• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

College Football Final Four

O

oldmandeac

Active member
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Messages
436
Reaction score
34
This year seems to be the perfect storm for the definitive four team playoff system to be as marred as anything else... just curious of some of the opinions of this group. Let me lay out a few questions to start the discussion (assuming it has not already been beat to death on a thread I've over looked for which accept my apologizes )

1) Should a team which doesn't participate in a conference championship game be part of the final four?
2) If a team in the top four loses their conference championship game be bumped by a team not playing in a conference championship game or outside the top 4 (specifically, if Clemson or Washington were to lose, should Michigan or the winner of Wisconsin-Penn St. move ahead of them?)

Look forward to your analysis and thoughts
 
If PSU wins, and someone in the top 4 loses, we could see a scenario where a team that won their conference championship gets passed over for 2 teams that finished behind them in their own division.

At that point, I have a hard time reconciling a team that won such a ballbuster of a division not getting in.
 
Liquid Karma said:
If PSU wins, and someone in the top 4 loses, we could see a scenario where a team that won their conference championship gets passed over for 2 teams that finished behind them in their own division.

At that point, I have a hard time reconciling a team that won such a ballbuster of a division not getting in.
Click to expand...


And even more confounding, Michigan stays at home with 2 losses with PSU possibly getting in. Only one problem. Michigan beat the living hell out of PSU, 49-10.

The easy solution is to go to eight teams which guarantees all P5 conference champions and 3 at-large bids. Then again, the NCAA has never made anything simple.
 
You have an 8 team playoff then the 9th team will be left out. I like the exclusiveness of the 4 team
Playoff.

Bama and OSU are locks. Clemson has to win this weekend.
 
DeacsOrDie said:
You have an 8 team playoff then the 9th team will be left out. I like the exclusiveness of the 4 team
Playoff.

Bama and OSU are locks. Clemson has to win this weekend.
Click to expand...


Not really an issue in college football, unlike college basketball. Just not that many great teams in college football.
 
DeacsOrDie said:
You have an 8 team playoff then the 9th team will be left out. I like the exclusiveness of the 4 team
Playoff.

Bama and OSU are locks. Clemson has to win this weekend.
Click to expand...

Meh. All the P5 conference champs would be in. Any exclusions would have themselves to blame.
 
But there was an issue when Nebraska, who wasn't in their conference championship game , made it to the national title game (iirc Colorado upset Kansas State that year in the Big 12 championship or final game of the season). It was one of the reason cited for a playoff. So, here we have the same situation with OSU. Clearly a top team, but didn't win the B1G. Does this mean conference champions are irrelevant compared to opinions as to who the best team in the conference may be?
 
After watching the OSU/Michigan game i'm even more confident that only of the teams in the Big "10" should get in as long as Washington or Clemson don't go out and shit the bed.
 
coredeac said:
Not really an issue in college football, unlike college basketball. Just not that many great teams in college football.
Click to expand...

Which makes it more of an issue. Often teams in that 7-12 range are interchangeable.
 
PhDeac said:
Which makes it more of an issue. Often teams in that 7-12 range are interchangeable.
Click to expand...

Completely disagree. Eight teams solves 90% or more of the problems with a 4-team pool. You get all five champions and three at-large selections. Significantly better than the current system.
 
coredeac said:
Completely disagree. Eight teams solves 90% or more of the problems with a 4-team pool. You get all five champions and three at-large selections. Significantly better than the current system.
Click to expand...

Yep. These were the same bullshit arguments in favor of the BCS.
 
Still think 6 teams is perfect. #1 and #2 get byes. Makes it incredibly valuable to be top 2 while solving the "4 isn't quite enough but 8 is too many" problem.
 
Not really sure why anyone is complaining about the current system.

In its first year (2014), the committee made an unpopular decision by allowing OSU as the 4 seed over TCU. Turned out that OSU ran the table, beating the #1 seed then the national championship. So the first year they got it "right."

Last year, there was no debate over who the four teams should be and the #1 seed won the Natty as they are expected to. Got it "right."

Right now we can't really criticize this committee or structure. It forced the BIG12 to get a conference championship game, as it should. Over time, it should also force Notre Dame to joining a conference.
 
coredeac said:
A playoff is the same "bullshit argument" as a non-playoff system? Please, have another.
Click to expand...

Refusing to expand the playoff because there will still be teams left out is the same bullshit argument against having any playoff in the first place. If you are afraid of that, just declare a champion at the end of the regular season.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Refusing to expand the playoff because there will still be teams left out is the same bullshit argument against having any playoff in the first place. If you are afraid of that, just declare a champion at the end of the regular season.
Click to expand...


I have no fucking idea what you are talking about. Zero. I'm not refusing to expand the playoff. I'm in favor of it. I'm not "afraid" of expansion. Are you seeing my posts?
 
DeacsOrDie said:
Last year, there was no debate over who the four teams should be and the #1 seed won the Natty as they are expected to. Got it "right." .
Click to expand...

Doesn't change your point, but Clemson was the #1 seed last year.
 
coredeac said:
I have no fucking idea what you are talking about. Zero. I'm not refusing to expand the playoff. I'm in favor of it. I'm not "afraid" of expansion. Are you seeing my posts?
Click to expand...

We are in complete agreement. I was agreeing with your post about expanding the playoff in the first place. What is wrong with you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top