Link: Mock playoff committee chooses this year's 4 team field (from SI.com)

BamaFlum

Hall of Fame
Dec 11, 2002
7,176
1,609
287
53
S.A., TX, USA
The NFL's regular season is about who's the best two teams in the NFL. The playoffs are about the teams that are playing the hottest at that particular time in the NFL. Many times the best teams don't even play in the superbowl. Which is kind of the purpose of the Superbowl.
Regular season is about getting to the play offs and play off position. The play offs are about who peaks at the right time.
 

LCN

FB | REC Moderator
Sep 29, 2005
14,242
68
67
54
The NFL's regular season is about who's the best two teams in the NFL. The playoffs are about the teams that are playing the hottest at that particular time in the NFL. Many times the best teams don't even play in the superbowl. Which is kind of the purpose of the Superbowl.
Which is why the SB seldom hooks me and often sucks :( I will feel the same way when a couple of 3 loss teams play for a title .
 

Bruce014

1st Team
Aug 29, 2012
752
82
52
Alabama
I don't like SEC Championship Game.
It adds a layer of difficulty that takes away from the regular season.
Without a championship game, we would've been SEC champions in 1992, 1994, co-champions in 1996, 1999, 2008, 2009, and co-champions in 2012.

I know that's slightly off-topic, but it annoys me, and I also do not understand how it fits in (or even if it does fit in) with a larger playoff picture.
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,558
18,310
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
Regular season is about getting to the play offs and play off position. The play offs are about who peaks at the right time.
Correct. The regular season is or should be a 16 game body of work to determine the best teams. Letting a 9-7 team into the playoffs because we deem them one of the best teams then using four games to judge whether they are the best team or not doesn't seem right. I'm not saying I totally against any playoff but it seems the 16 game regular season schedule should be enough body of work to see who the best teams are. And to me a team that is one game from being a .500 team isn't one of the best teams.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
OK, I'll bite:

In the NFL, it's VERY EASY to determine WHO NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO IS - there's no real argument.

How in the world do you do that in college football?
That's always been my point. How can you really determine whether or not Alabama is better than Florida, Oregon, or Florida State? Until you play it on the field you can't. All you can give is opinion and mathematical formula.
This does not follow...

If the criteria for determining who is best, is who has played each (and won) then the NFL champion is usually far, far, far away from having no real argument.
A: Not all NFL teams play each other.
B: Who beat who in the regular season usually have little to no bearing on the playoffs.

Let's just cut to the chase here. Some people believe that who beats who in the postseason is all that should matter, and those are the same people who tend to want huge postseasons because it helps them forget the fact that there was a regular season.

I firmly believe that the BCS we are seeing the last days of, was the best national championship of all major sports in America. What we are going to see is going to move closer and closer to the thoughtless wheel of fate postseason that somehow makes us forget that parts of it that doesn't make any sense (for instance how a Super Bowl champion could lose twice to a team not even in the playoffs)...
 

CrimsonProf

Hall of Fame
Dec 30, 2006
5,716
69
67
Birmingham, Alabama
I don't mind the NFL playoffs because scheduling, draft, salary cap, etc. mean that the parity is much more real. Points in the NFL mean something, unlike much of what transpires in college.

The problem with a college playoff is that parity is much less prevalent and it seems easier to judge the quality of the teams.
 

CullmanTide

Hall of Fame
Jan 7, 2008
6,614
885
137
Cullman, Al
My biggest complaint about the playoffs is they wont stop at 4. It will grow to 8 then 16 or more. We will end up with what amounts to a fall season and a winter season. That IMHO is completely unfair to the student athletes. If a playoff is the answer then start it immediately after the regular season and end it by the first week in January.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,895
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I've always felt a case could be made that more than 2 teams could be worthy of a national championship in any given season. But never more than 4.

But that's not what any of this is about. It's about money. It's about further entrenching the bowl system (which is quite corrupt). It's about further entrenching the power conferences. In essence, this entire thing is going to end up being the big boys telling the little guys to get lost. Everyone thinks it's playoff magic and we're going to have access and this and that. In the end... the Boise State's of the world will regret ever getting the college football world headed down this path. With this "playoff" and with conference realignment, if you can't see how the little guys are now going to be further shut out of the system, take another look. This will only create more frustration for the fans, but it will line the pockets of the big conferences.
 

RammerJammer14

Hall of Fame
Aug 18, 2007
14,511
6,521
187
UA
Their reasoning for a future expansion of the field was ridiculous. They got so lost in their own hypotheticals and rationalizations and comparisons that they forgot the whole point of the system is to choose the #1 team. I'm sorry, but in college football any team outside the top 4 is clearly not playing championship-level football. Just because you have a hard time determining the difference between 4 and 5 does not mean it needs to move to a 6 or 8 team playoff. You are just shoving that indecision down the line. The teams outside the top 4 played their way out of the game during the season. They lost their shot then.

They should have just seeded teams based on BCS rankings, this selection committee idea is a disaster. The BCS basically averages the national opinion of teams from a pool of 60 + some strength of schedule analysis, which moderates the extremes pretty well. They are chucking that out for the opinion of like 6 ADs.

 

Sabine Free Sta

BamaNation Citizen
Jul 3, 2012
69
0
0
Well, as the old saying goes, its all over but the crying. The BCS is dead, on life support might be a better analogy, mainly because the SEC produced so many good teams. The BCS could have been saved if the SEC had not won 6 straight championships and, horror of horrors, there had not been an all SEC championship game. Would we be better off with a less dominate SEC and a viable BCS?
 

RollTideMang

All-American
Oct 16, 2009
3,140
0
0
St. Louis, MO
If they increase the play-off number in the future, I don't think that it should be a set number for every year. I think all 1 loss or less teams should be allowed to play in the play-off games. Two losses, and you're out period. It is extremely hard to go undefeated every year, but teams with 1 loss will have played exceptionally well all year. That means that this year, there would be 6 teams in the play-off (either UGA or Bama and N. Illinois or Kent State are out after this weekend). Yes, I know Kent State and N Illinois don't really belong, but they would probably be weeded out in the first game. Odd numbers would increase scheduling difficulty, but I'm sure they could figure something out.
 

BamaDMD

Hall of Fame
Sep 10, 2007
5,446
834
137
Rainsville Al
I just got to read the SI article and I am saddened, disheartened, and steaming mad all rolled into one. Let me start by saying I am one that was opposed to a playoff system in the first place. However, with that said, I had relegated myself to accept the 4 team playoff system thinking this isn't so bad. It will, by the way, solve some of the problems we've had in previous years where you might have that 3rd, possibly (albeit rare IMO) 4th team that might be deserving a shot by the end of the year. So I'm thinking the system will be some homogenization of BCS that will funnel the teams into spots as they have done and then the playing on the field would solve the rest. But no, we can't use something that is pretty good at determining (although not perfect) the top tier teams by the end of the year and use the top 4 for the playoff. We have to make it mean absolutely for naught and go back to something worse than what we had 20 years ago. Instead of allowing a collective of several hundred helping to fray some of the bias that can creep into a human eye contest, we go to a small group that may have special interests tied to their decisions. Common, this is insane. Why not use the BCS as it is now and play the top 4 teams at the end of the season. If you are good enough to make it into the top 4, that should be good enough. Not a "let's look at every scenario that happened through out the year and let that help to determine maybe who gets to go". "Well team x almost beat team Y in game 7 and that may have affected an outcome of team Z to get into the top 4 so I'm disqualifying them". This is rationalization that will make political correctness seem benign. I tell you, if this is the outcome of this 2 years from now, we will have lost the most special and unique sport out there.
 

BruinTide

BamaNation Citizen
Nov 5, 2012
59
0
0
Agree with JDCrimson. This is likely to mean the end financially of some of the smaller schools .
How does the SEC distribute bowl money? Does each school keep their respective bowl payout or is it shared with the other conference teams?
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
I am forever stunned at the foolish people who actually thought this was going to solve bickering and whinning and finger pointing. College football will always be this way. The BCS and +1 was the simplest and would have been just as fair as this playoff idea. A round robin is the only way to be fair.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
So I'm thinking the system will be some homogenization of BCS that will funnel the teams into spots as they have done and then the playing on the field would solve the rest. But no, we can't use something that is pretty good at determining (although not perfect) the top tier teams by the end of the year and use the top 4 for the playoff. We have to make it mean absolutely for naught and go back to something worse than what we had 20 years ago.
The answer was pretty simple. They don't want the most deserving teams in a playoff. I've said all along I like the BCSCG, but I've also said that the BCS got things right accidentally. They tried screwing things up, with stuff like only two conference teams in BCS bowls, etc... but, the championship game itself ended up doing a far better job than they would have liked of showing who the best team was.

And there you have why things changed. The SEC was dominating, so they had to find an alternative. But, you can't just use the BCS selection process for that, because as we've seen the BCS selection process allows for the SEC to dominate. Instead, they used Slive's unbridled enthusiasm for a playoff against him. He's been pushing it for years, but he didn't get his way until they knew they could try to stack the deck against him. So, you toss out what worked too well (BCS rankings) and you introduce a committee. Then, just in case you didn't stack the deck enough, you throw in criteria that includes conference champs. Mission accomplished, they now have something designed to work poorly. If the SEC dominates, they can scrap that to, if the SEC doesn't... then they'll be happy with it even if it's horrible. Slive was like a giddy child eating poisoned candy.

I hate it, but I've been saying this was a grass is greener scenario. It was good in theory, but the more familiar we become with what we'll actually get, the less people will like it.
 

CapstoneTider

Suspended
Dec 6, 2000
7,453
6
0
They are going to screw college football up. The need for an undisputed end all argument #1 team is not more relevant than tradition. We are headed towards an ESPN road to the final 4. We are going to muck up the tradition of the game trying to reach an unattainable goal. And end all discussion undisputed #1 team.

Bowl Games > Computer Polls
 

BamaDMD

Hall of Fame
Sep 10, 2007
5,446
834
137
Rainsville Al
They are going to screw college football up. The need for an undisputed end all argument #1 team is not more relevant than tradition. We are headed towards an ESPN road to the final 4. We are going to muck up the tradition of the game trying to reach an unattainable goal. And end all discussion undisputed #1 team.

Bowl Games > Computer Polls
this is all about how can they can squeeze more money out of the sport and danged be the consequences....
 

DzynKingRTR

TideFans Legend
Dec 17, 2003
42,213
29,372
287
Vinings, ga., usa
Since you playoff people love a playoff so much, let’s just get rid of Division I-A/ Division I-AA nonsense ala college basketball. Everybody will be at the same level. A 64 team playoff, we can even get Obama to make his picks every year.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.