- 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: I don't like the new playoff system
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:39 am to SabiDojo
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:39 am to SabiDojo
Indeed. Obviously what I'm suggesting will never happen but there needs to be a some standard so we get more of a national, representative sample .
Require each team to schedule 10-11 games from the P5 every year? Idk
Require each team to schedule 10-11 games from the P5 every year? Idk
3
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:41 am to risesandfires
IMO the most it should be is 12 and it should have 3 pools of teams like the D3 playoffs.
Pool A - Auto bid conference champs - SEC, ACC, Big 10, Pac 12, Big 12
Pool B - Best two from the G5 conferences
Pool C - Best remaining 5 teams
You could also bump it down to 8, still do the 5 autos for the P5, have just 1 slot for the best G5, and then the last 2 are the best of the rest.
Pool A - Auto bid conference champs - SEC, ACC, Big 10, Pac 12, Big 12
Pool B - Best two from the G5 conferences
Pool C - Best remaining 5 teams
You could also bump it down to 8, still do the 5 autos for the P5, have just 1 slot for the best G5, and then the last 2 are the best of the rest.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:50 am to rocket31
quote:
Indeed. Obviously what I'm suggesting will never happen but there needs to be a some standard so we get more of a national, representative sample .
I completely agree.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 10:51 am to rocket31
quote:
Require each team to schedule 10-11 games from the P5 every year? Idk
Personally, I don't see why not. I know it's not fair to the smaller schools, but I would like to see 10-11 games of quality opponents.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:02 am to rocket31
quote:
Require each team to schedule 10-11 games from the P5 every year? Idk
So a completely separate division for the P5? The smaller conferences just play each other?
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:04 am to risesandfires
The only thing controversial about the Committee selections so far are that teams who haven't looked as good or played as difficult a schedule as teams who look good and have played better teams are being dinged for it.
Which isn't controversial at all.
Which isn't controversial at all.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:09 am to Professor Parks
quote:
BCS was fine
Should just use BCS rankings not a committee
Yea man, computers. Definitely the way to go!
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:12 am to etm512
quote:
So a completely separate division for the P5? The smaller conferences just play each other?
I hate to say it, but it's getting to that point. There are so many college football teams now. What are there, 136? It's ridiculous. It's becoming difficult to gauge who deserves to be in the discussion and who isn't. Too many analysts with their "eyeball" tests and saying things like, "Well, Baylor did beat TCU, but TCU's loss is better than Baylor's loss, so TCU is better than Baylor". shite is getting ridiculous.
The committee is making their job harder than it needs to be. I think making the schedules tougher through mandate can help that.
Seriously, how fun would it be to see the SEC play 4 games against teams in another conference, and have that rotate to a different conference every year? I would love that.
I guess I'm in the minority, but I'm just tired of the copious amounts of double talk and hypocrisy with the media and the committee.
This post was edited on 11/5/14 at 11:13 am
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:54 am to SabiDojo
i agree that there should be a playoff (however many teams) selected by the computers. I hate when people complain "we didn't understand the computers so now we've got people". At least with the computers you know before the season, before the first ball is tee'd up, what the rules and requirements were. Now, NO ONE knows what the frick is going on.
and I'm gonna pistol-whip the next person that says "eyeball test".... Looking at you herby!
and I'm gonna pistol-whip the next person that says "eyeball test".... Looking at you herby!
Posted on 11/5/14 at 11:57 am to SabiDojo
quote:
Seriously, how fun would it be to see the SEC play 4 games against teams in another conference, and have that rotate to a different conference every year? I would love that.
You can do this and not get rid of the traditional rivalry games. Maybe 2 against the teams who were the same "rank" in their respective conferences? Still need all the conferences to be the same size probably
I think you get the same result if you keep conferences, have 16 teams in 4 of them, then have 1 winner come out of each region. Have semi-final/final games in each region at neutral sites and you have to be top 4 in your region/conference to make those neutral site games. Still may not have the absolute 4 best every year, but it takes away some of the "we lost on the road to a top 5 team only, we beat them on a neutral site" or vice versa type argument
Posted on 11/5/14 at 12:09 pm to risesandfires
Just for perspective, here's the CFP top 16, their FBS winning %'s, and their SOS rank based on the old BCS formula:
1 Mississippi State 1.000 6
2 Florida State 1.000 27
3 Auburn .875 1
4 Oregon .875 10
5 Alabama .875 26
6 Texas Christian .857 32
7 Kansas State .857 31
8 Michigan State .857 47
9 Arizona State .857 19
10 Notre Dame .875 39
11 Ole Miss .778 2
12 Baylor .857 88
13 Nebraska .875 62
14 Ohio State .875 71
15 Oklahoma .750 29
16 Louisiana State .750 4
As you can see, the top 8 is almost completely consistent with at least these criteria. Kansas State's ranking below TCU is inconsistent with this, but this inconsistency will work itself out on the field very soon.
1 Mississippi State 1.000 6
2 Florida State 1.000 27
3 Auburn .875 1
4 Oregon .875 10
5 Alabama .875 26
6 Texas Christian .857 32
7 Kansas State .857 31
8 Michigan State .857 47
9 Arizona State .857 19
10 Notre Dame .875 39
11 Ole Miss .778 2
12 Baylor .857 88
13 Nebraska .875 62
14 Ohio State .875 71
15 Oklahoma .750 29
16 Louisiana State .750 4
As you can see, the top 8 is almost completely consistent with at least these criteria. Kansas State's ranking below TCU is inconsistent with this, but this inconsistency will work itself out on the field very soon.
This post was edited on 11/5/14 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 11/5/14 at 12:15 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
i think you get the same result if you keep conferences, have 16 teams in 4 of them, then have 1 winner come out of each region
close to what should happen.
Imagine whats likely this year...
Two SEC teams
FSU
TCU
That would mean that the playoff for the "National Championship" is comprised of teams all south of the Mason Dixon line, with three of the four teams having never ventured above the Mason Dixon line for a regular season game. Might as well label it the "Confederacy Championship." Smh
Posted on 11/5/14 at 12:23 pm to rocket31
It's not our fault that you people in the north can't field a good football team.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 12:33 pm to LarrytheGolfer
I dont live in the North 
But anyways, I agree, northern teams dont do themselves any favors by losing in big games, but thats not really the point here.
We need to have more of a nationally representative sample of games...if we want to keep a 4 team playoff system.
But anyways, I agree, northern teams dont do themselves any favors by losing in big games, but thats not really the point here.
We need to have more of a nationally representative sample of games...if we want to keep a 4 team playoff system.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 12:40 pm to rocket31
quote:Sos shouldn't count, but geography should.
That would mean that the playoff for the "National Championship" is comprised of teams all south of the Mason Dixon line, with three of the four teams having never ventured above the Mason Dixon line for a regular season game. Might as well label it the "Confederacy Championship." Smh
Your degree says you're smarter than Einstein. Come on, man.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 1:24 pm to risesandfires
6 teams is the best. It rewards the top 2 team with byes for taking care of business in the regular season.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 1:38 pm to Anfield Road
I think a playoff of 4, 6, or 8 would all be fine. Any more than that is too much IMO.
The idea of conferences rotating playing each other is intriguing. I don't know if it could work though b/c the season just isn't that long and there are so many teams. NFL can rotate b/c there are only 32 teams total and divisions only have 4 teams. I think there are 128 FBS teams and conferences have 10-14 teams.
The idea of conferences rotating playing each other is intriguing. I don't know if it could work though b/c the season just isn't that long and there are so many teams. NFL can rotate b/c there are only 32 teams total and divisions only have 4 teams. I think there are 128 FBS teams and conferences have 10-14 teams.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 1:46 pm to GumBro Jackson
quote:
The idea of conferences rotating playing each other is intriguing. I don't know if it could work though b/c the season just isn't that long and there are so many teams. NFL can rotate b/c there are only 32 teams total and divisions only have 4 teams. I think there are 128 FBS teams and conferences have 10-14 teams.
I meant rotate every year. So, 2015 the B1G would play the SEC. The PAC would play the ACC. So on, and so on.
Then, the next year, the SEC would play the Big 12, the ACC would play the B1G, etc.
Doing this would give us a greater sample size of the strengths of teams in the conference.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 2:07 pm to SabiDojo
it would be nice to see more quality games between the power conferences of course - but more importantly it would be nice to see similar quality teams from different conferences.
Seeing an OU beat up Wake Forest wouldn't' show me much - but seeing them beat Clemson would be pretty meaningful.
Seeing an OU beat up Wake Forest wouldn't' show me much - but seeing them beat Clemson would be pretty meaningful.
Posted on 11/5/14 at 2:10 pm to molsusports
quote:
Seeing an OU beat up Wake Forest wouldn't' show me much - but seeing them beat Clemson would be pretty meaningful.
Well, you never know who will be a good team. Duke is having a great season, better than last year.
And, in my suggestion, you can have that. You have 4 nonconference games. So, LSU may play FSU, Wake, Duke, and UNC in the same season. Alabama would play Clemson, Duke, Miami, Louisville. You see what I'm saying? You would have larger sample sizes. Alabama beating up on Chattanooga doesn't tell us anything. Alabama beating Clemson and Duke but losing to Louisville does tell us something.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News