• 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.

College Playoff

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Best Buckeye;1015155; said:
So let's go a step further with this. say that every fan in the world wants a playoff. How do you get it done in light of what the B10, Tv and the bowls want?
Click to expand...

Let's go a step further than that. Let's say:
  • All the fans want it
  • All the Players, Coaches and ADs want it
  • All the TV networks and providers (cable and satellite) want it
  • All the Bowls want it (??????) (accepting your premise)
All of this means jack-diddly-squat if the College Presidents don't want it. These guys are NOT motivated by money to nearly the extent that many people believe. They are motivated by self-congratulations and little else. The feeling of "keeping football/athletics in its place" gives them the opportunity to congratulate themselves for being intellectually and culturally superior to the masses. Fix that, and you'll get what the consumers want, whatever that is.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye;1015121; said:
Uh, how do they decide the #1 and #2 teams now? You take the BCS rankings and seed them accordingly...pretty simple, actually. In an 8-team bracket:

#1 vs #8
#2 vs #7
#3 vs #6
#4 vs #5
Click to expand...
I gotta ask, if the BCS is such a flawed system that we need a playoff, why would we use the rankings in order to determine seeding? If the BCS can accurately choose the top 8 teams in the country, surely it can also accurately choose the top 2, negating the need for a playoff.
 
Upvote 0
HailToMichigan;1017622; said:
I gotta ask, if the BCS is such a flawed system that we need a playoff, why would we use the rankings in order to determine seeding? If the BCS can accurately choose the top 8 teams in the country, surely it can also accurately choose the top 2, negating the need for a playoff.
Click to expand...

C'mon on man. Really, what's so hard about this?

Then don't use the BCS. I don't think anyone here thinks the BCS is automatically would choose the coorect 8. But at least out of the 8 selected a champion would be born, better than picking 2 teams for an automatic birth in a mythical championship.

How do we know definatively that LSU is the best 2 loss team?

I think we'd have a better understanding of who the best 2 loss team is, if we could see LSU play USC, or Oklahoma, or Missouri, or Kansas, or Hawaii, or Georgia.

And has been stated a million times, your arguent about being excluded b/c you're #9 and excluded from the playoff is much weaker than being #3 and being told biased coaches and Harris poll voters have decided you aren't good enough for the championship.
 
Upvote 0
billmac91;1017630; said:
C'mon on man. Really, what's so hard about this?

Then don't use the BCS. I don't think anyone here thinks the BCS is automatically would choose the coorect 8. But at least out of the 8 selected a champion would be born, better than picking 2 teams for an automatic birth in a mythical championship.

How do we know definatively that LSU is the best 2 loss team?

I think we'd have a better understanding of who the best 2 loss team is, if we could see LSU play USC, or Oklahoma, or Missouri, or Kansas, or Hawaii, or Georgia.
Click to expand...
How would you know definitively who the best two loss team is in a playoff? That assumes the associative property (X beats Y and Y beats Z therefore X beats Z) which is wrong because by that law, Michigan should have been handed the win over OSU.

Then you say "at least out of the 8 selected a champion would be born." So you're saying that it doesn't matter what 8 you pick? How is that any different than arbitrarily picking 2 instead? What makes a tournament game that much more magical about selecting the better team than a regular season game?
 
Upvote 0
HailToMichigan;1017725; said:
How would you know definitively who the best two loss team is in a playoff? That assumes the associative property (X beats Y and Y beats Z therefore X beats Z) which is wrong because by that law, Michigan should have been handed the win over OSU.

Then you say "at least out of the 8 selected a champion would be born." So you're saying that it doesn't matter what 8 you pick? How is that any different than arbitrarily picking 2 instead? What makes a tournament game that much more magical about selecting the better team than a regular season game?
Click to expand...

Having the top 8 teams (in any format you want) without any shadow of a doubt is a better system than picking 2 teams based on personal bias in the Harris Poll and computer formulas.

If you want to take the 6 conference champions, the top Non-BCS school, and an eigth team then fine. If you want the top 8 teams in the BCS standings, then fine. Either way its a helluva lot better than picking 2 teams based on perception.

Doi you really think the BCS works in determing the the best team year in- year out?

At the end of a playoff, at least one team is standing who faced the same obstacles every other team in the playoffs faced. Would you like to see the BCS formula applied to the NFL? I just don't get how anybody with any common sense would think the BCS formula works and is fair.

USC, Kansas, Georgia, Hawaii, and Missouri all have legitimate beefs. What makes LSU a better team or more deserving than any of those squads other than biased Harris Poll voters and a computer formula?

Let these teams battle it out in an 8 team playoff.
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks;1016615; said:
Let's go a step further than that. Let's say:
  • All the fans want it
  • All the Players, Coaches and ADs want it
  • All the TV networks and providers (cable and satellite) want it
  • All the Bowls want it (??????) (accepting your premise)
All of this means jack-diddly-squat if the College Presidents don't want it. These guys are NOT motivated by money to nearly the extent that many people believe. They are motivated by self-congratulations and little else. The feeling of "keeping football/athletics in its place" gives them the opportunity to congratulate themselves for being intellectually and culturally superior to the masses. Fix that, and you'll get what the consumers want, whatever that is.
Click to expand...
Hey DaddyBigBucks;
To clarify one point I don't know which of the above groups wants or doesn't want a playoff
Ok I wanted to get into this a little bit more Daddy. Suppose that all entities want a playoff except the College Presidents. I feel that it goes deeper than just them but for the sake of arguement we can stick to them.
Besides what you said above about them I also think that it goes back to when the university trustees voted to keep us out of the Rose bowl. Do you remember that? At that time they felt that the university was letting the athletic dept have too much rein and wanted to bring them back. They voted that way in order to reassure that they were the ones in control. Of course we all hated that. Accordingly every president of every university wants to be in control of everything connected to the university and that is their job. So they probably all sat around at some presidents meeting and said "this is how we will exercise control over athletics " and to this day they have.
Now organizing a playoff means restructuring the universities set plans and organization and the amount of money to be made. No president is going to give up one red cent to form a playoff where they lose the revenue from home games.
What do you think?
 
Upvote 0
BCS Commisioner talks about a playoff.

NEW YORK (AP) - One wild and unpredictable college football season won't cause the Bowl Championship Series to change.

BCS coordinator and Southeastern Conference commissioner Mike Slive was asked during a conference call with reporters Wednesday if the increased parity in college football this season would make some type of major college football playoff more likely in the future.

Slive said that his position hasn't changed since he took over as coordinator after the 2005 season: He's open to change, but an NFL-style playoff with eight or more teams won't happen anytime soon.
As he has said many times before, Slive said he was open to discussions about the BCS going to a plus-one format, which would match the top two teams in the country after the four major bowls are played. "You know, we are looking at that as a potential option for some modification, but I don't see anything beyond that," Slive said. "And I'm not saying that (plus-one) can't happen, but I'm certainly open-minded and at least from my perspective looking very, very hard drilling down into that concept."

Cont'd
 
Upvote 0
HailToMichigan;1017622; said:
I gotta ask, if the BCS is such a flawed system that we need a playoff, why would we use the rankings in order to determine seeding? If the BCS can accurately choose the top 8 teams in the country, surely it can also accurately choose the top 2, negating the need for a playoff.
Click to expand...

The "flaw" in the current BCS system is that it doesn't account for the level of parity in determining who should get to play for the title, because it only picks the "top" two teams no matter how close #3, #4, etc., are...there really isn't that much wrong with the actual way it racks-and-stacks teams.

Putting the actual second-best team in the country at #3, under the current system, totally hoses that team because they have no chance at playing for the title. Under a playoff system, that team would. There's a far greater "injustice" in ranking the second best team at #3 right now, than there would be by ranking the true sixteenth-best team at #17 in a 16-team playoff. Also, having teams "mis-ranked" amongst the playoff pool may affect the seedings somewhat, but they still at least have the opportunity to play, so the rack-and-stack doesn't have to be near as accurate as it does now in trying to pick only the two best teams...
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top