It's Official: College Football Going to a Seeded 4 Team Playoff

[selmaborntidefan]

My big concern still comes from wondering whether SOS or conference champ is more important. Simply compare unbeaten Boise with a one-loss SEC Western division team that lost a close game to an unbeaten SEC team.

I'm fine with four. Who's the committee?

To the 8-team advocates and above:

It will reduce the regular season to an exhibition. Compare your reaction last year:

BCS: "We MUST win!"

4-team: "Well we just gotta win out now and hope some teams lose"

8-team: "Oh it don't really matter. We beat MSU & Auburn &Ga Sou and anything can happen."

 

[TideEngineer08]

No, it won't. When compared to the Big East, or WAC? Sure, it will. But, the Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC? We know who the better conference is, but SoS is calculated from the bottom up, so for instance Vanderbilt or who ever is stinking it up down there matters as much as Alabama when calculating this. For instance Ole Miss mutilated the conference SoS last year.

This is worsened by the 9th conference game. Look at Oklahoma State's schedule, then explain to me how their SoS was higher than Alabama's. They played an extra conference game, and due to the oddities in calculating SoS, despite the argument to be made that the SEC had the top three teams in the country, their SoS came out higher. Alabama played a tougher schedule, yet Oklahoma St. on paper played a higher SoS. That's because SoS didn't calculate that Alabama played Penn St. at full strength, or how exponentially more difficult the LSU game was than any game Oklahoma St. played.

So, when it comes to the other major conferences, it won't and can't balance out anything. USC would still jump Alabama. The notion that SoS will save SEC teams being jumped just isn't based in reality. So, SoS included, Oklahoma St. jumped Alabama and in 2008 USC jumps Alabama. That's assuming as I have all along, that the conference champ provision is only a "tie breaker", SoS is used, and that the conference champ provision is not the dominant factor or some parties seem to be asserting. The conference champ part poisons the process as I said before.

As to Slive, I've been bashing him since he rammed through that signing limit. I know he doesn't control everything, heck he might not control anything. But, he sure does sound like an idiot if you actually listen to the words coming out of his mouth. If you are forced into doing something stupid, you should at least have the common sense not to act happy about it. He's cheered, encouraged, and rushed through this process much like he did the signing limit. He explained why it makes him happy, why it's a good thing, and basically he's been the cheerleader in both instance. Never mind both things are horrible ideas. Never mind both are tailor made to break the SEC's stranglehold on greatness. We have to listen to this guy explain to us why we should be happy about the SEC having harm done to it, and why he's happy that the SEC is having harm done to it, and I'm disgusted by it.

True, Oklahoma State would have jumped Alabama in the standings, but Alabama would have still made the playoff. 2008 is another story. I think USC gets in that year over us, but not Utah. Utah is out in the cold again. I don't think Boise State ever makes it if this formula (which we are still speculating on what that is exactly) is in place over the last 7 or 8 years.

The committee is the real wild card here. It's fallacy, IMO, to consider it better than a ratings system derived from several different inputs. A committee is far more likely to yield quirky results that are pushed by a political agenda. I wish these guys would hire a bunch of statisticians and computer scientists to devise computer rankings that are open. We don't see any of the formulas that make up the computer rankings of the BCS because they're owned by private entities and they don't want their IP exposed to public eyes. But if the BCS hires their own people to create the rankings systems, the IP belongs to the BCS and they can open it up for public consumption. That gives much greater transparency than 15 fomer ADs sitting behind closed doors making political deals.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

My big concern still comes from wondering whether SOS or conference champ is more important. Simply compare unbeaten Boise with a one-loss SEC Western division team that lost a close game to an unbeaten SEC team.

I'm fine with four. Who's the committee?

To the 8-team advocates and above:

It will reduce the regular season to an exhibition. Compare your reaction last year:

BCS: "We MUST win!"

4-team: "Well we just gotta win out now and hope some teams lose"

8-team: "Oh it don't really matter. We beat MSU & Auburn &Ga Sou and anything can happen."

64-team: "We just gotta make the tournament - then anything can happen..."

 

[TideEngineer08]

There is that fine line, and I think a 4 team playoff inches right up to it. Eight teams waltzes past it, but there are a ton of people calling for it, even tonight. So I expect to see it in my lifetime, probably as soon as the contract they sign for this 4 team playoff is up.

 

[OreBama]

As an SEC fan, I don't see this move to a 4 team playoff being a win for us. Frankly, the SEC has dominated the BCS in its current format even with "tweaks" added every other year. This appears as a move toward more parity in the sport, which usually hurts those on top.

Many of us would like to believe in a fair selection process that would result, in most years, of two SEC teams in the playoff if this selection process is based on the four best teams. However, I honestly don't trust in the fairness of the selection committee.

A smaller number of selection committee members means bias will be amplified and every decision scrutinized to the point of the commitee having no respect and the sport we love losing respect. I just can't get behind this idea right now as I understand it.

 

[ALA2262]

I dont know, seems to me an emphasis on conference champs is code for " last year will never happen again." I think they would have found some way of keeping bama out last year using this format because so many people did not want a rematch. The committee would have just said Bama was not conference champ so we chose someone else. The SEC might not be as much of a shoe in to get 2 teams in a playoff as people think with the old "they are not conference champs" out that they will have.

Stanford is the one that would have bit the dust last year. They were ranked 4th in the final BCS standings. Oregon was ranked 5th. Oregon was Pac 12 champion. Oregon beat Stanford 53-30 head to head. Oregon would have been seeded 3rd and played 2nd seeded Oklahoma State. #2 ranked Bama would have been seeded 4th against #1 ranked and #1 seeded LSU in order that one would be eliminated from the NCG. The top 3 seeds are conference champions. The 4th seed is a non-champion.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Stanford is the one that would have bit the dust last year. They were ranked 4th in the final BCS standings. Oregon was ranked 5th. Oregon was Pac 12 champion. Oregon beat Stanford 53-30 head to head. Oregon would have been seeded 3rd and played 2nd seeded Oklahoma State. #2 ranked Bama would have been seeded 4th against #1 ranked and #1 seeded LSU in order that one would be eliminated from the NCG.

Probably correct, and we would have beaten the crap out of them and then either Oregon or OSU. In a way, it answers the whine I hear over and over again, reading LSU boards - "Bama should have never been there - Waaaahhhhh!" Lord, I hope I never have to look in a mirror again after having having my rear thoroughly abused and whine that my abuser shouldn't have ever been allowed to have a chance to do it. Where the hell is the manhood in that? You take the opponents the PTB deal you and you go about your business...

 

[Nolan]

I'd prefer the conference champs thing wasn't considered...other than that its exciting and I'm looking forward to seeing it play out.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I have a friend here in Dallas, a UT fan who is pretty smart & has never once said they'd have beaten us except for Colt McCoy. Usually smart. He's for 8-team. I explained my opposition & he said this: "Well, that first round game will pretty much be a gimme." My response: "Then why waste time playing it?"

 

[jps1983]

My big concern still comes from wondering whether SOS or conference champ is more important. Simply compare unbeaten Boise with a one-loss SEC Western division team that lost a close game to an unbeaten SEC team.

I'm fine with four. Who's the committee?

To the 8-team advocates and above:

It will reduce the regular season to an exhibition. Compare your reaction last year:

BCS: "We MUST win!"

4-team: "Well we just gotta win out now and hope some teams lose"

8-team: "Oh it don't really matter. We beat MSU & Auburn &Ga Sou and anything can happen."

You're spot on. A 4 team playoff (in reality) will probably mean only 1 SEC team because I imagine a committee wouldn't take a 2nd SEC team even if it was a repeat of 2011 since it would give "us" a 50% chance of winning the title and their selection criteria includes the consideration of winning a conference. An 8 team playoff means a very high likelihood 2 SEC teams get in since there is no doubt we are the premier conference. I'd rather the BCS over a 4 team playoff, but I'd much rather an 8 team playoff because we have a greater likelihood of being one of the top 2 teams in the SEC than winning the SEC title each year.

 

[mdb-tpet]

True! I am still a Bama fan and no matter what they come up with that won't change. And even if we get screwed down the road with this format it won't be like Bama has never had that happen before. In fact its happened multiple times, but we are not the only ones who have been shafted over the years. As far as that goes though I like Bama's track record so far. 14 championships as far as I know is better than any other schools so...

Nope...see Princeton and Yale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS

It was a long time ago, but they still earned it on the field.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Uh they earned them "on the field" when they were pipularity votes and nothing but Ivy League schools. My goodness - some of those were when a FG was worth more than a TD.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Btw - everyone knows we outplayed LSU the first time. I take nothing away from how good they were but we still outplayed them.

It happens. The Braves held the Yankees to a 1.57 ERA in 1996 - and lost in six games.

 

[GrayTide]

I wish I shared peoples' enthusiasm for playoffs, but I don't. I give it 5 years before a move is afoot to go to 8 teams.

In the unlikely event 2 SEC teams end up in the playoffs, they of course will be matched against each other in one of the semifinal games.

And for the brief period of time we have a 4-team playoff, I find it endearing how some people actually believe a second SEC team will make the playoffs ahead of, for example, a one-loss WAC or ACC conference champion. The Selection Committee will do their job of ensuring conference diversity in the playoffs.

I agree, there will enough wailing and gnashing of teeth starting in 2014 that by 2016 this format will be expanded to 8 teams to include 6 conference champions and 2 at large teams and we all know ND will be one of the at large teams.

 

[BamaFlum]

If they move on to the 8 seed format, they must either eliminate conference championship games or make everyone have one.

 

[CrimsonProf]

I'll see this about Notre Dame - unless they get better soon, all of the preferential treatment in the world won't help them.

 

[MOAN]

Probably correct, and we would have beaten the crap out of them and then either Oregon or OSU. In a way, it answers the whine I hear over and over again, reading LSU boards - "Bama should have never been there - Waaaahhhhh!" Lord, I hope I never have to look in a mirror again after having having my rear thoroughly abused and whine that my abuser shouldn't have ever been allowed to have a chance to do it. Where the hell is the manhood in that? You take the opponents the PTB deal you and you go about your business...

The 4 team playoff almost ensures the SEC champion has a shot at winning the national championship every year. It sure would have given Auburn a shot back in '04, yeah some forget there was a time an SEC champ got left out! Since it was da barn most on here forget that point and had it been Bama left out that year most on here would be celebrating the playoff today!

Bama would have made the 4 team playoff this past year and most likely with the same outcome. I can also think of a couple other years a 4 team play off would have been advantageous to Bama. This past season was a unique season and may or may not ever happen again in the SEC but if you don't win your conference championship most times you should not be in the 4 team playoff. Thats why strength of schedule is important in case a team from the same conference losses 1 game in conference and its close, just as Bama did this past season, a conference champion with a much weaker schedule wouldn't automatically jump a much superior team from a much superior conference. That is why Wisconsin, the Big 10 champion wouldn't have jumped Bama in a 4 team playoff this past season.

What if Georgia had beaten LSU and was SEC champions this past season with 2 losses and LSU and Bama with 1 loss each but neither champions? Chances are that Bama and LSU both would have made the 4 team playoff with neither being the SEC champion! Wisconsin had 2 losses and would have been ranked significantly lower than either.

The complain and whine group would then have something new to complain and whine about as they always have and always will. The playoff is for the most part coming about because of the money that it could possibly and probably will generate. After a couple decades or so of the 4 team playoff and the ever need for more money it will expand again I expect. And by then Bama will have 20 national championships and I will probably not be around. But the gripe and complain group will have something else to keep them happy griping and complaining about lol! ROLL TIDE!!!

 

[CrimsonProf]

Anyone hear Tony Barnhart on JOX just now? He seemed very cautious about the whole thing.

 

[TideMan09]

Anyone hear Tony Barnhart on JOX just now? He seemed very cautious about the whole thing.

What did he say???

 

[CrimsonCarl]

I agree, there will enough wailing and gnashing of teeth starting in 2014 that by 2016 this format will be expanded to 8 teams to include 6 conference champions and 2 at large teams and we all know ND will be one of the at large teams.

This is my fear as well, and I truly think expanding to 8 teams would be a terrible blow to the sport. The guys over at Team Speed Kills have a pretty convincing argument that it won't be expanded. I hope they're right