Nebraska Alum Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 I voted 4. I never wanted playoffs in the first place, it cheapens the regular season games. Quote Link to comment
NU5XChamps Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 First, you form 8 conferences with 12 teams. Lets face it, some schools have no business playing with the big boys. Every conference would have to have a Championship game. Champs get in the playoffs, 8 teams. Period end of story. Everyone else plays in the other meaningless bowl games. Would keep the importance on the regular season and the paydays for the bowls. First two rounds are played at the higher seeded teams house. This would be based on the teams record and if there is a tie, then based on the overall record of the conference. This would hopefully create better cooperation within the conferences to improve its overall standing. NC game played at neutral site like the SB. Finally, you rotate the Non-conference games through the other conferences on a set rotation. Such as, B1G plays SEC and so on. This will help with the strength of schedule argument. Done.... Now lets move on to bigger and better problems like....... Quote Link to comment
Hooked on Huskers Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 I voted 4. I never wanted playoffs in the first place, it cheapens the regular season games. 5th rank team will be pissed off. Mark my word, next year will be more controversies than BCS. Quote Link to comment
deedsker Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 I voted 4. I never wanted playoffs in the first place, it cheapens the regular season games. 5th rank team will be pissed off. Mark my word, next year will be more controversies than BCS. True, but in most years they is a bigger difference between the fourth and fifth than the eighth and ninth. A bigger difference in eighth and ninth than sixteenth and seventeenth, and so on. Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I voted 4. I never wanted playoffs in the first place, it cheapens the regular season games. yeah, you would not want a 2 loss national champion. i would be happy with 8 or 10. 10 is nice because you could give the top two teams a bye. and anyone who would rather have a controversy about who is the no. 2 team than who is the no. 4 or 8 or 10 team is silly. it is easy to imagine no. 3 teams with a legitimate argument to be in the mnc, it gets harder with the no. 5 team to be the no. 4 team and so on and so fourth. also, i agree with walks. i think there will be four "superconferences" (like they will get nuclear waste spilled on them or something) and they will leave the ncaa and do their own thing. Quote Link to comment
Foppa Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Well...at least if there's a 64-team playoff, NU could have a legitimate shot of making this so-called tournament. Quote Link to comment
ohiocornhusker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 According to the USA Today brackets there is no way we don't make it to the elite 8. We would replay Mich. State (after beating Vandy), and I don't think we lose twice, also next would probably be a rematch between either Georgia or UCLA. Beat either of them for the same reason. Quote Link to comment
Sparker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I think 10, its a nice round number and its not huge. In general, if your not top 10 nobody cares about you anyway. #11 should have tried harder. Quote Link to comment
Sparker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I voted 4. I never wanted playoffs in the first place, it cheapens the regular season games. yeah, you would not want a 2 loss national champion. i would be happy with 8 or 10. 10 is nice because you could give the top two teams a bye. and anyone who would rather have a controversy about who is the no. 2 team than who is the no. 4 or 8 or 10 team is silly. it is easy to imagine no. 3 teams with a legitimate argument to be in the mnc, it gets harder with the no. 5 team to be the no. 4 team and so on and so fourth. also, i agree with walks. i think there will be four "superconferences" (like they will get nuclear waste spilled on them or something) and they will leave the ncaa and do their own thing. Like what? Wouldn't that pretty much destroy college football? This might be derailing the thread but I have heard this comment a couple times and I don't get it. Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 also, i agree with walks. i think there will be four "superconferences" (like they will get nuclear waste spilled on them or something) and they will leave the ncaa and do their own thing. Like what? Wouldn't that pretty much destroy college football? This might be derailing the thread but I have heard this comment a couple times and I don't get it. form their own regulatory entity, only play teams in the superconferences, their own championship set-up, etc. Quote Link to comment
Sparker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 also, i agree with walks. i think there will be four "superconferences" (like they will get nuclear waste spilled on them or something) and they will leave the ncaa and do their own thing. Like what? Wouldn't that pretty much destroy college football? This might be derailing the thread but I have heard this comment a couple times and I don't get it. form their own regulatory entity, only play teams in the superconferences, their own championship set-up, etc. I took some time after posting that to read a couple articles about it, and it seems that the theory is more along the lines of super conferences reforming their own regulatory body to replace the ncaa and still have a "National Champion" of some sort. Doubt it happens in the next decade or two. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Four teams. I'm not crazy about the idea of a playoff. Four teams would ensure that a close 3rd place wouldn't get screwed out of trying for the championship. Sure, the fifth place team could complain. But their argument wouldn't be as compelling. 1 Quote Link to comment
Sparker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Four teams. I'm not crazy about the idea of a playoff. Four teams would ensure that a close 3rd place wouldn't get screwed out of trying for the championship. Sure, the fifth place team could complain. But their argument wouldn't be as compelling. My biggest complaint against this is how the (current) SEC bias can easily occupy 2-3 of the top 4 spots. Make it 8 or 10 and its hard for bias to affect the outcome. 1 Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 My biggest complaint against this is how the (current) SEC bias can easily occupy 2-3 of the top 4 spots. Make it 8 or 10 and its hard for bias to affect the outcome. i do not understand why they do not keep the bcs ranking system and just use it to pick the top four for the playoffs. 1 Quote Link to comment
Sparker Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 My biggest complaint against this is how the (current) SEC bias can easily occupy 2-3 of the top 4 spots. Make it 8 or 10 and its hard for bias to affect the outcome. i do not understand why they do not keep the bcs ranking system and just use it to pick the top four for the playoffs. BCS ranking system sucks, not that that really answers your question... Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.