• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

College Playoff

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;2120832; said:
I'd be happier with a 4 team playoff than your 16 team field, though. Sorry, but 9-3 West Virginia just doesn't "deserve" the same chance as 11-1 Texas...
Click to expand...

We'll eventually end up with a 16-team field, though. Once that levee is broken it won't stop until it's totally gone the other way.

Not sure "deserve" has a lot to do with why 9-3 whomever will get in, but money certainly does. In that respect a playoff will have much the same flaw as the BCS.
 
Upvote 0
matcar;2120788; said:
I may be wrong, but I believe in the long haul, there will be less actual football as I'm guessing some of the bowls will die. Again, not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I don't know how that could be a good thing. I know a lot of people complain about the number of bowls, but who really cares if so-and-so got to a suck-poop bowl game? So Southern Cornhole State College gets to go to the Jenkins Cornmaze Bowlgame. If you don't care about it, don't watch it. Rather than whine about the Cornmaze Bowl, or the fact that Jenkins is a terrible farmer who doesn't deserve to sponsor a bowl game, just don't watch the game. So if you aren't watching or caring about the bowls you don't watch or care about, then how could losing that bowl game be good? You'd rather watch 120-pound men wearing bikinis thumb wrestle on ESPN?

I think playoffs would be neat. They fix a lot of problems the BCS has created, but would instead create additional problems. In my opinion, I don't want to buy something that fixes existing problems with my house, but creates additional problems. "Hm.. if I buy this gadget, the bathroom faucet will stop dripping, but then anyone using the washing machine will get electrocuted. I think I'll pass."
 
Upvote 0
buchtelgrad04;2120841; said:
I think it's just as much a problem with the BCS as it is with ESPN if the voters who are voting for the BCS are influenced by ESPN. Remove the bias and I'll never say another word.
Click to expand...
That's what the computers were originally for. But, we bitched enough that we tweaked them right on out of the equation for all intents and purposes..

or... internet porpoises.
 
Upvote 0
buchtelgrad04;2120841; said:
I think it's just as much a problem with the BCS as it is with ESPN if the voters who are voting for the BCS are influenced by ESPN. Remove the bias and I'll never say another word.
Click to expand...

Or how about the fact that the coaches who are trying to get a spot in the national championship game have a vote for who gets into the national championship game? Like, this year, we all knew LSU would get into the national championship game. Did Les Miles have a vote? If so, he got to vote for who his team got to play. I find that pretty disgusting.
 
Upvote 0
Damn I hate being late to the party and reading a million posts to try to catch up but everything turns to a blur as everything runs together.

So time to just jump in feet first and if I repeat points made earlier... fuck off.

I agree the BCS system isn't a bad way to determine the champion. The problem though is the BCS has become too politicized and ruined it. First off people got pissed about computers having too much say. But people fail to realize that the computers actually took the bias out of it and tried to compare apples to oranges.

But then they butchered the computers, first by taking out margin of victory. Why? Because people thought it caused running up the score on teams... boo freaking hoo. Take margin of victory out then it comprimises the integrity of the computer formulas. Then they took SOS out feeling the computers accounted for it. THEN they put so much weight into the human polls basically all the computers do is break the tie if two teams were really close in the polls.

The original intent was good, but they just screwed it up by trying to appease everyone.

While it is fun to debate about if we should have a playoff, just accept it is coming. It will be a 4 team playoff (fuck this plus one polically correct crap, its a playoff) the fun will be in the details.

So who should be in this 4 team playoff? Conference champions? 4 'best' teams? I think it will be interesting in HOW they pick these 4 teams. I really think Delany hinted this way back... I think they are going to do a committee to select the 4 'worthy' teams and try to cut the polls out of it bigtime. I really think they prefer conference champions, or at least weighting it heavily towards them.

The mechanics of the playoff also interest me. I LOVE the first round being on-campus. It gives incentive to being the #1/#2 teams and it allows fans not to worry about traveling to two different bowl sites. I can also see why Delany prefers this method... he knows the Rose Bowl will be fine, but he doesn't want the other bowls to get a leg up on the Rose to say they can 'host' the semifinal games. If the playoff games are self sustaining and not part of the bowl system, he knows the Rose Bowl will be the #1 bowl game every season.
 
Upvote 0
Piney;2120891; said:
Damn I hate being late to the party and reading a million posts to try to catch up but everything turns to a blur as everything runs together.

So time to just jump in feet first and if I repeat points made earlier... fuck off.

I agree the BCS system isn't a bad way to determine the champion. The problem though is the BCS has become too politicized and ruined it. First off people got pissed about computers having too much say. But people fail to realize that the computers actually took the bias out of it and tried to compare apples to oranges.

But then they butchered the computers, first by taking out margin of victory. Why? Because people thought it caused running up the score on teams... boo freaking hoo. Take margin of victory out then it comprimises the integrity of the computer formulas. Then they took SOS out feeling the computers accounted for it. THEN they put so much weight into the human polls basically all the computers do is break the tie if two teams were really close in the polls.

The original intent was good, but they just screwed it up by trying to appease everyone.

While it is fun to debate about if we should have a playoff, just accept it is coming. It will be a 4 team playoff (fuck this plus one polically correct crap, its a playoff) the fun will be in the details.

So who should be in this 4 team playoff? Conference champions? 4 'best' teams? I think it will be interesting in HOW they pick these 4 teams. I really think Delany hinted this way back... I think they are going to do a committee to select the 4 'worthy' teams and try to cut the polls out of it bigtime. I really think they prefer conference champions, or at least weighting it heavily towards them.

The mechanics of the playoff also interest me. I LOVE the first round being on-campus. It gives incentive to being the #1/#2 teams and it allows fans not to worry about traveling to two different bowl sites. I can also see why Delany prefers this method... he knows the Rose Bowl will be fine, but he doesn't want the other bowls to get a leg up on the Rose to say they can 'host' the semifinal games. If the playoff games are self sustaining and not part of the bowl system, he knows the Rose Bowl will be the #1 bowl game every season.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The 4-team playoff is going to be here in 2014 and for a few years after that.

Discussing how that 4-team playoff will function is an interesting and timely debate.

Continuing the old arguments for 6, 8, 12, and 16 teams is just re-hashing the same old stuff that has been talked about for years.

If people are able to focus on the mechanics of the 4-team format, I think the conversation will be more productive.

Having said that, I realize there's no way that will happen in this thread. :tongue2:
 
Upvote 0
BB73;2120908; said:
Exactly. The 4-team playoff is going to be here in 2014 and for a few years after that.

Discussing how that 4-team playoff will function is an interesting and timely debate.

Continuing the old arguments for 6, 8, 12, and 16 teams is just re-hashing the same old stuff that has been talked about for years.

If people are able to focus on the mechanics of the 4-team format, I think the conversation will be more productive.

Having said that, I realize there's no way that will happen in this thread. :tongue2:
Click to expand...

New thread for discussing those possibilities then?
 
Upvote 0
BB73;2120908; said:
Continuing the old arguments for 6, 8, 12, and 16 teams is just re-hashing the same old stuff that has been talked about for years.
Click to expand...

Hey, never thought about how a 6, 8, 12, and 16 team playoff would function. But since you brought it up I have some ideas......





:biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
BB73;2120908; said:
Exactly. The 4-team playoff is going to be here in 2014 and for a few years after that.

Discussing how that 4-team playoff will function is an interesting and timely debate.

Continuing the old arguments for 6, 8, 12, and 16 teams is just re-hashing the same old stuff that has been talked about for years.

If people are able to focus on the mechanics of the 4-team format, I think the conversation will be more productive.

Having said that, I realize there's no way that will happen in this thread. :tongue2:
Click to expand...

You old fogey, you just need a new thread so you can keep up :biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top