Started By
Message
Best team, or most deserving team?
Posted on 1/12/23 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 1/12/23 at 1:48 pm
The old poll system (and to some extent the BCS system) was slanted towards awarding the NC each year to the "most deserving" team. That's how you get BYU winning a title in '84 - no one was under the illusion they were truly the "best" team, but they had an excellent season and they did manage to beat a good team or two and voila, they get the NC.
The new playoff system is extremely heavily slanted towards awarding the title to the "best" team. Yes, there will be upsets here and there, but expecting a team like '84 BYU (or '22 TCU, for that matter) to win three or four games in a row against top-12 competition is pretty unlikely, to say the least. From now on titles are going to go almost exclusively to the Ohio States, Alabamas, and Georgias of the world, because those teams have far more talent than just about everyone else. College football is not a level playing field the way the NFL is.
I've gone on record several times here with my preference, but what says the board? Which kind of champion do you prefer?
The new playoff system is extremely heavily slanted towards awarding the title to the "best" team. Yes, there will be upsets here and there, but expecting a team like '84 BYU (or '22 TCU, for that matter) to win three or four games in a row against top-12 competition is pretty unlikely, to say the least. From now on titles are going to go almost exclusively to the Ohio States, Alabamas, and Georgias of the world, because those teams have far more talent than just about everyone else. College football is not a level playing field the way the NFL is.
I've gone on record several times here with my preference, but what says the board? Which kind of champion do you prefer?
This post was edited on 1/12/23 at 1:59 pm
13
Posted on 1/12/23 at 1:55 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Ummm... you mean BYU right? Not BC?
The way the system is and should be is the teams in the playoff are those who deserve to be in based on the regular season
And the winner is the team that wins the playoff (which will usually be the best of the playoff teams).
You can't award playoff spots for who might be the best... it has to be based on what those teams do on the field. yes, Bama may have been able to win the playoff... but they finished 4th in the SEC based on the results on the field (losing to #2 Tennessee and #3 LSU).
One the field is set... what happens on the field decides all.
The way the system is and should be is the teams in the playoff are those who deserve to be in based on the regular season
And the winner is the team that wins the playoff (which will usually be the best of the playoff teams).
You can't award playoff spots for who might be the best... it has to be based on what those teams do on the field. yes, Bama may have been able to win the playoff... but they finished 4th in the SEC based on the results on the field (losing to #2 Tennessee and #3 LSU).
One the field is set... what happens on the field decides all.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 1:58 pm to DawginSC
quote:
DawginSC
Well said.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:00 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:The kind that takes care of business on the field during the season and then takes care of business on the field during the playoffs.
Which kind of champion do you prefer?
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:03 pm to DawginSC
quote:
Ummm... you mean BYU right? Not BC?
D'oh! You are right. Corrected.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:06 pm to TheTideMustRoll
I get both points.
Most deserving gets into the playoffs, best team out of those wins the playoffs.
The biggest issue is the lack of parity - there are 121 div 1 programs, and only a tiny handful have any realistic chance of winning it all.
Everything they've changed to encourage parity has pretty much backfired. At least in the old days you could have the BYUs of the world win it all because they'd win their games, win a bowl, and with the right combo of wins and losses get a trophy.
The Bowl Coalition (started in 1992) was pretty much the death knell of that possibility. The BCS locked it down, and while the playoffs expanded that from 2 to 4 teams it's still the same.
It's not like basketball, where a scrappy team can pull together the right combo or a single superstar at the right time and make an epic run (like 8th seed Butler making it all the way to the championship game in 2011). That's almost assuredly not going to happen in the current landscape of college football.
You can expand it to 12 teams, but all that means is that you'll get a few more teams without opt-outs. You'll likely still have a ton of lopsided games.
Most deserving gets into the playoffs, best team out of those wins the playoffs.
The biggest issue is the lack of parity - there are 121 div 1 programs, and only a tiny handful have any realistic chance of winning it all.
Everything they've changed to encourage parity has pretty much backfired. At least in the old days you could have the BYUs of the world win it all because they'd win their games, win a bowl, and with the right combo of wins and losses get a trophy.
The Bowl Coalition (started in 1992) was pretty much the death knell of that possibility. The BCS locked it down, and while the playoffs expanded that from 2 to 4 teams it's still the same.
It's not like basketball, where a scrappy team can pull together the right combo or a single superstar at the right time and make an epic run (like 8th seed Butler making it all the way to the championship game in 2011). That's almost assuredly not going to happen in the current landscape of college football.
You can expand it to 12 teams, but all that means is that you'll get a few more teams without opt-outs. You'll likely still have a ton of lopsided games.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:06 pm to DawginSC
quote:
what happens on the field decides all.
Which is why a 12 team CFP is just going to water down the importance of regular season games.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:07 pm to skrayper
quote:
You can expand it to 12 teams, but all that means is that you'll get a few more teams without opt-outs. You'll likely still have a ton of lopsided games.
I'm looking forward to the year when the SEC gets a minimum of 7 of 12 and likely 3 of the Final 4.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:14 pm to TheTideMustRoll
I see you are at the bargaining stage.
Acceptance is right around the corner.
Acceptance is right around the corner.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:15 pm to TheTideMustRoll
I think at the end of the year you let the coaches get on tv and plead their case. That's how you decide on the champion.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:16 pm to TheTideMustRoll
It should be the most deserving. But TCU wasn’t deserving in my opinion. Losing to Kansas State while not having any high quality wins isn’t top 4 material. Tennessee had a horrendous loss but at least we had several very good wins.
This post was edited on 1/12/23 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:17 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The kind that takes care of business on the field during the season and then takes care of business on the field during the playoffs.
Correct
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:26 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
Which is why a 12 team CFP is just going to water down the importance of regular season games.
I actually think the design they've chosen will be okay.
By having to win a conference to get the top 4 spots which get you a bye, you make the regular season races still have import. As much? No, but it doesn't make it unimportant. UGA would have had MUCH more to play for in 2021's SEC title game if a bye were on the line. The game literally had no impact on their post season other than if they'd be playing Cincy or Michigan in the first round.
What it will do is not make a second loss disqualifying anymore... and not a 3rd loss for a conference championship game participant (for a non-championship game participant a 3rd loss would make it pretty unlikely for a top 12 finish). It pushes the "oh crap, we're out" point down a loss from where it is now.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:47 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Sorry. But this doesn't make sense since TCU just made the playoffs and Alabama missed the playoffs.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 2:54 pm to GreatPumpkin
quote:
It should be the most deserving
Yeah, I don't see how you can decide who is "most deserving" when some teams play in a conference full of powder puffs. If we're just going to put the teams in with the fewest losses, I propose Bama joins the MAC.
Posted on 1/12/23 at 3:04 pm to Teague
quote:
Yeah, I don't see how you can decide who is "most deserving" when some teams play in a conference full of powder puffs.
I think that schedules should be structured to qualify for the CFP:
- Minimum 9 game conference schedule
- Minimum 2 Power 5 OOC
- Maximum 1 Group of 5
- Zero FCS
Posted on 1/12/23 at 3:05 pm to TheTideMustRoll
"The Committee is responsible for determining the top four teams that will make up the Playoffs and be placed into Playoff Semifinal bowl games."
Posted on 1/13/23 at 10:37 am to VoxDawg
quote:
I'm looking forward to the year when the SEC gets a minimum of 7 of 12 and likely 3 of the Final 4.
We would have had how many this year (presuming the format doesn't change how the committee ranked the teams)?
(It should also be noted that TCU doesn't get the top 4 if the conference champs are the only ones eligible for byes, meaning Clemson is probably 3rd, and ).
SEC teams - Bold
Conf Champs - Italics
1. Georgia
2. Michigan
3. TCU
4. Ohio State
5. Alabama
6. Tennessee
7. Clemson
8. Utah
9. Kansas State
10. USC
11. Penn State
12. Washington
So Clemson becomes the #3 Seed, Utah the #4 Seed. Tulane gets in as the highest ranked G5 team.
Sporting News already did a mock bracket with those:
That Utah/TCU/Tulane bracket would be horrible.
Posted on 1/13/23 at 10:43 am to skrayper
They will arrange it where you can't get an all SEC or Big 10 final.
This post was edited on 1/13/23 at 10:45 am
Posted on 1/13/23 at 9:01 pm to Teague
That’s the only appeal that a 12 team playoff has to me at this point. It’ll be harder to get fricked over because of playing a tough schedule
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News