- 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: Mike Leach wants 64 team playoff in college football
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:37 am to M Le Rip
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:37 am to M Le Rip
quote:
A playoff that is too far expanded doesn't devalue the regular season
I agree with that. What I don't like are playoff that are too big, I think regular seasons should matter and when you a tam that is 7-7 after 14 of 16 games wins the SB, the regular season is cheapened a bit imo. .
quote:
it actually revalues it for most teams;
I don't really agree with this. When we look back, we can see teams were out with early loses, but usually we don't know that until the end. Take a team like Arkansas last year. They lost early to Bama, looks like they are out, but what if they beat LSU and Bama loses to Auburn? Arky is a good spot, didn't happen of course, but they really weren't eliminated til the last game. Putting them in an 8 team playoff just gives then a 2nd chance at teams that already beat them.
I prefer 4, 8 would not be the end of the world for me either. Most of the time a 1 or 2 seed wins the BB tourney.
2
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:38 am to volfan30
quote:
"You could cut the regular season down to 10 games, but guarantee everybody 12 games.
10 reg season games? How is LSU going to get its 7 home games with that season?
And before anyone un-knowledgeable on the situation shows their ignorance, LSU must have 7 home games (or 6 with a high paying neutral site) to pay the bills for shitty arse womens sports.
what is going to happen to conference championship games under this idea? those make the SEC a shite ton of money, they arent just going to give them up.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:39 am to volfan30
64 would be ridiculous. There were 70 teams in bowls this year. All but six of them would have made it into a 64-team playoff. There are only 120 teams in FBS, so more than half would make the playoffs.
32 is still too many. We don't need 25% of college football teams in the playoff.
16 is the absolute maximum. That's what FCS does. Even that is too many, though.
8 is better, although to give every conference a chance, you'd have to have 11 and have six of them in play-in games, with the other five getting byes. To cut down on the number of games teams play, get rid of conference championship games or cut the regular season to 11 games and play the CCGs a week earlier.
First round (the week currently used by CCGs):
#6 vs. #11
#7 vs. #10
#8 vs. #9
Second round (around Christmas):
#1 vs. #8/#9 winner
#2 vs. #7/#10 winner
#3 vs. #6/#11 winner
#4 vs. #5
Then the final four, with semifinals around New Year's and final about a week later (when the BCSNCG is currently played).
Maybe you could add one at-large slot for a 12-team field, and #5 play-in against #12 for the right to face #4. That would allow an independent or a deserving conference non-champion to get into the playoff.
The max any team could play is 16 games, and even that would only happen if one of the play-in teams got to the championship game.
Finally, and I think this is what will happen, you could just go to 4 or 6 teams and have the top 4 or 6 in the BCS standings go. If it's 6, then you'd have a first round play-in with #3 vs. #6 and #4 vs. #5, with #1 and #2 getting a bye. In the next round, #1 would play #4/#5 winner and #2 would play #3/#6 winner. If you wanted to avoid the requirement of having to win your conference to make the playoff, you could require that the top 4 seeds be the top 4 ranked conference champions, with the #5 and #6 slots being the two highest ranked teams left after the those four slots are filled. The 4- or 6-team format would have the virtue of preserving the revenue generated by playing 12 regular season games and having CCGs.
32 is still too many. We don't need 25% of college football teams in the playoff.
16 is the absolute maximum. That's what FCS does. Even that is too many, though.
8 is better, although to give every conference a chance, you'd have to have 11 and have six of them in play-in games, with the other five getting byes. To cut down on the number of games teams play, get rid of conference championship games or cut the regular season to 11 games and play the CCGs a week earlier.
First round (the week currently used by CCGs):
#6 vs. #11
#7 vs. #10
#8 vs. #9
Second round (around Christmas):
#1 vs. #8/#9 winner
#2 vs. #7/#10 winner
#3 vs. #6/#11 winner
#4 vs. #5
Then the final four, with semifinals around New Year's and final about a week later (when the BCSNCG is currently played).
Maybe you could add one at-large slot for a 12-team field, and #5 play-in against #12 for the right to face #4. That would allow an independent or a deserving conference non-champion to get into the playoff.
The max any team could play is 16 games, and even that would only happen if one of the play-in teams got to the championship game.
Finally, and I think this is what will happen, you could just go to 4 or 6 teams and have the top 4 or 6 in the BCS standings go. If it's 6, then you'd have a first round play-in with #3 vs. #6 and #4 vs. #5, with #1 and #2 getting a bye. In the next round, #1 would play #4/#5 winner and #2 would play #3/#6 winner. If you wanted to avoid the requirement of having to win your conference to make the playoff, you could require that the top 4 seeds be the top 4 ranked conference champions, with the #5 and #6 slots being the two highest ranked teams left after the those four slots are filled. The 4- or 6-team format would have the virtue of preserving the revenue generated by playing 12 regular season games and having CCGs.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:40 am to Louie T
quote:
This isn't basketball. The 8-16 teams wouldn't stand a chance.
Really?
There have been multiple eventual national champions that lost to teams that weren't in the top 16 during the regular season
Florida
LSU twice
USC if you count the AP title
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:53 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:I definitely agree with this; what I didn't make clear was that I was specifically talking about 2-or-more-loss teams. Georgia went 0-2 last year, and they were out of it. Had they won their remaining 10 (11) games, I'd certainly have no problem with them being in the playoffs.
I don't really agree with this. When we look back, we can see teams were out with early loses, but usually we don't know that until the end. Take a team like Arkansas last year. They lost early to Bama, looks like they are out, but what if they beat LSU and Bama loses to Auburn? Arky is a good spot, didn't happen of course, but they really weren't eliminated til the last game. Putting them in an 8 team playoff just gives then a 2nd chance at teams that already beat them.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 10:57 am to barry
quote:
You think a 16 seed doesn't stand a chance against a 1 seed in basketball, try football.
LSU - Troy
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:01 am to volfan30
Washington State still wouldn't make it in.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:01 am to Spoonie Luv
Do you realize that pointing out one example doesn't strengthen your case? When I say they don't stand it chance it doesn't mean it won't ever happen.
We're saying the likelihood of it happening when the top teams are also in a "win or go home" situation in football is so slim that it isn't worth the time, effort, and money of actually having those types of games played.
We're saying the likelihood of it happening when the top teams are also in a "win or go home" situation in football is so slim that it isn't worth the time, effort, and money of actually having those types of games played.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:01 am to volfan30
I like the idea of a BCS/playoff hybrid.
BCS #1 gets an automatic spot in the championship game.
The playoffs are used to determine the other opponent. Use the BCS to seed the teams
BCS #1 gets an automatic spot in the championship game.
The playoffs are used to determine the other opponent. Use the BCS to seed the teams
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:05 am to Pilot Tiger
I don't like that. What about a year where there are two the obvious top 2 and the top 2 are nearly identical? You just screw the #2 team and make them play their way into the game?
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:15 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
It devalues the regular season
Yeah, with a system like this, a team that didn't win it's conference, or even its division, and only has four wins over teams with a winning record could play and win the national title by essentially having a one game season....
Oh wait.
I mean, what would really suck is a regular season in which teams played crappy OOC schedules to pad their records and avoid losses so those great cross-regional games which are so common would become virtually extinct save a few high profile examples...
Oh damn. I was talking about now.
Devalue the regular season? What a crock. That horse has left the barn. A playoff might encourage teams to sack up and play good OOC games again (LSU's 2011 was a complete aberration, and so admirable because it was so rare -- and it counted for jack and squat).
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:17 am to Spoonie Luv
quote:
You think a 16 seed doesn't stand a chance against a 1 seed in basketball, try football.
LSU - Troy
what game are you talking about? 2008? 2008 LSU was 7-5, not a #1 seed type team there cochise.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:24 am to volfan30
I'm sorry but there's not 64 teams I want to see play in a playoff in division 1 football. Hell, might not even be 32 teams. I want to see the best teams play, that means top 16.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:26 am to HideChaKidz
BTW - any NCAA sanctioned playoff will include the conference champions. Keep that in mind, as it is a deal breaker for the NCAA (which is partly why the plus one advocates don't call it a playoff). So a 16-team model would have the 11 conference champs and 5 at larges.
If the power schools secede from the NCAA, it is not an issue, but I don't think anyone is ready for that apaocalyptic scenario.
If the power schools secede from the NCAA, it is not an issue, but I don't think anyone is ready for that apaocalyptic scenario.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:27 am to Baloo
quote:
Yeah, with a system like this, a team that didn't win it's conference, or even its division, and only has four wins over teams with a winning record could play and win the national title by essentially having a one game season....
Oh wait
I'm pretty sure you are familiar with the term outlier. But yes, Bama being in the BCS CG did devaule the 11/5 game which was supposed to be a death match. I think the chances of that repeating are about as likely as the 2008 Big 12 scenario repeating.
quote:
I mean, what would really suck is a regular season in which teams played crappy OOC schedules to pad their records and avoid losses so those great cross-regional games which are so common would become virtually extinct save a few high profile examples
I've noticed no matter what side of the playoff BCS divide people are on, they use some variation of the we will never get big OOC games ever again argument. The truth is the loss of big cross sectional games you are talking about is more due to conference expansion and increasing the # of conference games. 30 years ago we had over 30 independents, now we have 4. Florida dropped Miami when the SEC went from 6 to 7 games. Now with conferences playing 8-9 conference games, you are not going to get as many of those games as we ussed to. This is one reason I favor the proposal for a 4 team playoff using the top 4 conference winners
quote:
Devalue the regular season? What a crock. That horse has left the barn
really? The current SB champ was 7-7 14 games into a 16 game season. Last year in women's basketball. Baylor beat Texas A&M twice in the regular season and again in the Big 12 CT. That was really important for that 4th meeting in the final 4.
This post was edited on 3/23/12 at 11:32 am
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:29 am to Baloo
quote:
So a 16-team model would have the 11 conference champs and 5 at larges
I could live with that, but prefer the 4 team model.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:30 am to Louie T
quote:
Do you realize that pointing out one example doesn't strengthen your case? When I say they don't stand it chance it doesn't mean it won't ever happen. We're saying the likelihood of it happening when the top teams are also in a "win or go home" situation in football is so slim that it isn't worth the time, effort, and money of actually having those types of games played.
Some of those bottom teams in the NCAA tournament are just happy to make it and play in the tournament. Give a few of the football teams a little fun.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:31 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
I'm pretty sure you are familiar with the term outlier
Yes, but it's not an outlier. The BCS title game has had a non-conference champ playing in it three times. That's a design flaw at this point, not an outlier.
And while college basketball has a "devlaued" regular season, they have great regular season matchups because there is a smaller penalty for losing. I'd rather have a less valuable regular season with better games than a more valuable season littered with games against crappy teams.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:38 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
The current SB champ was 7-7 14 games into a 16 game season.
And, this obviously has crippled the NFL's popularity. No one watches the regular season at all anymore due to the random nature of the playoffs (I know you're not making this argument -- I'm just applying the anti-college basketball argument to football).
I'm for a playoff for a very simple reason -- it's more exciting. Also, it removes a good deal of politicing, though of course not all. But I think a smaller playoff (and to be honest, I prefer 16 or 8 teams as well) would balance fairness and excitement the best.
Posted on 3/23/12 at 11:41 am to volfan30
Prairieview vs Oklahoma would only improve college football. 
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News