Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Snaggletiger on November 28, 2016, 10:21:09 AM
-
Seeing some discussion in other threads about the need for expanded playoffs and/or the ranking system. Personally, I've advocated for an 8 team playoff from the start and I can see it eventually going to that. I also felt there was zero need for the selection committee and we would have been better served keeping the BCS ranking system in place to choose the current 4 teams, and ultimately the 8 teams.
My question though, is how much do we really need to try and alter the current state of college football when it comes to ranking the teams and deciding who is in and who goes to the Poulan Weedeater Krispy Kreme Bowl? College football is totally unique in its set up. No other sport from Junior High throughout all areas of professional sports handles their rankings and ultimate decision making on who plays on like college football. I grew up in a time when polls were the only thing that mattered. Where you landed in the AP or UPI or Coaches' polls was just the way it was. Everything was decided by the "Eye test" of the voters, which left the entire system open to discussion, argument and heated debate. Seemingly deserving programs getting the shaft and other programs claiming multiple championships based on whatever poll suited their fancy at the time.
There were no automatic bids (Other than the Rose Bowl) to certain bowls. It came down to the committee for each particular bowl game to decide who they wanted and extend offers to those teams. Certainly, things have changed with regard to bowls and our ranking system, but at the end of the day, our current playoff system is still decided by the eye test. The committee will meet tomorrow night behind closed doors, hash out where they think everyone should land and give us their findings. And the college football world, from fans to "experts" and analysts will debate the merits of those results.
Back to my question. While I firmly believe there's a better way, is it something we really want to mess with? Aren't those very discussions and debates part of what sets college football apart from all other sports at every level? At the end of the day, shouldn't the "Eye test" always factor in, at least to some degree?
-
Yes. I want to mess with it. It needs to be tossed on the garbage bin of time and become a memory.
What happens on the field is the only thing that should matter.
Take the WINNERS of the following conferences:
SEC
Pac12
BigTen
Big 12
ACC
The conference decides whether there is a championship game or not, either way it doesn't matter. Whoever and however the conference decides. That's five.
Then take three at-large teams from the CHAMPIONS of the
CUSA
Mountain West
MAC
Sunbelt
American
and/or one of the
Independents
Use the BCS rankings system (or the polls, whatever) to figure out which teams to include.
That's a total of eight teams. You don't win your conference? You're OUT. So long Michigan and Ohio State.
Eight teams. Six total games.
Peach, Fiesta, Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton rotate them out.
That's the way it should be.
The only other viable option to me is to cut the season down to eight or ten games and then start the playoff process by including four teams from each conference in the mix. The teams that don't make it play out the string against other losers for no reason.
-
4 Conferences: 64 Teams: 16 teams each: North, South (SEC Southern ACC), West (PAC 12, Big 12), Central (Big 10, Northern coast of ACC)
11 conference games
1 out of conference game against another team from one of the four big conferences
No conference championship game (conference champion based on conference record on the field)
Playoffs consist of 4 conference champion teams, 4 wild cards coming from remaining 4 conferences with no more than 2 slots taken by any one conference (so the ACC can't have 3 teams in and such).
It will NEVER happen even though it should.
-
4 Conferences: 64 Teams: 16 teams each: North, South (SEC Southern ACC), West (PAC 12, Big 12), Central (Big 10, Northern coast of ACC)
11 conference games
1 out of conference game against another team from one of the four big conferences
No conference championship game (conference champion based on conference record on the field)
Playoffs consist of 4 conference champion teams, 4 wild cards coming from remaining 4 conferences with no more than 2 slots taken by any one conference (so the ACC can't have 3 teams in and such).
It will NEVER happen even though it should.
No. Too much subjectivity.
My way is better.
-
Why not let the BCS formula choose the final 4 for a playoff?
-
Why not let the BCS formula choose the final 4 for a playoff?
Damn fine suggestion.
-
Why not let the BCS formula choose the final 4 for a playoff?
Computers don't have political and money motives. Can't be having that kind of objectivity!
-
Bamer git an automatic bid. Rest of em fight it out. Ro Ti!
-
No. Too much subjectivity.
My way is better.
How is on the field performance subjective?
-
How is on the field performance subjective?
My plan is 100% on field. Yours has this:
4 wild cards coming from remaining 4 conferences with no more than 2 slots taken by any one conference (so the ACC can't have 3 teams in and such).
Half the field is determined by some board or something picking the wildcard teams I assume.
-
How is on the field performance subjective?
Think he's saying the wild cards are subjective. Since they are chosen and not winners of conferences.
-
My plan is 100% on field. Yours has this:
4 wild cards coming from remaining 4 conferences with no more than 2 slots taken by any one conference (so the ACC can't have 3 teams in and such).
Half the field is determined by some board or something picking the wildcard teams I assume.
I should have clarified that, yes. Wild cards would be runners up based on record and compared to each other.
Say your Big Four finish 11-0, 10-1. 10-1, and 11-0. That's your top 4. If the runners up to the two 11-0 teams are both 10-1, they go. But say the runner up to one of the 10-1 teams is 8-3 or 7-4 and the other 10-1 runners up are 9-2 and 9-2. The two 9-2 teams would go over the 8 or 7 win teams based on overall record.
-
I should have clarified that, yes. Wild cards would be runners up based on record and compared to each other.
Say your Big Four finish 11-0, 10-1. 10-1, and 11-0. That's your top 4. If the runners up to the two 11-0 teams are both 10-1, they go. But say the runner up to one of the 10-1 teams is 8-3 or 7-4 and the other 10-1 runners up are 9-2 and 9-2. The two 9-2 teams would go over the 8 or 7 win teams based on overall record.
Strangth of SHADULE, Pawwwwwwl.. How he gonna adderess that? huh?