wadegarrett
FFA Legend™
Happy New Year! Going to be a great day.
Last edited by a moderator:
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7851441/source-bcs-exploring-neutral-site-4-team-playoff-formatLooks like a four team, neutral site playoff is getting closer to reality.
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."
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.'Hoos First said: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.'Hoos First said:Looks like Phillip Sims might be transferring to UVa. I like it a lot.
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.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.'Hoos First said:Looks like Phillip Sims might be transferring to UVa. I like it a lot.
College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
I can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
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 can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
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.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 can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.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 can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
Do you know how much whining there would be if they did that?Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.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 can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
As opposed to [insert fan base here] whining that his team isn't properly ranked?Do you know how much whining there would be if they did that?Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.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 can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
100 foldAs opposed to [insert fan base here] whining that his team isn't properly ranked?Do you know how much whining there would be if they did that?Agree...it does start with the preseason polls. Why they can't wait until October to release the first poll is beyond me.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 can think of about ten thousand other things but this list is a big one.This is everything wrong with college football.College Football Live's 2012 preseason top 25:1. USCNo official polls out yet? What's taking so long?!
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
Nice column by Dan Wetzel.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.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.
Good Read<_<Nice column by Dan Wetzel.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.
"Harm the bowls" Eff 'em and eff you, Christo, for thinking otherwise.
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 ####!
VERY good read...and posted a long time ago in the BCS threadGood Read<_<Nice column by Dan Wetzel.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.
What an idiotic rule.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 ####!
Why?What an idiotic rule.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 ####!
Because he's an SEC fanWhy?What an idiotic rule.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 ####!
Because a playoff should have the best teams regardless of their conferences.Why?What an idiotic rule.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 ####!
ORLY?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.
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?'Ramblin Wreck said:Because he's an SEC fan'Christo said:Why?'Slapdash said:What an idiotic rule.'SHIZNITTTT said: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 ####!
Who says they're the best teams?'Slapdash said:Because a playoff should have the best teams regardless of their conferences.'Christo said:Why?'Slapdash said:What an idiotic rule.'SHIZNITTTT said: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 ####!
The biggest farce is suggesting that those teams would be ranked 1-4.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?'Ramblin Wreck said:Because he's an SEC fan'Christo said:Why?'Slapdash said:What an idiotic rule.'SHIZNITTTT said: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 ####!
I know, but I felt like making it SEC 1-4 would derail the discussion.The biggest farce is suggesting that those teams would be ranked 1-4.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?'Ramblin Wreck said:Because he's an SEC fan'Christo said:Why?'Slapdash said:What an idiotic rule.'SHIZNITTTT said: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 are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.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!
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.What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.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!
Agreed.I am excited by a new era in UCLA football. Jim Mora
Huh?+ a good recruiting class (finally!)
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.Brent Hundley at quarterback (supposed to be a poor man's Cam Newton- I'll take it!)
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.+ 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.
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.Agreed.I am excited by a new era in UCLA football. Jim MoraHuh?+ a good recruiting class (finally!)
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.
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.Brent Hundley at quarterback (supposed to be a poor man's Cam Newton- I'll take it!)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.+ 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.
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.
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.What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.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!
Did Oklahoma St start outside of the top 15 last year and reach the top four with a loss?'Slapdash said:ORLY?'Ramblin Wreck said: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.
I'm all for that. Unfortunately that's not what the people in charge want.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.What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.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!
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.
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.'Ramblin Wreck said: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.
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.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.What are the top four conferences? Who decides that? Don't say the polls or the BCS.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!
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.What an idiotic rule.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 ####!