It's official...4-team playoff approved

exswoo said:
Finals will be bid out, so it's possible for the championship to be in Indianapolis or some other city in B1G country
Click to expand...
Maybe I missed that, but I remember hearing that was an option...didn't know if the 'bid out' was officially part of the deal or not.

Ah. Now I see that it is part of the deal. Thanks!

 
There's only one simple way to fix all of this. Have 8 conferences, all with a CCG. Then do a 8 team playoff starting the week after the CCG with the conference champions. Play the round of 4 in the bowl games and play the title game 2 weeks later. That would emphasize the regular season and keep the bowl games. I'm not totally onboard with the new playoff, but I can see it working. What I don't want though is to have the season drag on forever. Any involved playoff bowl games should be done by New Years day with the title game no more than 14 days later.

 
Here's my idea for playoffs;

1. We take the 120 top programs in the country and put them in a giant division.

2. We break down those 120 teams depending on size, performance and geography in to a number of conferences of different size.

3. We then play between 13-14 weeks of playoff games with the top ~50% of the teams making it to the secondary stage of playoffs in December/January.

4. The top four teams from those ~sixty than play semifinals in early January with the winners playing a week later.

Pretty out there....what do you guys think?

 
If they are using strength of schedule as one of the deciding factors, consider 2 SEC teams in this 4 team playoff each year. It is a stepping stone but to be honest, it's VERY far from a cure all be all.

 
so does this mean they got rid of all other bowl games? they can do both. i was in support of an 8 team playoff based off the bcs ranking or something similar and then the rest of the bowls. the first playoff games start of the week and there is a game a week with non-playoff bowls in between. they just can not resist making this harder than it needs to be.

 
Bowls still exist - but the team selection process for the major bowls may go back to the bowls like they used to instead of it being part of the 'BCS' system. This is one of the areas that's still yet to be finalized.

 
zoogies said:
Moiraine said:
zoogies said:
As far as having 3 teams from the same conference, they can easily put a rule in that if there are 3 in the top 4 of the poll, the #5 team gets in.
Click to expand...
Moiraine, how is that fair, to the #4 or #3 team left out?
Click to expand...
It's "fair" because they've already lost to one of the other teams in the playoff and the #5 team might be an undefeated team like Oklahoma State last year. I put fair in quotes because there's no such thing as a perfect system. You mention a non subjective way to determine it. That doesn't exist. The BCS is pollsters and computers. I'm guessing (though I obviously don't know) that they'll use the BCS and have some stipulations like what I mentioned.
Click to expand...
But if the #5 team were clearly lackluster in comparison to whatever team gets left out - which may be either #3 or #4...

You're right, though, there's no perfect way to do it. And the BCS does use poll #s, so it factors in the human component. However, the result is non-subjective. The BCS condenses everything it uses as factors into one output number. If there are imperfections in its weighting algorithms, that methodology can be released openly and subject to debate. However, the rules are set and clearly defined. If a team didn't make the cut, it can be clearly seen why.

If there is even a tiny bit of "purely subjective argument" introduced to a committee decision, then all this is thrown out the window and made worthless. If a team doesn't make the cut, why? Because an eloquent speaker made a passionate 15-minute case for another team? Because it was put up to a human vote and a few guys (whose sympathies might forever be questioned) overruled another?
Click to expand...
It already happened after 2003 when the objective system cut out Southern Cal. After some eloquent whining they realized money making teams shouldn't be excluded and thus tweaked the BCS to make SOS unimportant compared to polls. No one mentioned that the system was put in place to break ties by using SOS.

Trivia, the Trojans get in [and the system probably remains unchanged] if ND hadn't lost to Syracuse and/or Hawaii lost to Boise St in the last week. To me, that was our only win over USC of that era. chuckleshuffle

Anyway, this is college football. We've never wanted a purely numbers based system and it's never going to happen.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If what I read is correct:

- The semifinals will rotate between 6 sites ( Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, Orange ) and 2 to be named. ( count on Alanta being one of those two ).

- The Final game is bid on by any city, and the cities that host the semifinals can also bid for that game.

- A selection committee made up of conference commissioners and college athletic directors will pick the 4 teams.

Other than adding 2 teams to the mix, as of now, I don't see this as an improvement.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top