- 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
NCAA Playoffs Look Like A Reality in 2014
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:08 pm
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:08 pm
LINK
quote:
By the time the 2012 college football season kicks off, the sport’s administrators will have completed the details on the format that will determine its champion for 2014. The most likely outcome will be a three-game playoff — a final four of football — to replace the Bowl Championship Series system.
quote:
One of the most powerful voices to emerge is that of the Pac-12 commissioner, Larry Scott.
In a telephone interview Friday night, Scott spoke in depth for the first time about his preferences for football’s postseason
As for the potential playoff format, Scott agreed with the position of the Big Ten, first reported by The Chicago Tribune, which favored home sites for the semifinal games and a neutral site for the championship game. After a number of discussions with the N.F.L., Scott said, following its model made sense.
“There’s a reason that in the N.F.L. they only play the Super Bowl as a neutral-site game,” he said. “There’s a reason they play playoffs and A.F.C. and N.F.C. championships with home hosting.”
quote:
Although Scott declined to talk about specific dates for playoff games, the Dallas meeting raised the possibility of having semifinal games played soon after Christmas and the national title game closer to New Year’s Day. This year’s title game between Alabama and Louisiana State was played Jan. 9.
This post was edited on 2/25/12 at 11:18 pm
5
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:13 pm to rocket31
Just convince Jim Delany, that a conference can have more than one team in the Final Four (i.e. SEC)
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:33 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
As for determining the final four teams, Scott said a notion that Roy Kramer, a former Southeastern Conference commissioner, expressed to CBSSports.com last week “resonated with me.” To keep the integrity of the regular season and the conference championship games, Kramer said, all of the teams in the playoff should be conference champions.
interesting. Bama would have been left out this past year even thou they were clearly one of the best teams.
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:43 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
To keep the integrity of the regular season and the conference championship games, Kramer said, all of the teams in the playoff should be conference champions.
I just knew this couldn't happen without the NCAA royally fricking it up.
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:52 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
all of the teams in the playoff should be conference champions.
frick that shite.
lsu and alabama were clearly the 2 best teams last year. i would rather see the current format remain than have all the teams be forced to be conf champs.
what if uga had beat lsu last year? what is your final four then?
uga (got crushed by boise)
oregon (lost to lsu)
wvu (ditto)
okie lite
wisky
clemson
what a shitty arse list of teams to pic from
Posted on 2/25/12 at 11:53 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
interesting. Bama would have been left out this past year even thou they were clearly one of the best teams.
Final BCS Rankings-
#2,#4,#6,#7,#8,#9 would have been left out
can you guess why the Big10 would be in favor?
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:06 am to rocket31
I like it. We finally get rid of the BCS, and make the regular season and conference championships worthwhile. Last season proved that the SEC Championship was basically a waste of time, thanks to the BCS system, and LSU got royally screwed over.
Earn the right to be in the playoffs by winning your conference AND win on the big stage when it matters. Not just one or the other, but both.
Earn the right to be in the playoffs by winning your conference AND win on the big stage when it matters. Not just one or the other, but both.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:13 am to loweralabamatrojan
you cant be serious.
lsu had arguably the best regular season of any team in history, only capped off with a win in the sec champ game.
had lsu lost to uga, they still would have had one of the best regular seasons of any team in history. only under this proposed system they would have been replaced in the national title game by... oregon? a team lsu crushed already? a team that couldnt beat sc at home?
hell get rid of the bcs all together and just let the AP pick the top 4. this conf champ only business is stupid.
lsu had arguably the best regular season of any team in history, only capped off with a win in the sec champ game.
had lsu lost to uga, they still would have had one of the best regular seasons of any team in history. only under this proposed system they would have been replaced in the national title game by... oregon? a team lsu crushed already? a team that couldnt beat sc at home?
hell get rid of the bcs all together and just let the AP pick the top 4. this conf champ only business is stupid.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:21 am to jcole4lsu
quote:
had lsu lost to uga,
But we didn't, you can't just use one year.
quote:
a team that couldnt beat sc at home?
you mean 10-2, #6 USC, oh the horror. LSU lost at home to a worse team in 2007 and still played for the title as did 2008 UF, see others can cherry pick too
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:32 am to TigerintheNO
quote:
Final BCS Rankings-
#2,#4,#6,#7,#8,#9 would have been left out
can you guess why the Big10 would be in favor?
Yes, one year samples are so insightful.
Lets look at other years shall we? Highest ranked conference winners.
2010: 1, 2, 3, 5
2009 1, 2, 3, 4
2008 1, 2, 5, 6
2007 1, 2, 3, 4
2006 1, 2, 5, 6
2005 1, 2, 3, 6 was Notre Dame
2004 1, 2, 3, 6
2003 2, 3, 4, 7
2002 1, 2, 3, technically 4*
2001 1, 3, 4, 8
2000 1, 2, 3, 4
1999 1, 2, 3, 4
1998 1, 2, 4, 5
In 2002 USC and WSU tied for the Pac 10 title, but WSU beat USC, so they might get the nod as Pac 10 winners, in which case. Iowa at #5 probably gets in since both them and OHio State were 8-0 in the Big 10. These of course would not be issues now.
This post was edited on 2/26/12 at 12:39 am
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:36 am to H-Town Tiger
Looking at it, in the BCS era, only 3 times would you have to get to 7 or below, most of the ones where you get to #6 are years where the teams at the top had already beaten the teams in the top 4 that got left out. For examples, 2004 Texas was 4, Cal was 5, 1 and 2 had already beaten those 2.
BTW: Im not necessarily in favor of only conference winners, I don't have a problem with using it as sort of a tie breaker, like in 2010 taking #5 Wisconsin over #4 Stanford, 2011 would have looked bad going in, but after LSU beat the crap out of Wisky and OSU, no one would have cared
BTW: Im not necessarily in favor of only conference winners, I don't have a problem with using it as sort of a tie breaker, like in 2010 taking #5 Wisconsin over #4 Stanford, 2011 would have looked bad going in, but after LSU beat the crap out of Wisky and OSU, no one would have cared
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:45 am to jcole4lsu
quote:
get rid of the bcs all together
That's the idea. The BCS devalued LSU's regular season road win in Tuscaloosa, and the SEC Championship by allowing Alabama to play in the BCS Championship game.
You really prefer that system over a playoff that consists of the teams that earned a conference championship? Fine, take it from 4 places out to 8 places and let a worthy non-championship winning team in (like Alabama) the new playoffs, but for the love of CF get rid of the BCS. It's stupid, subjective and outdated.
This post was edited on 2/26/12 at 12:46 am
Posted on 2/26/12 at 12:52 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Looking at it, in the BCS era, only 3 times would you have to get to 7 or below
& that is an improvement?
Posted on 2/26/12 at 1:17 am to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
The BCS devalued LSU's regular season road win in Tuscaloosa, and the SEC Championship by allowing Alabama to play in the BCS Championship game. You really prefer that system over a playoff that consists of the teams that earned a conference championship?
LSU hung 40 points on both West Virginia & Oregon, two teams that not only won their conference, but BCS Bowl games as well. In their two games games against Bama, they didn't break double figures.
As an LSU fan the last team I wanted to see in the BCS title game was another SEC school.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 1:51 am to rocket31
It won't be a good system until you get rid of auto bids. Still not convinced the Big East Champ deserves that nod. Especially with realignment. Who gets the bids post-realignment?
This post was edited on 2/26/12 at 1:52 am
Posted on 2/26/12 at 2:39 am to RLDSC FAN
quote:
Bama would have been left out this past year even thou they were clearly one of the best teams.
Rightfully so.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 2:42 am to RLDSC FAN
Roy Kramer hating against Bama. I'm absolutely shocked by this latest development.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 3:43 am to TigerintheNO
quote:Exactly. Thanks to the BCS you had to play them twice. Meaning: The BCS rendered your previous victory over Alabama on the road worth exactly nothing. The system completely devalued the biggest game of LSU's regular season by forcing the Tigers to play a team they'd already beaten.
As an LSU fan the last team I wanted to see in the BCS title game was another SEC school.
You should have played Oklahoma State instead. Would have been a much better game.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 4:06 am to loweralabamatrojan
quote:
Exactly. Thanks to the BCS you had to play them twice. Meaning: The BCS rendered your previous victory over Alabama on the road worth exactly nothing. The system completely devalued the biggest game of LSU's regular season by forcing the Tigers to play a team they'd already beaten.
You should have played Oklahoma State instead. Would have been a much better game.
It was really a joke that Alabama got to play in the game. Were they better than LSU? It certainly seemed like it on January 9th. But that honestly doesn't mean shite. It was straight up unfair to LSU have to play them again. If Alabama would have won the first game, it would have been unfair to them if they had to play LSU again.
The system was crap. If there's a playoff, each other 4 teams should be from different conferences. They don't necessarily have to be conference champions though, IMO.
Posted on 2/26/12 at 7:55 am to RLDSC FAN
So essentially you go 8-4 (lose all OOC games) win your conference and play for the NC? 4 loss champions baby! 
Eta: This would effectively make all OOC games, or 1/3 of the schedule officially irrelevant. Say bye bye to any decent OOC game, why risk the injury? Sit those starters when you're playing OOC and rest them up for conference season.
Eta: This would effectively make all OOC games, or 1/3 of the schedule officially irrelevant. Say bye bye to any decent OOC game, why risk the injury? Sit those starters when you're playing OOC and rest them up for conference season.
This post was edited on 2/26/12 at 8:00 am
Page 1 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News