College Playoff

[DaddyBigBucks]

Best'

You seem to be coming back around to the money issue, and I don't think that's the issue. I stated what I think the issue is.

If you can give them a way to feel smug and superior, while giving the rest of us a play-off; then more power to you. I really don't see them "protecting" revenue from one source or another. That isn't what motivates them, or at least it's not what motivates them most

 

[billmac91]

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...

much better explanation than how i was trying to say it.

I agree completely, and still don't understand what is so hard about understanding this?

How does the current system, or proponents of it, justify a 2 loss LSU team being in the championship game over undefeated Hawaii, 2 loss USC, 2 loss Oklahoma, 1 loss kansas, and 2 loss Georgia

Why do people put their trust in a computer formula and human voters is beyond me. Let the top teams in the country fight it out.

 

[Best Buckeye]

Best'

You seem to be coming back around to the money issue, and I don't think that's the issue. I stated what I think the issue is.

If you can give them a way to feel smug and superior, while giving the rest of us a play-off; then more power to you. I really don't see them "protecting" revenue from one source or another. That isn't what motivates them, or at least it's not what motivates them most

No I am trying to expound on your thouight s about what the issue is.
The money part is just a smaller part of it. The biggest part is maintaining their influence over the collegiate athletic field . I am also just trying to explore the presidents psyche.

 

[schwab]

How would you know definitively who the best two loss team is in a playoff?

You seed them, and they play each other. Is this a trick question?

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.

I know the associative property you speak of as the transitive property, but that's just being silly. You are using a law that only applied in Ann Arbor. We never planned on ever handing scUM a win. You must have asked the wrong people. It's like Europe and the metric system, using it doesn't automatically make it right....

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?

Oh, it definitely matters what 8 you pick. Where do you assume otherwise? You wonder how picking 8 teams is different from picking 2 instead? I really need to get into some business transactions with you....Ahem....1 vs. 8, plays 4 vs. 5, and 2 vs. 7, plays 3 vs. 6. What you end up with, is 7 teams that proved their worthiness during the season to earn a playoff berth, and 1 team that earned the same berth, and then won it's playoff games. We'd call them national champs, and #'s 9 on down can cry all day long about it.

 

[HailToMichigan]

You seed them, and they play each other. Is this a trick question?



I know the associative property you speak of as the transitive property, but that's just being silly. You are using a law that only applied in Ann Arbor. We never planned on ever handing scUM a win. You must have asked the wrong people. It's like Europe and the metric system, using it doesn't automatically make it right....

Uh, you have to assume the transitive (associative, whatever) in a playoff. It's the only way the system works. Like I said for a four team playoff. If A beats B, C beats D, A plays C. If A beats C, we crown A the champion, even though A never played D. It only works because of the transitive (associative, whatever) property. You're saying it's dumb, but it's the single premise that crowning a champion is based on. If you think D should beat A, then you didn't really crown a champion, did you? Me, I never said Michigan actually should have beaten OSU based on it, those are the words you put in my mouth.

Oh, it definitely matters what 8 you pick. Where do you assume otherwise? You wonder how picking 8 teams is different from picking 2 instead? I really need to get into some business transactions with you....Ahem....1 vs. 8, plays 4 vs. 5, and 2 vs. 7, plays 3 vs. 6. What you end up with, is 7 teams that proved their worthiness during the season to earn a playoff berth, and 1 team that earned the same berth, and then won it's playoff games. We'd call them national champs, and #'s 9 on down can cry all day long about it.

I agree that it matters what 8 you pick. billmac implied he didn't care if the 8 were the correct 8 so long as it was a playoff system. Again you took what I said and twisted it 180 degrees.

And again: How do you pick the correct 8? Mili pointed out, fair enough, that there's a lot more parity these days, but I think that's borne out all the way down through and even past #20. Even if you took the top 8 in the BCS this year for a playoff, you still leave out this year's #1 poster child for the playoff-lovers: Hawaii.

Somebody mentioned the NFL playoffs and would we want to use the BCS for that too? I think that's interesting because if you read the stories surrounding the NFL playoffs, they've been similar to those surrounding the MLB playoffs too, and to a lesser extent the NHL playoffs. Namely, how come the wild cards keep getting to the Super Bowl (or World Series) and messing up the competition? People worry that it's watering down what should be the ultimate matchups. Me, I wouldn't have wanted to swap the USC-Texas Rose Bowl for a scintillating Georgia-Oregon matchup in some playoff championship, not for the world. Reward a team that lost twice over a team that lost once, simply because the loss happened to be in the playoff to a good team instead in the regular season to a bad one?

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Uh, you have to assume the transitive (associative, whatever) in a playoff. It's the only way the system works. Like I said for a four team playoff. If A beats B, C beats D, A plays C. If A beats C, we crown A the champion, even though A never played D. It only works because of the transitive (associative, whatever) property.

The playoff system nothing to do with the associative property, it deals with the process of elimination, with the higher seeded teams having an easier road based on their earning it during the season.

And again: How do you pick the correct 8? Mili pointed out, fair enough, that there's a lot more parity these days, but I think that's borne out all the way down through and even past #20. Even if you took the top 8 in the BCS this year for a playoff, you still leave out this year's #1 poster child for the playoff-lovers: Hawaii.

Sheesh, do people even fucking read what I post? How many times do I have to say that you use the same BCS rankings to select the teams as is used now to pick the top two teams for the title game...they may not be perfect, but with the combination of human and computer evaluations used to rank teams, it's pretty good. You also use the same 16-team format for the 1119 I-A teams as you do for the 119 I-AA teams.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Sheesh, do people even fucking read what I post? How many times do I have to say that you use the same BCS rankings to select the teams as is used now to pick the top two teams for the title game...they may not be perfect, but with the combination of human and computer evaluations used to rank teams, it's pretty good. You also use the same 16-team format for the 1119 I-A teams as you do for the 119 I-AA teams.

I'm sorry, I thought what I said was "if you took the top 8 in the BCS". In fact, I'm damn sure that's what I said.

 

[methomps]

And again: How do you pick the correct 8? Mili pointed out, fair enough, that there's a lot more parity these days, but I think that's borne out all the way down through and even past #20. Even if you took the top 8 in the BCS this year for a playoff, you still leave out this year's #1 poster child for the playoff-lovers: Hawaii.

Not necessarily. The voters cast their ballots this year under the understanding that the top two teams play for the NC. It does not follow that they would cast their ballots the same way under the premise of an 8-team playoff. I bet Hawaii would've been higher had the #8 ranking meant anything.

 

[methomps]

ESPN.com: SPORTSNATION - SportsNation Polling - 3273

4) Should college football have a playoff system?

85.2%Yes
14.8%No

7) Would a playoff system make the regular season less compelling?

79.6%No
20.4%Yes

8) Would a playoff system make bowl games not involved in the playoff less compelling than current non-BCS games?

67.2%No
32.8%Yes

9) Which do you think would generate more interest if college football had a playoff system?

64.9%December Delirium in college football
35.1%March Madness in college basketball

10) As a fan, which better describes your take on the current state of affairs?

59.3%It's a complete joke and an embarrassment.
40.7%It's great drama and makes for good debate.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Here's how the current top 16 teams would be seeded in a I-AA type playoff format:

I'd love to see this happen...lots of great games.

 

[BB73]

This comment from Fiu strikes home with me.

cfn

?Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? Will you take us to Mount Splashmore? ? The line is dead even on who?s whinier, my three-year-old when she wants another episode of the gripping, biting theater known as Max & Ruby, or media people asking for a college football playoff. I talked with the college football bigwigs and they?ve decided to cut a deal. They?ll think about coming up with a playoff format if everyone would just SHUT UP about it for 24 hours

 

[Jaxbuck]

Here's how the current top 16 teams would be seeded in a I-AA type playoff format:

I'd love to see this happen...lots of great games.

The biggest problem I see with this proposition?

2 SEC teams playing football in December outside of the South.

Never going to happen.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

The biggest problem I see with this proposition?

2 SEC teams playing football in December outside of the South.

Never going to happen.

Tough shit for them. Fuck 'em...

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

i wouldn't want it either, if i was him... why risk the odds when JT's basically batting .500 in MNC appearances in the last six years? the probablities and associated pay-offs and costs-vs-benefits just wouldn't add up for tOSU, imo.

Tressel was 4-2 (.667) in I-AA playoffs.

 

[shetuck]

Tressel was 4-2 (.667) in I-AA playoffs.

i'd have to run the numbers, but i think a 50/50 shot at winning the whole pot (a HUGE one at that) for just one additional game, might beat a 67% shot at winning what would, presumably, be a smaller pot.