Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: AUChizad on January 08, 2013, 10:08:37 AM
-
1 Alabama (59) 13-1 1475
2 Oregon 12-1 1358
3 Ohio State 12-0 1302
4 Notre Dame 12-1 1288
5 Georgia 12-2 1230
5 Texas A&M 11-2 1230
7 Stanford 12-2 1169
8 South Carolina 11-2 1038
9 Florida 11-2 933
10 Florida State 12-2 922
11 Clemson 11-2 889
12 Kansas State 11-2 871
13 Louisville 11-2 781
14 LSU 10-3 756
15 Oklahoma 10-3 615
16 Utah State 11-2 456
17 Northwestern 10-3 443
18 Boise State 11-2 419
19 Texas 9-4 358
20 Oregon State 9-4 303
21 San Jose State 11-2 243
22 Northern Illinois 12-2 227
23 Vanderbilt 9-4 180
24 Michigan 8-5 147
25 Nebraska 10-4 119
See bold and LOL yourself.
-
Notre Dame should be behind UGA and aTm also. Those teams didn't look like complete clusterfuck when playing Alabama...
-
And that's why I don't have much confidence in the four team playoff.
Luckily, there is a committee that decides who gets in. However, I bet that committee is not much better than our current voters.
Who would have gotten in this year?
Based on the 2nd to last polls:
1. Notre Dame
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Kansas State
Who actually deserved to get in based on what we saw of the overall season?
1. Notre Dame (they DID go undefeated and beat the Pac 10 and Big 12 champs, so I can see the argument for giving it to them)
2. Alabama
3. Oregon
4. Texas A&M
But then, thinking about it more openly, the following teams had an argument to compete in the four team playoff:
Alabama
Oregon
Notre Dame
Georgia
Texas A&M
Florida
South Carolina
Stanford
Who do you leave out if you're basing your decision purely on the eye test like the committee will be doing?
-
Florida would have probably been in the playoff.
Remember, if UGA had actually beaten Alabama, UF may have slipped all the way in like Alabama did last year.
The bad thing about a playoff, is that all conferences are not equal. And, the conference championship game could eliminate a team like UGA or Alabama this year while allowing a team like UF to slip in.
The 4 that SHOULD have gotten in this year would have been,
Alabama
UGA
Notre Dame
and either
K-State or Oregon
-
How do you make Florida cookies?
Put them in a bowl and beat the hell out of them for 3 hours.
-
How do you make Florida cookies?
Put them in a bowl and beat the hell out of them for 3 hours.
You and bottomfeeder should get together and tell each other your jokes...
privately...
-
Damn Snaggle, WE!!! is on that ass this morning.
-
Damn Snaggle, WE!!! is on that ass this morning.
He's giving no quarter.
-
But then, thinking about it more openly, the following teams had an argument to compete in the four team playoff:
Alabama
Oregon
Notre Dame
Georgia
Texas A&M
Florida
South Carolina
Stanford
Who do you leave out if you're basing your decision purely on the eye test like the committee will be doing?
Right there is where it needs to be, 8 teams. 7 games to determine the championship. Cut the regular season back to 10 plus the conference championships. The most a team would play is 14 games like they do now.
Take the top 8 teams after the conference championship games have been played and let them go at it. Use the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, and let two other bowls bid for the other two games with the championship game location getting swapped out between the big 4 every year. At least I would like to see something along those lines.
/endsleepdeprivedrant
-
Right there is where it needs to be, 8 teams. 7 games to determine the championship. Cut the regular season back to 10 plus the conference championships. The most a team would play is 14 games like they do now.
Take the top 8 teams after the conference championship games have been played and let them go at it. Use the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, and let two other bowls bid for the other two games with the championship game location getting swapped out between the big 4 every year. At least I would like to see something along those lines.
/endsleepdeprivedrant
Ed Zachary. Much too easy, though. Makes too much sense. I wouldn't even care if they kept the same BCS system in place to determine the top 8 teams. There will always be some butthurt team feeling like they were left out no matter what system you use, but I'd rather point and laugh at #9 complaining than to watch that shit sandwich last night and realize there were 3-4 teams that needed to be there over ND.
-
Right there is where it needs to be, 8 teams. 7 games to determine the championship. Cut the regular season back to 10 plus the conference championships. The most a team would play is 14 games like they do now.
Take the top 8 teams after the conference championship games have been played and let them go at it. Use the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, and let two other bowls bid for the other two games with the championship game location getting swapped out between the big 4 every year. At least I would like to see something along those lines.
/endsleepdeprivedrant
No way. This is saying that 90% of the teams would be only playing 10 games. Do you know how much revenue that would lose? Also, a 10 game season would suck...
-
The thing is, I can't complain about this year's Bama championship, other than the fact that the stars aligned and everyone that needed to lose did.
A perfect system, to me, is that every team joins a conference, every conference has a championship game, and every champion gets a seeding in the playoff based on some subjective poll.
Wouldn't mind losing the three "cupcake" OOC games to make room for a playoff in the season.
The conference championships are about as fair as fair can get. Everyone in one division plays eachother. The best team in that division plays the best team in the other division. Do that for each conference and let the "best" of each one play each other.
Seems logical to me.
-
No way. This is saying that 90% of the teams would be only playing 10 games. Do you know how much revenue that would lose? Also, a 10 game season would suck...
And there is the issue and why it will never happen. They wouldn't make as much money. It's always driven by money. I don't mind a 10 game season, grew up with them and it seems like there was a lot less injuries back then too. My memory is fuzzy but it seems like games were more competitive then b/c less people were injured and the teams were more evenly matched.
-
The thing is, I can't complain about this year's Bama championship, other than the fact that the stars aligned and everyone that needed to lose did.
A perfect system, to me, is that every team joins a conference, every conference has a championship game, and every champion gets a seeding in the playoff based on some subjective poll.
Wouldn't mind losing the three "cupcake" OOC games to make room for a playoff in the season.
The conference championships are about as fair as fair can get. Everyone in one division plays eachother. The best team in that division plays the best team in the other division. Do that for each conference and let the "best" of each one play each other.
Seems logical to me.
Man, I used to be right there with you. But I've lost all faith in the rest of college football.
Conference champions don't mean anything anymore.
And after seeing the dozen or so guys that declared for the draft at LSU, I don't believe for a second that LSU's team was 100% committed to the Chick Fil A Bowl. Same with Florida. They sold 7000 tickets to their fans. You really think Florida prepared to play a real football game?
-
Man, I used to be right there with you. But I've lost all faith in the rest of college football.
Conference champions don't mean anything anymore.
And after seeing the dozen or so guys that declared for the draft at LSU, I don't believe for a second that LSU's team was 100% committed to the Chick Fil A Bowl. Same with Florida. They sold 7000 tickets to their fans. You really think Florida prepared to play a real football game?
I don't see your point.
Florida would be out of the picture.
If they had beaten Georgia and then beaten Bama?
I bet you they'd give a little bit more of a shit about beating whatever conference champion if it was a stepping stone to winning it all.
-
I don't see your point.
Florida would be out of the picture.
If they had beaten Georgia and then beaten Bama?
I bet you they'd give a little bit more of a shit about beating whatever conference champion if it was a stepping stone to winning it all.
How many conferences?
No way you can do that with the SEC being as stacked, and the Big East or whoever being so weak. All conferences wouldn't be the same. Should Boise get an automatic birth into the playoffs because they are in a shitty league whose #2 team couldn't have beaten Auburn this year?
-
Should Boise get an automatic birth into the playoffs because they are in a shitty league whose #2 team couldn't have beaten Auburn this year?
Surely you jest?
-
Surely you jest?
sunshine, unicorns, etc.
-
How many conferences?
No way you can do that with the SEC being as stacked, and the Big East or whoever being so weak. All conferences wouldn't be the same. Should Boise get an automatic birth into the playoffs because they are in a shitty league whose #2 team couldn't have beaten Auburn this year?
That was my point.
A perfect system, to me, is that every team joins a conference, every conference has a championship game, and every champion gets a seeding in the playoff based on some subjective poll.
The SEC is VASTLY superior to all other conferences. Not just the top team or two. The majority of SEC teams are better than the majority of conference champions.
It wouldn't be fair to leave the #2, #3, or hell, even the #4 SEC team out of the playoffs because Ohio State won the Big Shit conference.
And my point about LSU and Florida was that neither team was playing their best. They had no real reason to. If LSU and Florida felt compelled to prove something on the field those two nights, they would have probably blown out Clemson and Louisville.
-
That was my point.
The SEC is VASTLY superior to all other conferences. Not just the top team or two. The majority of SEC teams are better than the majority of conference champions.
It wouldn't be fair to leave the #2, #3, or hell, even the #4 SEC team out of the playoffs because Ohio State won the Big Shit conference.
And my point about LSU and Florida was that neither team was playing their best. They had no real reason to. If LSU and Florida felt compelled to prove something on the field those two nights, they would have probably blown out Clemson and Louisville.
Yep.
-
That was my point.
The SEC is VASTLY superior to all other conferences. Not just the top team or two. The majority of SEC teams are better than the majority of conference champions.
It wouldn't be fair to leave the #2, #3, or hell, even the #4 SEC team out of the playoffs because Ohio State won the Big Shit conference.
And my point about LSU and Florida was that neither team was playing their best. They had no real reason to. If LSU and Florida felt compelled to prove something on the field those two nights, they would have probably blown out Clemson and Louisville.
But there would be a reason to if they were playing en route to a championship.
To me, I don't care if Alabama beat the brakes off of LSU in last year's championship game. They should have been eliminated from a "tournament" when they played in Tuscaloosa. All teams can't play each other. But all teams from one division can, and do. Whoever emerges as the #1 in their division won that "tournament". The prize for winning that? Playing the winner of the other division. The prize for that? Playing every other conference's champion.
It's so logical, it pains me that apparently everyone doesn't see it that way.
Who gives a fuck if the SEC dominates? They're going to anyway. But if there are 5 better SEC teams than the next best conference champ? Too bad. They should have won when it mattered. The BCS's twitter handle is @EveryGameCounts for Christ's sake. If Florida wanted a claim, they should have beaten Georgia head-to head. Georgia proved to be the better team in the fairest of possible systems. Texas A&M thinks they deserve a shot? Beating Bama's great, but you shouldn't have lost to LSU & Florida (who both lost their bowl games, btw). This year Bama earned the top spot in the West by losing the least amount of SEC games. Then they earned the right to play for the championship game, when they beat UGA.
I don't see why this doesn't make perfect sense. Who gives a fuck if they have to steamroll Louisville (who obviously proved that that's not a foregone conclusion this year) to get there? Beat the best each conference has to offer, after they emerged as the best in their conference? That's the most accurate way possible to crown a champion.
-
But there would be a reason to if they were playing en route to a championship.
To me, I don't care if Alabama beat the brakes off of LSU in last year's championship game. They should have been eliminated from a "tournament" when they played in Tuscaloosa. All teams can't play each other. But all teams from one division can, and do. Whoever emerges as the #1 in their division won that "tournament". The prize for winning that? Playing the winner of the other division. The prize for that? Playing every other conference's champion.
It's so logical, it pains me that apparently everyone doesn't see it that way.
Who gives a fuck if the SEC dominates? They're going to anyway. But if there are 5 better SEC teams than the next best conference champ? Too bad. They should have won when it mattered. The BCS's twitter handle is @EveryGameCounts for Christ's sake. If Florida wanted a claim, they should have beaten Georgia head-to head. Georgia proved to be the better team in the fairest of possible systems. Texas A&M thinks they deserve a shot? Beating Bama's great, but you shouldn't have lost to LSU & Florida (who both lost their bowl games, btw). This year Bama earned the top spot in the West by losing the least amount of SEC games. Then they earned the right to play for the championship game, when they beat UGA.
I don't see why this doesn't make perfect sense. Who gives a fuck if they have to steamroll Louisville (who obviously proved that that's not a foregone conclusion this year) to get there? Beat the best each conference has to offer, after they emerged as the best in their conference? That's the most accurate way possible to crown a champion.
It makes sense.
What doesn't make sense to the rest of us is having a playoff where the 8 best god damn teams aren't invited. Or 7 of the 8. Or even 6 of the best 8.
When you have 8 teams in a playoff, what good is the playoff when 4 of the teams aren't going to be competitive in the first place? That is fucking stupid.
And I'll add: At what point do you see an FSU or Clemson or Vandy or South Carloina moving to the Big East or Atlantic 10 so they have an easy road?
-
8 best play it off, regardless of conference. Develop a system that ranks using criteria similar to the BCS. Combination of polls, strength of schedule, strength of conference etc. If the Boise's and Air Force's of the world want a shot at the ring, then 3 out of 4 OOC games should be Nebraska, Tennessee and Clemson. (Just examples) Prove to the voters and establish by the system's criteria that you're really better than getting up for one game against Michigan State every year. And if that's good enough according to the ranking system, then let the chips fall where they may.
-
It makes sense.
What doesn't make sense to the rest of us is having a playoff where the 8 best god damn teams aren't invited. Or 7 of the 8. Or even 6 of the best 8.
If you're not the best in your division, or your conference, you're not the best in the country. Or at least, you didn't earn your claim. I thought every game mattered? That's what makes college football unique? Hell, games are much more important in the NFL. Not naming names to misdirect the conversation, but there are certainly teams that did not make the NFL playoffs that are certainly capable of knocking off teams that did make it to them. Guess what? They didn't win their conference, so it doesn't matter. Any other system is subjective as hell. Any "eye test", is flawed, IMO.
When you have 8 teams in a playoff, what good is the playoff when 4 of the teams aren't going to be competitive in the first place? That is fucking stupid.
Again, subjectivity. Let them prove it. The Big East Co-Champion just beat the shit out of our bulletproof conference's #2 team. You can say all day that Florida didn't "care enough". I call that bullshit, and more importantly, even if true, THEY SHOULD HAVE CARED. Did Notre Dame not care last night, or did they just get their asses handed to them? Because what happened on the field is all there is to judge by objectively, without inserting some ESPN crafted narrative bias into it.
And I'll add: At what point do you see an FSU or Clemson or Vandy or South Carloina moving to the Big East or Atlantic 10 so they have an easy road?
If that happens? Even better! Your perceived problem that certain conferences don't stand a chance will work itself out. The free market will dictate that. I suspect, especially in the SEC, tradition will trump any cataclysmic conference shifts.
-
8 best play it off, regardless of conference. Develop a system that ranks using criteria similar to the BCS. Combination of polls, strength of schedule, strength of conference etc. If the Boise's and Air Force's of the world want a shot at the ring, then 3 out of 4 OOC games should be Nebraska, Tennessee and Clemson. (Just examples) Prove to the voters and establish by the system's criteria that you're really better than getting up for one game against Michigan State every year. And if that's good enough according to the ranking system, then let the chips fall where they may.
:kimclap:
-
If you're not the best in your division, or your conference, you're not the best in the country. Or at least, you didn't earn your claim. I thought every game mattered? That's what makes college football unique? Hell, games are much more important in the NFL. Not naming names to misdirect the conversation, but there are certainly teams that did not make the NFL playoffs that are certainly capable of knocking off teams that did make it to them. Guess what? They didn't win their conference, so it doesn't matter. Any other system is subjective as hell. Any "eye test", is flawed, IMO.
Again, subjectivity. Let them prove it. The Big East Co-Champion just beat the shit out of our bulletproof conference's #2 team. You can say all day that Florida didn't "care enough". I call that bullshit, and more importantly, even if true, THEY SHOULD HAVE CARED. Did Notre Dame not care last night, or did they just get their asses handed to them? Because what happened on the field is all there is to judge by objectively, without inserting some ESPN crafted narrative bias into it.
If that happens? Even better! Your perceived problem that certain conferences don't stand a chance will work itself out. The free market will dictate that. I suspect, especially in the SEC, tradition will trump any cataclysmic conference shifts.
You are the only one assuming that during a 10-12 game season, the best team always wins.
8 best play it off, regardless of conference. Develop a system that ranks using criteria similar to the BCS. Combination of polls, strength of schedule, strength of conference etc. If the Boise's and Air Force's of the world want a shot at the ring, then 3 out of 4 OOC games should be Nebraska, Tennessee and Clemson. (Just examples) Prove to the voters and establish by the system's criteria that you're really better than getting up for one game against Michigan State every year. And if that's good enough according to the ranking system, then let the chips fall where they may.
This is the best idea.
-
You and bottomfeeder should get together and tell each other your jokes...
privately...
My ex-girlfriend provided that for the short time we dated.
-
You are the only one assuming that during a 10-12 game season, the best team always wins.
This is the best idea.
Um, yeah, I said the exact same thing.
-
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/33064042.jpg)
-
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/33064042.jpg)
Simp, I owe you an apology.
We got off on the wrong foot. I thought you were a bad poster...and, let's be honest, you still have your moments.
BUT...
This fucking tard is stealing your thunder. Congrats, bottomfeeder, you are the worst poster on the X.
Celebrate accordingly. May I suggest some auto-erotic asphyxiation? Ask Carradine and Hutchence for pro-tips.
-
Care to back up your claim, west florida?
-
Love is all in this place.
-
Um, yeah, I said the exact same thing.
No. I said it better. And since I did, your post is automatically disqualified. It's a new rule, I've made up just now.
-
Simp, I owe you an apology.
We got off on the wrong foot. I thought you were a bad poster...and, let's be honest, you still have your moments.
BUT...
This fucking tard is stealing your thunder. Congrats, bottomfeeder, you are the worst poster on the X.
Celebrate accordingly. May I suggest some auto-erotic asphyxiation? Ask Carradine and Hutchence for pro-tips.
Ba-ba-ba-bazzzzinnga....
-
Celebrate accordingly. May I suggest some auto-erotic asphyxiation? Ask Carradine and Hutchence for pro-tips.
Now I know you're lying. You never suggested auto-erotic asphyxiation to me.
-
Simp, I owe you an apology.
We got off on the wrong foot. I thought you were a bad poster...and, let's be honest, you still have your moments.
BUT...
This fucking tard is stealing your thunder. Congrats, bottomfeeder, you are the worst poster on the X.
Celebrate accordingly. May I suggest some auto-erotic asphyxiation? Ask Carradine and Hutchence for pro-tips.
The fact that simp is even mentioned with bottomfeeder wounds even me.
Wes you need to apologize to simp, for your apology.
-
You are the only one assuming that during a 10-12 game season, the best team always wins.
So the alternative is to pick and choose who we "think" or "feel" are the better teams based on subjective biased opinion?
What's the fuckin' point of a playoff in the first place then? This is BCS, or worse, pre-BCS mentality.
If a team doesn't empirically prove to be the best team on the field in a head-to-head matchup, or by losing the least amount of games to common opponents (i.e. their division peers), then they fucked up and missed their shot. There's always next year.
Instead, we have this system that gives certain teams (first and foremost Bama) the benefit of the doubt, because, well, Saban. Wash rinse repeat. Same ordained programs every year. Boring.
-
No. I said it better. And since I did, your post is automatically disqualified. It's a new rule, I've made up just now.
and he's backing it up with this gun, that he just got from the NRA.
-
and he's backing it up with this gun, that he just got from the NRA.
Do you have a flag?
-
Do you have a flag?
We don't need a flag, this is our country, you bastard!
-
We don't need a flag, this is our country, you bastard!
No flag, no country. You can't have one.
-
So the alternative is to pick and choose who we "think" or "feel" are the better teams based on subjective biased opinion?
What's the fuckin' point of a playoff in the first place then? This is BCS, or worse, pre-BCS mentality.
If a team doesn't empirically prove to be the best team on the field in a head-to-head matchup, or by losing the least amount of games to common opponents (i.e. their division peers), then they fucked up and missed their shot. There's always next year.
Instead, we have this system that gives certain teams (first and foremost Bama) the benefit of the doubt, because, well, Saban. Wash rinse repeat. Same ordained programs every year. Boring.
You are not going to have the pre-ordained same 8 teams every year.
I like the subjective approach with 8 teams. Not a conference champ for 8 teams. That's just me. You have your opinion, and although it is stupid, I respect it.
-
I agree with Chizad in theory, however the Conferences would need to be realigned to make sense in terms of difficulty. That ain't never gonna happen though. You have a better chance at 8 with the subjective poll.
-
I agree with Chizad in theory, however the Conferences would need to be realigned to make sense in terms of difficulty. That ain't never gonna happen though. You have a better chance at 8 with the subjective poll.
Shit doesn't happen in theory...so I am right...
-
I agree with Chizad in theory, however the Conferences would need to be realigned to make sense in terms of difficulty. That ain't never gonna happen though. You have a better chance at 8 with the subjective poll.
Again, everyone keeps getting hung up on this notion that the SEC would be impossible to beat.
First of all, we're not going to be this dominant forever. These things go in cycles. People have really short memories. Remember 2004? The SEC wasn't considered strong enough compared to the Big 12 & Pac 10 to get a shot.
Secondly, if it's the best team in the SEC, crowned by the fair, equitable system of an SEC championship, then what's the point in more SEC vs. SEC games? You either redundancy, or raise more questions than answers, i.e. LSU last year. LSU & Bama had the same records last year, and now they're 1-1 vs. eachother. LSU proving it when it mattered, then beating the best team they didn't already play would have been infinitely more satisfying to me than making the do-over count for realzies, while the regular season basically doesn't mean shit.
-
Shit doesn't happen in theory...so I am right...
You are blind to the irony of the fact that you are arguing for "theory". You don't want it played on the field. You want to "theorize" about who you "think" is better.
-
Notre Dame should be behind UGA and aTm also. Those teams didn't look like complete clusterfuck when playing Alabama...
This ^^
Nd gets buttfucked by Bama. Aggy and uga did not.
-
You are blind to the irony of the fact that you are arguing for "theory". You don't want it played on the field. You want to "theorize" about who you "think" is better.
I am just fucking with you dude. Don't go all "saints" on me.
But for real...I just think the system should be that the best 8 teams should play regardless of conference affiliation. No more. no less. I just don't think that the conference champ thing works because all conferences are not equal. In size. Power. Money. Nothing.
-
I am just fucking with you dude. Don't go all "saints" on me.
Saints?
They cheat.
-
Again, everyone keeps getting hung up on this notion that the SEC would be impossible to beat.
First of all, we're not going to be this dominant forever. These things go in cycles. People have really short memories. Remember 2004? The SEC wasn't considered strong enough compared to the Big 12 & Pac 10 to get a shot.
Secondly, if it's the best team in the SEC, crowned by the fair, equitable system of an SEC championship, then what's the point in more SEC vs. SEC games? You either redundancy, or raise more questions than answers, i.e. LSU last year. LSU & Bama had the same records last year, and now they're 1-1 vs. eachother. LSU proving it when it mattered, then beating the best team they didn't already play would have been infinitely more satisfying to me than making the do-over count for realzies, while the regular season basically doesn't mean shit.
Easy boy, I agree with you. What I said had no bearing on the SEC. My belief though is that some conferences are much easier to win in (based on history). That being said does a 3 loss WAC team that won their conference deserve to be in a playoff more than a one loss PAC12 or BIG12 or even a BIG 10 or ACC team? So yeah subjective may not be fair, but neither is that.
So IMO the only way to get true winner would be to create divisons with no affiliations and that will never happen.
-
Easy boy, I agree with you. What I said had no bearing on the SEC. My belief though is that some conferences are much easier to win in (based on history). That being said does a 3 loss WAC team that won their conference deserve to be in a playoff more than a one loss PAC12 or BIG12 or even a BIG 10 or ACC team? So yeah subjective may not be fair, but neither is that.
In my opinion? Yes. It is. At the very least, it's infinitely more fair than subjectively dumping who the media "thinks" should go is.
We may not think a 3 Loss WAC team has a chance against a 3 loss PAC12 team. But we would never know unless they play. Maybe, just maybe, the WAC is insanely strong one year and they beat eachother up all year. You'd never know, because we don't "feel" like a team from the WAC could possibly stand up to a team from the Big 10, so it is written, and so it shall be done. I say bullshit. Put them on the field and let's see.
I think you'll find upsets and "the impossible" happening more often in the system I'm proposing.
-
In my opinion? Yes. It is. At the very least, it's infinitely more fair than subjectively dumping who the media "thinks" should go is.
We may not think a 3 Loss WAC team has a chance against a 3 loss PAC12 team. But we would never know unless they play. Maybe, just maybe, the WAC is insanely strong one year and they beat eachother up all year. You'd never know, because we don't "feel" like a team from the WAC could possibly stand up to a team from the Big 10, so it is written, and so it shall be done. I say bullshit. Put them on the field and let's see.
I think you'll find upsets and "the impossible" happening more often in the system I'm proposing.
But, if you create a system that only uses the opinion polls as a percentage of the criteria used to rank the teams, you don't get the bias you had when we went strictly by the AP or Coaches Poll or UPI as we have in years past. That's what the BCS ranking system does right now. The one and only thing I hate about the BCS system is that the end result is 2 teams that get to play over about 125 others...when there is absolutely no way you can prove that #1 is clearly better and more deserving than #4. But when you get down to the end of the season, I can live with the 8 teams as they're ranked.
As for conference champions, if New Mexico State wins their conference with 3 losses and their OOC schedule includes Savannah State, UAB and Richmond, then no way they deserve to even be remotely considered to be in a playoff.