• 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!

NCAA president supports Plus-One

I think the article is a little confusing. My understanding is that a plus one model and a four team playoff were different animals. A four team playoff would be better (IMO) than a plus one. In the plus one, one extra game would be played after all of the bowl games. This sounds pretty dumb, but is a way to protect the Rose Bowl. A four team playoff takes the top four teams and pits them against each other.
 
I love it. It's just a gateway drug to a real playoff.
 
I think the article is a little confusing. My understanding is that a plus one model and a four team playoff were different animals. A four team playoff would be better (IMO) than a plus one. In the plus one, one extra game would be played after all of the bowl games. This sounds pretty dumb, but is a way to protect the Rose Bowl. A four team playoff takes the top four teams and pits them against each other.

I've heard the plus one described with 4 teams. Not sure how that makes sense but I guess it has become the vernacular.
 
I think the article is a little confusing. My understanding is that a plus one model and a four team playoff were different animals. A four team playoff would be better (IMO) than a plus one. In the plus one, one extra game would be played after all of the bowl games. This sounds pretty dumb, but is a way to protect the Rose Bowl. A four team playoff takes the top four teams and pits them against each other.

the first one you described is a "pure" plus one. The second is "seeded" plus one. They are looking at playoff format aka "seeded" plus one.
 
I think the article is a little confusing. My understanding is that a plus one model and a four team playoff were different animals. A four team playoff would be better (IMO) than a plus one. In the plus one, one extra game would be played after all of the bowl games. This sounds pretty dumb, but is a way to protect the Rose Bowl. A four team playoff takes the top four teams and pits them against each other.

I've never understood the sanctity of the Rose Bowl. Who gives a shit? So you won the Rose Bowl and showed you were the best team amongst two generally mediocre and (at least as to one of them) extremely boring conferences - yippee. Other than the one played about 2 weeks ago, I couldn't tell you who played in or won any previous Rose Bowls other than naming some Big 10 and Pac 10 teams that were generally successful in the era in question. Don't they realize they could make a ton more money if that game were part of a playoff that had some actual meaning attached to the result?
 
I've never understood the sanctity of the Rose Bowl. Who gives a shit? So you won the Rose Bowl and showed you were the best team amongst two generally mediocre and (at least as to one of them) extremely boring conferences - yippee. Other than the one played about 2 weeks ago, I couldn't tell you who played in or won any previous Rose Bowls other than naming some Big 10 and Pac 10 teams that were generally successful in the era in question. Don't they realize they could make a ton more money if that game were part of a playoff that had some actual meaning attached to the result?

The Rose Bowl isn't about making as much money as possible - as part of the Tournament of Roses Association, the Rose Bowl is designed to showcase both the Tournament of Roses New Years' Day Parade and to highlight the community of Pasadena as a whole. In other words, its the BCS Bowl that actually does what it is supposed to do as a non-profit organization.

As for all of the arguments about tradition - the only thing that compares to the Rose Bowl in terms of how people make a stink whenever it changes is the ACC Tournament. Look at how everyone on these bowls growls and grumbles that the league needs to go back to eight teams and all the games need to be played in Greensboro and you start to see where fans in the Big Ten and Pac-12 feel about the Rose Bowl.
 
I think a "4-team playoff" is a lot more likely than a "plus-one," at least in terms of how they're defined in this thread. Seen a lot more talk about 1 playing 4/2 playing 3 then the winners playing versus just playing the bowls out then pairing 1 and 2
 
I think the plus-one is the better option and would be awesome.

But I think a bigger problem is fixing the BCS formula. In particular, removing the coaches poll.
 
I think the plus-one is the better option and would be awesome.

But I think a bigger problem is fixing the BCS formula. In particular, removing the coaches poll.

And also releasing the formulas actually used in the computer polls, as well as including margin of victory in those formulas.
 
And also releasing the formulas actually used in the computer polls, as well as including margin of victory in those formulas.

No. It'll bring back the days of the 90s when it wasn't enough to just beat your opponent by a couple of scores, you had to keep your starters in and run up the score or risk losing ground in the polls. Terrible idea.
 
The Rose Bowl isn't about making as much money as possible - as part of the Tournament of Roses Association, the Rose Bowl is designed to showcase both the Tournament of Roses New Years' Day Parade and to highlight the community of Pasadena as a whole. In other words, its the BCS Bowl that actually does what it is supposed to do as a non-profit organization.

As for all of the arguments about tradition - the only thing that compares to the Rose Bowl in terms of how people make a stink whenever it changes is the ACC Tournament. Look at how everyone on these bowls growls and grumbles that the league needs to go back to eight teams and all the games need to be played in Greensboro and you start to see where fans in the Big Ten and Pac-12 feel about the Rose Bowl.

So the whole national system is screwed up because of a fucking parade and the promotion of Pasadena? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? I'm pretty sure they can still have the exact same parade, and the exact same or greater promotion of Pasadena, if the game actually meant something. The worst thing that would happen would be that the winner would have the chance to play one more game.

I understand that people get pissed when the ACC Tournament changes, but the structure of the ACC tournament has little to no actual effect on the eventual national champion. In general the same teams are going to be in the national championship hunt regardless of the number of games they play in the ACC Tournament.
 
No. It'll bring back the days of the 90s when it wasn't enough to just beat your opponent by a couple of scores, you had to keep your starters in and run up the score or risk losing ground in the polls. Terrible idea.

1zqy8ok.gif


Scores get run up anyways, because the human polls still end up considering it.
 
No. It'll bring back the days of the 90s when it wasn't enough to just beat your opponent by a couple of scores, you had to keep your starters in and run up the score or risk losing ground in the polls. Terrible idea.

Tuffalo's exactly right. Humans take margin of victory into account already. There's no reason to hamstring the computers by not allowing them to use all available data.
 
Back
Top