. So this year TCU and Baylor would play in against OSU and FSU (4th and 3rd highest teams) at their home fields next week. The winners would slot in the final 4. Let's say there was only 1 team who had an argument (example assume TCU), that team TCU would travel to Columbus to play OSU next week to fill in the last spot.
Some years you may have no play ins, some years you may have 2, 3 even maybe 4 play ins (which would be like an 8 team playoff). The advantage of being a top ranked team is that you may not have to play a play in and if you do at least it will be at home.
The committee would determine who and how many play ins each year. That would be awesome and give them a lot of flexibility.
Some years you may have no play ins, some years you may have 2, 3 even maybe 4 play ins (which would be like an 8 team playoff). The advantage of being a top ranked team is that you may not have to play a play in and if you do at least it will be at home.
The committee would determine who and how many play ins each year. That would be awesome and give them a lot of flexibility.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:04 pm to Rabern57
quote:
There's no telling how many believe they are top 8.
E.g., "Ole Miss deserves to be in an 8 team playoff ahead of Michigan State."
It should stay at 4.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:05 pm to GAFF
Bad idea. Two loss teams don't deserve to be part of the equation.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:06 pm to GAFF
Totally agree. Leaves a spot for teams like Boise as well. That way, they can prove if they deserve a shot on the field.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:09 pm to GatorNation4Lyfe
quote:
I think a great solution is to have play in games when necessary. Some years it will be clear cut who the 4 top teams are. Other years their maybe discussion between 5-8. When there's a discussion, you have a play in at the higher teams home venue.
frick no. First of all, it's never, ever, clear cut to the team that gets left out. Second, given the nature of football and the possibility of an injury that can knock players out for at least a week...or at least make them less than 1005...having to play an extra game is patently unfair to that #4 team relative to teams, 1, 2, and 3.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:12 pm to Rabern57
There would be nothing to argue. Win your conference and you're in. Then they'd be 3 spots to fill with teams that have better records than conference champs. Example would be the loser of the SEC Champ going because they're 11-2 while the winner of the PAC 12 is also 11-2. Regular season matters as well as conference championship games.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:20 pm to GAFF
Then you have to deal with 2 teams splitting the conference title and there would still be multiple teams with better or equal records that don't look as good but would have an argument that they should be in.
This post was edited on 12/7/14 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:24 pm to GAFF
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:27 pm to GAFF
quote:
That leaves 3 spot as "wild cards".
Jesus fricking christ.
What is it with this shite, who came up with this stupid idea that everyone seems to think it's a good idea for college football?
Wildcards are for generating more revenue for professional leagues, and children playing poker.
No one has yet given a logical reason for wildcards in college football, it's just repeated like some sort of stupid mantra.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:30 pm to GregAl
quote:
Bad idea. Two loss teams don't deserve to be part of the equation.
What if Bama lost to Mizzou last night? You mean to tell me they shouldnt have a say when OSU, TCU, Baylor do?
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:31 pm to GatorNation4Lyfe
quote:
I think a great solution is to have play in games when necessary.
Instead of making it more and more complicated, the only obviously fair solution is 8 teams using conference champions only. There would be no controversy, everyone knows what it takes to get in, if you don't win your conference, you shut up and sit down.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:31 pm to BamaGradinTn
Then don't be ranked #4...
I'm all for an 8 team playoff but until then I think a committee selected play in would be awesome. That way they can decide if an extra team should get a chance.
I'm all for an 8 team playoff but until then I think a committee selected play in would be awesome. That way they can decide if an extra team should get a chance.
quote:
having to play an extra game is patently unfair to that #4 team relative to teams, 1, 2, and 3.
Posted on 12/7/14 at 1:36 pm to GAFF
How many wildcard contenders would be bitchign today?
All of them.
And you'd have teams like fricking Arizona in the playoffs?
No way.
Reward the teams at the top (1/2) not the teams at the bottom (7/8).
More games = higher chance of injuries, higher chance of losing a fluke game, etc.
All of them.
And you'd have teams like fricking Arizona in the playoffs?
No way.
Reward the teams at the top (1/2) not the teams at the bottom (7/8).
More games = higher chance of injuries, higher chance of losing a fluke game, etc.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News