Started By
Message
re: Upcoming battle for Slive: College football playoff?
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:04 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:04 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
quote:
And the way that college basketball determines who gets to play in the NCAA tournament doesn't make any sense either. Why do mid-major teams get in the NCAA tournament based on what they do in the conference tournament rather than the regular season? Explain to me how one good week of basketball should override three or four months of being the best team in the conference. The regular season champs should get the automatic bids not the conference tournament champions.
I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure it is up to the conference's on how they award their automatic birth.
3
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:06 pm to marshallcotiger
quote:
up to the conference's on how they award their automatic birth.
True
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:10 pm to marshallcotiger
quote:
I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure it is up to the conference's on how they award their automatic birth.
The Ivy League is the only conference to award their automatic berth to the regular season champions.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:10 pm to marshallcotiger
quote:
I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure it is up to the conference's on how they award their automatic birth.
Too lazy to verify this but that sounds right to me.
I believe the NCAA just says you are guaranteed one team per conference (and the conference decides who that one team will be). From there, it's up to the tournament committee to decide what, if any, at large teams are invited from each conference.
This is one reason why the NCAA tournament is now up to 68 teams. By pleasing every conference with at least one team selected, they create more demand for at large berths.
If you make the whole tournament at large and by invitation only based on selection committee criteria, you could cut the field in half or better yet -- down to 16 teams.
Football should start small and STAY small. Just take the top 4 per whatever metric they want to use. BCS rankings are fine by me. We don't want March Madness for football. A 4 team playoff would be 3 games and done in 2 weeks. It would be a ratings bonanza and would probably give the Super Bowl a run for its money.
I give Slive credit for not being as short sighted as his peers and seeing the potential gold mine out there waiting to be mined. Once again, the SEC is leading the way and the other conferences are belatedly seeing the light.
This post was edited on 3/5/12 at 5:12 pm
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:13 pm to NonregAg09
Do Not Want
LINK
1998 championship: No. 1 Tennessee vs. No. 2 Florida State (same)
1998 Plus One: No. 1 Tennessee vs. No. 5 UCLA; No. 2 Florida State vs. No. 4 Ohio State
Not included: No. 3 Kansas State.
1999 championship: No. 1 Florida State vs. No. 2 Virginia Tech (same)
1999 Plus One: No. 1 Florida State vs. No. 4 Alabama; No. 2 Virginia Tech vs. No. 3 Nebraska
2000 championship: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. No. 2 Florida State (same)
2000 Plus One: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. Washington; No. 2 Florida State vs. No. 3 Miami
2001 championship: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 3 Colorado
2001 Plus One: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 8 Illinois; No. 3 Colorado vs. No. 4 Oregon
Not included: No. 2 Nebraska, No. 5 Florida, No. 6 Tennessee, No. 7 Texas
2002 championship: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 2 Ohio State (same)
2002 Plus One: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 6 Washington State; No. 2 Ohio State vs. No. 3 Georgia
Not included: No. 4 USC, No. 5 Iowa
2003 championship: No. 2 LSU vs. No. 3 USC
2003 Plus One: No. 2 LSU vs. No. 7 Florida State; No. 3 USC vs. No. 4 Michigan
Not included: No. 1 Oklahoma, No. 5 Ohio State, No. 6 Texas
2004 championship: No. 1 USC vs. No. 2 Oklahoma (same)
2004 Plus One: No. 1 USC vs. No. 6 Utah; No. 2 Oklahoma vs. No. 3 Auburn
Not included: No. 4 Texas, No. 5 California
2005 Championship: No. 1 USC vs. No. 2 Texas (same)
2005 Plus One: No. 1 USC vs. No. 7 Georgia; No. 2 Texas vs. No. 3 Penn State
Not included: No. 4 Ohio State, No. 5 Oregon, No. 6 Notre Dame
2006 championship: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 2 Florida (same)
2006 Plus One: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 6 Louisville; No. 2 Florida vs. No. 5 USC
Not included: No 3. Michigan, No. 4 LSU
2007 championship: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 2 LSU (same)
2007 Plus One: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 4 Oklahoma; No. 2 LSU vs. No. 3 Virginia Tech
2008 championship: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. No. 2 Florida (same)
2008 Plus One: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. No. 6 Utah; No. 2 Florida vs. No. 5 USC
Not included: No. 3 Texas, No. 4 Alabama
2009 championship: No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 2 Texas (same)
2009 Plus One: No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 4 TCU; No. 2 Texas vs. No. 3 Cincinnati
2010 championship: No. 1 Auburn vs. No. 2 Oregon (same)
2010 Plus One: No. 1 Auburn vs. No. 5 Wisconsin; No. 2 Oregon vs. No. 3 TCU
Not included: No. 4 Stanford
2011 championship: No. 1 LSU vs. No. 3 Oklahoma State
2011 Plus One: No. 1 LSU vs. No. 10 Wisconsin; No. 3 Oklahoma State vs. No. 5 Oregon
Not included: No. 2 Alabama, No. 4 Stanford, No. 6 Arkansas, No. 7 Boise State, N. 8 Kansas State, No. 9 South Carolina
LINK
1998 championship: No. 1 Tennessee vs. No. 2 Florida State (same)
1998 Plus One: No. 1 Tennessee vs. No. 5 UCLA; No. 2 Florida State vs. No. 4 Ohio State
Not included: No. 3 Kansas State.
1999 championship: No. 1 Florida State vs. No. 2 Virginia Tech (same)
1999 Plus One: No. 1 Florida State vs. No. 4 Alabama; No. 2 Virginia Tech vs. No. 3 Nebraska
2000 championship: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. No. 2 Florida State (same)
2000 Plus One: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. Washington; No. 2 Florida State vs. No. 3 Miami
2001 championship: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 3 Colorado
2001 Plus One: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 8 Illinois; No. 3 Colorado vs. No. 4 Oregon
Not included: No. 2 Nebraska, No. 5 Florida, No. 6 Tennessee, No. 7 Texas
2002 championship: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 2 Ohio State (same)
2002 Plus One: No. 1 Miami vs. No. 6 Washington State; No. 2 Ohio State vs. No. 3 Georgia
Not included: No. 4 USC, No. 5 Iowa
2003 championship: No. 2 LSU vs. No. 3 USC
2003 Plus One: No. 2 LSU vs. No. 7 Florida State; No. 3 USC vs. No. 4 Michigan
Not included: No. 1 Oklahoma, No. 5 Ohio State, No. 6 Texas
2004 championship: No. 1 USC vs. No. 2 Oklahoma (same)
2004 Plus One: No. 1 USC vs. No. 6 Utah; No. 2 Oklahoma vs. No. 3 Auburn
Not included: No. 4 Texas, No. 5 California
2005 Championship: No. 1 USC vs. No. 2 Texas (same)
2005 Plus One: No. 1 USC vs. No. 7 Georgia; No. 2 Texas vs. No. 3 Penn State
Not included: No. 4 Ohio State, No. 5 Oregon, No. 6 Notre Dame
2006 championship: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 2 Florida (same)
2006 Plus One: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 6 Louisville; No. 2 Florida vs. No. 5 USC
Not included: No 3. Michigan, No. 4 LSU
2007 championship: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 2 LSU (same)
2007 Plus One: No. 1 Ohio State vs. No. 4 Oklahoma; No. 2 LSU vs. No. 3 Virginia Tech
2008 championship: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. No. 2 Florida (same)
2008 Plus One: No. 1 Oklahoma vs. No. 6 Utah; No. 2 Florida vs. No. 5 USC
Not included: No. 3 Texas, No. 4 Alabama
2009 championship: No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 2 Texas (same)
2009 Plus One: No. 1 Alabama vs. No. 4 TCU; No. 2 Texas vs. No. 3 Cincinnati
2010 championship: No. 1 Auburn vs. No. 2 Oregon (same)
2010 Plus One: No. 1 Auburn vs. No. 5 Wisconsin; No. 2 Oregon vs. No. 3 TCU
Not included: No. 4 Stanford
2011 championship: No. 1 LSU vs. No. 3 Oklahoma State
2011 Plus One: No. 1 LSU vs. No. 10 Wisconsin; No. 3 Oklahoma State vs. No. 5 Oregon
Not included: No. 2 Alabama, No. 4 Stanford, No. 6 Arkansas, No. 7 Boise State, N. 8 Kansas State, No. 9 South Carolina
This post was edited on 3/5/12 at 5:15 pm
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:26 pm to BrerTiger
quote:
Football should start small and STAY small
This is something else that will not happen. It will expand as sure as taxes will rise. Once it starts it will snowball just like the Big Dance, they started with eight teams.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:30 pm to bona fide
quote:
This is something else that will not happen. It will expand as sure as taxes will rise. Once it starts it will snowball just like the Big Dance, they started with eight teams.
The biggest that they'll expand to is 16 teams with 11 automatic bids for the conferences and five at-large bids but I don't see that happening for a long time. It took 46 years for the NCAA tournament field to expand from 8 teams to 64 teams and the NCAA tournament didn't give out at-large bids for the first 35 years.
This post was edited on 3/5/12 at 5:32 pm
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:35 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
How has DeLoss Dodds not already called this dumb frick out? 2008 Texas would have been in a plus one (along with OU) while this plan they still get left out. Funny how the conference that wrote the book on sending non conference champions to the BCS title game is the one crying now 
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:38 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
quote:
he biggest that they'll expand to is 16 teams w
Doesn't matter, 12,16 or 24, it is still a huge increase over the original four that is being proposed. The increase will happen, not a matter of if but when.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:41 pm to NonregAg09
If it's going to be only conference champions, it should include ALL conference champions, not just 4, unless the NCAA goes ahead and makes another division for the pathetic conferences like Sunbelt, Big 12-2, and CUSA, etc.
The only way that a 4-team playoff is fair is if the top 4 BCS teams are in, or all conference champs are in.
The only way that a 4-team playoff is fair is if the top 4 BCS teams are in, or all conference champs are in.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 5:47 pm to bona fide
quote:
Doesn't matter, 12,16 or 24, it is still a huge increase over the original four that is being proposed. The increase will happen, not a matter of if but when.
I can see your point. I mean just look at how quickly the number of bowl teams have increased over the years. It wasn't that long ago when college football had the Blue-Gray game for senior players who played for teams that didn't make bowl games. Now you have 6-6 teams regularly being invited to bowl games. It's gotten out of control.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 9:05 pm to Unbiased Bama Fan
A plus 1 format with a conference title mandate would be so much worse than what we have right now. I will add that the comments in the media that state that only Bama fans would be opposed to the conference title mandate are out of line. Bama fans realize that what happened this year was about a once in a lifetime occurrence, and there is very little chance the country would allow that to happen again with Bama. THe real problem is it's just too easy to see all kind of scenarios playing out where really bad teams make it in (ie Wisconsin this year). And don't get me started about a possible exception being made for ND. ND would basically have to just get themselves ranked in the top 10-15 to make the big dance. horseshite.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 11:06 pm to attheua
quote:
Any playoff format that doesn't guarantee #1 vs #4 and #2 vs #3 is worse than what we have now and shouldn't even be considered an option.
The Big 10 ain't running this shite.
The Pac 12 needs to grow a pair and get out of the Big 10's jock.
NBC ain't running anything either so Notre Dame shouldn't get an easier in than Boise State.
Posted on 3/5/12 at 11:52 pm to chinese58
How can you have 4 conference champs without four legit football conferences?
SEC
B1G
PAC12?
ACC?
BigEast?
the others?
If you identify four conferences, we will see expansion to 16 teams and probably the end of the NCAA.
Might be for the best.
SEC
B1G
PAC12?
ACC?
BigEast?
the others?
If you identify four conferences, we will see expansion to 16 teams and probably the end of the NCAA.
Might be for the best.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 10:06 am to bigpapamac
quote:
The only way it'll stand the slightest chance is if everybody starts crowning their conference champions the same way, with a conference title game
Why would that have to be the method? A round-robin schedule is a more valid way to determine a league championship.
Posted on 3/6/12 at 10:47 am to Nuts4LSU
Go to four 16 team conferences with four pods each. Have playoffs within the conferences to win conference championship and then playoff the conference champions.
Do it that way and we don't need the NCAA. Make it like a mini NFL with the entire schedule of every team being composed of teams from the four conferences. With a true playoff, there would be no need to worry about overall records so there would be real incentive to play power teams from the other four conferences.
Do it that way and we don't need the NCAA. Make it like a mini NFL with the entire schedule of every team being composed of teams from the four conferences. With a true playoff, there would be no need to worry about overall records so there would be real incentive to play power teams from the other four conferences.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News