81 replies to this topic

[Mistletoad]

It's sad that we're even having this discussion about the BCS's involvement in the NCG in the first place.

a) Reason BCS want 4 teams is, it doesn't look like a real play-off, which it's not.
b) 8 teams would be a real playoff... and the best college team would be included.
c) If it looks like a real playoff... what is the need(worth)for/of a BCS Cartel.
d) Teams should be decided by the AP rankings top 8 teams... no matter conference.
e) Or total average points via AP/Coaches polls; no more BCS formuliar/computers.
f) If Fresno St. beats OU and Utah in ooc games... and finishes #8 AP; they're in.
g) Conference championships should have no priority over national rankings.


Would like idealistically to see the playoff structure/formula settled in a purely honest and ethically fair(free from bias) manner to all... prior to discussing where and how played. To hell which conference a team is from. The AP follows these teams closer than any national organization and prior to BCS, solely named the National Champion and capable of getting the right 8 teams into a national playoff without the influence of any Good Ole Boys in smokey rooms.

Cheers !

[BUGrad95]

From what I'm seeing, there are a couple of options. One of them is top 4 ranked conference champions will play in their designated bowl. (B1G/PAC at the Rose Bowl, SEC Sugar, Big 12 Fiesta, which I'd rather it be the Cotton. ACC at the Orange). The winners would meet at a site that is has been selected by bid like the Superbowl. Or, top 3 conference champions plus Notre Dame/BYU provided they are ranked high enough. Or, top 4 teams regardless of conference affiliation. The bowls that don't have a top 4 from their designated conference become regular bowl games, no BCS affiliation. For example, if the ACC doesn't have a top 4 team, the Orange Bowl is simply another bowl. The BCS is only concerned with the 3 games. The money for those 4 teams will be crazy. Like $600M. To be divided among the conferences represented. The remaining money, approx $300M would be divided to remaining FBS conferences. It's conceivable that would add an additional $4M-$6M per team, or more for conferences that are represented.

This is good for power conferences (B1G, SEC, Big 12, PAC). This could also be devastating to the Big East and ACC. There are no more AQ conferences.

It will be interesting to see what the final plan is, but it looks like ND has wiggle room to stay indy for the next several years. The question is will the ACC football schools jump to conferences most likely to have top 4 teams, or will they roll the dice on getting one of their own in there. They could potentially double their money, or better just by being in a conference that is represented. The ACC doesn't have a good track record with teams finishing in the top 4.

[full house frog]

Any 4 team playoff has to be the top 4 conference champs, especially, if they are in the top 8-10 in the polls. That way the regular season has meaning and the champs will have had to win in various different locales. It would make teams have to win their conference to have a chance at a NC. ND/BYU would need some type of plan to play into the playoff.

There has to be some sort of SOS to be able to determine the top 4 conference champs. Conference SOS and record should be important in seeding teams for the playoff. Encouraging teams to play better teams OOC would make the playoff and all college football more attractive.

[Endless Purple]

The reason I am strongly in the conference champ is that there will always be biases (towards SEC right now) which can easily bump a team one spot.  Last year I believe the Big 12 had the better OOC record and tougher overall SOS but the SEC was considered to be head and shoulders above them in perception.  Reality is that we do not know.  If the Big 12 was perceived to be the stronger conference, most likely OSU would have played LSU.

The other issue is that after this is taken into account and the SEC gets additional teams, even in years they do not deserve it, they will also get more money.  Money will most likely heavily favor the teams in the playoffs (as would be expected) thus it adds even more to the perceived better conference when they could not have done it without all the other teams.  Thus extending the power imbalance.  With conference champions it at least spreads more money among 4 conferences instead of maybe 2 (or 1 if the SEC got 3 teams in).

[Mistletoad]

Thought the whole purpose of a playoff format scheme(even a wimpy 4 team one)was to insure the best and 2nd best teams were included into the eventual NCG.

What ya'll are suggesting here would be battling over who in the hell is the top conferences 1st, which is ridiculous.... then an 8-3(rated #9 or #15)team has a good nite in a CCG against a #6 10-1 team and wins. This is crap! This scenario could happen in 2 to 3 of the so called top conferences. The existing BCS formula is even better than what is being suggested by many of you..?.. to get to the 2 best teams in a NCG.

Just bet if we were in the MWC or BE... we would not be hearing any of this doo doo about 4 best conference and etc. This sounds very hipocrytical in nature and an absence of fairness and even more backroom tactics than is going on now inside the BCS cartel.  AP top 8 teams and no League champion preferences, will guarantee the best 2 teams make it to the NCG.

Cheers!

[BoydAveFrogFan]

Mistletoad, on 28 April 2012 - 02:04 PM, said:

Thought the whole purpose of a playoff format scheme(even a wimpy 4 team one)was to insure the best and 2nd best teams were included into the eventual NCG.

What ya'll are suggesting here would be battling over who in the hell is the top conferences 1st, which is ridiculous.... then an 8-3(rated #9 or #15)team has a good nite in a CCG against a #6 10-1 team and wins. This is crap! This scenario could happen in 2 to 3 of the so called top conferences. The existing BCS formula is even better than what is being suggested by many of you..?.. to get to the 2 best teams in a NCG.

Just bet if we were in the MWC or BE... we would not be hearing any of this doo doo about 4 best conference and etc. This sounds very hipocrytical in nature and an absence of fairness and even more backroom tactics than is going on now inside the BCS cartel.  AP top 8 teams and no League champion preferences, will guarantee the best 2 teams make it to the NCG.

Cheers!

The questions that need be be answers is
1) do we want a playoff
Or
2) do we want #1 to play #2
To decide who the national champ will be. Being a national champ does not always mean the best team won.

What other sport doesn't let their conference compete for the big trophy.  I don't know on sport where a conference champ competed against their #2 for the championship.

[Mistletoad]

BoydAveFrogFan, on 28 April 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

The questions that need be be answers is
1) do we want a playoff
Or
2) do we want #1 to play #2
To decide who the national champ will be. Being a national champ does not always mean the best team won.

What other sport doesn't let their conference compete for the big trophy.  I don't know on sport where a conference champ competed against their #2 for the championship.

It's perfectly fine with me if the #1 and #2 rated teams from same league end up playing one another in the NCG... just as long as it starts out fair and each have to go through the other top 8 teams to get there... which would have included Okie St./Oregon/Stanford/Arkansas/Boisie St. and So. Carolina.

Now it may have very well been Bama and LSU.... However, by the end of 2010 season, most Sports writers felt the hotest team, Wisconsin, at #5, was the best 2 or 3 teams in the country.  

a)Now you wouldn't have wanted them out of a playoff as potentially could win it all.
b)Nor would you want their league status to bump out a #3 from a so called #5 or #6 league.
c)So the top AP 8 team format reducecs(no eliminates)the good ole boy nonsense for the good of all... instead of the good for a few.

Cheers !

[BUGrad95]

Endless Purple, on 28 April 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

The reason I am strongly in the conference champ is that there will always be biases (towards SEC right now) which can easily bump a team one spot.  Last year I believe the Big 12 had the better OOC record and tougher overall SOS but the SEC was considered to be head and shoulders above them in perception.  Reality is that we do not know.  If the Big 12 was perceived to be the stronger conference, most likely OSU would have played LSU.

The other issue is that after this is taken into account and the SEC gets additional teams, even in years they do not deserve it, they will also get more money.  Money will most likely heavily favor the teams in the playoffs (as would be expected) thus it adds even more to the perceived better conference when they could not have done it without all the other teams.  Thus extending the power imbalance.  With conference champions it at least spreads more money among 4 conferences instead of maybe 2 (or 1 if the SEC got 3 teams in).

This is a concern, and obviously the model Slive wants. If the SEC gets 2 teams in, it's a huge financial gain. Larry Scott favors the conference champs, for obvious reasons. It will be interesting to see how it ends. The good news is that regardless which model is chosen, the Big 12 is in a very strong position. It's not unreasonable that the Big 12 could get two in. It's very likely that there will be at least one representative each year.  My biggest concern is replacing the Fiesta Bowl with the Cotton Bowl. Our BCS bowl should be in our footprint, not the PAC's.

[Endless Purple]

BUGrad95, on 28 April 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

The good news is that regardless which model is chosen, the Big 12 is in a very strong position. It's not unreasonable that the Big 12 could get two in. It's very likely that there will be at least one representative each year.  My biggest concern is replacing the Fiesta Bowl with the Cotton Bowl. Our BCS bowl should be in our footprint, not the PAC's.

agree 100%

[Endless Purple]

Mistletoad, on 28 April 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

It's perfectly fine with me if the #1 and #2 rated teams from same league end up playing one another in the NCG... just as long as it starts out fair and each have to go through the other top 8 teams to get there... which would have included Okie St./Oregon/Stanford/Arkansas/Boisie St. and So. Carolina.

Now it may have very well been Bama and LSU.... However, by the end of 2010 season, most Sports writers felt the hotest team, Wisconsin, at #5, was the best 2 or 3 teams in the country.  

a)Now you wouldn't have wanted them out of a playoff as potentially could win it all.
b)Nor would you want their league status to bump out a #3 from a so called #5 or #6 league.
c)So the top AP 8 team format reducecs(no eliminates)the good ole boy nonsense for the good of all... instead of the good for a few.

Cheers !

except it is a 4 team playoff and not 8 teams.  I think more would be open to non champions with 8 teams.

So Boise was more deserving than the team that beat them late in the season and won the MWC?

[BUGrad95]

Endless Purple, on 28 April 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

except it is a 4 team playoff and not 8 teams.  I think more would be open to non champions with 8 teams.

So Boise was more deserving than the team that beat them late in the season and won the MWC?

I think this is the start of a very long process of expanding playoffs. They will see the money generated here, and when the BCS contract is up, it will expand to 6 or 8. But logistics will be increasingly difficult for fanbases. Traveling across the country will get expensive.

[toadallytexan]

I guess, since this post was NOT about how best to pick the top eight teams; but rather, was how to select four --  and ONLY four -- teams, then I must emphasize that no team who did not win its conference championship has any business being considered. Since this scenario is not given to us as a true playoff, but only as a plus-one, or a FIRST STEP TOWARDS a playoff, then we must let the conference games constitute the de facto first stage of a playoff.

Maybe this is elitist, maybe not...In 2010, TCU was in the top four going into the BCS bowl games, this despite coming from the lower regarded MWC conference. The opportunity to go on and play Auburn for the NC, following the 2010 season would not have been precluded by our confernce affilliation had there been a plus-one as they are now considering.

I'm not sure how ND gets access to the NC game, however, unless you also made an exception to winning your conference so that any independent who was ranked in the top four could be considered for the plus-one scheme.

[BUGrad95]

You are right. How will the 4 teams be selected?  Will it be BCS rankings, or conference champs?  Also, what goes into the rankings?  IMO, the coaches poll needs to be removed from the equation. Too much potential for politicking and voting for schools they want as opposed to who is actually better. Still a lot of questions to be answered. Supposedly, we will know in July.

[Mistletoad]

Endless Purple, on 28 April 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

except it is a 4 team playoff and not 8 teams.  I think more would be open to non champions with 8 teams.

So Boise was more deserving than the team that beat them late in the season and won the MWC? We lost 2 games... we were not a best 8 team; that win put us back into the top 25.

Do understand it's 4 and not 8 teams. The point is ... that you'll get the 2 best teams in the playoffs with an  AP top 8. But with this ridiculous 4 team thing and tying in conference champ thing isn't fair and isn't good for the greater good of the sport. It's about Gordon Gee types and his B10 getting a gauaranteed shot at a Nationall Championship... as last year  the B10 wouldn't have gotten 1 team even in an AP 8 team playoff in 2011.  The Best 8 teams period, and who cares if it's 3 SEC/2 B12/2 PAC12 and no B10... but a Fresno or a Boise.  The AP top 8 teams absolutely guarantees the 2 best teams in the mix... even with some predjudice.

Can you imagine how conflicted this whole 4 'best conference' champ thing would have been in 2011 if the Big10 was considered one, and then sent  #10 Wisconsin(10-2) to a 4 team playoff and leaving out a #4/5/6/7/8/9 rated team... Total Bull Shee-it and only self severing to those wealthier programs that are trying to pig out even more. AGAIN this is worse than the existing BCS scheme. And AGAIN most of you professing such ridiculous formats, would be totally opposed to such nonsense a year ago.  

Time must have erased all the whining and squeeling going on around here over the past few years about the total unfairness in college football... but now the ball is in our court, and now we want to be like the new Gordon Gee asswholes on the block.

Cheers !

[HG73]

Anybody want to see another Alabama vs. LSU championship game?  After they played in the regular season?  That's what they're trying to avoid.  This four team playoff is really a 10 team playoff.  Conference champions ONLY means the playoffs really start with the conference championship games (B1G, PAC, SEC and ACC plus winners of the Big12 and BigEast-10 teams total).  The AP or some select committee picks the top four out of this group of 6 champions.

Using the top 8 AP teams is just more of the same old crap.  Nobody will play meaningful OOC games because a loss would knock you out of the top 8.  Then there will be 3 or 4 SEC teams in the AP top 8.  Just like it is now.  Those conference championship games will become even more meaningful if it means a trip to the final four.  Still not perfect, but much better than it is now.  And more importantly, much more money.

[Opintel]

If there is an opportunity to utilize the Good 'ol Boy network, the selectors will do it.

Can we have a Beauty Contest? If they can, they will.  That is what needs to be avoided.  Keep the regular season meaningful...that's said a lot!  First win your conference, then be considered for the tournament.

The teams that are playing their best - that's usually at the end of the season.  Say, at about the time of the Conference Championship game...those winners need to be the participants.  Don't over-think this.  It ain't Rocket Surgery.

[Endless Purple]

Mistletoad, on 29 April 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

Do understand it's 4 and not 8 teams. The point is ... that you'll get the 2 best teams in the playoffs with an  AP top 8. But with this ridiculous 4 team thing and tying in conference champ thing isn't fair and isn't good for the greater good of the sport. It's about Gordon Gee types and his B10 getting a gauaranteed shot at a Nationall Championship... as last year  the B10 wouldn't have gotten 1 team even in an AP 8 team playoff in 2011.  The Best 8 teams period, and who cares if it's 3 SEC/2 B12/2 PAC12 and no B10... but a Fresno or a Boise.  The AP top 8 teams absolutely guarantees the 2 best teams in the mix... even with some predjudice.

Can you imagine how conflicted this whole 4 'best conference' champ thing would have been in 2011 if the Big10 was considered one, and then sent  #10 Wisconsin(10-2) to a 4 team playoff and leaving out a #4/5/6/7/8/9 rated team... Total Bull Shee-it and only self severing to those wealthier programs that are trying to pig out even more. AGAIN this is worse than the existing BCS scheme. And AGAIN most of you professing such ridiculous formats, would be totally opposed to such nonsense a year ago.  

Time must have erased all the whining and squeeling going on around here over the past few years about the total unfairness in college football... but now the ball is in our court, and now we want to be like the new Gordon Gee asswholes on the block.

Cheers !

I see what you are saying and only agree when you are talking about a #15 champion or something getting in.  I think the top 4 in poll is more unfair and allows for more bias than 4 conference champs.  If it was 8 I would agree that not all champs are required.  To avoid low teams is why I mentioned in an earlier post to have a minimum ranking requirement (like top 6/8) or it goes to an at large thus you will not have a #12 team going. Any spot not filled after that could be for at large. (It just seemed to convoluted for a one line in the choices)

Plus HG73 put it well in that your conference games are the playoffs too.  How can you be the #1 team in the country if you can't be the #1 team in your own conference?  If you are #4 but not the conference champion that means you most likely already lost to your conference champion.  Why should they be given two chances based on perception when another team gets 0 chances based on perception even though they won on the field - that would be unfair to me.  The perception thing can get you fairly close but it is not accurate enough when your talking one or two spots.

[Mistletoad]

Endless Purple, on 29 April 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

I see what you are saying and only agree when you are talking about a #15 champion or something getting in. I think the top 4 in poll is more unfair and allows for more bias than 4 conference champs.

So a # 7 from #4 conf can kick out a #3 from a conference rated #5.
..?...  Totally disagree. There will always be some bias, but the top AP 4 (or 8) would be much less bias than the good ole boys maneuvering behind closed doors of a system that will guarantee their conf champ, whether #5 or #7, in the 4 spots most every year and knocking out a #2 Florida St. and/or a #4 Boise St.  because their conferences were rated at  #s 5 and 6.  Even if the conferences were rated fairly, it still would not be fair to the #2 and 4 in the AP and Coaches... plus  two could be out in the 'ranked league champs' scenario.  The fact that 2 teams, from lower rated conferences(though still major conferences)made it to the top 4 proves them worthy , even in face of bias'.

If it was 8 I would agree that not all champs are required. To avoid low teams is why I mentioned in an earlier post to have a minimum ranking requirement (like top 6/8) or it goes to an at large thus you will not have a #12 team going. Any spot not filled after that could be for at large. (It just seemed to convoluted for a one line in the choices) Plus HG73 put it well in that your conference games are the playoffs too. How can you be the #1 team in the country if you can't be the #1 team in your own conference? If you are #4 but not the conference champion that means you most likely already lost to your conference champion. Why should they be given two chances based on perception when another team gets 0 chances based on perception even though they won on the field - that would be unfair to me. The perception thing can get you fairly close but it is not accurate enough when your talking one or two spots.

The AP top 8 will definately guarantee the top 2 or even the very top 4 getting in with or without bias of a league champ thing which can create a whole new can of worms to createadditional bias... therefor 2 sets of bias over a simple 1 through 8 AP invite. The only  bias effect of an AP 8 formula would be the 'seating' by the bias in ranking and that would occur in any formula... yet the only formula that promises the best 4 to 6 teams ... therefore again, the top 1 and 2 teams. But if it has to be only 4 teams... then AP top 4 in fairness to all teams and conferences... but don't believe, for a moment, the Godon Gee types and many on this forum want anything to do with that sort of fair play scenario recipe or it would not have been brought up in the 1st place... if there wasn't an angle of eliti$m, with some sort of self advantage involved.

Cheers !

[Jake102]

Anything but the top 4 teams in the rankings doesn't make sense. If we didn't, then Alabama wouldn't have gotten in last year, and the wrong team would have won the championship. Then the BCS we have now would be more effective

[Mistletoad]

Jake102, on 29 April 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

Anything but the top 4 teams in the rankings doesn't make sense. If we didn't, then Alabama wouldn't have gotten in last year, and the wrong team would have won the championship. Then the BCS we have now would be more effective

  

Yes... a ranking system also that can not possibly be manipulated by the the BCS(ie computer polls/etc). There will always be some bias in people polls(2/3s of BCS too), but it would most likely always guarnatee the 2 top teams in the country get to the NCG. Still like 8 teams... in light, that #5 Wisconsin(BCS) was widely considered, by most, the hottest team in college football at the end of 2010 season, with 1 loss...

Yet... even the BCS top 4 is better than the league Champs of  "top 4 conferences"...
far and away, much better(Just) !  

Cheers !