Started By
Message
re: The College Football Playoffs have been terrible.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to MizzouTrue
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to MizzouTrue
quote:
This year woulda been Bama Clemson. Clemson is ranked number 2, OSU was 3
The committee did yes but the AP Poll and the coaches poll both had OSU #2. OSU would have been #2 using the old BCS formula.
0
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to GIbson05
quote:
2014
2. Oregon 59
3. Florida State 20
I thought it was a great game
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to lsufball19
quote:
how would it make for better football with the #16 team playing the #1 team? It would be a bloodbath even more so than it's been
You get better games, 5 vs. 12, 6 vs. 11, 7 vs. 10, 8 vs. 9, and also the potential for cinderellas much like the NCAA BBall tournament.
To me, an expanded playoff also means a better determined Champion. 4 teams out of 128 is pretty laughable. FCS does 24 teams and it's smaller.
Regardless of what you do there will always be some blowouts, you cant eliminate them entirely. Point here is making a better playoff overall with more headlines, better games and more stories. Not to mention never really having a team say "we got shafted" by missing the thing all together.
This post was edited on 1/5/17 at 10:17 am
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to GIbson05
Too small of a sample size to draw conclusions really.
Can't believe people would ever want to expand. Just short sighted fans who want to see their own pet team make it, they don't care about the good of the sport.
Look at the FCS/DII playoffs for example, the early rounds are usually blowouts.
Can't believe people would ever want to expand. Just short sighted fans who want to see their own pet team make it, they don't care about the good of the sport.
Look at the FCS/DII playoffs for example, the early rounds are usually blowouts.
This post was edited on 1/5/17 at 10:16 am
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to thunderbird1100
biggest change is the playoff round needs to be the week before New years and have the championship on new year's day.
the schedule really sucks. I don't want to watch these games on work nights. I want them during the holidays.
the schedule really sucks. I don't want to watch these games on work nights. I want them during the holidays.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:15 am to Bham Bammer
quote:
It absolutely does not need to be more than four teams.
4 teams out of 128 is laughable
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:16 am to MizzouTrue
quote:
This year woulda been Bama Clemson.
Just because it worked out the same as it would under teh BCS doesnt' mean it was a failure. OSU had a VERY valid and legit claim to be a title contender this year which they wouldnt' have had a chance under the BCS. They got shellacked but that doesnt' mean the system failed.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:17 am to GIbson05
quote:
2. Alabama 38
3. Michigan State 0
And even that was 10-0 at half but otherwise that was a butt whopping in 2nd half
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:17 am to Nissanmaxima
quote:
Is going to 6 or 8 or more the answer?
In some ways yes. For example, USC and PSU were playing like top 5 teams at year end, but both had multiple losses. OSU wasn't playing like a top 3 team at the end of the year, but they had 1 loss and a great resume.
Getting 6 or 8 in there gives the committee to weigh in the "hotness" of teams as well. If all 4 of PSU, FSU, OSU and USC had gotten in, you could easily have seen OSU be ranked 5 or 6th. When you add more teams you can include the hot team as opposed to only the resume teams
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:17 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
Then they wont win a NC, that's the point of the playoff in case you forgot.
By that logic let's just include 6-6 teams in the a playoffs too!
Playoffs for everyone!
Playoff spots should be earned. No 8-4 team has earned shite.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:20 am to IAmReality
quote:
Can't believe people would ever want to expand. Just short sighted fans who want to see their own pet team make it, they don't care about the good of the sport.
Yeah because it's great for the sport to watch Alabama play Mercer and win 70-0. How about let's eliminate an OOC game (the bad cupcake ones), go to 9 game conference schedules for everyone and expand the playoff so we have at least 1 more meaningful game.
The real tragedy here is when schedules expanded from 11 to 12 games back in the mid 2000s most everyone just added naother cupcake game. How about at least going back to 11 games and adding a much better (playoff) game?
quote:
Look at the FCS/DII playoffs for example, the early rounds are usually blowouts.
In case you failed to see 6 of the 8 CFB playoff games have been horrible. Blowouts WILL ALWAYS be a apart of the game. The BCS NCG was a blowout more than it was a good game too.
This post was edited on 1/5/17 at 10:26 am
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:20 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
Then they wont win a NC, that's the point of the playoff in case you forgot.
Like a 9-7 team would never win the SuperBowl, but the Gaints did it.
You let 16 teams in and the regular season starts to mean nothing. Alabama could have rested players and lost to Auburn and Florida(not that they would have)and still be in the playoffs. That's dumb and college football doesn't need it.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:22 am to Buckeye06
quote:
In some ways yes.
Nah, 4 is perfect.
quote:
USC and PSU were playing like top 5 teams at year end, but both had multiple losses
That's the bottom line. If you have multiple losses, you've lost your shot. There shouldnt' be some playstation-eque "hot streak factor" to allow people in simply because htey're playing well in November. GAmes in novmeber count just the same as ones in september.
quote:
Getting 6 or 8 in there gives the committee to weigh in the "hotness" of teams as well.
which is stupid, why invalidate what happened the first 66% of the season?
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:24 am to IAmReality
quote:
By that logic let's just include 6-6 teams in the a playoffs too!
Dumb logic, 16 teams is very doable, it's 24 in FCS. Obviously having a 64 team playoff is impossible as nobody wants to play 18 or 19 games.
quote:
Playoff spots should be earned. No 8-4 team has earned shite.
16 teams out of 128 is pretty damned earning it. Professional sports take a way higher percentage, NCAA basketball takes 68 out of 351, NCAA baseball takes 64 out of 295, FCS takes 24 out of 125. You realize 4 out of 128 is ridiculous in comparison to all of these, right?
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:26 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
You realize 4 out of 128 is ridiculous in comparison to all of these, right?
Comparing football to baseball/basketball is ridiculous.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:29 am to GIbson05
quote:
Like a 9-7 team would never win the SuperBowl, but the Gaints did it.
They deserved it. You act like winning games that matter 4 in a row (Only 1 of them at home) somehow doesnt mean they didn't earn that Championship? Really? Plus, the NFL has way more parity than college.
quote:
You let 16 teams in and the regular season starts to mean nothing.
This is always a dumb argument. 16 teams out of 128 means the regular season still means a lot more than literally EVERY other NCAA sport with a playoff or tournament. The higher seeds get rewarded with home game(s) on top of that.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:30 am to GIbson05
quote:
Comparing football to baseball/basketball is ridiculous.
FCS football 24 teams out of 125
Next
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:36 am to thunderbird1100
Just using CFB Playoff rankings:
1. Alabama
16.West Virginia
8. Wisconsin
9. USC
5. Penn State
12. Oklahoma State
4. Washington
13. Louisville
6. Michigan
11. Florida State
3. Ohio State
14. Auburn
7. Oklahoma
10. Colorado
2. Clemson
15. Western Michigan
Man what an awful way to determine a champion
1. Alabama
16.West Virginia
8. Wisconsin
9. USC
5. Penn State
12. Oklahoma State
4. Washington
13. Louisville
6. Michigan
11. Florida State
3. Ohio State
14. Auburn
7. Oklahoma
10. Colorado
2. Clemson
15. Western Michigan
Man what an awful way to determine a champion
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:42 am to thunderbird1100
1. Alabama
16.West Virginia
Blowout
8. Wisconsin
9. USC
Decent
5. Penn State
12. Oklahoma State
Decent
4. Washington
13. Louisville
Blowout
6. Michigan
11. Florida State
great
3. Ohio State
14. Auburn
blowout
7. Oklahoma
10. Colorado
blowout
2. Clemson
15. Western Michigan
blowout
So we would get one good game out of all that.
16.West Virginia
Blowout
8. Wisconsin
9. USC
Decent
5. Penn State
12. Oklahoma State
Decent
4. Washington
13. Louisville
Blowout
6. Michigan
11. Florida State
great
3. Ohio State
14. Auburn
blowout
7. Oklahoma
10. Colorado
blowout
2. Clemson
15. Western Michigan
blowout
So we would get one good game out of all that.
Posted on 1/5/17 at 10:44 am to GIbson05
I think the reason the semi-finals have been so lackluster has been the extended preparation time. You give these teams 3 plus weeks to dissect a team in every aspect, and weeks of practice specifically for them to know every contingency and the better team is going to win handily most of the time. In contrast, the NCG you have a much shorter time to get ready, and they'll probably be more competitive games over time. If you went to 8 teams, that first round would still be less competitive due to extra preparation, but it would probably produce much more entertaining semi-final games.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News