• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

2008 Playoff Hypos

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buckeyeskickbuttocks

Buckeyeskickbuttocks

Z --> Z^2 + c
Staff member
Conference Champions Only

Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
ACC........Virginia Tech...19...10-4...26...15....18
Big XII....Oklahoma.........1...12-2....7....5.....3
Big East...Cincinnati......12...11-3...60...17....34
Big Ten....Penn State.......8...11-2...55....8.....8 *
C-USA......East Carolina...NR....9-5...67...NR....54
MAC........Buffalo.........NR....8-6...92...NR....76
MWC........Utah.............6...13-0...56....2.....5
Pac 10.....USC..............5...12-1...16....3.....2
SEC........Florida..........2...13-1....4....1.....1
Sun Belt...Troy............NR....8-5..117...NR....70
WAC........Boise State......9...12-1...94...11....12

* Penn State split the Big Ten title with Ohio State (10-3 BCS 10)

The Brackets (Used the Big Ten basketball Tournament bracket as the model for an 11 team tournament) as before, seeds precede the team name, actual BCS ranks in parens:

8 Virginia Tech (19) v. 9 East Carolina (NR) winner to play 1 Oklahoma (1)
7 Cincinnati (12) v. 10 Troy (NR) winner to play 2 Florida (2)
6 Boise State (9) v. 11 Buffalo (NR) winner to play 3 USC (5)
4 Utah (6) v. 5 Penn State (8) winner to play winner of Oklahoma v. 8/9 game winner.

If you've read sequentially up until now, you should already know what I'm about to write. Buffalo, at 8-6 will be getting their "fair" shot while "deserving" Texas (12 - 1 BCS 3) sits at home wondering if it can become a Sunbelt power or something. I haven't mentioned real re-matches in a while, but Virginia Tech v. ECU is a rematch of the season opener, won by ECU 27-22 on August 30, 2008. Not that the winner of this rematch has a whole lot to look forward to with a game against BCS 1 Oklahoma being their prize for victory. Virginia Tech - Oklahoma doesn't necessarily SOUND bad, and Virginia Tech's defense was 13th in the nation which would have been in the same County as Florida's 5th rated group that shut down the 60 point a game bullies, but I think OU probably gets it done. Even if I'm wrong, the road only gets tougher, and if they do somehow manage to win it all, 3 loss Virginia Tech is your champion, or worse, 6 loss Buffalo while, again Texas with it's 1 loss wonders "W.T.F?"

Cincinnati - Troy? Maybe on a Thursday in September I'll watch, but as a playoff game, I'm unimpressed. (As the type of fan I am, I still would watch this playoff game, don't get me wrong, I just don't think many others - and certainly not the more casual fan of the game, would) Boise State - Buffalo doesn't have me reaching for the DVR either. I suppose I'm not too sure what to think about Utah v. Penn State. On the one hand, Utah did, in fact, beat Alabama (12 - 2 BCS 4) in the Sugar Bowl, on the other PSU beat the pants off Oregon State 45-7 while the Utes won 31-28. Giving it the benefit of the doubt, we'll call this one a realtively good match-up. If nothing else, Penn State carries with it a large fan base while Utah saw its fair share of Jump on the Bandwagon and Ride Along type fans this past season as the beloved mid major underdog who was "blowing up" the much hated BCS.

As for the second round, Cincinnati or Troy v. Florida - yet another match worthy of the title "Assured win" for the SEC, especially if it was Troy and not the Bearcats. Boise State or Buffalo against USC would probably result in a beating so severe the game itself would be illegal in most states. I know there are some folks out there saying "Don't sleep on Boise State!" and I know I myself have several times pointed out the Stanford v. USC upset from 2007. I'm talking probability here. USC, I think, would be an absolute machine in a playoff format. You might catch them napping when you're a pretty bad Stanford club. But, when it's live or die, safe money takes SC, and if you think differently, you're just not paying attention.

Six Plus Two System

Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
ACC........Virginia Tech...19...10-4...26...15....18
Big XII....Oklahoma.........1...12-2....7....5.....3
Big East...Cincinnati......12...11-3...60...17....34
Big Ten....Penn State.......8...11-2...55....8.....8
Pac 10.....USC..............5...12-1...16....3.....2
SEC........Florida..........2...13-1....4....1.....1
Big XII....Texas............3...12-1...14....4.....4 At Large 1
SEC........Alabama..........4...12-2...28....6.....6 At Large 2

Pairings:

8 Virginia Tech (19) v. 1 Oklahoma (1)
7 Cincinnati (12) v. 2 Florida (2)
6 Penn State (8) v. 3 Texas (3)
5 USC (5) v. 4 Alabama (4)

First thing I notice, and with 2008 so fresh in my mind - no Utah. If nothing else the type of Playoff someone advocates for is of paramount importance. I have heard some advocates on the radio suggest the Six plus 2 system and we see logistically, it doesn't come close to helping the mid major at all, and actually prevents them from competing for the Crystal in literally every season examined. Again, there are other ways to do a 6 plus two, and really, that is precisely what the BCS is already, except as a playoff you don't play one and call it a season. You seed and move on where appropriate. But, as a system of principle, any such 6+2 is based on the same allegedly faulty premise as the current system. Arbitrary as it is.

We see both Virginia Tech and Cincy playing well out of position, while Penn State thankfully avoids USC (USC 38-24 in the 2009 Rose, score closer than the game), who instead set their sights on Bama. Potential rematches include Oklahoma - Texas (Red River Shootout, Texas 45-35) and Alabama - Florida (SEC title game, Florida 31-20) In so creating this system we miss the classic Fiesta Bowl of Texas v. Ohio State (Texas 24-21) which came down to the last 16 seconds. That said, we don't know what sort of excitement we've missed by not having a playoff.

In any event, as always, there is simply no assurance that a 6+2 solves any of the BCS's alleged problems, and in my evaluation of the data, actually creates a few extra ones and one very specific one which is directly contrary to some people's attempts to get teams like Utah a shot. If you use a 6+2 system, unless it's formula is "take 6 champions and anyone else you want," the mid majors aren't likely to get a bid. If the 10 year history of the BCS data is an indication, that is.

BCS Top 8

Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
Big XII....Oklahoma.........1...12-2....7....5.....3
SEC........Florida..........2...13-1....4....1.....1
Big XII....Texas............3...12-1...14....4.....4
SEC........Alabama..........4...12-2...28....6.....6
Pac 10.....USC..............5...12-1...16....3.....2
MWC........Utah.............6...13-0...56....2.....5
Big XII....Texas Tech.......7...11-2...27...12.....9
Big Ten....Penn State.......8...11-2...55....8.....8

Bubble Teams: 9 Boise State (12-1), 10 Ohio State (10-3), 11 TCU (11-2), 12 Cincinnati (11-3)

Utah makes the field, and in a 16 game scenario, so do TCU and Boise State. I count 3 Big XII teams, one of whom got embarrassed by Ole Miss in their actual bowl game (Texas Tech lost 47-34 in the 2009 Cotton Bowl, and it should have been 7 points worse) and two SEC teams, which accounts for more than half the field. Utah draws Texas instead of Alabama, which has to suit up against USC. Meanwhile considering the 3 Big Twelve teams and two SEC teams, the potential for re-matches exists all over the place, including a possible (even if unlikely) Championship of Oklahoma v. Texas Tech (OU 65 - TTU 21). Here again, there is a great deal of risk that the games resulting from this playoff formula are just not compelling because they've already been played during the season.

I say again, giving teams like Utah a shot, deserved or not, brings with it unintended consequences. As a fan of the game I'll watch anyway, but how do you sell a Texas Tech v. Oklahoma Championship game when the score was 65 - 21? Seriously. I realize that's simply a "worst case" scenario, but if the BCS has proven one thing over the course of its existence, if it CAN go wrong, it WILL go wrong. I won't tell you Utah wasn't the best team in the nation in 2008. I personally don't believe they were, regardless of their record, for the simple fact that all records are not built equally. I can forgive a loss to a 4th rated schedule and have a hard time giving a great deal of credit to wins that come against a schedule rated as just slightly better than 50% of the entire 119 teams in the nation. And, I don't care what Utah did to Alabama, I simply do not believe they would beat Florida.

Leading to my final point in all this - What I believe about Utah and its chances against Alabama is just that, one man's opinion. And that's what I've learned about the possibilities of a playoff. If it is your opinion that you just like the playoff format better - that it's just your preference, then that's fine. I won't argue your preference with you. But, don't tell me playoffs are better than the BCS. They are not. Don't tell me they are more fair, because the facts demonstrate otherwise (6+2 and most of the top 8 formulas) and when they are fair don't come close to giving fans what they actually desire (Conference Champions format). Finally, don't suggest Playoffs choose a legitimate champion while the BCS is nothing but guess work. There are 119 teams out there to consider, and there is simply not enough games to be able to treat them all objectively. There will ALWAYS be opinion, or one method of evaluation to differentiate one team from the next. A playoff gives more teams a chance to win, but really is no more sound than the current system.

With that said, I shall save the rest of my "rant" for the Conclusion. I thank you for reading all of this material. I hope you have enjoyed it. Whether you agree with my analysis or not, at least now, I hope we can all see just what exactly we're talking about when we talk Playoffs in the future.

Link to Methodology
Link to 1998 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 1999 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2000 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2001 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2002 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2003 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2004 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2005 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2006 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2007 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2008 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to Conclusion
http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/...arding-playoff-possibilities.html#post1383197
 
Last edited:
Well done, BKB. As I've said before, if you want to watch a team have to beat a team it's already beaten twice in the regular season have to "prove on the field" that they're better for the third time in a season to get to the championship game, or if you want a champion that's lost 6 or 7 regular season games, go watch the NFL. Leave college football alone.
 
Upvote 0
About using regular season play to break two-way ties? I don't think a team should have to replay a game it won earlier. In the case of 08 that means PSU ahead of OSU, no playoff. (a situation which was already in play per Big 10 rules.) And of course, it doesn't solve the Big 12 problem mostly because their playoff is based on the false notion that they have parity in their two sections. The championship game should have been used to choose between Texas and Okie.

In the case of 02 it could, perhaps should, have resulted in a playoff between OSU and Iowa. Had Iowa not lost to ISU and without a playoff game the Bucks probably would have still gone on to the NC game based on position in polls and if I were a Hawkeye fan I would have bitched loudly about poll bias.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyesin07;1383214; said:
Well done, BKB. As I've said before, if you want to watch a team have to beat a team it's already beaten twice in the regular season have to "prove on the field" that they're better for the third time in a season to get to the championship game, or if you want a champion that's lost 6 or 7 regular season games, go watch the NFL. Leave college football alone.
Click to expand...

Given that we've been a Florida loss away from having rematches in 2008 and 2006, I think you are going to have to accept that (if the system persists) a rematch in the BCS system is inevitable.
 
Upvote 0
methomps;1385153; said:
Given that we've been a Florida loss away from having rematches in 2008 and 2006, I think you are going to have to accept that (if the system persists) a rematch in the BCS system is inevitable.
Click to expand...
True, though the chances are dramatically reduced when there are only 2 teams to play in the championship game. A Playoff makes rematches a certainty (At least in the terms I used in my examples, again, there are other ways to make a playoff system)
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1385220; said:
True, though the chances are dramatically reduced when there are only 2 teams to play in the championship game. A Playoff makes rematches a certainty (At least in the terms I used in my examples, again, there are other ways to make a playoff system)
Click to expand...

But not all rematches are created equally. If Florida had dropped a second game at some point in the season, how would Oklahoma v. Texas looked after the Big 12 South sputtered in the bowl season? I think you would see a lot of buyer's remorse regarding an all-B12N championship.

In a playoff, to have a championship game rematch means that each team won some previous games. I think people would feel that OU and UT were a lot more battle-tested had they taken out the best of the rest. Any playoff rematch is not ideal, but worlds better than a BCS rematch.
 
Upvote 0
methomps;1386120; said:
But not all rematches are created equally. If Florida had dropped a second game at some point in the season, how would Oklahoma v. Texas looked after the Big 12 South sputtered in the bowl season? I think you would see a lot of buyer's remorse regarding an all-B12N championship.

In a playoff, to have a championship game rematch means that each team won some previous games. I think people would feel that OU and UT were a lot more battle-tested had they taken out the best of the rest. Any playoff rematch is not ideal, but worlds better than a BCS rematch.
Click to expand...

If you look at 2001, I made the same point that all re-matches aren't equal necessarily. Nonetheless, the BCS already gives us "good" rematches on the rare occasion. Not for the title, necessarily, but there have been high caliber re-matches.... And the few times it has happened, people are generally OK with it because the teams have won important games against others - over the course of the year. Is your remark "Wolds better" based on something other than what you've mentioned or are you just stating a personal opinion? If the former, I'm not sure you've established it enough to make your conclusion just yet. (Specifically that the POs would be materially different than the BCS where rematches are concerned.)
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top