- 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: College Football Needs This Playoff System
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:10 pm to Chicken
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:10 pm to Chicken
quote:
Take the BCS conference champions plus two at large...eight teams total. The two at-large teams would be the highest ranked teams in the BCS poll that did not receive the automatic bid.
If you can't win your conference, you are on the outside looking in
so in other words you are just taking the top 8 conference winners.
Which means a 4 loss team that wins the Big East or CUSA would get a hot at the NC but an 11-1 LSU that lost to Auburn and didn't win the SEC gets left out.
No thanks. The BCS >>> Than this
1
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:10 pm to Tigerbait337
quote:this would not be the case in my system...more than two teams could come from the same conference...maybe cap it at two.
Using the BCS format, you can't take more than two teams from a conference
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:11 pm to Chicken
quote:
This is true, but who is to say that the low ranked conference champion isn't playoff worthy? In 2001, LSU, with its three losses, was one of the hottest teams in the country at the end of the season.
I love LSU and I'm also a baseball STL Cardinals fan
I would say 2001 LSU definitely did not deserve to be entered into a NC tournament - because they were fairly disqualified already by losing too many games
(I would also say the recent STL Cardinals World Series championship rang pretty hollow to me considering how mediocre that team was most of the year)
It shouldn't be about who gets hot for the last few weeks or games
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:11 pm to Chicken
quote:
If you can't win your conference, you are on the outside looking in
quote:
more than two teams could come from the same conference.
I'm missing something here. Do you have to win a conference or not.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:11 pm to Big Saint
quote:this has been considered...but I wouldn't want to give too much power to the polls in this scenario.
Conference champs should be included if they finish in the top 10 of said polls.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:14 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:whoa...slow down...CUSA is not a BCS conference, and if LSU wins out, they are likely to move ahead of TCU, giving LSU an at-large playoff bid (assuming Boise State gets the other).
Which means a 4 loss team that wins the Big East or CUSA would get a hot at the NC but an 11-1 LSU that lost to Auburn and didn't win the SEC gets left out.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:17 pm to molsusports
quote:well, titles are awarded at the end of the season for a reason.
I would say 2001 LSU definitely did not deserve to be entered into a NC tournament - because they were fairly disqualified already by losing too many games
LSU beat No. 2 Tennessee and a top 10 Illinois to end the season. Finished with 10 wins. We were legit that year, despite our early losses.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:17 pm to reddman
I just can't bring myself to approve of a system, that promotes teams to schedule easy competition.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:18 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:to be clear, if you don't win your BCS conference, you will need to be an at-large team to enter the playoff.
I'm missing something here. Do you have to win a conference or not.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:19 pm to Chicken
quote:
whoa...slow down...CUSA is not a BCS conference, and if LSU wins out, they are likely to move ahead of TCU, giving LSU an at-large playoff bid (assuming Boise State gets the other).
OK, I'm missing something or your op is worded poorly (no offense) You said 6 bids would go to 6 BCS conference winners. 2 at large would be next highest in the BCS Standings and that if you can't win your conference, you are on the outside looking in. So do you need to win a conference or not?
Also i you give auto bid to the BCS conference you will have Pitt or whoever wins the BE in, while 1 of unbeaten TCU, unbeaten Boise and 11-1 LSU will be out.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:20 pm to Chicken
01 LSU was legit for what they were - they were a quality top ten team and had a great year... they were appropriately recognized and upset UT to win the SEC
Those things are awesome and achievements worth striving for even if you are out of the NC hunt
But IMO they didn't deserve a shot at the NC - and teams like a 5 loss FSU team damn sure don't deserve to sniff the NC
Those things are awesome and achievements worth striving for even if you are out of the NC hunt
But IMO they didn't deserve a shot at the NC - and teams like a 5 loss FSU team damn sure don't deserve to sniff the NC
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:22 pm to Tigerbait337
quote:???
I just can't bring myself to approve of a system, that promotes teams to schedule easy competition.
In my system, LSU, if they win out this year, would most likely get the 2nd at-large...this would only be due to its perceived strong schedule, especially the OOC schedule.
Additionally, SOS factors into a team's BCS rankings, which would control the seedings...top four teams would get to play first round game at home.
To say scheduling won't play a factor is incorrect.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:23 pm to Chicken
quote:
well, titles are awarded at the end of the season for a reason.
it would be pointless if they were awarded at mid season. Why should it reward the "hottest" team?
quote:
LSU beat No. 2 Tennessee and a top 10 Illinois to end the season. Finished with 10 wins. We were legit that year, despite our early losses.
2001 LSU is a great example why Conference Championship Games and playoffs in general suck. Florida had a better record than LSU AND beat us by 30 at BR. Tenn had the best SEC record and beat the next 2 best teams. They should not have to play an extra game with a special name to win the conference. After 8 games they proved it. EVen with the SEC CG they had a better record than LSU and were 1-1 vs US.
quote:
despite our early losses.
Our loses were UT 18-26, UF 15-44, OM 24-35. The OM game 10/27, not exactly "early".
This post was edited on 11/11/10 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:24 pm to Chicken
Well, an easy option is to do add the following:
1) All teams must have 3 or less losses (could even make it 2 if people are that worried).
2) All conference champions have to be within the top 12 of the BCS standings.
By requiring both, you can keep some relevance to the polls and eliminate a bad Va Tech team at #17 from playing that would've happened one year.
A large component of the BCS is strength of schedule, so if you have losses in a bad conference that is accounted for.
1) All teams must have 3 or less losses (could even make it 2 if people are that worried).
2) All conference champions have to be within the top 12 of the BCS standings.
By requiring both, you can keep some relevance to the polls and eliminate a bad Va Tech team at #17 from playing that would've happened one year.
A large component of the BCS is strength of schedule, so if you have losses in a bad conference that is accounted for.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:27 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:I edited my post...if you don't win your BCS conference, you can still get in as an at-large.
if you can't win your conference, you are on the outside looking in
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:31 pm to Chicken
The standard 16-team format with 11 conference champs and 5 at large bids played at home site is probably the one that addresses most people's concerns about the current system. I'm not in love with it, as I'm against at large bids, but I think it's the best system that's been popularly suggested.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:32 pm to LSUMafia
quote:I would be ok with this...I think my system is a start.
1) All teams must have 3 or less losses (could even make it 2 if people are that worried).
2) All conference champions have to be within the top 12 of the BCS standings.
I think the a nice component of my system is that it carves the nation up into geographic sections (via conferences), and provides a winner from each section.
I think this would further add to the intrigue and interest.
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:34 pm to Baloo
quote:I think this is WAY too many teams...and it adds another week to the schedule (a sore spot with some school presidents).
The standard 16-team format with 11 conference champs and 5 at large bids played at home site is probably the one that addresses most people's concerns about the current system. I'm not in love with it, as I'm against at large bids, but I think it's the best system that's been popularly suggested.
But it is in line with my idea in that it leans heavily on conference champs. I think this is the key.
This post was edited on 11/11/10 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:35 pm to Chicken
I say we make the entire season one big single elimination tourney. THAT would be awesome!!!!!!
Posted on 11/11/10 at 1:44 pm to The Easter Bunny
I'm against giving BCS or playoff spots to conferece champs automatically. I believe you should take the top 8 BCS rankings regardless of conference. AFter all, you want the 8 best teams.
If someone like Floirda upsets auburn in the SEC championship game they do not deserve to be in the playoff as possibly the 5th or 6th best team in the conference.
I like a playoff with the 8 best teams period.
If someone like Floirda upsets auburn in the SEC championship game they do not deserve to be in the playoff as possibly the 5th or 6th best team in the conference.
I like a playoff with the 8 best teams period.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News