- 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: The answer to why there will not be a playoff in college football
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:32 pm to tigerinridgeland
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:32 pm to tigerinridgeland
You don't have to shorten the season.
At a 16 team playoff format, you play 3 extra games if you play in the NC. You have a seeded round robin (with the higher seeded team plays at home) that would generate more revenue than any bowl game would. THEN you play a neutral site game to determine the NCAA champion. $$$$$. That is real money.
Let's take last years results.
If you put every conference champion in the bracket, then highest ranking teams per order, you have Troy Vs. Alabama. David vs goliath. Ok maybe not a barn burner.
Then, TCU VS LSU!! Really?!?!?! What a match up.
If we win we play either Florida or Penn state!
But hey, there is no money in a playoff.......
At a 16 team playoff format, you play 3 extra games if you play in the NC. You have a seeded round robin (with the higher seeded team plays at home) that would generate more revenue than any bowl game would. THEN you play a neutral site game to determine the NCAA champion. $$$$$. That is real money.
Let's take last years results.
If you put every conference champion in the bracket, then highest ranking teams per order, you have Troy Vs. Alabama. David vs goliath. Ok maybe not a barn burner.
Then, TCU VS LSU!! Really?!?!?! What a match up.
If we win we play either Florida or Penn state!
But hey, there is no money in a playoff.......
2
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:33 pm to SwatMitchell
how do you split the money?
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:33 pm to COF
quote:
If you put every conference champion in the bracket,
then you'd have a shitty playoff
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:36 pm to ELVIS U
Division one is a league of unequals.
- Unequal strength of schedule
- Unequal stadium size
- Unequal conferences
- Unequal $$
It will be impossible to make a fair play-off system until these things are leveled, which will never happen.
A plus 1, possibly plus 2 is the best that will happen that preserves the bowl system.
- Unequal strength of schedule
- Unequal stadium size
- Unequal conferences
- Unequal $$
It will be impossible to make a fair play-off system until these things are leveled, which will never happen.
A plus 1, possibly plus 2 is the best that will happen that preserves the bowl system.
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
Not at all. You have for better drama. Ok, I see. Troy and East Carolina aren't gonna burn it up. But they would play Alabama and Texas.
Thats right. Texas doesn't get upset at home by bad teams.
Oh wait.
Thats right. Texas doesn't get upset at home by bad teams.
Oh wait.
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:38 pm to COF
quote:
You have for better drama.
you have unworthy teams making it for no real reason
16 teams would be an abortion, especially if every conference champ got a shot
8 teams at most. the 8 best teams
4 should be the max
and nobody can tell me how they'd split the playoff money (or home game revenue)
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:40 pm to COF
If you seed only conference champions, then it's cut and dried, but when you start placing "wild cards" by rankings, then it will always be controversial.
I'm not against it, but just stating that controversy will always abound when rankings are used...just like it is now.
"Should Boise go before LSU?" or "LSU should go before Ohio State?"
I'm not against it, but just stating that controversy will always abound when rankings are used...just like it is now.
"Should Boise go before LSU?" or "LSU should go before Ohio State?"
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:44 pm to oompaw
Not just the conference champions, but also ranked top seeds. Boise won the WAC. LSU is just a high ranked team.
As for controversy, you think the system we have now is not controversal?
As for controversy, you think the system we have now is not controversal?
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:46 pm to COF
quote:
Boise won the WAC.
i thought nevada did
Posted on 1/25/11 at 2:57 pm to COF
You are correct, BS did win the WAC, but you missed what I posted. As long as rankings are involved, there'll always be controversy.
If you take the conference champions then only two wildcards to fill out the bracket, there will be controversy over the rankings of those two teams. Which two teams would've deserve to go this past season? Ohio State? Arkansas? LSU? Michigan State? Stanford?
If you take the conference champions then only two wildcards to fill out the bracket, there will be controversy over the rankings of those two teams. Which two teams would've deserve to go this past season? Ohio State? Arkansas? LSU? Michigan State? Stanford?
This post was edited on 1/25/11 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 1/25/11 at 3:06 pm to Geaux1967
total crap. more money is to be made by all in this solution
playoff solution
one day, folks will realize that there is one and only one reason we do not have a college football playoff...
The ego of university presidents/chancellors, who are henched into false reasons.
There are easy-to-implement solution frameworks such as the one in this link that make EVERYONE more money.
Money is NOT the issue. Folks who think that are fooling themselves and are not in the know.
This is some easy stuff to fix, aside from the ego issue that is...
playoff solution
one day, folks will realize that there is one and only one reason we do not have a college football playoff...
The ego of university presidents/chancellors, who are henched into false reasons.
There are easy-to-implement solution frameworks such as the one in this link that make EVERYONE more money.
Money is NOT the issue. Folks who think that are fooling themselves and are not in the know.
This is some easy stuff to fix, aside from the ego issue that is...
This post was edited on 1/25/11 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 1/25/11 at 3:10 pm to COF
COF
what movie is your pic from?? that looks so familiar..
But yeah. I've always felt the BCS bowls we're a natural fit for playoff locations. (adding cotton and cap1 are nice additions too)
what movie is your pic from?? that looks so familiar..
But yeah. I've always felt the BCS bowls we're a natural fit for playoff locations. (adding cotton and cap1 are nice additions too)
Posted on 1/25/11 at 3:12 pm to therocketscientist
quote:
that make EVERYONE more money.
the problem is that the big schools would want to make more money and the small conferences would get a very small piece of the pie, possibly making less money
Posted on 1/25/11 at 3:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
My pic is from Hocus Pocus. Ice. Or Eddie. LOL
What I am Suggesting may need to get the kinks out of it. Not perfect maybe. But is it not better than what we have now?
What I am Suggesting may need to get the kinks out of it. Not perfect maybe. But is it not better than what we have now?
Posted on 1/25/11 at 3:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
16 teams would be an abortion, especially if every conference champ got a shot
no way do the lower teams get in by virtue of winning weak conferences. win and get in the top 10, then we'll talk
Posted on 1/25/11 at 4:15 pm to ELVIS U
Thanks for the compliment, and I know it would never actually be accepted, for a number of reasons that have been discussed here. But we can all hope.
Posted on 1/25/11 at 4:28 pm to CovingtonTiger
quote:
You could use the top 8 in BCS rankings to determine the participants,
It's funny, people bitch and moan about the BCS liek it's really any different than it used to be before the BCS.
The reason it's not different?
The use of opinion polls.
If you're going to scrap the BCS, SCRAP THE BCS.
quote:
or take the champs of the 6 automatic qualifying conferences plus two at large selections.
I like this, except I would NOT take "at large" selections as wildcard teams, I would take the two best NON_AQ conference champions.
That way it doesn't minimize the achievement of a conference championship.
Posted on 1/25/11 at 4:32 pm to CovingtonTiger
How about putting the best teams into BCS Bowls, then after they shake out, do one final BCS calculation and put #1 vs #2 against each other ten days later.
Second scenario, again put the best teams into the BCS bowls, let them play, then do one final BCS calculation and put #4 vs #1 and #3 vs #2 a week later, then those two winners against each other the following week.
Second scenario, again put the best teams into the BCS bowls, let them play, then do one final BCS calculation and put #4 vs #1 and #3 vs #2 a week later, then those two winners against each other the following week.
Posted on 1/25/11 at 4:37 pm to Geaux1967
Currently there are 4 BCS bowls with 8 teams playing in those bowls.
So if those 8 teams played a playoff it would be like adding 3 more BCS bowls. This equals more money.
So if those 8 teams played a playoff it would be like adding 3 more BCS bowls. This equals more money.
Posted on 1/25/11 at 4:42 pm to bradwieser
quote:
Currently there are 4 BCS bowls with 8 teams playing in those bowls.
So if those 8 teams played a playoff it would be like adding 3 more BCS bowls. This equals more money.
the tv ratings would be astronomical for all the games.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News