4 team playoff this year

[7Samurai13]

I wouldn't put either B1G team in. If Auburn wins in my scenario, they are in. So is Bama. I can kind of go with you on the FSU Duke loss, but that would be a pretty bad loss I would think. It would boil down to FSU having lost to Duke, OkSU or Baylor.

I can't argue with "Committee > Conference Champ only > BCS rankings" but you have to realize the committee will start with the polls and then go from there.

I am ok with them starting with the rankings as a base line, but if it's just pure rankings that just will push teams to schedule the worst OOC possible just to ensure they are ranked higher.

Are you suggesting it could possibly be; Auburn, Alabama, 2 loss OkSU and 2 loss Baylor? I would take a one loss FSU over a team that had lost to West Virginia. That is the only way I think Texas can win the Big12, but I could be wrong, don't follow that craziness that closely.

 

[haydav49]

I'm just flipping shit. Actually the whole Missouri in the east sounded crazy to me until I saw this diagram, which at least makes a little sense:

I'm not debating Missouri in the East. Just that aTm and Missouri are not in the southeast. I believe they divided up teams as best they could.

 

[cane_man]

Dawg, I didn't start it. One of your tSEC brothers did. Rag on him. If you want to dig on the B1G for 14 teams. I'm going to dig on the SEC for having SW and MW teams.

Not all acc teams in coastal states
Big ten is neither big, nor does it have 10 teams
Big 12 doesnt have 12
Pac isnt only pacific schools
Sec isnt only se schools

But.....the aac does have all american schools that play athletics [/argument]

 

[LawDawg]

I'm not debating Missouri in the East. Just that aTm and Missouri are not in the southeast. I believe they divided up teams as best they could.

You have the better of the argument. One could even argue that Arkansas is more Midwest than Southeast. But Missouri and Texas are definitely Midwest and Southwest, not Southeast. This coming from native southerner who lived in Missouri for a while.

 

[LawDawg]

I am ok with them starting with the rankings as a base line, but if it's just pure rankings that just will push teams to schedule the worst OOC possible just to ensure they are ranked higher.

Are you suggesting it could possibly be; Auburn, Alabama, 2 loss OkSU and 2 loss Baylor? I would take a one loss FSU over a team that had lost to West Virginia. That is the only way I think Texas can win the Big12, but I could be wrong, don't follow that craziness that closely.

I haven't taken the time to think how the BigXII shakes out, but definitely wouldn't have two 2 loss teams from that conference. Would probably take one of the PAC teams before that.

 

[sakau2007]

You have the better of the argument. One could even argue that Arkansas is more Midwest than Southeast. But Missouri and Texas are definitely Midwest and Southwest, not Southeast. This coming from native southerner who lived in Missouri for a while.

Driving Times from College Station to major southwest and southeast cities

phoenix 16h 6m
las vegas 19h 49m
albequerque 11h 41m
los angeles 21h 16m


atlanta 12h 26m
new orleans 6h 33m
nashville 11h 59m
birmingham 10h 19m

 

[haydav49]

Not all acc teams in coastal states
Big ten is neither big, nor does it have 10 teams
Big 12 doesnt have 12
Pac isnt only pacific schools
Sec isnt only se schools

But.....the aac does have all american schools that play athletics [/argument]

You get it. Maybe the AAC schools can all start making fun of the rest of us now?

 

[7Samurai13]

Not all acc teams in coastal states
Big ten is neither big, nor does it have 10 teams
Big 12 doesnt have 12
Pac isnt only pacific schools
Sec isnt only se schools

But.....the aac does have all american schools that play athletics [/argument]

Since when does the AAC play athletics?

 

[haydav49]

You have the better of the argument. One could even argue that Arkansas is more Midwest than Southeast. But Missouri and Texas are definitely Midwest and Southwest, not Southeast. This coming from native southerner who lived in Missouri for a while.

I'm done with it now. Cane Man spelled it out perfectly.

 

[sakau2007]

I'm done with it now. Cane Man spelled it out perfectly.

be done with it. i just showed you that college station is closer to major southeastern cities than major southwestern cities.

 

[The Crimson King]

But NOT in the SE you dumb shit.

If you believe Lebanon, Kansas is the geographical center of the contiguous US then both College Station and Columbia are technically in the SE

However, I think when using points constantly above water, College Station may be about 30 miles west of the center and Columbia about 70 miles north of the center

 

[LawDawg]

Regions Of The United States

/thread

 

[Jim Rome is Flaming]

Brilliant discussion all around.

 

[potzer25]

should be the 4 best teams

fsu, bama, seccg winner, and someone else. probably ohio state if they win. probably okst if they beat oklahoma and ohio st loses

I disagree. Divisions and conference championships should mean something. Teams should be conference champs or division winners at minimum to get into the playoffs. I know that isn't how it will work with the selection committee, though...all this talk about wanting "the best teams" to play is nothing more that continued reliance on polls and opinion. It's the stupidest method in sports, using voting decide a champion or who gets to play for a championship. Play the game - win and you move on; lose and you lose. The better team got left out? Too bad - win next year.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

Which ones? Aren't they all still in Eastern Time Zone?

Of the 14.5 members of the ACC, most of them are in a state that touches the Atlantic Ocean. Louiville and Notre Dame are not.

 

[LawDawg]

I disagree. Divisions and conference championships should mean something. Teams should be conference champs or division winners at minimum to get into the playoffs. I know that isn't how it will work with the selection committee, though...all this talk about wanting "the best teams" to play is nothing more that continued reliance on polls and opinion. It's the stupidest method in sports, using voting decide a champion or who gets to play for a championship. Play the game - win and you move on; lose and you lose. The better team got left out? Too bad - win next year.

So, you would have wanted a 7-6 UCLA to go the playoff had they won the PACCG a couple years ago? Or how about Duke this year, should they knock off FSU? That's the problem with your Conf Champion argument ... it is a no tolerance, throw common sense out the window solution, that fails to consider that more than one of the best teams might be in the same conference.

Before you go all "SEC homer" on me, remember that while it appears to benefit the SEC today, that college football is cyclical. There are many years where this would benefit, to the good of all college football, other conferences. For example, ACC - Miami/FSU/VaTech, B1G - UM/OSU/PSU, PAC - USC/Oregon/Stanford, BigXII - OU/UT/OkSU.

If people can get past the anti-SEC rhetoric, a committee comprised of people from all conferences looking at conference champs, SOS, record, polls, the eyeball test, etc., is clearly the best way to ensure that you are going to get as close to the 4 best teams playing each other that you can get without have all 125 teams in a playoff (which still doesn't guarantee you get the best team as the winner).

 

[haydav49]

So, you would have wanted a 7-6 UCLA to go the playoff had they won the PACCG a couple years ago? Or how about Duke this year, should they knock off FSU? That's the problem with your Conf Champion argument ... it is a no tolerance, throw common sense out the window solution, that fails to consider that more than one of the best teams might be in the same conference.

Before you go all "SEC homer" on me, remember that while it appears to benefit the SEC today, that college football is cyclical. There are many years where this would benefit, to the good of all college football, other conferences. For example, ACC - Miami/FSU/VaTech, B1G - UM/OSU/PSU, PAC - USC/Oregon/Stanford, BigXII - OU/UT/OkSU.

If people can get past the anti-SEC rhetoric, a committee comprised of people from all conferences looking at conference champs, SOS, record, polls, the eyeball test, etc., is clearly the best way to ensure that you are going to get as close to the 4 best teams playing each other that you can get without have all 125 teams in a playoff (which still doesn't guarantee you get the best team as the winner).

I might buy into this argument if the two teams had not met prior to the NCG. LSU should have never had to play Bama again. And Auburn should not have to either.

 

[7Samurai13]

So, you would have wanted a 7-6 UCLA to go the playoff had they won the PACCG a couple years ago? Or how about Duke this year, should they knock off FSU? That's the problem with your Conf Champion argument ... it is a no tolerance, throw common sense out the window solution, that fails to consider that more than one of the best teams might be in the same conference.

Before you go all "SEC homer" on me, remember that while it appears to benefit the SEC today, that college football is cyclical. There are many years where this would benefit, to the good of all college football, other conferences. For example, ACC - Miami/FSU/VaTech, B1G - UM/OSU/PSU, PAC - USC/Oregon/Stanford, BigXII - OU/UT/OkSU.

If people can get past the anti-SEC rhetoric, a committee comprised of people from all conferences looking at conference champs, SOS, record, polls, the eyeball test, etc., is clearly the best way to ensure that you are going to get as close to the 4 best teams playing each other that you can get without have all 125 teams in a playoff (which still doesn't guarantee you get the best team as the winner).

He did say conference or DIVISION winner. So at least play for the conference championship. So FSU would be eligible to play according to his criteria. Oregon would have still been eligible if UCLA had beaten them. Basically it would have prevented Bama from playing for the title in 2011, which there are many who agree with that, and would prevent them from sneaking in this year. I don't know of any other team that has played for a National title who did not at least win their division (if they had divisions), but I am too lazy to go back and check.

 

[sakau2007]

I might buy into this argument if the two teams had not met prior to the NCG. LSU should have never had to play Bama again. And Auburn should not have to either.

in the NCAA tournament, you see rematches all the time. learn the difference between a regular season and postseason. a regular season is where you earn your seeding, position, etc. for the postseason. the postseason resets the records and you play winner take all.

 

[LawDawg]

I might buy into this argument if the two teams had not met prior to the NCG. LSU should have never had to play Bama again. And Auburn should not have to either.

In a 4 team playoff, I would have loved to see OSU and Michigan play again back in whenever it was the UF beat OSU, and UM was the odd team out. In fact, that year is a good example of a year in which the multiple team benefit would have gone to the B1G, not the SEC.

The 4 best teams, even if they have played before, is how it should be in my mind.