- 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
re: BCS has achieved consensus on 4-team seeded playoff.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 6:34 pm to Choot em Tiger
Posted on 6/20/12 at 6:34 pm to Choot em Tiger
quote:
This guy is right. 1. Alabama vs 4 ok state
2 LSU vs 3 arkansas would be last years example
I think LSU would have gotten the 1 seed, and wouldn't UGA have been the runner up?
1
Posted on 6/20/12 at 6:39 pm to The Easter Bunny
No, it would be Arkansas, they were ranked 3 or 4 last year at the end.
And who's the idiot who seeded bama 1? Lsu was undefeated last year they'd be the 1...
And who's the idiot who seeded bama 1? Lsu was undefeated last year they'd be the 1...
Posted on 6/20/12 at 6:41 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
Still like my plan
Posted on 6/20/12 at 6:59 pm to blzr
Is it okay to say the Big East is fricked?
Posted on 6/20/12 at 7:23 pm to BluegrassBelle
This won't solve anything. Wait until an undefeated #3 gets passed over for a strong #5 by this "committee". Same shite, different year & system. 8-team playoff is next on the agenda. Just give it time.
This post was edited on 6/20/12 at 7:24 pm
Posted on 6/20/12 at 7:44 pm to nosaj56
quote:
@slmandel Via multiple sources, commissioners prefer a selection committee that picks "best four," emphasizes but not requires conference champions.
what the hell does that mean?
Posted on 6/20/12 at 7:48 pm to RLDSC FAN
it's probably just something to make the B1G a little bit happier 
Posted on 6/20/12 at 7:53 pm to nosaj56
Playoffs are gay. Way to go guys, lets just make it the NFL where you can lose 9 games yet theoretically still win the Super Bowl.
ETA: What is that, the college football equivalent of 5-7?
Couldn't just leave a decent enough system alone. Just had to go improve it by making it shitty.
ETA: What is that, the college football equivalent of 5-7?
Couldn't just leave a decent enough system alone. Just had to go improve it by making it shitty.
This post was edited on 6/20/12 at 7:55 pm
Posted on 6/20/12 at 8:06 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
where you can lose 9 games yet theoretically still win the Super Bowl.
Do you really think this will be an issue for the BCS?
Posted on 6/20/12 at 8:13 pm to nosaj56
"Selection Committee"
Gotta make sure Bama, ND, and USC make it. Only one true slot open each year.
Gotta make sure Bama, ND, and USC make it. Only one true slot open each year.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 8:14 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
Still like my plan
8 Team Playoff
4 Conference Champions
4 At Large
That's not a bad plan, it keeps winning a conference important and penalizes a team that doesn't win its conference. Based on last year, Bama would have to go play at Wisconsin.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 8:18 pm to H-Town Tiger
2 Questions for everyone
1) Does this system have a chance at limiting conference expansion? It could keep teams like FSU in the ACC, ND independent, etc by not directly placing the Big 4 champions into the Final 4 automatically.
2) Wouldn't BCS rankings work better than a selection committee?
1) Does this system have a chance at limiting conference expansion? It could keep teams like FSU in the ACC, ND independent, etc by not directly placing the Big 4 champions into the Final 4 automatically.
2) Wouldn't BCS rankings work better than a selection committee?
Posted on 6/20/12 at 8:21 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
Way to go guys, lets just make it the NFL where you can lose 9 games yet theoretically still win the Super Bowl.
ETA: What is that, the college football equivalent of 5-7?
A grand total of 1 team has ever made the NFL playoffs with 9 losses. 5-7 in college would not be anywhere close to being 1 of the 4 highest ranked conference winners. I do agree that the regular season should be more important and systems like the NFL where 37.5% of the league makes the playoffs, does diminish the regular season (BTW 37.5% of D1 is 45 teams, no one has proposed a playoff that big.
I've defended the BCS because the regular season becomes very important, but last year both proved and disproved that. I don't think a 4 team playoff diminishes the regular season, at least no more than allowing a team a rematch after losing at home to a higher ranked team.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 8:24 pm to Keys Open Doors
1) I don't think so. They wouldn't be stupid enough to have a 4 team playoff for just the winners of 4 certain conferences. If they did that, they might as well file a lawsuit against themselves on behalf of those left out
2) IMO yes. The committee idea sounds good in theory, but I doubt it would vary much from the BCS rankings and could be a huge CF in a year like 2008 where you had 7 BCS teams at 12-1 or 11-1 and 2 NonAQ's that were 12-0.
2) IMO yes. The committee idea sounds good in theory, but I doubt it would vary much from the BCS rankings and could be a huge CF in a year like 2008 where you had 7 BCS teams at 12-1 or 11-1 and 2 NonAQ's that were 12-0.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 9:05 pm to Keys Open Doors
quote:
1) Does this system have a chance at limiting conference expansion? It could keep teams like FSU in the ACC, ND independent, etc by not directly placing the Big 4 champions into the Final 4 automatically.
Depends on the school IMO. If you're someone like say Louisville who is looking at probably getting excluded even if they win their conference (no more 3+ loss teams in the "BCS") because of the lack of strength in conference scheduling you're probably looking to change conferences. But as you said, someone like Notre Dame is sitting pretty as an Independent.
quote:
2) Wouldn't BCS rankings work better than a selection committee?
I'd think so. Especially since it seems like they're leaning towards a system that doesn't have much set-in-stone criteria.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 9:29 pm to H-Town Tiger
I'm well aware that they wouldn't approach the Top 4 seeds.
The point is, you are devaluing the regular season AND adding a selection committee. It won't stop here and more teams will be added to this playoff, which means the fluke of a 2 loss BCS champion like 2007 LSU just shot up dramatically. Hell, if they touch 8 teams, there is an outside chance at a 3 loss team winning it. Michigan State finished with 3 losses at #10 last year which is a pretty standard ranking for a 3 loss team, so maybe all is not lost yet, but when you add the selection committee, there will be lower ranked teams picked over higher ranked teams, and you'll have a bigger mess than we have now.
Just my opinion, but no 3 loss teams should EVER have a shot at an NC.
The point is, you are devaluing the regular season AND adding a selection committee. It won't stop here and more teams will be added to this playoff, which means the fluke of a 2 loss BCS champion like 2007 LSU just shot up dramatically. Hell, if they touch 8 teams, there is an outside chance at a 3 loss team winning it. Michigan State finished with 3 losses at #10 last year which is a pretty standard ranking for a 3 loss team, so maybe all is not lost yet, but when you add the selection committee, there will be lower ranked teams picked over higher ranked teams, and you'll have a bigger mess than we have now.
Just my opinion, but no 3 loss teams should EVER have a shot at an NC.
This post was edited on 6/20/12 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 6/20/12 at 9:56 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
if they touch 8 teams, there is an outside chance at a 3 loss team winning it. Michigan State finished with 3 losses at #10 last year which is a pretty standard ranking for a 3 loss team
Mich State was #10 after the bowls, before them, the highest ranked 3 loss team was #12 Baylor. The poll before the bowls is the one that natters for seeding playoff teams.
In the BCS era, highest ranked team with 3 losses before the bowls was Kansas State at #9 in 2000. Teams 10-15 all had fewer loses. So I disagree that 10 is a common ranking for 3 loss teams. however, the # of loses itself is not important, its where the record ranks for any particular season. Yeah, LSU had 2 loses in 2007. So did everyone else except #1 Ohio State and Kansas and Hawaii, neither of whom beat a ranked team all year.
quote:
The point is, you are devaluing the regular season AND adding a selection committee.
I basically agree with you and I want regular seasons to matter more. In a perfect world I'd only have a playoff if necessary., but that just wouldn't work in the real world.
But I do not think a 4 team playoff devalues the regular season anymore than last year's rematch. Having only conference winners actually increases the importance of the regular season imo. Even more so if you got rid of stupid CCG, which of course will never happen.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 10:04 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Having only conference winners actually increases the importance of the regular season imo.
Completely agree. LSU lost the national title last year because they played and beat Oregon. Had they not scheduled that game, or even lost it, Alabama does not play for the national title and LSU still does (against Oregon). LSU and Oregon were punished for playing an elite foe, which is an absurd outcome. LSU was further punished for beating Bama the first time, having to beat 10-win Georgia to qualify for the BCSCG.
LSU would have been better off not playing Oregon or losing to Bama, maybe both.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 10:22 pm to Marciano1
quote:
This won't solve anything. Wait until an undefeated #3 gets passed over for a strong #5 by this "committee". Same shite, different year & system. 8-team playoff is next on the agenda. Just give it time.
Agree, there needs to be concrete standards for entry, such as the top teams in a computer ranking or poll. The committee is just asking for controversy.
Posted on 6/20/12 at 10:24 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
I've defended the BCS because the regular season becomes very important, but last year both proved and disproved that.
Last year was such an anomaly, and given the events that played out throughout the season I do think the two best teams were chosen.
Page 3 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News