Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

wadegarrett

*** Official 2015 College Football Thread ***

Recommended Posts

Some playoff proposals discarded

Updated: April 26, 2012

By Mark Schlabach | ESPN.com

HOLLYWOOD, Fla. -- Football Bowl Subdivision conference commissioners, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick and other college football officials Thursday agreed to eliminate eight-team and 16-team playoff proposals to determine the sport's future national champions, but settled on very little else during weeklong meetings at a beachside resort here.

After meetings Thursday, BCS spokesman Bill Hancock said the sport's 11 FBS conference commissioners would take "two to seven" playoff proposals -- each involving four teams -- back to their respective university presidents, athletic directors and coaches to discuss for the next five to seven weeks.

BCS officials and conference commissioners are scheduled to meet in Chicago again in June.

The proposed changes wouldn't go into effect until the 2014 season. The current BCS system, in which the top two teams in the final BCS standings play in a national championship game at the site of one of the current BCS bowls (Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar), will remain in place the next two seasons.

A statement released Thursday read:

"As part of our deliberations, we have carefully considered a number of concepts concerning the postseason structure for the BCS. From the start, we set out to protect college football's unique regular season which we see as the best regular season in sports. We are also mindful of the bowl tradition and seek to create a structure that continues to reward student-athletes with meaningful bowl appearances.

"Having carefully reviewed calendars and schedules, we believe that either an eight-team or a 16-team playoff would diminish the regular season and harm the bowls. College football's regular season is too important to diminish and we do not believe it's in the best interest of student-athletes, fans, or alumni to harm the regular season. Accordingly, as we proceed to review our options for improving the post-season, we have taken off the table both an eight-team and 16-team playoff."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Phillip Sims might be transferring to UVa. I like it a lot.

McCarron is the better QB by a large margin. Sims would never see playing time unless the game is out of reach or a McCarron injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Phillip Sims might be transferring to UVa. I like it a lot.

Hope he does well....want to see him there over some small school. He's got a lot of talent, just ended up in a tough situation for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Phillip Sims might be transferring to UVa. I like it a lot.

Hope he does well....want to see him there over some small school. He's got a lot of talent, just ended up in a tough situation for him.
Yeah, will be a lot easier in the ACC if it happens. Also a rumor of Quinta Funderburk(WR at Arkansas) transferring to UVa too. Him and Sims were teammates in high school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.
I can think of a lot of other things too, but they are all built on top of this. If they don't stop using these polls as a legit source to start the season, it doesn't matter if you have a playoff or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.
I can think of a lot of other things too, but they are all built on top of this. If they don't stop using these polls as a legit source to start the season, it doesn't matter if you have a playoff or not.
I would say the big thing unrelated to this is the whole not paying the players thing, but that is a hijack.

I think these guys got their USC rankings backwards anyways. :boxing:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.
I can think of a lot of other things too, but they are all built on top of this. If they don't stop using these polls as a legit source to start the season, it doesn't matter if you have a playoff or not.
Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.
I can think of a lot of other things too, but they are all built on top of this. If they don't stop using these polls as a legit source to start the season, it doesn't matter if you have a playoff or not.
Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.
Do you know how much whining there would be if they did that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.
I can think of a lot of other things too, but they are all built on top of this. If they don't stop using these polls as a legit source to start the season, it doesn't matter if you have a playoff or not.
Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.
Do you know how much whining there would be if they did that?
As opposed to [insert fan base here] whining that his team isn't properly ranked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No official polls out yet? What's taking so long?! :devil:

College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Link

This is everything wrong with college football.

I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.
I can think of a lot of other things too, but they are all built on top of this. If they don't stop using these polls as a legit source to start the season, it doesn't matter if you have a playoff or not.
Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.
Do you know how much whining there would be if they did that?
As opposed to [insert fan base here] whining that his team isn't properly ranked?
100 fold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to read anything about the 4 team playoff that is being discussed but I truly hope they will have a format that is fair and not penalize a conference if they have multiple teams ranked in the top 4. Realistically there could be a year where 2 Conference teams finish in the Top 4. I hope the commissioners don't try to implement some sort of rules where a conference can only have one team participate in the Final Four. If such safeguards were made then are the conferences truly looking to match up the top 4 teams or make sure there conference gets a cut of the financial pie. The SEC will not put in such a recommendation because I can still see 2 SEC teams finishing in the Top 4 when this format is introduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to read anything about the 4 team playoff that is being discussed but I truly hope they will have a format that is fair and not penalize a conference if they have multiple teams ranked in the top 4. Realistically there could be a year where 2 Conference teams finish in the Top 4. I hope the commissioners don't try to implement some sort of rules where a conference can only have one team participate in the Final Four. If such safeguards were made then are the conferences truly looking to match up the top 4 teams or make sure there conference gets a cut of the financial pie. The SEC will not put in such a recommendation because I can still see 2 SEC teams finishing in the Top 4 when this format is introduced.

Nice column by Dan Wetzel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to read anything about the 4 team playoff that is being discussed but I truly hope they will have a format that is fair and not penalize a conference if they have multiple teams ranked in the top 4. Realistically there could be a year where 2 Conference teams finish in the Top 4. I hope the commissioners don't try to implement some sort of rules where a conference can only have one team participate in the Final Four. If such safeguards were made then are the conferences truly looking to match up the top 4 teams or make sure there conference gets a cut of the financial pie. The SEC will not put in such a recommendation because I can still see 2 SEC teams finishing in the Top 4 when this format is introduced.

Nice column by Dan Wetzel.
<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to read anything about the 4 team playoff that is being discussed but I truly hope they will have a format that is fair and not penalize a conference if they have multiple teams ranked in the top 4. Realistically there could be a year where 2 Conference teams finish in the Top 4. I hope the commissioners don't try to implement some sort of rules where a conference can only have one team participate in the Final Four. If such safeguards were made then are the conferences truly looking to match up the top 4 teams or make sure there conference gets a cut of the financial pie. The SEC will not put in such a recommendation because I can still see 2 SEC teams finishing in the Top 4 when this format is introduced.

Nice column by Dan Wetzel.
<_<
Good Read

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lmao: "Harm the bowls" :lmao:Eff 'em and eff you, Christo, for thinking otherwise.

:thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to read anything about the 4 team playoff that is being discussed but I truly hope they will have a format that is fair and not penalize a conference if they have multiple teams ranked in the top 4. Realistically there could be a year where 2 Conference teams finish in the Top 4. I hope the commissioners don't try to implement some sort of rules where a conference can only have one team participate in the Final Four. If such safeguards were made then are the conferences truly looking to match up the top 4 teams or make sure there conference gets a cut of the financial pie. The SEC will not put in such a recommendation because I can still see 2 SEC teams finishing in the Top 4 when this format is introduced.

Nice column by Dan Wetzel.
<_<
Good Read
VERY good read...and posted a long time ago in the BCS thread ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?
Because he's an SEC fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the "four best teams" deal is the polls determining those four best teams start with heavy biases. Look at the preseason poll posted earlier today. The SEC starts with #2, #3, #6, #8, and #9. The media will convince you how great the entire conference is and when they beat each other, it's the strong beating the strong. When one of them loses they will drop 3-4 spots and still be in the mix. When Nebraska, Ohio St, or Oklahoma St loses outside of the top 15, they have next to no chance to reach the top 4 at 11-1.

The NFL playoffs would have been a complete joke last year if Green Bay, San Francisco, New England and Baltimore were the only teams allowed to participate. The NCAA tournament would suck if it was Kentucky, UNC, Syracuse, and Michigan St only. What makes those tournaments great are if you win your division/conference you automatically get to play for the championship. It's decided ON THE FIELD/COURT.

This stupid four team playoff is still a beauty contest with a little bit of makeup added to it. It's still an ugly SOB underneath the makeup.

1. USC

2. LSU

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. Florida St.

8. South Carolina

9. Arkansas

10. Michigan

11. West Virginia

12. Michigan State

13. Kansas State

14. TCU

15. Stanford

16. Wisconsin

17. Nebraska

18. Clemson

19. Virginia Tech

20. Ohio State

21. Oklahoma State

22. Texas

23. Boise State

24. Notre Dame

25. Florida

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?
Because a playoff should have the best teams regardless of their conferences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Nebraska, Ohio St, or Oklahoma St loses outside of the top 15, they have next to no chance to reach the top 4 at 11-1.

ORLY?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?
Because he's an SEC fan
If the end of season poll looked like this (unlikely I know):1. LSU2. Alabama3. Georgia4. USCWhat would be the bigger farce, not winning your conference, or not taking the top four teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?
Because a playoff should have the best teams regardless of their conferences.
Who says they're the best teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?
Because he's an SEC fan
If the end of season poll looked like this (unlikely I know):1. LSU2. Alabama3. Georgia4. USCWhat would be the bigger farce, not winning your conference, or not taking the top four teams?
The biggest farce is suggesting that those teams would be ranked 1-4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
Why?
Because he's an SEC fan
If the end of season poll looked like this (unlikely I know):1. LSU2. Alabama3. Georgia4. USCWhat would be the bigger farce, not winning your conference, or not taking the top four teams?
The biggest farce is suggesting that those teams would be ranked 1-4.
I know, but I felt like making it SEC 1-4 would derail the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why that should be the discussion. People ##### and moan about the polls and the BCS. The easiest way to marginalize the polls is to require teams to win their conference to get into the playoffs. Conference affiliation is voluntary. You want a shot at the ring--WIN YOUR DAMNED CONFERENCE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why that should be the discussion. People ##### and moan about the polls and the BCS. The easiest way to marginalize the polls is to require teams to win their conference to get into the playoffs. Conference affiliation is voluntary. You want a shot at the ring--WIN YOUR DAMNED CONFERENCE!

What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why that should be the discussion. People ##### and moan about the polls and the BCS. The easiest way to marginalize the polls is to require teams to win their conference to get into the playoffs. Conference affiliation is voluntary. You want a shot at the ring--WIN YOUR DAMNED CONFERENCE!

What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.
They'd still play a part, but less so. That's what "marginalize" means. The polls are going to play a part in any playoff format. There's no way around it with the way CFB is structured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am excited by a new era in UCLA football. Jim Mora + a good recruiting class (finally!) + Brent Hundley at quarterback (supposed to be a poor man's Cam Newton- I'll take it!) + better defense (can't be worse).

It will be a while before we can play with the big boys in the Pac-12. But at least there's something to look forward to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am excited by a new era in UCLA football. Jim Mora

Agreed.

+ a good recruiting class (finally!)

Huh?

The 2012 class is ranked #12. That's a fantastic class, considering the on the field "product" of the last few years and considering the debacle that was the 2011 class (outside of Brett Hundley and Devin Lucien), but other than that 2011 class, this year's recruiting class is the worst UCLA class on the roster:

2008 #10 ranked class.

2009 #5 ranked class.

2010 #8 ranked class.

Brent Hundley at quarterback (supposed to be a poor man's Cam Newton- I'll take it!)

Link? I don't want you to be too disappointed, but I don't think anyone's saying that. He's got decent feet, but isn't super fast, has a decent arm, is working on his accuracy, but is supposed to have incredible leadership qualities. Cam Newton is a freak. I don't think Hundley is anything like Newton.

+ better defense (can't be worse).

It will be a while before we can play with the big boys in the Pac-12. But at least there's something to look forward to.

I agree about the defense, but the secondary and linebackers are depleted. Dietrich Riley is out for the year after having the same surgery on his neck that Peyton Manning had and Isaiah Bowens is out with a torn ACL. Those two positions were thin heading into the year. The DL should be fantastic based on recruit rankings, but that was the case last year, too, and it was horrible (true Frosh Ellis McCarthy is a freak, though).

I'll go out on a limb based on what I've seen in practice and say that, if relatively healthy, UCLA can play with the big boys in the Pac-12 starting this year. That doesn't mean they will win the conference, but I don't expect to see any blowouts at all with this staff. And, I'm not saying I expect them to beat Southern Cal and Stanford (they don't play Oregon this year until the conference championship game), but I do expect them to be competitive in every game this season. The schedule this year is not very difficult.

By the way, outside of Mora, the biggest hire on the staff appears to be Sal Alosi, the strength and conditioning coach. It's no wonder UCLA sucked the last several years with what they were doing in S&C training (and horrific schemes).

I still need to see it to believe it, but based largely off the talent level of the team, what I think is an excellent coaching staff and natural development/improvement, UCLA should be very good in 2013-2014 with the returning talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am excited by a new era in UCLA football. Jim Mora

Agreed.

+ a good recruiting class (finally!)

Huh?

The 2012 class is ranked #12. That's a fantastic class, considering the on the field "product" of the last few years and considering the debacle that was the 2011 class (outside of Brett Hundley and Devin Lucien), but other than that 2011 class, this year's recruiting class is the worst UCLA class on the roster:

2008 #10 ranked class.

2009 #5 ranked class.

2010 #8 ranked class.

Brent Hundley at quarterback (supposed to be a poor man's Cam Newton- I'll take it!)

Link? I don't want you to be too disappointed, but I don't think anyone's saying that. He's got decent feet, but isn't super fast, has a decent arm, is working on his accuracy, but is supposed to have incredible leadership qualities. Cam Newton is a freak. I don't think Hundley is anything like Newton.

+ better defense (can't be worse).

It will be a while before we can play with the big boys in the Pac-12. But at least there's something to look forward to.

I agree about the defense, but the secondary and linebackers are depleted. Dietrich Riley is out for the year after having the same surgery on his neck that Peyton Manning had and Isaiah Bowens is out with a torn ACL. Those two positions were thin heading into the year. The DL should be fantastic based on recruit rankings, but that was the case last year, too, and it was horrible (true Frosh Ellis McCarthy is a freak, though).

I'll go out on a limb based on what I've seen in practice and say that, if relatively healthy, UCLA can play with the big boys in the Pac-12 starting this year. That doesn't mean they will win the conference, but I don't expect to see any blowouts at all with this staff. And, I'm not saying I expect them to beat Southern Cal and Stanford (they don't play Oregon this year until the conference championship game), but I do expect them to be competitive in every game this season. The schedule this year is not very difficult.

By the way, outside of Mora, the biggest hire on the staff appears to be Sal Alosi, the strength and conditioning coach. It's no wonder UCLA sucked the last several years with what they were doing in S&C training (and horrific schemes).

I still need to see it to believe it, but based largely off the talent level of the team, what I think is an excellent coaching staff and natural development/improvement, UCLA should be very good in 2013-2014 with the returning talent.

You've paid much closer attention than I have. I've only skimmed a few articles here and there. Appreciate the input, and I hope you're right. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why that should be the discussion. People ##### and moan about the polls and the BCS. The easiest way to marginalize the polls is to require teams to win their conference to get into the playoffs. Conference affiliation is voluntary. You want a shot at the ring--WIN YOUR DAMNED CONFERENCE!

What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.
Why does the SEC get to start with 5 of the top 9 teams? We both know the polls are an important part of the BCS standings so that's a gigantic advantage three months before the first game is even played. I don't even see how it's debatable if you create a playoff with conference champions and a couple of at-large bids to accommodate seasons where LSU and Alabama (using 2011 as an example) clearly deserve to be in any playoff. Hell, last years four team playoff would have put Stanford in there instead of the champion of their conference who beat the piss out of them head to head. Polls are just stupid... human polls, BCS polls, or whatever it is.If the big boys don't want to let CUSA, MAC, Mtn West, or whoever else play then break away and form their own division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Nebraska, Ohio St, or Oklahoma St loses outside of the top 15, they have next to no chance to reach the top 4 at 11-1.

ORLY?
Did Oklahoma St start outside of the top 15 last year and reach the top four with a loss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why that should be the discussion. People ##### and moan about the polls and the BCS. The easiest way to marginalize the polls is to require teams to win their conference to get into the playoffs. Conference affiliation is voluntary. You want a shot at the ring--WIN YOUR DAMNED CONFERENCE!

What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.
Why does the SEC get to start with 5 of the top 9 teams? We both know the polls are an important part of the BCS standings so that's a gigantic advantage three months before the first game is even played.

I don't even see how it's debatable if you create a playoff with conference champions and a couple of at-large bids to accommodate seasons where LSU and Alabama (using 2011 as an example) clearly deserve to be in any playoff. Hell, last years four team playoff would have put Stanford in there instead of the champion of their conference who beat the piss out of them head to head. Polls are just stupid... human polls, BCS polls, or whatever it is.

If the big boys don't want to let CUSA, MAC, Mtn West, or whoever else play then break away and form their own division.

I'm all for that. Unfortunately that's not what the people in charge want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the "four best teams" deal is the polls determining those four best teams start with heavy biases. Look at the preseason poll posted earlier today. The SEC starts with #2, #3, #6, #8, and #9. The media will convince you how great the entire conference is and when they beat each other, it's the strong beating the strong. When one of them loses they will drop 3-4 spots and still be in the mix. When Nebraska, Ohio St, or Oklahoma St loses outside of the top 15, they have next to no chance to reach the top 4 at 11-1.

Agree w/ what you're saying but they haven't decided what formula to use for the 4 best teams so far. That Wetzel article posted above spells it out pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why that should be the discussion. People ##### and moan about the polls and the BCS. The easiest way to marginalize the polls is to require teams to win their conference to get into the playoffs. Conference affiliation is voluntary. You want a shot at the ring--WIN YOUR DAMNED CONFERENCE!

What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.
They'd still play a part, but less so. That's what "marginalize" means. The polls are going to play a part in any playoff format. There's no way around it with the way CFB is structured.
This is correct. That's why I've pissed and moaned about the polls for so long. I'd rather not have to marginalize the polls and just fix them. Lay out specific criteria for all to know and allow the computer to crunch the numbers and spit out the poll. This crap where the "experts" are ranking these teams on what they THINK the teams will do is absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

playoff system is the best thing to ever happen to cfb. also, no more than 1 team per conference in the playoff, you don't win your conference championship tough ####!

What an idiotic rule.
I'm fine with it. If those are the rules going in, than there won't be any room for complaining. That being said, I don't think Slive will go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.