Started By
Message
re: Only Need SIX teams in to crown a true champ, not 8
Posted on 11/15/16 at 9:44 pm to Hussss
Posted on 11/15/16 at 9:44 pm to Hussss
This conference champ thing needs to carry less weight. Nobody, Nobody will convince me winning the ACC is the same. Nor will they convince me that winning the Big 12 is the same or the Pac 12. If you go with 6 give me the 6 BEST teams.
I've said since the start either have a playoff or don't have one. College football is trying to keep the regular season meaningful at the same time giving more teams chances. you can't have both. If we do a TRUE playoff you gotta expand a la the NCAA basketball tournament in the 80's. 10 teams. Conference champs, ok. fine. 5 conference champs but 5 at large so we don't miss anybody OR go back to the polling system. The Big 10 is the deepest this year. PSU, OSU or Mich is gonna get screwed when those three may be amoung the best 4 in the country because of the conference champ thing and Oklahoma gets in when they have no business there.
I've said since the start either have a playoff or don't have one. College football is trying to keep the regular season meaningful at the same time giving more teams chances. you can't have both. If we do a TRUE playoff you gotta expand a la the NCAA basketball tournament in the 80's. 10 teams. Conference champs, ok. fine. 5 conference champs but 5 at large so we don't miss anybody OR go back to the polling system. The Big 10 is the deepest this year. PSU, OSU or Mich is gonna get screwed when those three may be amoung the best 4 in the country because of the conference champ thing and Oklahoma gets in when they have no business there.
0
Posted on 11/15/16 at 9:49 pm to Hussss
quote:
They are going to ram Michigan AND OH St down our throats while Wisky or Penn St win that league!
Not no but hell no. Bishop Bullwinkle said hell no... to the no no no- hell to the no
The committee can't be that damn stupid to pull that shite. I know those two schools have a ton of pull but that would be a bigger travesty than the 1972 Olympic basketball scandal giving the Russians a win over the USA. Penn State-Wisky winner is in. That's assuming that the Wolverines won't beat Ohio State. They still could. I could see a scenario where Michigan wins out and gets the Big Ten bid and the only one from that conference. Buckeyes to the Rose against Southern Cal in a NY6 game but the ACC gets Clemson/Louisville in the CFP, Oklahoma wins out and they get in from the Big 12 and Bama from the SEC.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 10:12 pm to TomRollTideRitter
agree 100%
Posted on 11/15/16 at 10:23 pm to Hussss
Love this idea. Keeps the regular season interesting as well with 1,2 getting byes
Posted on 11/15/16 at 10:31 pm to VOLLeyLLama
Winning your conerence is an important consideration, but it's not as important as many people seem to think. It's more of a tiebreaker factor for teams with resumes that are very comparable. If Ohio State wins out, they'll have 1 loss and a substantially better resume than 2-loss Penn State and 2-loss Wisconsin. It's about determining the top four teams, period. And that's how it should be. In some years one or two conferences might have a couple of teams that are better and more deserving to be in than are the champs of other conferences. Winning your conference championship is not necessarily that big of a factor in determining the four best teams. Heck the top two teams could even be in the same conference division.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 1:06 am
Posted on 11/15/16 at 10:47 pm to Hussss
5 conference champs
3 at large
If a team win their conference they should be in no matter their record.
3 at large
If a team win their conference they should be in no matter their record.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 10:59 pm to Hussss
Only need four. If it's six then the first 2 or 3 out will bitch that it should be 8. If it's eight, then the first few out will want it expanded. It's good the way it is. The regular season counts more and it encourages teams to play good ooc opponents. Expanding the playoff field beyond four is not a good idea.
This post was edited on 11/15/16 at 11:00 pm
Posted on 11/15/16 at 11:09 pm to TidalSurge1
6-8 teams will allow non power 5 teams to get some chances. I would have enjoyed seeing a team like Houston in the playoffs last year. And six teams, giving the first two a bye gives more incentive to do well. Also, by allowing more "mid-major" teams to have a chance, it will make the season more fun by making more games meaningful due to playoff implications likely spreading to other conferences.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 11:10 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
If Ohio State wins out, they'll have 1 loss and a substantially better resume than 2-loss Penn State
Except for the pesky little fact that Penn St. beat them.
Let's face it: this season is a shitshow.
Posted on 11/15/16 at 11:24 pm to ChiTownBammer
It's a pesky little fact, but Penn State's resume doesn't come close to OSU's if both win out. Penn State was fortunate, coming off a bye, playing at home, with Ohio St coming off a grueling physical battle with Wisconsin. Ohio St led until the late winning FG. Also, I doubt Penn State would beat OSU if they met in the the playoffs. I also doubt Penn State will beat Wisconsin anyway.
This post was edited on 11/15/16 at 11:30 pm
Posted on 11/16/16 at 12:11 am to TidalSurge1
Still, if you have a vote in the playoff committee, are you putting OSU ahead of Penn St. assuming they have identical records?
I see everyone saying you can't put Louisville ahead of Clemson for the same reason.
I see everyone saying you can't put Louisville ahead of Clemson for the same reason.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 12:16 am to ChiTownBammer
quote:
Still, if you have a vote in the playoff committee, are you putting OSU ahead of Penn St. assuming they have identical records?
I see everyone saying you can't put Louisville ahead of Clemson for the same reason.
If OSU and PSU have identical records, the odds are extremely good that neither gets into the playoffs, since the most realistic chain of events involves OSU losing to Michigan and Michigan likely taking the spot in the CFP that OSU is aiming for.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 12:20 am to BarnHater
No. You lost too many games. Your playoff was the regular season.
People literally want to destroy college football.
Also if you want kids to play an nfl season (16 games) it's high time you stop calling them student athletes and call them what they actually are; semi-professional players
People literally want to destroy college football.
Also if you want kids to play an nfl season (16 games) it's high time you stop calling them student athletes and call them what they actually are; semi-professional players
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 12:21 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 12:56 am to randomways
Good point. The scenario I was envisioning is pretty much impossible.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 1:33 am to ChiTownBammer
quote:
Still, if you have a vote in the playoff committee, are you putting OSU ahead of Penn St. assuming they have identical records?
I see everyone saying you can't put Louisville ahead of Clemson for the same reason.
If they both only had one loss (i.e., if Penn State hadn't lost to Pitt.), then lt depends first and foremost on how their resumes compare. Ohio St's best wins would be vs ranked Oklahoma, Michigan, Wisconsin and Nebraska. Penn St's best wins would be vs ranked Wisc and Ohio St and unranked Pitt, and they would also be the conference champ. But, Penn St has a blow out loss to Michigan and would not have gotten to play in the CG if Ohio St had not knocked Michigan out of it. Tie breakers, like conference champ, head-to-head, common opponents, etc., matter if their resumes are comparable, but Ohio St would have a substantially better resume, so there's no tie to break. Thus, I would vote Ohio St over Penn St.
Clemson has a substantially better resume than Louisville, so the head-to-head tiebreaker isn't even needed to justify ranking Clemson ahead of Louisville. But, if their resumes were comparable, the head-to-head would mean Clemson gets the nod over Louisville.
As another example, note that Tennessee and ATM have the same W/L record, but UT is now ranked ahead of ATM, even though ATM beat UT. Apparently it's because UT has a little bit better resume. UT beat UF, VT, UK & UGA and lost to Bama, ATM & USCe. ATM beat AU, UT (in OT, at home), Ark & UCLA and lost to Bama, MSU & OM. And of course they could rise or fall in the rankings going forward. Also, it's noteworthy that 2-loss UF is ranked behind 3-loss UT. The fact that UF's best win is vs UK most likely has more to do with that than the fact that UT beat UF.
The CFP Committee ranks teams based primarily on their W/L resumes (i.e., it matters who you beat and who beats you) and the committee uses tiebreakers, such as conference championships, head-to-head, common opponents, etc. if needed. That's how it should be done. The level of competition you play matters. Lots of P5 teams would be undeafeated if they played Western Michigan's schedule.
This post was edited on 11/16/16 at 2:44 am
Posted on 11/16/16 at 6:59 am to BarnHater
quote:bullshite!! Teams with 2-3 losses can't be the best...it's absurd.
Meh. This season has proved that there
needs to be more of an opportunity for an at-large bid. Teams with 2 or 3 losses that have been very competitive deserve a shot.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:05 am to Hussss
Top 6 teams? Yes.
Mandating that 5 HAVE to be conference champs? frick that. That is stupid and defeats the purpose of adding two teams entirely IMO.
Mandating that 5 HAVE to be conference champs? frick that. That is stupid and defeats the purpose of adding two teams entirely IMO.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:05 am to Hussss
My argument is that 4 is too many. This year 2 is.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:07 am to coachcrisp
quote:
bullshite!! Teams with 2-3 losses can't be the best...it's absurd.
Kind of like when the NY Giants won the Super Bowl with a 10-6 regular season record? Yeah, they sucked compared to the undefeated Patriots. No way they could hang.
Posted on 11/16/16 at 7:10 am to ChewyDante
That actually supports the argument that there are too many teams. Giants didn't deserve the shot, like 5 or 6 other NFL teams that year.
If you want a tournament then call it a tournament and crown a tournament champion like college basketball. It's a joke that they call the winner a national champ.
If you want a tournament then call it a tournament and crown a tournament champion like college basketball. It's a joke that they call the winner a national champ.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News