If there are only two undefeated teams every year, that would be correct. If you're having to decide between one-loss (or even two-loss) teams because of style points and computer calculations, no. You still have to have a great regular season to get into the playoffs.In CFB you earn[ed] it on the field over 12 games instead of two. Playing better in the playoffs is not better than doing it in the regular season. But people think that is because it's at the end of the year and it's called "the playoffs." Aside from popular opinion, there is nothing innately meritocratic.
The same way a team can be passed over for the playoffs by a lesser team with a worse record.If there are only two undefeated teams every year, that would be correct. If you're having to decide between one-loss (or even two-loss) teams because of style points and computer calculations, no. You still have to have a great regular season to get into the playoffs.In CFB you earn[ed] it on the field over 12 games instead of two. Playing better in the playoffs is not better than doing it in the regular season. But people think that is because it's at the end of the year and it's called "the playoffs." Aside from popular opinion, there is nothing innately meritocratic.
How can you're point be correct if you can go undefeated and not get a chance at the National Championship?
So you're saying that both systems can do the same thing? Interesting change in your argument.The same way a team can be passed over for the playoffs by a lesser team with a worse record.If there are only two undefeated teams every year, that would be correct. If you're having to decide between one-loss (or even two-loss) teams because of style points and computer calculations, no. You still have to have a great regular season to get into the playoffs.In CFB you earn[ed] it on the field over 12 games instead of two. Playing better in the playoffs is not better than doing it in the regular season. But people think that is because it's at the end of the year and it's called "the playoffs." Aside from popular opinion, there is nothing innately meritocratic.
How can you're point be correct if you can go undefeated and not get a chance at the National Championship?
More likely, the playoff helps teams that don't play the season long grind consistently , but can get up for a big game. The playoff is a benefit to teams like the Carrol Trojans, who were always ready for primetime tv but couldn't focus on their boring conference games.
If there are three undefeated teams, do they all get a shot? Seems like that's a change to me.Notre Dame Joe said:I said both system are equal in quality, changed nothing.