Tweet
Originally posted by Conor Dary
View Post
-
But by choosing the top 6 they would gotten 2 spots last year instead of one. Guaranteeing the Power 5 conference champions 5 of the 6 spots would come at the cost of the Group of 5. The real fight should be over the selection of next year's Committee. The Group of 5 should have just as much representation on the Committee as the Power 5 does just like they do in the Coaches poll. That's why Bearcat fans were holding up signs last week that said "Bring back the BCS". Under the BCS, one-loss teams couldn't jump an undefeated Cincinnati in 2009 and they finished #3 in the rankings, but that was under the 2-team format. -
The other option is the Power 5 telling everyone else....goodbye its been nice knowing you....Comment
-
Notre Dame has the right way to do all this, don't need no conference do what we want.
Who is bigger than Notre Dame, yep...nobody!Comment
-
I doubt they're willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces. Note also that the biggest opponents of automatic bids are the SEC and the Independents. If they expand to 12, I say pick the top 12 in the rankings and if 7 of them happen to be SEC teams, so be it.Originally posted by Conor Dary View PostComment
-
No way just the top 12 will ever happen...Originally posted by jazzcyclist View Post
Silly way too....interconference play is so minimal....Comment
-
I agree that interconference play is important which is why 2020 doesn't count in my book. However, this year there was enough interconference play to have the Ducks sitting at #3 right now. 😎Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
The PAC 12 only gets a little more respect than the AAC. Where would Oregon be ranked today if they hadn't taken that trip to Columbus a couple of months ago?Last edited by jazzcyclist; 11-11-2021, 07:35 PM.Comment
-
Comment
-
Get rid of the committee altogether and bring back the BCS ranking methodology. 12 team playoff. P5 champions + highest ranked G5 champion. Next 6 highest ranked teams. Top 4 teams in the rankings get a bye to the quarterfinals, teams 5-12 play round 1 at the home stadium of the higher seed. Re-seed after the first round, so if the 12-seed upsets the 5-seed in round 1 the top ranked team gets to face them in the quarterfinals.Comment
-
I think a 12 team playoff would hurt a lot of regular season interest in certain games/rivalries as some of them might end up as being virtually meaningless or certainly less important. This won't be like the FCS playoffs which encompasses many teams but generally you end up with games between teams who haven't played or even have a tangental competitive relationship with the matchups.Comment
-
This is a really good point and something I struggle with as an LSU fan. The atmosphere in town and on campus the week of a home game against a highly ranked Alabama/Florida/Auburn when we're still in the hunt for the West is absolutely electric. Even more so during the BCS era when, if you lost to a conference opponent, your season wasn't totally over but you needed some help to make the BCSCG.Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post
I think a lot of that will go away with the expansion to 12 teams. A good LSU team could make the playoff a lot of years with 2 losses as long as those losses were close games against good teams. The 2018 LSU team would have made the playoff (based on BCS rankings) as the 10 seed despite 3 regular season losses (one of which was a 29-0 loss at home). I still remember the feeling of despair that overwhelmed leaving the 2007 3OT loss to Arkansas to end the regular season because I thought there was no way we would make the BCSCG. Yeah, it sucked at the time, but I think those low moments in our lives allow us to appreciate the high points more fully. If there had been a 12 team system in place at the time, I wouldn't have cared about that game at all because we would have been locks for the playoff. I don't like not caring about things.
On the other hand, in a 12-team system, we would've made the playoffs in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2018. That's a lot more fun to me than playing in the Citrus Bowl, Peach Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Citrus Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Peach Bowl, and Fiesta Bowl in games that are essentially meaningless. But thinking about a first round college football playoff game held in a college stadium does a lot of things for me. We would've had to travel in 2004, 2005, 2009, 2010, and 2012, but hitting the road with my buddies to an LSU playoff game sounds like a great time.Last edited by Big Tusk; 11-12-2021, 09:09 PM.Comment
-
A 12 team playoff would kill the regular season. Some people complain that college football is the only sport in which one loss can end your championship hopes but that's its biggest appeal IMO, the regular season is the playoffs. With a 12-team playoff you might see teams resting their starters the last week of the season, since seeding would mean nothing with all the games being played at neutral sites. For those who like sports with a meaningless regular season we already have college basketball.Originally posted by NotDutra5 View PostComment
-
This a great summation of the pros and cons of a 12-team playoff from an LSU fan and I guess it all depends on whether you think the thrill of 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012 and 2018 playoff games would make up for loss of all those high stakes, do-or-die regular season games in 2003, 2007, 2011 and 2019. Like you I'm a Tiger fan but I'm also a college football fan too and in years in which LSU isn't in the hunt I enjoy watching other teams play high stakes regular season games almost as much as I enjoy watching LSU do it. I've been glued to the TV every Saturday this season despite the fact that I knew LSU wouldn't be competing for any titles after their season opening loss to UCLA. Expanding from 4 teams to 12 teams would mean 8 more meaningful games in December and what it all boils down to for me is giving up 3 to 5 dozen meaningful games over 14 Saturdays in September, October and November in order to get 8 extra playoff games in December.Originally posted by Big Tusk View PostComment
-
I like this plan but the only change I would make is pick the top 6 conference champions instead of P5 + G5 (1), which inevitably amounts to giving participation trophies undeserving Power 5 champions. If a Power 5 conference champion can't finish in the top 6 they don't deserve to be in the playoffs anyway. However, the Power 5 will rail against the idea of brining back the BCS rankings because it's a lot fairer to the Group of 5 and that fairness comes at their expense. I still remember Power 5 coaches and conference commissioners going ballistic in 2010 when it became evident late in the season that one-loss Power 5 teams would be unable to leapfrog two undefeated Group of 5 teams which were both much better than this year's Cincinnati team IMO.Originally posted by Big Tusk View Post
https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...0/seasontype/2Comment
-
I guess the Committee was right about Oklahoma. Down go the Sooners!Comment
-
Comment