Playoff as of today
by gtne91 on Nov 9, 2010 1:03 PM EST
Email
Print
Scenario: 16 team playoff, 11 conference champ auto bids, 5 at large bids. BCS standings used to determine at large teams and seeding. For the 4 champs not in the BCS top 25, Sagarin was used. Top team in BCS assumed to be conference champ, until otherwise determined. How the first round would look using current BCS standings below the jump.
16 Troy @ 1 Oregon 9 Ohio St @ 8 Nebraska 13 Pitt @ 4 Boise St 12 Virginia Tech @ 5 LSU 15 Temple @ 2 Auburn 10 Oklahoma St @ 7 Wisconsin 14 C Florida @ 3 TCU 11 Michigan St @ 6 Stanford
FanPosts are user-submitted, and thus NOT representative of EDSBS editorial or any of our opinions unless posted by us ourselves. Please refrain from posting blatant spam or self-promotion, because this makes us hate you. Thanks!
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As long as there are 120+ teams in NCAA D-1 a playoff makes no sense for CFB.
Too many very capable teams would be left out.
Huh?
How does that make any sense. There are over 300 D1 basketball teams reduced down to 68.
FCS has a 16 team playoff and they have more than 120 teams, although they are expanding to 20.
A 16 team with 5 at larges gets everyone who was even remotely in the discussion currently. The at-larges are LSU, Stanford, Ohio St, Ok St, Michigan St. 5 current 1 loss teams. At the current point, Utah and Nevada are the only 1 loss teams excluded, and that seems reasonable.
The standard criticism is it lets in too many teams and you are saying too few?
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
There are 120 teams in D1
A 16-team playoff would leave too many teams out. Therefore, the only solution is to keep the current system – a two-team playoff.
THAT’S ONLY LOGICAL
We want to build a university our football team can be proud of. -- Dr. George Lynn Cross
by marktgarten on Nov 9, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
My point was...
16 of 120 is not enough to constitute a playoff pool that is representative of the entire field…Especially considering how you determined who the top 16 were…Sun Belt Champ? WAC Champ? MAC Champ? C-USA Champ? Mountain West Champ? Big East Champ? ACC Champ? Why on Earth should those schools automatically make the playoffs and in turn bump out a more deserving team? 7 of your 16 teams could very well be garbage…every year, but “hey, they won their shitty conference so let ’em in!”. A playoff from 120 teams would only be ‘fair’ if it consisted of the top 25 or 30 teams which is obviously ridiculous to consider.
by Uncle Earmuffs on Nov 9, 2010 3:46 PM EST up reply actions
That is just stupid
Why would you need 25-30?
Look at the “5 at large” list for the past decade. There isnt a year where any legit national title contender doesnt make it. 16 is more than enough.
7 garbage teams? Yeah right. this year is an extreme year with 4 of the “champions” being outside the BCS top 25. Most recent years its been 3 (going back further, its been 4 or 5, when the MWC and WAC werent producing a top team). 7 isnt going to happen. However, a few crappy teams at the bottom gives an advantage to the very top teams, they get an easy game in round 1. And even with the weaker teams, I dont think Boise St or TCU are exactly gettting a bye.
The FCS has been at 16 teams for years and they have well more than 120 teams. 16 is more than enough.
One final thing. You oppose 16 because it isnt enough, so instead you support a 2 team playoff. Have you ever heard of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good?
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Easy there, cowboy...
If “16 is more than enough” for the FCS, then why are they expanding to 20 (and how long will it be before they expand to 24)? Maybe because like I said, 16 is not enough! Let’s take a look at current sports that have playoff systems and maybe you’ll see where I’m coming from. The following number of teams from the total number of participants make the playoffs: NCAA BB (which considered 96 teams this fuckin year!), 68 of 345 (20%); MLB, 8 of 30 (27%); NFL, 12 of 32 (38%); NHL, 16 of 30 (53%); NBA, 16 of 30 (53%)…You want to take the top 16 of 120 (13%)…Not enough. And as far as your, “There isn’t a year where any legit national title contender doesn’t make it” quote…That’s just your opinion, man. The system is GOOD RIGHT NOW, you’re the one that’s trying to make it perfect with no regard for the possible consequences.
P.S. I don’t want some huge-ass fuckin playoff; I want D1 to eliminate about 60 god-damned teams and THEN we could consider a playoff, but until that happens, it’s pretty stupid to just bark “playoff, playoff, playoff, derp, playoff”.
by Uncle Earmuffs on Nov 9, 2010 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
They're expanding the field to 20
because NCAA regulations require that a championship field consist of at least as many at-large invitations as automatic bids. NCAA regulations also clearly specify what’s required to obtain an automatic bid, more on this in a moment.
Because the Northeast Conference and Big South Conference have been granted auto-bids, they need to expand the field by two.
Interestingly, this means that if the NCAA were to sanction a Division I FBS Championship, it would be required to grant autobids to every conference currently in FBS, and also be required to have a field of at least 22 teams.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Unless they changed the rules
which they would, if necessary.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
"[I]t’s pretty stupid to just bark 'playoff, playoff, playoff, derp, playoff.'"
Is it better to bark “bowls, bowls, bowls, derp, bowls”?
We want to build a university our football team can be proud of. -- Dr. George Lynn Cross
Not really...
The bowl system is definitely flawed too.
by Uncle Earmuffs on Nov 10, 2010 9:06 AM EST up reply actions
Then the system isnt GOOD RIGHT NOW
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Anything with flaws ipso facto isn't good?
As a wiser man than me said upthread, “Have you ever heard of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good?”
GOURANGA!
Its fundamentally flawed
Flawed to an insane degree. Letting the perfect (or even the good) be the enemy of the bad is a good thing to do.
Lets compare the two arguments:
Hayden: We need a 32 team playoff, we have a 2 team playoff, going to 16 is a bad idea.
Me: We have a fundamentally flawed bowl system with bowls ripping off the schools, lets go to a 16 team playoff where the schools get the money they deserve (Yes, I didnt actually make those arguments in this thread, but they are implied :) ).
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
You are clearly hearing what you want to hear...
I never said, “we need a 32 team playoff”…I actually said the contrary, “I don’t want some huge ass playoff”…“A playoff from 120 teams would only be ‘fair’ if it consisted of the top 25 or 30 teams which is obviously ridiculous to consider.”
And WTF makes you think that a playoff system is going to ensure that, “the schools get the money they deserve”? The NCAA and TV execs would make a shit-ton of cash, guaranteed. The schools would have ZERO guarantees.
by Uncle Earmuffs on Nov 15, 2010 3:15 PM EST up reply actions
The system isnt good right now
the current system blows monkeys.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Actually, Im well aware of the possible consequences
I consider them all to be positives.
Possible destruction of the bowl system that has been ripping off schools for decades? Check.
Increased number of “games that matter”? Check.
No teams eliminated from title contention before season starts? Check.
Possible dilution of major conference power? Check.
I dont think my suggestion is perfect, there are still some flaws, but it is pretty damn good and easy to implement.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Let's just agree to disagree...
For the record; I’m not pro-BCS or anti-playoff…It’s not a black and white issue. I lie somewhere in the middle and I just don’t think it’s worth it to start screwing around with CFB as we know it.
P.S. The regular season is awesome – I don’t know what you’ve been watching that makes you feel otherwise.
by Uncle Earmuffs on Nov 10, 2010 10:38 AM EST up reply actions
Auburn v Chattanooga
yeah….awesome
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
well, pretty much all teams have an absolute speed bump on the sched somewhere
i really dont have a side in the playoff/no playoff deal. The team a pay attention to/root for porbably wouldnt be in the conversation, anyway. i just like watching foobaw.
to make the headliner make sense: State played Alcorn St a few weeks ago. It was televised.
SpamBot Sez: "AF tank woman $17"
by CoastalCowbell on Nov 10, 2010 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
That everyone has one makes it worse, not better
not that they would go away with a playoff.
They just make the regular season less awesome.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Why is 16 not enough?
How many teams other leagues, especially pro leagues take doesnt prove your point. Heck, I think baseball was fine at 4 teams, and 2 out of 20 pre-1969 for that matter. 10% worked well (they were 12.5% from the founding of the AL to expansion in early 60s).
So, in the golden age of baseball, they were right about the percent Im suggesting. Hmmmm….
But, really, why does what other leagues do matter at all? The goal of 16 is to get all conference champs (to avoid a team getting screwed by conference affiliation like happens yearly) and then fill in with a few 2nd and 3rd place teams that have stellar records. Prevents the TT-Tex-Ok problem a few years ago as all 3 would have made it at 11-1. No need to dip down to the 9-3 or 8-4 teams, Im trying to avoid the problem the basketball tourney has or the nba has, that as long as you are decent you are in the playoffs.
My school went into the ACCCG last year at 10-2 and the game with Clemson would have been an elimination game under a playoff scenario. Clemson had to win to get in, they wouldnt have got an AL. Because of our loss to uga the week before, we couldnt get an at large bid with a loss, although with a win we were on the border of a home game (as it turned out, we would have been #9 last year playing first round at Ohio St).
Instead we were playing for the Orange Bowl, which is nice but pretty much meaningless.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
As long as there are 120+ teams in NCAA D-1 a TWO-TEAM playoff makes no sense for CFB.
Fixed that for you.
Bradley-Terry ratings for college football and basketball
Because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
So much money
I dont get why the fight to not have a playoff system .. they always say the money with the bowls etc, but the money out of something like this would be phenomenal. and you could incorporate the bowls into the process. …
by BillfromGainesville on Nov 9, 2010 3:12 PM EST reply actions
Its not about money, its about power.
Everyone will get more money with a playoff. So a win, win right? Not so fast…its about power and the ratio of money will change, and thus the power conferences will lose power.
Example:
SEC gets more money
Sun Belt gets more money
But, the ratio of SEC:SB money goes down, so the SEC loses power. And the next thing you know, a Boise St is playing for the national title.
Its a fight they cant win, talent is gettting more distributed year after year, but they are going to go down fighting.
If it was about $$$, we would have had a playoff 15 years ago.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Can Troy State stop the Oregon offensive juggernaut???
TUNE IN TONIGHT to find out!!!
Don't Panic.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Nov 9, 2010 5:39 PM EST reply actions
There are a few problems with 8
Not least of which is jonfmorse’s recognition above that NCAA regulations require you to have as many at-large bids as automatic bids. If you have just the BCS automatic bids — ACC, BEast, Big 12, Pac-12, Big 10 and SEC — you would be required to have another six at-large bids. That requires at least a 12-team playoff system.
Unless you include first-round byes, 16 teams would be required to balance the bracket.
Adding 16 teams also has the benefit of allowing you to include two more automatic bids from smaller conferences, thus reducing the opportunity for people to complain about an unfair system.
Note, though
that there’s nothing whatsoever that says they can’t change the rules. I just think it’s unlikely that they would, because the rules which govern the size of the field and the requirements for an auto-bid apply to every single sport in all three divisions in which the NCAA sponsors a team championship — including Division I Basketball, where the play-in game was invented expressly because the Mountain West was gaining an autobid.
That said: it’s quite clear that the BCS conferences have the NCAA over a barrel. The NCAA itself makes almost nothing off FBS football, and makes almost all its money off the D-I men’s basketball tournament. Pushing the football guys to the point of making them take their ball and go home would… well, frankly, it would be the best piece of news the NAIA ever got.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Not exactly right
the play-in game was invented because they were holding at large bids at 34, despite the MWC becoming the 31st AQ conference. It was due to the MWC but not the 1/2 rule, so different than the FCS thing.
There were 30 AQs and 34 ALs, then it went to 31 and 34. Now, its going to 31 and 37 for no good reason.
Also, no reason they wouldnt tweak the rule just for D1A as part of a compromise to get rid fo the BCS.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
Yeah, true enough.
The rule does, however, apply to the D-I tournament all the same, which is what I was getting at; in fact, surprisingly, the rule was initiated with D-I to begin with.
The expansion of the field to 64 in the first place was partially due to a whole slew of newer leagues becoming eligible in the early 80s. All those leagues were formed in the late 70s-early 80s, and most of them didn’t start getting to dance at all until ‘85. (The A-10 and Big East were part of this. They didn’t have to worry too much, of course, but they received their auto-bids around the same time.)
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
BCS does have the NCAA over a barrel
But it seems to me that only means that if the big six conferences wanted a playoff (which they don’t, but I’m talking theoretical here), then they could always tell the NCAA:
1) Eliminate the rule about auto v. at-large bids, and we’ll let you in on this money printing playoff machine we have here, or
2) Don’t, and we’ll set up playoffs without your sanction and, just like with the bowls, you won’t get money from D-1 post-season.
It’s all speculation, but it seems like the NCAA might make an exception for D-1 football in that scenario.
We want to build a university our football team can be proud of. -- Dr. George Lynn Cross
by marktgarten on Nov 10, 2010 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
If they had the cahones
the NCAA could do to the BCS what they did to the NIT. They could even follow the same path.
Set up a tournament and give a trophy. Some teams/conferences might turn it down to participate in the BCS instead. But when the NCAA is handing a team a trophy that says D1A champion, its gonna carry some weight. And maybe for a while teams are allowed to participate in both. Then they have to choose, then the NCAA says that if offered the tourney spot, you cant accept the BCS spot (they did this in hoops after Marquette turned down an NCAA bid for the NIT circa 1970). Eventually the bowls become the NIT of postseason football (which really, outside the BCS, they are now).
So, even though it was the premier tourney at the time, does anyone really put much weight on the NIT titles over the NCAA titles in basketball from the 40s?
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
The real problem I see
is the very real possibility that the big schools will just tell the NCAA to go fuck themselves altogether. I’m not saying it’s likely, but we all know it’s been floated before. If that happens, it’s not just the D-I bottom feeders that will get screwed; it’s every NCAA member right on down to D-III.
As for NIT titles… to the average fan, you’re absolutely right. Tell them that West Virginia was the best team in the country in 1942, and they’ll give you that retard look, tell you Stanford was the best team, and if WVU was any good, why were they in the NIT? But anyone who knows the history realizes that until the point-shaving scandal wrecked NYC college basketball and stained its reputation, the NIT was the big dance.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Re: #2
they need the NCAA’s permission to set up a playoff, they can only have 1 postseason game now, for multiple, they need the NCAA to agree.
But, yeah, the NCAA would want in on the playoff money and would bend the 1/2 rule if necessary.
Conference homers are the lowest form of fandom. That is why the SEC has so many of them.
As long as we're playing make-believe..
…First-round byes go to the five BCS conferences that have (or will have) championship games (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, and Pac-12.)
The other six conferences and sixteen at-large teams play in the first round (play these in lesser bowl games, moved up two weeks.)
That makes 11 AQs and 16 at-larges. 27 teams seems inclusive enough, and give the 28th team something to bitch about!
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them, well, I have others."
Big 12 is losing its championship game
unless it scares up 2 more members.
And here's a lighthouse keeper being beheaded by a laser beam!
Thanks for ruining my ridiculous scenario
That said, by the time the current BCS deal expires I’m fairly certain that either the Big 12 will expand or fold (with the MWC the likely beneficiary.)
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them, well, I have others."
16 is the perfect number
Every single team in D1 would have a chance to make it into the playoffs at the beginning of the year. We always here that the college football regular season is so great (total bullshit). This would actual ensure that the regular season does have meaning for every single team.
Five at larges is plenty. It gives enough of the good teams a chance to make it who don’t win their conference.
www.charliebaumandeservedit.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
