- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Expand the Play Offs
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:09 am to Moscow Mule
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:09 am to Moscow Mule
quote:
Highschool does it
What a shite show participation trophy where everyone gets into the playoffs.
0
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:13 am to kingbob
should be 8 for sure, that way all conferences represented with the top Group of 5 and wildcards
The conference championship games need to go. A lot of times it ends up being a rematch from a game already played.
SEC can go to a 9 game schedule instead.
The conference championship games need to go. A lot of times it ends up being a rematch from a game already played.
SEC can go to a 9 game schedule instead.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:13 am to Moscow Mule
No thanks. Just another excuse for Bama to be in every year.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:16 am to Moscow Mule
Swiss pairings
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:21 am to CajunTiger_225
quote:
I disagree. Under that scenario conferences would be pooling teams and Oklahoma and Texas are the best two programs in that region
That’s fine but that doesn’t mean the ratings would go thru the roof as the guy I responded to said
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:28 am to biglosdaddy
quote:
I say 8 teams. 5 power 5 champs, 3 at large.
Make every conference have a title game so the champion of that gets in, no matter what.
This.
3 at larges chosen by the committee.
Ranking 1-8 chosen by the BCS computers.
First 4 games at the home site of the top 4 teams on NYE and NYD.
The semifinal and final are exactly as they are now.
Makes it doable for fans and students. Gives huge advantage to top 4. And provides college football the opportunity to showcase the fan passion and pageantry associated with big home game environments.
Also, it almost gives MORE importance to the regular season because conference championships are in reach for a lot of teams mathematically and because getting an at-large is more possible for more teams.
As it stands now, teams with championship dreams feel like their season is over after 1 loss.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:38 am to TheCaterpillar
Agree...It should be 6 maybe 8. Definitely not 16!
But I strongly disagree with giving the 5 Power 5 auto entries. If the season ended today, and you look at the current top 25, the highest rank PAC 12 team is Oregon at 12. Now they might move up given alot of the teams above them have to play each other, but to me, the Top 6 should come from the rankings only.
But I strongly disagree with giving the 5 Power 5 auto entries. If the season ended today, and you look at the current top 25, the highest rank PAC 12 team is Oregon at 12. Now they might move up given alot of the teams above them have to play each other, but to me, the Top 6 should come from the rankings only.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:43 am to kingbob
quote:
I'm good with 4 for now. I would rather address the issue of rent-a-wins before considering expanding the playoffs. I believe FBS teams should not be playing FCS teams and that there should be FAR fewer FBS teams.
You address the rent-a-wins by expanding the playoffs. That is, you make strength of schedule (SOS) actually matter ala college basketball. Right now there is very little incentive for the power conf. schools to play each other in non conf games. That is, if you are a power conf. school and you go undefeated, you are getting into the playoffs. PERIOD. Regardless of if you played an awful non-conf. schedule. For example: Ohio St. played a dogs shite OOC schedule. But if they go undefeated and we have a 12-1 Oregon team (whose only loss is a neutral site game vs. Auburn), does anyone think OSU isn't getting in over Oregon? Of course not. In short, the benefit of winning that big non-conf game doesn't outweigh the risk of losing it. See Texas. They could very well still be in the playoff hunt had the simply chosen to play ULM instead of LSU.
By expanding the playoffs you start to make SOS matter because 1 loss teams will still have a chance to make the playoffs even if they lose to a non-conf. game vs. a power conf. opponent. College basketball routinely has big reg season non conf. games. That's because SOS is important and one loss to a really good team doesn't kill you.
You can expand the CFB playoffs to a number that still makes the reg season very important (8 teams, or AT MOST, 12) but also makes the benefit of big non-conf matchups outweigh the risk of a loss in such games. College football could absolutely OWN the month of December like college basketball owns the month of March. Get rid of the conf. championship games. Expand the playoffs to 8 teams, and put at least the first round of games on campus sites. Would anyone be opposed to watching a playoff game at Tiger Stadium?
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:52 am to Moscow Mule
6 or 8 teams is plenty. Especially when conferences have multiple teams that pass the eye test.
LSU, OU, Alabama, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Clemson all deserve it this year (so far) but 2 of those teams will be left out.
Crazy that this year there doesn't seem to be much separation between the top 6. Much different that the past couple of years when it was Alabama, Clemson, and then everybody else.
LSU, OU, Alabama, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Clemson all deserve it this year (so far) but 2 of those teams will be left out.
Crazy that this year there doesn't seem to be much separation between the top 6. Much different that the past couple of years when it was Alabama, Clemson, and then everybody else.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 9:54 am to Moscow Mule
I couldn’t think of many things more disgraceful than a 16 team playoff. Might as well throw the regular season in the trash
Posted on 10/18/19 at 10:16 am to biglosdaddy
Yes ti this and the at large would be determined by highest rank either thru committee or old bcs ranking formula
Posted on 10/18/19 at 10:34 am to Alt26
I want 4 because what makes college football exciting is that every big game matchup is high stakes. One loss, anywhere, and you might be out of the running completely, as opposed to the NFL where losses matter, but not nearly as much because 6 of them still usually gets one to the post season.
By narrowing the field of teams available for FBS teams to schedule, it will automatically raise the strength of schedule for all. The gap between an upper tier G5 program like Cincinatti and a lower tier P5 program like Arkansas isn’t that great, but the gap between Cincinatti and Nichols St. is massive. Imagine teams like Hawaii, UCF, and App St being the worst potential teams on your schedule. That’s already a huge step up in difficulty from today.
Big names schedule rent-a-wins because they can, and because their blue blood status affords them more lee-way than other programs.
A one-loss Alabama (that didn’t win their division) or a one loss Notre Dame already get in over a 2-loss Pac 12 champ not named USC. Keeping the rent-wins, but widening the field doesn’t really fix the “eye-test” bull shite. What fixes it is forcing those teams to play better competition during the season, but keeping the playoff small so the regular season remains tense and meaningful, unlike the NBA where it’s almost meaningless.
The most I would like to see at this time is 6, and that’s only if we compress FBS to just 6 conferences.
By narrowing the field of teams available for FBS teams to schedule, it will automatically raise the strength of schedule for all. The gap between an upper tier G5 program like Cincinatti and a lower tier P5 program like Arkansas isn’t that great, but the gap between Cincinatti and Nichols St. is massive. Imagine teams like Hawaii, UCF, and App St being the worst potential teams on your schedule. That’s already a huge step up in difficulty from today.
Big names schedule rent-a-wins because they can, and because their blue blood status affords them more lee-way than other programs.
A one-loss Alabama (that didn’t win their division) or a one loss Notre Dame already get in over a 2-loss Pac 12 champ not named USC. Keeping the rent-wins, but widening the field doesn’t really fix the “eye-test” bull shite. What fixes it is forcing those teams to play better competition during the season, but keeping the playoff small so the regular season remains tense and meaningful, unlike the NBA where it’s almost meaningless.
The most I would like to see at this time is 6, and that’s only if we compress FBS to just 6 conferences.
This post was edited on 10/18/19 at 11:04 am
Posted on 10/18/19 at 2:07 pm to rbdallas
quote:don't you know the BCS formula was two-thirds HUMAN POLLS.
get the effin humans out of it !
we went to the BCS because of the HUMANS but a lot of you are too young to remember.
The other one-third was computer rankings, but remember that humans program the computers and have control over the weighting of the different variables they use. Sometimes margin-of-victory is considered, the next year it isn't.
THe computers aren't some 22nd century AI all-knowing entity. They spit out rankings based on factors that HUMANS deem important and which are weighted by HUMANS. And those computer formulas aren't perfect and are tweaked every year.
The March Madness Committee is universally respected because they get together for a long time and use extreme amounts of data. I'd argue the Playoff Selection Committee does the same thing.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 2:10 pm to Pelican fan99
quote:correct. 16 teams renders much of the regular season meaningless.
I couldn’t think of many things more disgraceful than a 16 team playoff. Might as well throw the regular season in the trash
8 teams would be perfect. Reward conf champs with auto bids, and give 3 at-large bids to other deserving teams. Only one extra round, which can be played mid-December.
No-brainer.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 3:26 pm to gumpinmizzou
What are those 2 teams going to “buy”. Maybe, they can do it on their BYE week
Posted on 10/18/19 at 3:31 pm to tigahlovah
quote:
I think you have to go 6 or 12. Top seeds play at home until you get to the neutral site championship. This retains the importance of the regular season, because teams will strive for the highest seeds to secure a bye and/or home games. Does LSU want to travel to ohio st. in december?
I get what you're saying, but that could impose a pretty hefty financial burden on a fan who wants to attend every playoff game. Not all of us are like Bama fans who will mortgage their double wides or sell their children just for a football ticket.
Posted on 10/18/19 at 5:29 pm to LouisianaLonghorn
quote:and the Bama obsession continues.
Not all of us are like Bama fans who will mortgage their double wides or sell their children just for a football ticket.
Posted on 10/19/19 at 10:14 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
ratings would go thru the roof as the guy I responded to said
They probably would though.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News