Started By
Message
re: Why 6 > 8
Posted on 12/10/14 at 12:46 pm to Farmer1906
Posted on 12/10/14 at 12:46 pm to Farmer1906
I like 5 teams with 4+5 playing a play-in game.
The problem now is that you could have 5 clear-cut great teams that are conference champions, and one has to be kept out. We need at least 5. Let's take another look with just 5 teams:
2014
1. Bama 12-1
2. UO 12-1
3. FSU 13-0
4. tOSU 12-1 <--Play-in
5. BU 11-1 <--Play-in
--
6. TCU 11-1
7. Ms State 10-2
8. Mi State 10-2
2013
1. FSU 13-0
2. Auburn 12-1
3. Bama 11-1
4. Mi State 12-1 <--Play-in
5. Stanford 11-2 <--Play-in
--
6. BU 11-1
7. tOSU 12-1
8. Mizzou 11-2
2012
1. Notre Dame 12-0
2. Bama 12-1
3. Florida 11-1
4. UO 11-1 <--Play-in
5. KSU 11-1 <--Play-in
--
6. Stanford 11-2
7. UGA 11-2
8. LSU 10-2
2011
1. LSU 13-0
2. Bama 11-1
3. Okie St 11-1
4. Stanford 11-1 <--Play-in
5. UO 11-2 <--Play-in
--
6. Ark 10-2
7. Boise St 11-1
8. KSU 10-2
Obviously, you'd need to shuffle it around so that the play-in games would be a possible elimination game for a power 5 runner-up.
The problem now is that you could have 5 clear-cut great teams that are conference champions, and one has to be kept out. We need at least 5. Let's take another look with just 5 teams:
2014
1. Bama 12-1
2. UO 12-1
3. FSU 13-0
4. tOSU 12-1 <--Play-in
5. BU 11-1 <--Play-in
--
6. TCU 11-1
7. Ms State 10-2
8. Mi State 10-2
2013
1. FSU 13-0
2. Auburn 12-1
3. Bama 11-1
4. Mi State 12-1 <--Play-in
5. Stanford 11-2 <--Play-in
--
6. BU 11-1
7. tOSU 12-1
8. Mizzou 11-2
2012
1. Notre Dame 12-0
2. Bama 12-1
3. Florida 11-1
4. UO 11-1 <--Play-in
5. KSU 11-1 <--Play-in
--
6. Stanford 11-2
7. UGA 11-2
8. LSU 10-2
2011
1. LSU 13-0
2. Bama 11-1
3. Okie St 11-1
4. Stanford 11-1 <--Play-in
5. UO 11-2 <--Play-in
--
6. Ark 10-2
7. Boise St 11-1
8. KSU 10-2
Obviously, you'd need to shuffle it around so that the play-in games would be a possible elimination game for a power 5 runner-up.
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/SR_Icon.jpg)