Currently BCS only guarantees #1 and #2 matchup. I think they've done that for the most part better than any other system.Oh, so the conference champion criteria only matters for the top three. I missed that part, I was worried for a little while. Thanks for pointing that out because I was thinking it applied to all four teams, silly me.
Message boards are for discussion. If it was all us agreeing with each other, what would be we discussing?Let's just watch what happens in a couple of years. No where does it say all 4 teams must be conferences champs -- it's just a factor. If that system had been in place last year, even with the conference champion factor, Alabama still would have gotten a spot.
I agree with the first part of your statement. And, while I don't like a playoff in college football, I could see your argument for 1-4 being better. But, they put criteria in that works contrary to that and I don't think they would have done that if they didn't want to toss out the BCS selection process for the top 4. They could have kept it, instead it's committee with conference champs as criteria. It can't work like it did before, it can't just be the next two teams in the BCS standings or else they would have left the selection part as is.Currently BCS only guarantees #1 and #2 matchup. I think they've done that for the most part better than any other system.
4 team playoff only guarantees #1, 2, 3, 4 are in. I think this will be better.
And I think we all get your "point" that you've made! Many, just don't agree and that's fine!Message boards are for discussion. If it was all us agreeing with each other, what would be we discussing?
I agree with this part of your statement. Alabama was #2, I do not see them dropping them all the way out last year. However, they clearly would have moved Okie St. ahead. However, Florida is in a different position and as things stand they are highly likely to be out. Of course there is a wait and see aspect, but there's no need to be naive. The SEC fought against it, it was added anyway. There will be repercussions and if it has 0 impact, then all that fuss over it was pointless and I doubt they all got together and said let's argue over nothing because it will make us look good.
I agree with the first part of your statement. And, while I don't like a playoff in college football, I could see your argument for 1-4 being better. But, they put criteria in that works contrary to that and I don't think they would have done that if they didn't want to toss out the BCS selection process for the top 4. They could have kept it, instead it's committee with conference champs as criteria. It can't work like it did before, it can't just be the next two teams in the BCS standings or else they would have left the selection part as is.
I understand the point to saying let's just wait, but my point is that things will never be like this again.
Do you hate the SECCG? It is a playoff.I hate the playoff system
In college football. Last night doesn't happen. I watching watching both games when I got home from Tuscaloosa like Bama was playing again. It was a good feeling. Playoff system not so much. Maybe if you are the four and five team trying to stay/get in.
I couldn't agree with you more. That is what I always said. Seems like the best way in my opinion. Just because there will be teams in here with more than 1 loss doesn't mean they aren't the best team in the country. Maybe these teams had key injuries or bad calls that affected their record. I am tired of popularity polls.Why in the world can't we do a playoff with these 8 teams?
Conference champ from SEC, Pac12, Big 12, Big 10 and ACC
3 at-large teams ranked the highest who are not conference champs?
Each round seeded with highest ranking matched to lowest ranking.
Fairly simple. You don't get in, you have no excuse.
We were #4 going into the weekend. WCU doesn't do much for our SOS. Oregon played and lost to a ranked team and it was a close OT game. With that alone we may move to #3. With KSU laying an egg to an unranked team we probably move to #2. With our rival game and pending CCG left to play against a team nipping at our heels that creates a lot of interest. We have to have a GOOD peformance against our bitter rival AND beat a top 5 team in the CCG in order to stay in the top 2/4. Either way, to me, it's exciting. For me it would have been much the same as if the playoff system were already in place.I hate the playoff system
In college football. Last night doesn't happen. I watching watching both games when I got home from Tuscaloosa like Bama was playing again. It was a good feeling. Playoff system not so much. Maybe if you are the four and five team trying to stay/get in.
And this way, if you don't win your conference and don't make it, you can only blame yourself. If you don't win and still get in, you'll know you were blessed and fortunate. Those that are on the cusp will still kvetch about it though.I couldn't agree with you more. That is what I always said. Seems like the best way in my opinion. Just because there will be teams in here with more than 1 loss doesn't mean they aren't the best team in the country. Maybe these teams had key injuries or bad calls that affected their record. I am tired of popularity polls.
Really?I don't know why people are worrying. If you are "elite" and you deserve it, you'll be there! If you're not you won't!
Statistically it does and is designed to do just that. The conference champ criteria was fought over, and resisted by the SEC. Ultimately the Big 12 backed it and the SEC was forced into a playoff that included it. This is huge, and once again we can't just wish it away. It's there, it will be there, and it wouldn't be there unless it was to do something. That something is to favor conference champs over non-conference champs.
It is not coincidence that this occurs in the aftermath of Alabama winning the BCS as a non-conference champ. It was an immediate response. Anyway, what this does is simple, it does mathematically lower the SEC's chances. Take this year for instance, Alabama has an inside track to the BCSCG game. It's not that simple, but let's call that a 50% chance of the SEC winning the championship.
Well, you expand to four teams and Florida should also have an inside track. Whooops, not conference champ. So, Kansas St. and Oregon have an inside track. The chances go from 50%, to 25%. That won't matter some years, but it will make a difference and it's exactly why they all ganged up on the SEC and did it! I'm astounded that some people are still oblivious to this.
Conference Champion Criteria
The old BCS formula will not exist.
I think a lot of the attitudes about the selections comes from Paranoia that the world is against "Alabama". I think we should just "get used to it" because that's the way it will be. It will eventually evolve into a playoff system like the NFL has right now.Really?
No: elite (or whatever that means) has nothing to do with it. Conference champions and selection committee whims has everything to do with it. Until every team has the same conference championship that the SEC does, the system is unfair.
And don't tell me we should "get used to it."
There will be an "RPI System" set up when that happens.The only thing I don't like about the playoff system is its inevitable expansion. College football just does not have the depth of the NFL so all expansion does is dilute the championship. A 3-4 loss team has no business playing for the national title-that's what the regular season is for. But once they expand the playoff to 8 and/or 16 teams, it is almost guaranteed that an undeserving team will get a shot, probably some hot team that just happens to have everything clicking in the last 3 games of the season despite not having a full body of work ala the Giants, or say Texas A&M this year. I'm not looking forward to that.