Started By
Message
re: 4 not enough?
Posted on 5/17/12 at 8:24 am to SemperAuburn
Posted on 5/17/12 at 8:24 am to SemperAuburn
quote:
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?
I'm not a fan of the playoff system; however, your idea isn't that bad if a playoff system is inevitable.
0
Posted on 5/17/12 at 8:41 am to mrbroker
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
Figures, winnin conference no longer means anything..used to a home loss was worse than losing on the road...
Figures, winnin conference no longer means anything..used to a home loss was worse than losing on the road...
Posted on 5/17/12 at 8:43 am to SemperAuburn
quote:Agreed
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"
Posted on 5/17/12 at 8:47 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 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 use to be totally against an 8 team playoff but have now come full circle on the idea. I agree that it's probably the only way to come up with a good compromise between the conference champion only crowd vs the simply take the top teams regardless of conference crowd.
I like your idea except that I wouldn't give the Big East's bid to another conference. I'd give bids to the 5 highest rated conference champions and then 3 at large bids to the highest rated teams that didn't win their conference. Those teams would have been Alabama, Stanford, and Boise State this past season so that argues against deserving non-AQ conference teams being left out in such a format. I would further stipulate that these conference winners have to at least be ranked in the Top 12 to qualify. That would have eliminated Clemson and West Virginia which weren't even ranked in the Top 18 in the final poll and quite frankly didn't deserve a bid over Alabama, Stanford, and Boise State.
I think a 5 highest rated conference champions/3 at large bids with a Top 12 requirement for conference champions. I'd even throw in a Top 8 requirement for highest ranked teams that didn't win their conference to qualify for the at large bids. The top 8 requirement would have eliminated Virginia Tech after its very ugly loss to Clemson in the title game. I know that would have meant an ACC team wasn't in the playoff but that would actually be a good thing from the standpoint that such a playoff wasn't just a good ole boy agreement among the SEC, B1G, Big 12, Pac 12, and ACC to always gaurantee a team from each conference in the playoff. This would further appease the small non-AQ conferences to agree to this.
This post was edited on 5/17/12 at 8:52 am
Posted on 5/17/12 at 8:49 am to SemperAuburn
There are eleven or so conferences plus independents. I don't think they will or can give auto bids to certain conferences while leaving out the others.
I hate the idea of playoffs, but it should all be based on ranking, nothing else.
I hate the idea of playoffs, but it should all be based on ranking, nothing else.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:07 am to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
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.
You can't get rid of the polls because you have to pick the 5 or 6 (depending on how many conference champs you go with) highest ranked conference champions. You really need a ranking requirement for 2 reasons: First of all, you need it to determine the highest ranked champions because there are 11 conferences so you have to pick the 5 or 6 highest rated conference champions. Second of all, you need rankings to be involved because you need some kind of ranking requirement to keep a playoff from being a complete joke. You can't gaurantee certain conferences bids because a non-top 20 team like West Virginia would go over a much higher rated conference champ like TCU which is totally unfair.
No offense, but I'm getting a little tired of the conference champions only crowd arguing about their format increasing the importance of the regular season. That's total bull####. In fact, the exact opposite is true. Non conference regular season games become completely meaningless under that format because all that matter is winning your conference. The conference champion only format in both a 4 and an 8 team playoff with no ranking requirement is a cluster#### disaster waiting to happen when a 6-6 UCLA team or a team that lost all their non conference games but wins their conference gets into a 4 team or an 8 playoff over a team like last year's #2 ranked 11-1 Alabama team. I don't understand why some of you can't see that.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:22 am to SemperAuburn
Get rid of AQ status and you are close. Just take the 6 highest rated conference champions (no matter the conference) and the two highest rated teams after that (the two wildcards, which theoretically could be either conference championship or not, most years they probably won't be conference champions is my guess). Easy, fair, awesome.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:23 am to Govt Tide
quote:
Govt Tide
quote:
The conference champion only format in both a 4 and an 8 team playoff with no ranking requirement is a cluster#### disaster waiting to happen when a 6-6 UCLA team or a team that lost all their non conference games but wins their conference gets into a 4 team or an 8 playoff over a team like last year's #2 ranked 11-1 Alabama team. I don't understand why some of you can't see that.
Dude it is obvious that everyone going with the conference title thing are Bama haters. Actually everyone in the SEC going along with it are still butt-hurt over 21-0 and those outside the SEC hate the Tide and the SEC completely.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:26 am to MontyFranklyn
Don't flatter yourself 
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:26 am to elposter
quote:
Get rid of AQ status and you are close. Just take the 6 highest rated conference champions (no matter the conference) and the two highest rated teams after that (the two wildcards, which theoretically could be either conference championship or not, most years they probably won't be conference champions is my guess). Easy, fair, awesome.
I totally agree except that I'd go with the 5 highest rated conferences instead of 6. That leaves 3 wildcards instead of 2. However, there will undoubtedly be years when there are only 2 teams that didn't win their conference that are qualified for the playoff so that leftover at large would go to another conference champion. I'd also simply add a Top 12 requirement.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:31 am to SemperAuburn
Some conference/BCS reps have stated that 4 teams is a start. They will see how it works out logistically for a few years then go from there. They have to found out how fans will travel for an extra game during holiday season when money is short anyway, the effect it has on kids and winter finals, how it shakes out incorporating bowls, etc. I think this was the intent of Slives baby step +1 proposal in 2008.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:34 am to jpsig64g
What is going to be funny is when you have 2 undefeated conference champions, a 1 loss conference champion, a couple of 2 loss conference champions and a 1 loss Notre Dame. Who do you take?
This post was edited on 5/17/12 at 9:43 am
Posted on 5/17/12 at 9:47 am to dachsie
quote:
I would say no AQ and the top 8 or 12 ranked teams play in a playoff system
I agree they need to drop the AQ and also the rule that states that conferences are only allowed 2 teams in.
Every year there have been teams left out of the BCS that deserve to be in it.
I would say they need to set a number of teams they feel is doable and then take the top teams in the rankings. No more letting a 23rd, 15th and 16th ranked team in BCS Bowls just because of those two stupid rules.
Due to top ten teams not getting their due and going to BCS bowls while other undeserving schools get in it makes the BCS bowls irrelevant in deciding who the best teams are.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 12:09 pm to sfury
no need to limit 2 per conference..if you going to have 8 in, and the sec for instance has 3 teams in top 8 then why kick one out..in a 4 team scenario I think it would be hard to have more then 2 from a conference but in an 8 team one, then let the top 8 in the bcs poll in.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 12:55 pm to mrbroker
quote:That was the point I was making. That allowing only 2 schools per conference in the BCS bowls and having the AQ conferences makes it irrelevant as far as who the best teams were. When top 10 BCS ranked teams are going to lesser bowls so the 15th,16th and 23rd ranked teams can go to BCS bowls proves nothing.
no need to limit 2 per conference..if you going to have 8 in, and the sec for instance has 3 teams in top 8 then why kick one out..in a 4 team scenario I think it would be hard to have more then 2 from a conference but in an 8 team one, then let the top 8 in the bcs poll in.
In 2007 when Missouri ended up ranked top 5 in the BCS and ahead of several schools that got BCS bowls the excuse for MU not getting one in the media was Oklahoma and Kansas got the two that were allowed for the big 12. In my opinion last year 4 SEC teams should have went to BCS Bowls since they all finished in the top 10.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 1:05 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Top 8 provided you win your division or at least your conference. Sorry Crimson Mulligans you stay home.
Posted on 5/17/12 at 1:15 pm to Govt Tide
quote:
You can't get rid of the polls because you have to pick the 5 or 6
Yes.
You.
Can.
Either take the 6 BCS conference champs and the two higest rated non-BCS conference champs BASED ON S.O.S. or just have the top 8 conference champs selected based on S.O.S.
If you're going to have a playoff, just get rid of the polls altogether.
If you want to keep the polls, why have a playoff?
The DUMBEST thing would be to have both.
This post was edited on 5/17/12 at 1:18 pm
Posted on 5/17/12 at 1:48 pm to LSUDonMCO
quote:
Top 8 provided you win your division or at least your conference. Sorry Crimson Mulligans you stay home.
The problem that shortsighted butthurt LSU fans like yourself either are incapable of or unwilling to see is that LSU VERY VERY VERY easily could have lost 9-6 in OT on Nov 5th and LSU would have been left out of a playoff that included a 2 loss Oregon team they destroyed earlier in the season. You'd also have #10 Wisconsin who lost 2 games to average teams getting in ahead of LSU. Would you still be cool with "staying home" then?
Posted on 5/17/12 at 1:50 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
it should be done in a similar fashion to the DIII playoffs
pool A = 6 AQ conference champs (SEC, Big10, Pac12, Big 12, ACC, Big East)
pool B = 2 slots for best non AQ champs and independents
pool C = 4 slots for best of the rest wildcards
make it to where you can lose your AQ status if you dont meet certain parameters so the mid major conferences have a shot at moving up if a conference like the Big East continues to get raided or simply falls off the map sue to poor play.
pool A = 6 AQ conference champs (SEC, Big10, Pac12, Big 12, ACC, Big East)
pool B = 2 slots for best non AQ champs and independents
pool C = 4 slots for best of the rest wildcards
make it to where you can lose your AQ status if you dont meet certain parameters so the mid major conferences have a shot at moving up if a conference like the Big East continues to get raided or simply falls off the map sue to poor play.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News