Started By
Message
re: We are already seeing problems with the playoff in its current format
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:15 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:15 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Why would you want to exclude the SEC champions if it's a particularly brutal year and the champs come out with a 9-3 record?
I would want to exclude a shitty ACC team or a shitty Big Ten team. In favor of more teams that are actually good.
The only way a 3 loss team wins the SEC is if a shitty divisional winner pulls an upset, but really there isn't realistically going to be a worthy SEC champion with 3 losses.
2
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:15 pm to Topwater Trout
and what happens if Notre Dame is 11-1 as well?
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:19 pm to goldennugget
quote:
Example:
Georgia 12-1 Wins SEC
Ole Miss 12-1 Loses SEC Title Game to Georgia
Michigan State 12-1
TCU or Kansas State 12-1
Oregon 12-1
Florida State 13-0
Herp Derp
That's actually pretty easy.
1. If Georgia is 12-1, they're in. That would mean they would have beaten two top 5 SEC West teams.
2. Florida State is in at 13-0. There shouldn't be any question there.
3. Neither TCU or Kansas State will end up 12-1. Whichever team doesn't lose to the other will lose at least one more. Kansas State still hasn't played Oklahoma State or Baylor yet.
4. If Oregon goes 12-1 and beats Arizona in the title game they're in and Michigan State is out. Michigan State needs Nebraska to win out to have a shot.
5. In order for a 2nd SEC team to get in, the Big 12, Big Ten and PAC 12 champions + Notre Dame must all have 2 losses.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:20 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
I would want to exclude a shitty ACC team or a shitty Big Ten team. In favor of more teams that are actually good.
How do you KNOW what teams are good? A vote? Why have a playoff at all if you can just vote for who's good?
BUT - what are you going to be crying for whenever the committee decides to leave the SEC champions out because "they just didn't look good"? (Before you say that will never happen, think about why the committee was formed in the first place - to introduce bias into the system for determining a champion.)
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:21 pm to Landmass
quote:
They should expand it to 8 teams and take all 5 conference champs (if the conference champs have no more than two losses) then the next best teams after that. I think this would go a long way to please people and end the debate about conference preference.
8 team playoff, no auto bids, use to old BCS formula and bring back the freaking Crystal Ball and not the golden pocket pussy
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:23 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
The playoffs should just have conference champions, you don't win your conference, you don't go. And that way you would completely eliminate the polls except for seeding
I would be ok with this only if we either did away with conference championship games, or only took the top 2 conference teams and get rid of divisions.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:26 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
The only way a 3 loss team wins the SEC is if a shitty divisional winner pulls an upset, but really there isn't realistically going to be a worthy SEC champion with 3 losses.
If the winner of the SEC championship game has 3 losses but the runner up only has 1 or 2, then screw the 3 loss team and put in the runner up.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:30 pm to Landmass
Notre Dame should be left out until they join a confrence
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:30 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
How do you KNOW what teams are good? A vote? Why have a playoff at all if you can just vote for who's good?
BUT - what are you going to be crying for whenever the committee decides to leave the SEC champions out because "they just didn't look good"? (Before you say that will never happen, think about why the committee was formed in the first place - to introduce bias into the system for determining a champion.)
That is the the whole issue of a playoff in college football. To think just magically selecting 8 teams out of 112 and getting the not having to be somewhat subjective is dumb. Playoffs offs work in other sports because they either have a limited number of teams (professional sports), or the tournament is so big that is you didn't get in oh well. There realistically no team that can pretend to be the best that doesn't make the Baseball or basketball tournament.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:32 pm to Landmass
I think it should be 6 teams. The top two rated conference champions get byes (seeds 1/2)
The next 4 teams are based on power rankings (old BCS formula will work).
First round is before Christmas, Second round is around New Years, Final is a week later. Use the existing Big 6 bowls and bid out the Championship.
This would fix it all.
The next 4 teams are based on power rankings (old BCS formula will work).
First round is before Christmas, Second round is around New Years, Final is a week later. Use the existing Big 6 bowls and bid out the Championship.
This would fix it all.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:33 pm to Bubbles Up
No
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:33 pm to Bubbles Up
quote:
I think it should be 6 teams.
No.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 12:42 pm to Landmass
One of my concerns for this year is lets say Miss St runs the table and plays in the SEC championship, but Ole Miss only has one loss to Miss St...So, Miss St will have to play one extra game against the best East team, while Ole Miss gets time off and will most than likely get in as the At Large...Also, if 2 west teams get in isn't there a chance they could be seeded as 1 vs 4 or 2 vs 3 or would they make sure to put them on opposite sides??
Posted on 10/21/14 at 1:12 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
To think just magically selecting 8 teams out of 112 and getting the not having to be somewhat subjective is dumb.
Unless you use the conference champions.
There is NO WAY a playoff determines who the best team is - no matter how you select the teams. The winner of the playoff is simply the champion, not necessarily the best team. Even the term "best team" itself is subjective.
Is the conference champion not the best team in the conference? Why/why not?
Everyone wants subjectivity in the selection process UNTIL IT WORKS AGAINST THEM. I guaran-damn-tee you that as soon as the SEC champion gets snubbed, you will be crying for a more objective system. Personally, I just want to be consistent and not change my mind when the results don't suit me.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 1:26 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Honestly, it should have taken the old BCS system and used the top 4 teams from that. The purpose is to put the best 4 teams in the playoffs; you get a different set of rewards for winning your conference.
Why would winning the ACC, for example, be a big deal? I can think of 5 SEC teams that would be undefeated with FSU's schedule (yes, that includes Notre Dame).
Why would winning the ACC, for example, be a big deal? I can think of 5 SEC teams that would be undefeated with FSU's schedule (yes, that includes Notre Dame).
Posted on 10/21/14 at 1:37 pm to Landmass
quote:this has been obvious since day one, and everyone knows it will be that way 10 years from now, fricking around with 4 until then is pointlessly frustrating.
They should expand it to 8 teams
Posted on 10/21/14 at 1:46 pm to bigpapamac
quote:
I've said from day 1 of this playoff that the committee is going to be a massive dumpster fire and that we should've kept the BCS and taken the top 4 teams.
Pretty much my view. As is, conference champions are going have priority regardless or record to some extent. All things equal, the Big 12 Champ will be the odd man out since they don't have a conference championship.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 1:52 pm to skrayper
quote:
The purpose is to put the best 4 teams in the playoffs
If it's so easy to figure out what the best team is by using a poll, why have a playoff?
quote:
you get a different set of rewards for winning your conference.
You get less and less, and eventually, the way things are going, you won't get shite. It'll be like baseball where no one GAF about the conference. Is that what we really want to do to football, make conference championships irrelevant?
I don't.
quote:
Why would winning the ACC, for example, be a big deal? I can think of 5 SEC teams that would be undefeated with FSU's schedule (yes, that includes Notre Dame).
I don't know, and I don't care. By the same token, they will lose in the playoffs - or will they? Because I can think of one SEC team that wouldn't have been undefeated in the ACC last year, and they won the SEC championship.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 1:57 pm to NytroBud
quote:
Notre Dame should be left out until they join a confrence
They have at least 5 votes already, they are the one team who will get in whenever possible. They are the only true national brand in FBS college football and they have lots of friends in high places in corporate media offices.
Posted on 10/21/14 at 2:07 pm to Cheese Grits
Everyone assumes conference championship is greater than strength of schedule which is absolutely ludicrous.
All conferences aren't equal stop saying "the big 5" there are not 5 equal conferences in college football.
Notre Dame going 11-1 doesn't matter they won't have beaten a top 10 team this year. Not 1, so how is an 11-1 Notre Dame in the same conversation as an 11-1 SEC West team?
Oregon at 12-1 beat top 10 Mich State, lost to #15 Arizona, Conf Championship against top 20 USC
Alabama, Auburn, Miss St, Ole Miss- whoever of that group finishes at 11-1 will have beaten 2 top 10 teams and lost to 1, not to mention other key wins.
Oregon and Notre Dame couldn't afford to lose a game with their strength of schedule and still compare to SEC strength of schedule it isn't close.
All conferences aren't equal stop saying "the big 5" there are not 5 equal conferences in college football.
Notre Dame going 11-1 doesn't matter they won't have beaten a top 10 team this year. Not 1, so how is an 11-1 Notre Dame in the same conversation as an 11-1 SEC West team?
Oregon at 12-1 beat top 10 Mich State, lost to #15 Arizona, Conf Championship against top 20 USC
Alabama, Auburn, Miss St, Ole Miss- whoever of that group finishes at 11-1 will have beaten 2 top 10 teams and lost to 1, not to mention other key wins.
Oregon and Notre Dame couldn't afford to lose a game with their strength of schedule and still compare to SEC strength of schedule it isn't close.
This post was edited on 10/21/14 at 2:08 pm
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News