- 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
New playoff format... Would this work?
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:37 pm
After hearing all the arguments, about not playing too many games, who gets into the playoffs, etc. here is a thought that I think would work. Can't really think of an argument of why it would be a bad idea, or unfair to anyone.
SEC, Big 10, ACC, PAC 10, Big 12 all play their conference championship, which would serve as the first round of the playoffs.
Those conferences can be left to have divisions, or not. They can determine where the conf title game is played, but regardless those games serve as the first round of the playoffs. Winner advances, and it doesn't add an extra game.
Then you take the top 2 ranked teams from the rest of the conferences and/or independents play in a game the same weekend. Winner advances into the final 6. This is the only area I think is tricky, because those conferences would either have to eliminate conference championships, or play them a week earlier. I think they would be fine with this though, because they are awarded a spot at the big boy table. It also solves the issues of ND having a path to the playoffs.
So they playoffs would be 12 teams, without adding an extra week.
From there, the committee can rank the 6 teams who advance 1-6. Top two teams get a bye into the semi finals, and you play it out from there.
It only adds potentially one extra game to possibly two teams, if the 3-6 seed would advance to the finals.
Where is the issue with this?
SEC, Big 10, ACC, PAC 10, Big 12 all play their conference championship, which would serve as the first round of the playoffs.
Those conferences can be left to have divisions, or not. They can determine where the conf title game is played, but regardless those games serve as the first round of the playoffs. Winner advances, and it doesn't add an extra game.
Then you take the top 2 ranked teams from the rest of the conferences and/or independents play in a game the same weekend. Winner advances into the final 6. This is the only area I think is tricky, because those conferences would either have to eliminate conference championships, or play them a week earlier. I think they would be fine with this though, because they are awarded a spot at the big boy table. It also solves the issues of ND having a path to the playoffs.
So they playoffs would be 12 teams, without adding an extra week.
From there, the committee can rank the 6 teams who advance 1-6. Top two teams get a bye into the semi finals, and you play it out from there.
It only adds potentially one extra game to possibly two teams, if the 3-6 seed would advance to the finals.
Where is the issue with this?
16
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:38 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Better than most alternative scenarios I’ve seen.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:40 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
I see no reason that every Conference Champ need to be automatically included in a playoff.
The best thing WOULD have been to simply leave the BCS calculation / formula and take top 4.
Now that we have the CFP Committee, just leave it as is. I have had no issue with the FINAL selections in any year. All of this quibbling we are doing is AWESOME. I do not WANT it eliminated.
The best thing WOULD have been to simply leave the BCS calculation / formula and take top 4.
Now that we have the CFP Committee, just leave it as is. I have had no issue with the FINAL selections in any year. All of this quibbling we are doing is AWESOME. I do not WANT it eliminated.
This post was edited on 11/14/19 at 3:41 pm
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:43 pm to Philippines4LSU
quote:
Better than most alternative scenarios I’ve seen
I believe so. It eliminates the argument of a committee trying to determine the four best teams vs four most deserving teams. You earn you way into the playoffs through your division, and battle it out there.
Could a team, like LSU, Bama, Auburn, Florida, Penn St be among the best teams in the nation and miss the playoffs? Yes. But it keeps the college football season super important, because winning in your conference is extremely important.
The only thing it does is devalues OOC games. They will ultimately be meaningless. But it would be up to the teams to either schedule cupcakes to pad their record, which would do them no good. Or schedule tougher opponents to become battle tested to prepare for the playoffs. Either way though, OOC wins/loses would be meaningless.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:45 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
The best thing WOULD have been to simply leave the BCS calculation / formula and take top 4.
But the BCS final 4 would have been exactly the same as the playoff teams every single year so far. So people arguing to bring back the BCS are dumb.
quote:
I see no reason that every Conference Champ need to be automatically included in a playoff
Well that's exactly what people are crying for right now.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:48 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
quote:
. So people arguing to bring back the BCS are dumb.
Stop being an insulting a-hole. That is my point EXACTLY. We would not have a "group of experts" meeting and voting, blah blah....BECAUSE it is nearly identical.
quote:
Well that's exactly what people are crying for right now.
My dad taught me that just because I cry for a thing does not mean I get that thing OR that it is a good thing.
People are "crying for" it because of the passion around college football. Changing it as suggested just makes the playoff worse and the bellyaching will STILL be ongoing.
This post was edited on 11/14/19 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:54 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Go back to old bowl system, with conference tie-ins and all. This re-energizes the bowls again, brings viewers and money, encourages players to participate. Brings in matchups that we never see now (Pac12 vs Big10, etc) and would help settle out a lot of the questions of who is better than who.
After bowls, apply the old BCS formula and play 1 vs 2 on second weekend in January.
Only 1 extra game
Revitalizes bowls
Creates a lot of marquis matchups.
Could do a 4 team playoff after bowls by dropping a week of the regular season ( who cares about P5 vs FCS games anyway) and moving bowls up a week.
After bowls, apply the old BCS formula and play 1 vs 2 on second weekend in January.
Only 1 extra game
Revitalizes bowls
Creates a lot of marquis matchups.
Could do a 4 team playoff after bowls by dropping a week of the regular season ( who cares about P5 vs FCS games anyway) and moving bowls up a week.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 3:58 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Don't some of the Group of Five conferences play conference championship games. Wouldn't this add another game for them?
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:10 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
It by no means guarantees the four best teams.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:10 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Not a bad scenario. It would open the door to fluke upsets though like a 12 ranked Florida upsetting the West champ and people would complain that they had an easier path in the same conference.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:11 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Conference chsips are either ALL reward or they are punishment. Never liked the idea after 05.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:16 pm to billfish21
quote:
It by no means guarantees the four best teams
Neither does the current system.
And neither does any playoff system. Often times the best team isn't the team who wins.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:17 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
quote:Why, why should some team we know has no chance...get a chance for more exposure and prolong their season just to call it an expanded "Playoff"
SEC, Big 10, ACC, PAC 10, Big 12 all play their conference championship, which would serve as the first round of the playoffs.
We know who the best teams are, just let them play each other. If an undefeated UGA team and an undefeated LSU team meet in the Championship game you would have a 1 v 2 seed NATIONALLY playing each other in the first goddamn round of the playoff...while their is a cripple fight in the Big 12, or 10, or Pac....
That seems fair as hell.
quote:shite, never mind, it isn't a playoff in the conf championships
From there, the committee can rank the 6 teams who advance 1-6
A 8-4 PSU team beats and undefeated OSU....and then you take OSU anyway
The issue is not needing MORE teams, it is needing the right teams, and we all know who they are....LSU and OSU are in unless they shite the bed. Now the Committee just needs to pick Bama, Oregon, or Clemson, or Georgia (if they win the SEC) as the remainders. Baylor could destroy OU and change things up, but the rest will sort itself out.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:17 pm to beantown
quote:
. It would open the door to fluke upsets though like a 12 ranked Florida
That's what we love about the college basketball playoffs though. I think it would be great to have a Cinderella college football team.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:19 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
Stop being an insulting a-hole
So you tell me not to insult people, and then insult me in the next word? Cool.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:19 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
8 teams. no byes. P5 champs and 3 at large
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:22 pm to BlackAdam
quote:
Don't some of the Group of Five conferences play conference championship games. Wouldn't this add another game for them?
I referenced this issue in the OP a bit. They would have to either not play a conference championship game, or play it a week earlier, eliminating a week of their regular season. So, it wouldn't add a game.
It's the only drawback i see in this, but don't you think ULL/App St/Boise/Cincy would gladly trade this off for a chance to make the playoffs? The other option is to have the NOLA bowl as your best possibility. Seems like a no brainier to me.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:23 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Only 2 ranked teams that don't make their conference championship game get in? You will have 1 and 2 loss teams getting shut out of the playoff while 3 and 4 loss teams get in by virtue of winning the disvision in their shitty conferences. Last year fricking Pitt got into the ACC Championship game with 5 losses. Northwestern got into the Big 10 CG with 4. Sorry, but making it to your conference championship shouldn't give you the right to win and advance in the CFP.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:26 pm to oOoLsUtIgErSoOo
Force all teams into one of 8 conferences. 8 conferences, 8 conference championships.
8 team playoff.
8 team playoff.
Posted on 11/14/19 at 4:32 pm to LSU82BILL
quote:
Only 2 ranked teams that don't make their conference championship game get in? You will have 1 and 2 loss teams getting shut out of the playoff while 3 and 4 loss teams get in by virtue of winning the disvision in their shitty conferences
All I've heard all week on here was arguments about how much conference championships should matter. The people making these arguments are only doing it because they want to throw a fit about Bama getting back into the playoffs.
I come up with a format that solves nearly every issue this board has been complaining about, and the same people come in and argue AGAINST what they had been arguing for.
Personally, I think the CFP playoff is fine at four teams. And I think they have nailed it every year. I think the same will happen this year as well.
This thread just further proves what I have been saying. The people melting down are doing it because they can't get over an obsession with Bama. Had LSU lost the game, you would see totally different arguments.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News