- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2008 proves www.collegefootballsolution.com
Posted on 1/2/09 at 7:54 pm
Posted on 1/2/09 at 7:54 pm
is the best overall and equitable solution. All the others are too shallow and would not work every year, and/or would be logistically problematic.
All top 10 BCS teams would have made field this year in this solution.
And this year ONCE AGAIN..will prove the stupid, SHALLOW-thinkers PLUS-ONE is totally inadequate since USC, either OU or FLa, likely Texas and possibly a 13-0 Utah will all likely emerge with legit arguments for the 2 spots in the plus-one scheme, leaving 2 extremely strong cases out of the game.
LINK
All top 10 BCS teams would have made field this year in this solution.
And this year ONCE AGAIN..will prove the stupid, SHALLOW-thinkers PLUS-ONE is totally inadequate since USC, either OU or FLa, likely Texas and possibly a 13-0 Utah will all likely emerge with legit arguments for the 2 spots in the plus-one scheme, leaving 2 extremely strong cases out of the game.
LINK
This post was edited on 1/2/09 at 7:59 pm
3
Posted on 1/2/09 at 8:57 pm to therocketscientist
I've said it before and I'll say it again. A playoff does not necessarily produce "the best" team.
Need I mention last year's NFL champion? They beat a previously undefeated team in the final minutes of the game. The previously-undefeated team had beaten the Giants just a few weeks back, as a matter of fact.
Where the Giants "the best" team in the NFL last year? I'm not convinced. The Patriots simply made the mistake of beating the Giants on the wrong Sunday. If they had lost to the Giants during the regular season and then beaten them on Super Bowl Sunday, we would then be saying that the Patriots were definitively "the best". But instead, the Patriots made the error of getting the series split backwards in time, and for that sin, they lose the title of being "the best" of last season. This is hardly a compelling case for the Giants being "the best".
Can we really say with certainty that the Giants would have won a "best of X" series? I don't think so...
Need I mention last year's NFL champion? They beat a previously undefeated team in the final minutes of the game. The previously-undefeated team had beaten the Giants just a few weeks back, as a matter of fact.
Where the Giants "the best" team in the NFL last year? I'm not convinced. The Patriots simply made the mistake of beating the Giants on the wrong Sunday. If they had lost to the Giants during the regular season and then beaten them on Super Bowl Sunday, we would then be saying that the Patriots were definitively "the best". But instead, the Patriots made the error of getting the series split backwards in time, and for that sin, they lose the title of being "the best" of last season. This is hardly a compelling case for the Giants being "the best".
Can we really say with certainty that the Giants would have won a "best of X" series? I don't think so...
Posted on 1/2/09 at 9:31 pm to sml71
quote:
A playoff does not necessarily produce "the best" team.
No one with any brains at all feels that a playoff always produces the best team, Of course there are exceptions, otherwise we would just ask Vegas to decide the outcome. That has nothing to do with whether the glory of winning a championship should be determined via play on the field. A playoff gives teams that are on the short list an opportunity on the field of play to prove they are the best. If you want to claim to be the best, you had better be able to win when it counts. If you do, then you are the outright champion via a merit-based outcome.
Your rationale is solid that the best team does not always come out of playoffs, but has nothing to do with whether sports should give an opportunity for teams-of-merit to get an opportunity to win a champiosnhip on the field of play. That is why sports are so special. It is about winning when it counts.
this playoff proposal would ensure that the teams with legit argumens that they are the best a chance to prove it. If they don't win, then they should shut up and honor the team that did as the champion, which is not guaranteed to be the best, but who has earnd the right to be the champion of that season. Thats how it should be,
This post was edited on 1/2/09 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 1/2/09 at 9:33 pm to sml71
I think it is awesome rocketscientist! It baffles me that this doesn't happen already!
sml71, you are right, I would much rather be left to wonder who was best at the end of the season. Playing uneven schedules and then going by the best record is a perfect way to do things. How do we know Utah is not he best team this year? Or USC? Or Texas? We don't and we won't until they play it off.
sml71, you are right, I would much rather be left to wonder who was best at the end of the season. Playing uneven schedules and then going by the best record is a perfect way to do things. How do we know Utah is not he best team this year? Or USC? Or Texas? We don't and we won't until they play it off.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 10:33 pm to duboisd
my only problem with what you have is that I think the conference championship should not be a part of the bracket.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 10:35 pm to duboisd
I've been advocating almost exactly the same format as listed on this site, rocket. One additional requirement (and forgive me if it was included), would be for all of the major conferences, particularly the Big 10 and Pac 10, to expand to 12 teams and absorb a few of the independents or solid mid teams. At minimum, these conferences would have to play a championship game, which the format proposed on this site has. The beauty of this format is that it provides a clear path to the BCS championship and includes 16 teams while only requiring 3 extra games to be played. It also maintains the traditional bowl tie-ins. As usual, the Big 10, Pac 10 and Notre Dame will have the biggest problem with it. And to anyone who says that they would lose money, well, you're an idiot.
This is an excellent format.
This is an excellent format.
This post was edited on 1/2/09 at 10:36 pm
Posted on 1/2/09 at 10:42 pm to C
quote:
my only problem with what you have is that I think the conference championship should not be a part of the bracket
I beleive that all conferences should have a conference championship game and all of the major conference winners should get automatic bids. However, I can see where you would have situations where the conference losers have a legitimate argument for an at large.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 11:07 pm to ffishstik
Don't like having the conference championship loser eliminated in first round. This year would've had #1 playing #4 in SEC CG. Gotta find a better way to seed that first round.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 11:11 pm to DArbonneDuke
The makes for one looooong season for some college kids.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 11:25 pm to kclsufan
quote:
The makes for one looooong season for some college kids
Agreed. And even though practice time is extended just like it is now, its not the same because each team is having to prepare for a different opponent each week. Instead of developing players. Just saying.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 11:27 pm to kclsufan
quote:
The makes for one looooong season for some college kids.
4 out of 119 teams would play past New Years day, which is less than the current number of teams (this year 6 BCS teams do). These 4 would play about the same time as the current NC teams do. Therefore, the difference is that the final 2 teams out of 119 standing would play beyond the timeframe that the season currently plays till. That is a good trade-off to provide the overwhelming number of fans, players and coaches who want a playoff system.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 11:32 pm to DArbonneDuke
quote:
Don't like having the conference championship loser eliminated in first round.
If you are the best, you had better be able to win the games at the end of the season to prove so. Nothing wrong with that. Win if you are claiming to be the best, or shut your damn trap. The point is not to re-invent all of college football, but to work within the current BCS structure and traditions TO GET THE TEANS WITH A LEGIT ARGUMENT IN THE FIELD. Seeding would require an overhaul, when this system just augments and works with what currenty exists in a pragmatic fashion.
Posted on 1/2/09 at 11:36 pm to therocketscientist
quote:
Seeding would require an overhaul
Exactly what is needed instead of some patchwork add-on to an already flawed system.
This post was edited on 1/2/09 at 11:38 pm
Posted on 1/3/09 at 12:03 am to DArbonneDuke
quote:
Exactly what is needed instead of some patchwork add-on to an already flawed system.
I'm going to guess you do not interface with susbtantial political matters that involve a lot of moving parts and influences of substantial nature...and probably have never been involved in any complicated logistical operation
Otherwise, you would see that an "overhaul" is a total non-starter for college football.
The more pragmatic approach is to augment the traditions and BCS contracts that are in place and incorporate them in tact to the maximum extent possible...or you will get absolutely nowhere.
This post was edited on 1/3/09 at 12:05 am
Posted on 1/3/09 at 12:24 am to therocketscientist
There are two problems I have with this:
The potential for a conference dominating the final 16. Using this years final BCS standings and the format on the site, the Big 12 would have had 4 teams out of the final 16 (OU, Mizzou, UT, TT).
The other is the benefit of being a third seed in a conference. For argument's sake, pretend Ole Miss was high enough to pick up one of the 4 at large bids. There is the chance that they would play a team like Texas Tech, or even better, Boise State in the round of 16. Who does the SECW Champ play in the round of 16? Florida. Obviously a better matchup for the team that didn't win it's own division, let alone conference.
The potential for a conference dominating the final 16. Using this years final BCS standings and the format on the site, the Big 12 would have had 4 teams out of the final 16 (OU, Mizzou, UT, TT).
The other is the benefit of being a third seed in a conference. For argument's sake, pretend Ole Miss was high enough to pick up one of the 4 at large bids. There is the chance that they would play a team like Texas Tech, or even better, Boise State in the round of 16. Who does the SECW Champ play in the round of 16? Florida. Obviously a better matchup for the team that didn't win it's own division, let alone conference.
Posted on 1/3/09 at 12:31 am to therocketscientist
collegefootballsolution.com is made by people who don't realize the obvious fact that bowl games will never be used as playoff games. The fact that so many people still support this site is really disheartening.
Posted on 1/3/09 at 8:54 am to xiv
quote:yea, not like the great bcs system we have now!?!?!
I've said it before and I'll say it again. A playoff does not necessarily produce "the best" team
Posted on 1/3/09 at 8:57 am to therocketscientist
Plus-one should only be triggered if an undefeated team finishes #3 or #4 in the BCS rankings. If not, then just do the status quo. If you don't schedule hard enough to be ranked in the Top 4 of the BCS with a perfect regular season, then you don't deserve a shot at the national title. Sorry.
Posted on 1/3/09 at 9:28 am to kclsufan
quote:
makes for one looooong season for some college kids.
A great point often overlooked. That's one reason why the NCAA turned down an offer by some guy (I think the CEO of Gateway computers) of $30 million to LSU and USC after 2003 for an extra game. Trouble was, the NCAA promises players that the season ends after a certain date.
The more talented players may figure that, hey, if I'm going to play even more games against quality opposition, I might as well talk to my agent now so I can start getting paid for it.
This post was edited on 1/3/09 at 9:31 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News