Might as well bring back the BCS with 4 teams

theboardref · Dec 3, 2016

GoldRusher said:
1. Call the AAC a P5
2. Expand the playoff to 6
3. Win your conference
4. Conference champions only in the playoff

Done and done, enough with the name game..

No to AAC being a power 5, bad enough the Big East was considered a power 5 on the back of West Virginia and occasionally Louisville. Connecticut earning a BCS bid, Cincinnati playing a Tebow-led Florida team. Games that never should have happened.

GoldRusher · Dec 3, 2016

theboardref said:
No to AAC being a power 5, bad enough the Big East was considered a power 5 on the back of West Virginia and occasionally Louisville. Connecticut earning a BCS bid, Cincinnati playing a Tebow-led Florida team. Games that never should have happened.

That's why I want them , with a month to prepare and heal up from the regular season anything can happen in those post season games, WVU has been there done that several times. What are people afraid of? Blowout victories? We already have those. I would argue that had it not have been for the AQ of the BCS era and the exposure vs the bigger brands that WVU/UL wouldn't even be in a P5 conference right now and that would be a cryin shame just like it is for BYU/Boise/UH/USF ect. now. Kills me when people act like the P5 is some big step up when programs like Wake, Purdue,Kansas, Vandy, Rutgers, ect are sitting in them, what a freggin joke :laugh:

. If those are "P5" then what is BYU/Boise/UH/ ect.? You tellin me that with a month to prep and heal that this years UH team couldn't give Clemson/UW/PSU/WISKY/Michigan a good game on a big stage? especially in that first game? Give me a freggin break.

NDHoosier101 · Dec 3, 2016

Cowboyinexile said:
I'd prefer an 8 team playoff with more input from the computers. The committee is filled with experts but as long as the human element is involved it's going to favor the blue bloods. The computers take some of that bias out.

An 8 team playoff would water down the season way too much, after the conference championship game you'd likely get at least one 3 loss team and at least half the teams would have two losses on an average year, way too many in a 12-13 game season.

theboardref · Dec 3, 2016

GoldRusher said:
That's why I want them , with a month to prepare and heal up from the regular season anything can happen in those post season games, WVU has been there done that several times. What are people afraid of? Blowout victories? We already have those. I would argue that had it not have been for the AQ of the BCS era and the exposure vs the bigger brands that WVU/UL wouldn't even be in a P5 conference right now and that would be a cryin shame just like it is for BYU/Boise/UH/USF ect. now. Kills me when people act like the P5 is some big step up when programs like Wake, Purdue,Kansas, Vandy, Rutgers, ect are sitting in them, what a freggin joke. If those are "P5" then what is BYU/Boise/UH/ ect.? You tellin me that with a month to prep and heal that this years UH team couldn't give Clemson/UW/PSU/WISKY/Michigan a good game on a big stage? especially in that first game? Give me a freggin break.

The best group of 5 team. All crappy conferences have equal claim. If Western Michigan is the best team, why should a garbage, Temple team get the nod?

SU Nittany Tide · Dec 3, 2016

If I could design the system, I would make it (fairly) simple. I would make it an eight team playoff. I would give each of the five power conferences an auto bid as their champion and then have a committee or rankings of some sort pick three wild cards.

theboardref · Dec 3, 2016

SU Nittany Tide said:
If I could design the system, I would make it (fairly) simple. I would make it an eight team playoff. I would give each of the five power conferences an auto bid as their champion and then have a committee or rankings of some sort pick three wild cards.

If it was an 8 team system, it would have to be: all power 5 champs, 1 group of 5, 2 at large, and seeded based on the rankings.

Deep Creek · Dec 3, 2016

SU Nittany Tide said:
If I could design the system, I would make it (fairly) simple. I would make it an eight team playoff. I would give each of the five power conferences an auto bid as their champion and then have a committee or rankings of some sort pick three wild cards.

I would agree with one exception. I would put a qualifier on the conference champion to prevent what could have happened with the PAC 12 in 2011. UCLA was 6-8 that year and had UCLA had a miracle upset of Oregon in the CCG would have been in the playoffs under your scenario with a 7-6 record.

SU Nittany Tide · Dec 3, 2016

theboardref said:
If it was an 8 team system, it would have to be: all power 5 champs, 1 group of 5, 2 at large, and seeded based on the rankings.

That sounds pretty good to me.

SU Nittany Tide · Dec 3, 2016

Deep Creek said:
I would agree with one exception. I would put a qualifier on the conference champion to prevent what could have happened with the PAC 12 in 2011. UCLA was 6-8 that year and had UCLA had a miracle upset of Oregon in the CCG would have been in the playoffs under your scenario with a 7-6 record.

I guess I would be ok with that rare scenario happening. They would likely get wiped out like the 7-9 or 8-8 NFL teams do and the conference would be looked down upon that season. So be it.

Wild Turkey · Dec 3, 2016

GoldRusher said:
1. Call the AAC a P5
2. Expand the playoff to 6
3. Win your conference
4. Conference champions only in the playoff

Done and done, enough with the name game..

This is a terrible idea. Not all conference champs are created equally. The only way this even remotely works if you do away with all divisions, take the top 2 teams in the conference and have a threshold of a minimum avg rating in the polls to qualify.

And absolutely no to an automatic spot for the AAC.

There is just so much wrong to the point if you are going to rework the entire system then there are better ways.

DunceKaep · Dec 3, 2016

TBBishop said:
I'd say the committee explained it pretty well. They are looking for the best four teams. They use many factors to determine that INCLUDING conference championships. Conference championships are special for the players and fans but it doesn't make you one of the best 4 teams in the country. I mean do we really believe VaTech should be in the playoffs if Clemson implodes today? Or do we let Big Game Bob in at that point? The Gators? Are we putting the Gators in this discussion? Best 4 teams. Let's say it together. Best 4 teams.

And without a doubt, UW is one of the top 4 teams.
UW earned it AND deserve it.

Deep Creek · Dec 3, 2016

SU Nittany Tide said:
I guess I would be ok with that rare scenario happening. They would likely get wiped out like the 7-9 or 8-8 NFL teams do and the conference would be looked down upon that season. So be it.

Good point. We've had teams in before that didn't pan out and got beat first round.

TROJAN-MAN · Dec 3, 2016

DunceKaep said:
And without a doubt, UW is one of the top 4 teams.
UW earned it AND deserve it.

Do you even understand the argument against Washington getting in

gohusk · Dec 3, 2016

wazzu31 said:
Experts? How so? Which one of those are the committee is more of an expert than homeless Joe who sits at a bar and watches every game?

How the hell does Homeless Joe afford all that beer? He must be the GOAT begger.

gohusk · Dec 3, 2016

Just expand it to 8 teams. If it were 8 teams then the argument would end up being does the B10 loser deserve a shot over USC or something.

SU Nittany Tide · Dec 3, 2016

gohusk said:
Just expand it to 8 teams. If it were 8 teams then the argument would end up being does the B10 loser deserve a shot over USC or something.

It is impossible to get rid of the arguments at the back end. Get the conference champions in there so every power five team has a definitive path there and then get the best three remaining teams in there.

DunceKaep · Dec 3, 2016

TROJAN-MAN said:
Do you even understand the argument against Washington getting in

no. I don't. Please explain it to me.

Here are my reasons why: Excited to hear your reasons of why NOT.

P5 Conference Champ, in a dominating fashion.
12-1 record.
1 loss, to a USC team that lots of people feel is playing at a high level. But 3 bad early losses for USC.
No bad losses. 1 loss as mentioned, to a hugely successful program.
Non Conference. Get over it dude. So most P5 teams played 1 tougher OOC game. BFD.
Non Conference game against BYU or Nevada or San Diego State instead of Portland St. UW wins anyway.
Top level talent. I laughed at a poster that said UW had "no team speed" WTF?
Top level talent, the UW Huskies have at least 10 guys on the roster that will play in the NFL.
Beating Ranked Teams, #7 Stanford. #17 Utah, #23 WSU, and #8 Colorado. Losing Only to #20 USC.
Undefeated on the Road. UW was hanging a W after EVERY road game.

From the ESPN site.
With the help of ESPN’s strength of record metric (SOR), we can project how each team’s overall body of work will stack up. Strength of record measures the chance an average top-25 team would have a team’s record or better, given its schedule. We often display strength of record as a rank, but behind those rankings are calculations that give an actual probability. For example, an average top-25 team would have a 3 percent chance of starting 11-1 or better against Ohio State’s schedule.

After defeating Colorado on Friday night, Washington moved up to No. 4 in strength of record.

Your turn. Tell me why UW is NOT in the top 4.

broncosmitty · Dec 3, 2016

DunceKaep said:
UW is in.

If not, then TOTAL failure from the committee.

Members: Current Clemson AD and Current Wisconsin AD. Conflict? Me thinks so. That's 2 of 12.

If they aren't in theres no point in the Pac12 participating again.

gohusk · Dec 3, 2016

SU Nittany Tide said:
It is impossible to get rid of the arguments at the back end. Get the conference champions in there so every power five team has a definitive path there and then get the best three remaining teams in there.

Yeah, but the ultimate answer to any argument is don't lose 3 games and you won't be in this position. This is a little different.

TROJAN-MAN · Dec 3, 2016

DunceKaep said:
no. I don't. Please explain it to me.

Here are my reasons why: Excited to hear your reasons of why NOT.

P5 Conference Champ, in a dominating fashion.
12-1 record.
1 loss, to a USC team that lots of people feel is playing at a high level. But 3 bad early losses for USC.
No bad losses. 1 loss as mentioned, to a hugely successful program.
Non Conference. Get over it dude. So most P5 teams played 1 tougher OOC game. BFD.
Non Conference game against BYU or Nevada or San Diego State instead of Portland St. UW wins anyway.
Top level talent. I laughed at a poster that said UW had "no team speed" WTF?
Top level talent, the UW Huskies have at least 10 guys on the roster that will play in the NFL.
Beating Ranked Teams, #7 Stanford. #17 Utah, #23 WSU, and #8 Colorado. Losing Only to #20 USC.
Undefeated on the Road. UW was hanging a W after EVERY road game.

From the ESPN site.
With the help of ESPN’s strength of record metric (SOR), we can project how each team’s overall body of work will stack up. Strength of record measures the chance an average top-25 team would have a team’s record or better, given its schedule. We often display strength of record as a rank, but behind those rankings are calculations that give an actual probability. For example, an average top-25 team would have a 3 percent chance of starting 11-1 or better against Ohio State’s schedule.

After defeating Colorado on Friday night, Washington moved up to No. 4 in strength of record.

Your turn. Tell me why UW is NOT in the top 4.

Your teams SOS is extremely weak, The one team you needed to beat, you couldn't get the job done. There are other teams with a much better resume

Might as well bring back the BCS with 4 teams

thewhite_00 ESPN board

Well-Known Member

Reigning "Last to post" Champion

thewhite_00 ESPN board

Well-Known Member

thewhite_00 ESPN board

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Sarcasm: Just one of my many services.

Trolling 45, it's EASY.

Well-Known Member

Been around the block more times than the mailman

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Trolling 45, it's EASY.

Banned in Europe

Well-Known Member

Been around the block more times than the mailman

Similar threads