Why I hate only 4 teams in the playoffs

Win and get in without needing help

To me, the only way the 4 team final works is if you use the entire year as the playoffs. In other words, you have to win your way to the final 4 - it is not who is best it is who played best. Each of the 4 teams should have a convincing argument as to why they should be #1. So, no one loss teams should be in the final 4 until all undefeated teams (having played respectable competition) are out.

Yes, the 4 team final sucks.

I think 8 is a good number
Power 5 champs automatically and 3 at larges

Let the committee seed them how they like.

4 teams is fine

someone is always going to feel left out

i like the importance of winning the regular season

quote:

---

2007 LSU was put in the NC game with 2 losses

---

And we won our conference. Forget that didja?

This is why, in 2 years, the field will expand to 8 teams, under intense pressure from teams, fans, and network$$$.

It happened in basketball several times over the decades.

Remember, it wasn't that long ago that the powers that controlled this event (BCS) were expressly opposed to a playoff at all.....

quote:

---

96 Florida says howdyyyyyy

---

First off, get the frick off of this board you Gump Bitch.

Second, you and your cousin fricking fanbase can shove that Florida 96 year up your cleft assholes.

Florida played Florida State again because there was no one else for them to play due to the Bowl Coalition tie ins.

The Sugar Bowl would have killed to have FSU play undefeated Arizona State or even 1 loss Ohio State, but the Big 10 and Pac 10 were excluded because of their Rose Bowl lock.

Nebraska was a lock at #2 over Florida until they lost the Big 12 CG to a 4 loss Texas team.


See that 96 Rematch had as much to do with the creation of the BCS as the split title in 97 did.

The only holdout to a "playoff" was the idiotic BIG/PAC 10 Rose Bowl situation. But after their 2 champs got snubbed for not participating in the Coalition, they realized they had to get over their Rose Parade fetish. The dialogue started that off season and was finalized after the Michigan Nebraska split when they arranged that the traditional Rose matchup would always occur unless one of their champs was 1 or 2, or they were hosting the NCG.


See, the BCS wasn't just created to pick the "two best teams". It was created to ensure that conference Bowl tie ins would not prevent ALL of the best teams from having an opportunity to " settle it on the field".

Your inbred tide already had their chance in 2011, and if your coach and ESPN hadn't manipulated the votes, the system would have rightly selected the other conference champ to have their opportunity at #1, which would have put OSU against LSU, to "settle it on the field", ensuring the most teams had a chance to cross conference lines to make a claim for #1.


So frick you and Florida 96, both of those shams spurred paradigm shifts in the postseason process, because they both were not the fair outcome.

At least in 96 the Sugar Bowl had no other option. In 2011, there was another option, and it was a robbery of LSU, OSU, and all the fans that made it one of the least watched BCSCGs ever that Alabama was given that Mulligan.


So ends the lesson. Go to bed, Junior

quote:

---

Florida then gets a playoff spot and has only one loss which was to LSU.

---

Head-to-head is a tie-breaker. Florida and LSU won't be tied in anything in this scenario.

quote:

---

Stop diminishing the regular season.

---

Myth. Right now there are about 10 schools who have reasonable national title aspirations and 118 who don't. That alone diminishes everything past September for about 100 schools.

The real truth is that the regular season will never be diminished, be it 4, 8, or 16.