A sixteen playoff - even an 8 team playoff - says I have watched an entire season of football and I am still not sure whether Florida is better than Utah.
Horseradish.
Horseradish.
Upvote
0
-
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!
- Thread starter Oh8ch
- Start date
Oh8ch;1329807; said:
Much like whether or not Oklahoma was better than Boise State in 2006?
Bottom line is that there will be some years where an 8-team playoff may otherwise suffice, but there will be others where it will not (this year being a good example). The best system is the tried-and-true system that the lower divisions have implemented, especially that of the division that is closest to I-A and who often beats I-A teams. If getting a truly deserving team into the playoffs means maybe having another team or two that's not so deserving in also, then so be it.
People are wanting a perfect system and there is none...you can find flaws in any system that anyone here on BP or anywhere can can devise.
Upvote
0
tugger5000
Junior
As a fan, I think I would favor a playoff... I wouldn't mind seeing more CFB, but not sure if it would diminish the regular season games or not. I don't watch the NFL anymore and only pay attention to the playoffs and the Superbowl.
However (and I apologize if this has been mentioned before, don't have time to go through 70+ pages), I would guess that more games at the end of the season would increase the chances for injury, which could hurt those juniors/seniors looking to go into the NFL.
However (and I apologize if this has been mentioned before, don't have time to go through 70+ pages), I would guess that more games at the end of the season would increase the chances for injury, which could hurt those juniors/seniors looking to go into the NFL.
Upvote
0
billmac91
Head Coach
Oh8ch;1329807; said:
Not saying you are incorrect in that assumption...because I also think UF is easily better than Utah. I hate making assumptions, though.
We were a 2 score favorite against UF in 2006 and that didn't turn out well.
USC was declared the best team EVER in 2005. A team that could beat multiple NFL teams. That didn't turn out very well.
Boise State beat a good Oklahoma club in 2006. Utah pasted the Big East champ and likely could have given other big boys all they could handle. Last year West Virginia was a heavy dog to the Sooners and ran them out of the stadium.
I agree there is no perfect solution. I agree playoffs don't necessarily determine the best team. I believe it was you who stated a team 10 games back in the baseball standings can win the World Series. Absolutely correct.
But at least the system is fair, and clearly determines a winner at the end. I'd rather have Alabama get upset by the 8 or 16 seed than have Harris Poll voters, and college coaches who watch WAYYYY fewer games than I do tell me who the better 1 loss team between USC, Oklahoma, Texas, and Penn State is.
Upvote
0
Not to mention determining the outcome of the playoff itself.
Oklahoma WAS the better team in 2006. That again is my point.
Upvote
0
2007 - 1 OSU 2 LSU | 3 VT 4 OU | 5 UGA 6 Mizz 7 USC 8 Kan | 9 WVU 10 Haw 11 ASU 12 FLA 13 ILL 14 BC 15 Clem Tenn
Review: Top 2 - best, Top 4 - ok, Top 8 - meh, Top 16 - awful. 4 loss Tenn? Clemson? BC?
2006 - 1 OSU 2 UF | 3 UM 4 LSU | 5 USC 6 Louis 7 Wisc 8 Boise | 9 Aub 10 Okl 11 ND 12 Ark 13 WVU 14 Wake 15 VT 16 Rut
Review: Top 2 - controversy, Top 4 - best, Top 8 - meh, Top 16 - good but not as good as top-4 imo
2005 - 1 USC 2 TEX | 3 PSU 4 OSU | 5 ORE 6 ND 7 UGA 8 DaU | 9 Aub 10 VT 11 WVU 12 LSU 13 Bama 14 TCU 15 TTech 16 UCLA
Review: Top 2 - best, Top 4 - good, Top 8 - great lineup but USC-Tex still a cut above, Top 16 - competitive, but better?
2004 - 1 USC 2 OU | 3 Aub 4 Tex | 5 Cal 6 Utah 7 UGA 8 VT | 9 Boise 10 Louis 11 LSU 12 Iowa 13 Mich 14 Mia 15 Tenn 16 FSU
Review: Top 2 - good but Aub left out, top 4 - best, top 8 - good but not best, top 16 - a LOT of junk sneaking in at the end
The more I look at it, the more I agree there is no right system. There will be years where horribly unworthy teams get in.
Ironically, I think you can make a case that top-2 was as good as any system.
Review: Top 2 - best, Top 4 - ok, Top 8 - meh, Top 16 - awful. 4 loss Tenn? Clemson? BC?
2006 - 1 OSU 2 UF | 3 UM 4 LSU | 5 USC 6 Louis 7 Wisc 8 Boise | 9 Aub 10 Okl 11 ND 12 Ark 13 WVU 14 Wake 15 VT 16 Rut
Review: Top 2 - controversy, Top 4 - best, Top 8 - meh, Top 16 - good but not as good as top-4 imo
2005 - 1 USC 2 TEX | 3 PSU 4 OSU | 5 ORE 6 ND 7 UGA 8 DaU | 9 Aub 10 VT 11 WVU 12 LSU 13 Bama 14 TCU 15 TTech 16 UCLA
Review: Top 2 - best, Top 4 - good, Top 8 - great lineup but USC-Tex still a cut above, Top 16 - competitive, but better?
2004 - 1 USC 2 OU | 3 Aub 4 Tex | 5 Cal 6 Utah 7 UGA 8 VT | 9 Boise 10 Louis 11 LSU 12 Iowa 13 Mich 14 Mia 15 Tenn 16 FSU
Review: Top 2 - good but Aub left out, top 4 - best, top 8 - good but not best, top 16 - a LOT of junk sneaking in at the end
The more I look at it, the more I agree there is no right system. There will be years where horribly unworthy teams get in.
Ironically, I think you can make a case that top-2 was as good as any system.
Upvote
0
billmac91
Head Coach
jwinslow;1329818; said:
Then make it a 4 team playoff. Honestly, any type of system that brings at least 2 more teams into the mix is fine by me.
Obviously the more teams you accept, the more open you are to including unqualified teams. But a system predicated on 2/3rd of human voting is ridiculous IMO. Especially when the teams play in different conferences, overcome different injuries, improve or get worse throughout a season.
The current system also negates improvement over a season. UF won a national title by beating FSU even after FSU beat them in the regular season (pre-BCS). An early loss to USC effectively ended OSU's shot for a National Title. Who's to say OSU hasn't improved to the point where they are the better team?
The current system just relies on too many assumptions for my taste. Expand the field and let them play it out for the title.
Upvote
0
Jake
Once a Buckeye, always a Buckeye
‘17 The Deuce Champ
Fantasy Baseball Champ
'18 The Deuce Champ
I'd settle for the four BCS bowls being the quarterfinals, two semis and the NC game. That's just two more games than we have now, and the minor bowls can still exist.
The NC game they added a few years ago is just another bowl game, giving 10 schools a BCS payout instead of eight. They simply expanded the flawed system and convinced the world we now had a real "championship" game.
Amazingly, no other sport - and no other level of football - determines its champion this way. Go figure.
The NC game they added a few years ago is just another bowl game, giving 10 schools a BCS payout instead of eight. They simply expanded the flawed system and convinced the world we now had a real "championship" game.
Amazingly, no other sport - and no other level of football - determines its champion this way. Go figure.
Upvote
0
Oh8ch;1329817; said:
Then why did Boise State beat them on a neutral field in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl?
Upvote
0
billmac91
Head Coach
MililaniBuckeye;1329835; said:
I understand Oh8ch on this.
Were the Giants better than the Patriots last year?
Was Buster Douglas better than Tyson?
Were the St. Louis Cardinals the best team in baseball in 2006 when they made the playoffs barely over .500?
Playoffs don't unequivocally determine the best team...IMO it is still a much better system and takes a lot of the guess work out.
And you can't bitch if you lose in the playoffs. It is an even field.
Upvote
0
