BCS will go with a four-team playoff in 2014

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
50,997
17,632
1,743
#3
Limit it to conference champions. That's round 1 of the playoffs, earn your spot!

(if a conference does a poor job identifying their champion don't come crying on my shoulder)

Of those conference champions seed the top four based on the current BCS Formula.

(Notre Dame - get a life and join a conference)

This last season this would have given us the following games in round 2.

Game 1 in round 2
1) LSU 13-0
4) Wisconsin 11-2

Game 2 in round 2
2) OSU 11-1
3) Oregon 11-2
 
Nov 26, 2008
4,543
1,808
743
#5
Four teams is not enough. One season's worth of results and there will be more backlash and controversy than the BCS.

If you limit it to conference champions what happens if an 8-4 / 9-3 champ gets lucky for 2 games.

If you don't limit it to conference champions you know there will be a year with 3 SEC teams in it. If you place a limit on teams from the same conference being in it then you have controversy when the same conference has any combination of teams in the top 4.

You think there won't be controversy when a Boise State or similar school is #4 then the Pac 12 or SEC Championship game is played and magically they're #5 on the outside now.

It's too small of a system. It's not like picking between the 9th best Big East team and the 3rd best Missouri Valley school for the 68th team in March Madness.

You need to do 12 (8 teams playing with 4 having initial byes) or 16 to have any resemblance to an actual playoff. Four is just an elitist system like the BCS and everyone will whine just as much after the first year. Not much difference between picking #s 1 and 2 out of a worthy group and #s 1 through 4.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
50,997
17,632
1,743
#6
Four teams is not enough. One season's worth of results and there will be more backlash and controversy than the BCS.

If you limit it to conference champions what happens if an 8-4 / 9-3 champ gets lucky for 2 games.

If you don't limit it to conference champions you know there will be a year with 3 SEC teams in it. If you place a limit on teams from the same conference being in it then you have controversy when the same conference has any combination of teams in the top 4.

You think there won't be controversy when a Boise State or similar school is #4 then the Pac 12 or SEC Championship game is played and magically they're #5 on the outside now.

It's too small of a system. It's not like picking between the 9th best Big East team and the 3rd best Missouri Valley school for the 68th team in March Madness.

You need to do 12 (8 teams playing with 4 having initial byes) or 16 to have any resemblance to an actual playoff. Four is just an elitist system like the BCS and everyone will whine just as much after the first year. Not much difference between picking #s 1 and 2 out of a worthy group and #s 1 through 4.

If a conference does a poor job identifying their champion don't come crying on my shoulder.

Upsets happen. #1 and #2 seeds loose early sometimes in the NCAA Basketball tournament.

Regular season games mean something.

If a conference doesn't want to be represented by an 8-4 team then don't put them in a position to have a shot at representing your conference. Isn't my damn fault they screwed up.

Conferences would know the system, make them responsible for putting their best foot forward. Why should the BCS be responsible for cleaning up their damn mess all becuase of their greed for $'s.
 
Nov 26, 2008
4,543
1,808
743
#7
If a conference does a poor job identifying their champion don't come crying on my shoulder.

Upsets happen. #1 and #2 seeds loose early sometimes in the NCAA Basketball tournament.

Regular season games mean something.

If a conference doesn't want to be represented by an 8-4 team then don't put them in a position to have a shot at representing your conference. Isn't my damn fault they screwed up.

Conferences would know the system, make them responsible for putting their best foot forward. Why should the BCS be responsible for cleaning up their damn mess all becuase of their greed for $'s.
Upsets happen in the basketball tournament because there are 68 teams involved.

If the basketball tournament was just the best four basketball teams meeting in the Final Four there wouldn't be upsets.

Put it on your calendar to message me after the 2014 season. People are not going to like this from the first season on. It's going to be just like the evolution of the BCS. We complain, they tweak the system, we complain about the tweaks they tweak it again.

Four doesn't solve anything. Conference champions? Well, there are more than four conferences. Why even play football if you are the ACC or Big East you'll never be in the 'playoffs' Don't have to be conference champs? Then you'll just have people that didn't even win their division but have a good record resting up for the national semis while other teams play for their conference title. No division title, no conference title, but eligible for national title.

People think it's good because it's not the BCS, but wait til anything like I've been saying happens and they'll want to change again.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
50,997
17,632
1,743
#8
Upsets happen in the basketball tournament because there are 68 teams involved.

If the basketball tournament was just the best four basketball teams meeting in the Final Four there wouldn't be upsets.

Put it on your calendar to message me after the 2014 season. People are not going to like this from the first season on. It's going to be just like the evolution of the BCS. We complain, they tweak the system, we complain about the tweaks they tweak it again.

Four doesn't solve anything. Conference champions? Well, there are more than four conferences. Why even play football if you are the ACC or Big East you'll never be in the 'playoffs' Don't have to be conference champs? Then you'll just have people that didn't even win their division but have a good record resting up for the national semis while other teams play for their conference title. No division title, no conference title, but eligible for national title.

People think it's good because it's not the BCS, but wait til anything like I've been saying happens and they'll want to change again.
That isn't true......

2010: Alabama, Oregon, TCU and Ohio State (Boise State)
2009: Alabama, Texas, Cinc and TCU (Boise State)
2008: Oklahoma, Florida, USC and Utah (Penn State)
2007: Ohio State, LSU, VA Tech and Oklahoma (Hawaii)

Highest ranked conference champion not making the list of 4 in parenthesis.

Short of letting everyone in basically like they do in basketball this is the best case system I think. You know you have to win your conference and it's usually by an objective method.

That whittles the list down pretty effectively to 11 eligible teams.
 
Nov 26, 2008
4,543
1,808
743
#9
That isn't true......

2010: Alabama, Oregon, TCU and Ohio State (Boise State)
2009: Alabama, Texas, Cinc and TCU (Boise State)
2008: Oklahoma, Florida, USC and Utah (Penn State)
2007: Ohio State, LSU, VA Tech and Oklahoma (Hawaii)

Highest ranked conference champion not making the list of 4 in parenthesis.

Short of letting everyone in basically like they do in basketball this is the best case system I think. You know you have to win your conference and it's usually by an objective method.

That whittles the list down pretty effectively to 11 eligible teams.
No that is true. I used 'never' as hyperbole, not literal.

Big 12, Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, Big East, and ACC are the 'major' conferences.

That is six. If there is a four team playoff of conference champions the most likely left out will almost always be the lesser thought of conferences and that's the Big East and ACC.

Of what you listed the Big East and ACC would have been in mythical playoffs of the past once each in the past since 2007. TCU, now in the Big 12 and Utah, now in the Pac 12 did it as Mountain West teams. So I say again why would they even bother playing football? If you set up a four team playoff those schools in the Big East and ACC practically need a miracle season to trump the negative perception of the conference and avoid being the 5th or 6th conference champion and left out or being left out because a future Boise State-type school runs the table and ends up in the playoff ahead of them.

Nothing is perfect. There are issues with every plan. I just think four has the most issues of any playoff system. The BCS wants it just because it's the easiest to implement.

And now as I have thought even more of this, how can you equally weigh conference champions of different conferences when they don't even play the same number of conference games? Play more conference games that just means more conference losses...is an 10-2 (6-2 in conference) team better than a 10-2 (7-2 in conference) team? Is a one conference loss Big East team better than two conference losses in the Big 12?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
50,997
17,632
1,743
#10
No that is true. I used 'never' as hyperbole, not literal.

Big 12, Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, Big East, and ACC are the 'major' conferences.

That is six. If there is a four team playoff of conference champions the most likely left out will almost always be the lesser thought of conferences and that's the Big East and ACC.

Of what you listed the Big East and ACC would have been in mythical playoffs of the past once each in the past since 2007. TCU, now in the Big 12 and Utah, now in the Pac 12 did it as Mountain West teams. So I say again why would they even bother playing football? If you set up a four team playoff those schools in the Big East and ACC practically need a miracle season to trump the negative perception of the conference and avoid being the 5th or 6th conference champion and left out or being left out because a future Boise State-type school runs the table and ends up in the playoff ahead of them.

Nothing is perfect. There are issues with every plan. I just think four has the most issues of any playoff system. The BCS wants it just because it's the easiest to implement.

And now as I have thought even more of this, how can you equally weigh conference champions of different conferences when they don't even play the same number of conference games? Play more conference games that just means more conference losses...is an 10-2 (6-2 in conference) team better than a 10-2 (7-2 in conference) team? Is a one conference loss Big East team better than two conference losses in the Big 12?
Same reason they do now.

Do you really think the Big East and ACC teams are good enough every year to have a major impact on the national championship?

Short of going to a larger field to narrow it down to conference champions and taking the highest ranked teams from that list is a pretty decent field.
 
Nov 26, 2008
4,543
1,808
743
#11
Same reason they do now.

Do you really think the Big East and ACC teams are good enough every year to have a major impact on the national championship?

Short of going to a larger field to narrow it down to conference champions and taking the highest ranked teams from that list is a pretty decent field.
I don't think they do every year. That's why I'm wondering why they would want this. Every year now whether their champion is 8-4 or 11-1 they get a BCS berth. Now, if the decision is made to make it only conference champions they can have an 11-1 champ and not even get to play for the national title. That's my big gripe with this proposed system.

Not because I'm fighting for the downtrodden Big East, because if it can happen to them it can happen to anyone in the end. Do you want Oklahoma State to be 11-1 and win the Big 12 in the future...but be left out of any shot of a national title because their 11-1 wasn't as 'impressive' as an SEC 11-1 or a 12-0 Big East / ACC team...or even possibly a future Mountain West or other lesser conference undefeated team?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
50,997
17,632
1,743
#12
I don't think they do every year. That's why I'm wondering why they would want this. Every year now whether their champion is 8-4 or 11-1 they get a BCS berth. Now, if the decision is made to make it only conference champions they can have an 11-1 champ and not even get to play for the national title. That's my big gripe with this proposed system.

Not because I'm fighting for the downtrodden Big East, because if it can happen to them it can happen to anyone in the end. Do you want Oklahoma State to be 11-1 and win the Big 12 in the future...but be left out of any shot of a national title because their 11-1 wasn't as 'impressive' as an SEC 11-1 or a 12-0 Big East / ACC team...or even possibly a future Mountain West or other lesser conference undefeated team?
It's based on BCS rank, SOS means something.

Look, the only way to change that is to expand the field and that isn't going to happen. Save your breath man.
 
Nov 26, 2008
4,543
1,808
743
#13
It's based on BCS rank, SOS means something.

Look, the only way to change that is to expand the field and that isn't going to happen. Save your breath man.
I know it isn't changing. They're going with four...for now. It just isn't the greatest day in the history of American sports like the reaction online and on the radio in some places are treating it.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
50,997
17,632
1,743
#14
I know it isn't changing. They're going with four...for now. It just isn't the greatest day in the history of American sports like the reaction online and on the radio in some places are treating it.
It is a pretty big step. Let's wait to see if they get the selection process right though. If they start letting in non-conference champions it'll tick me off. And to be clear I didn't like that even before this last season.

The only reason you allow a non conference champion is because you want to prove (through manipulation and hiding) that no one from another conference is good enough.