What's the perfect playoff system?

[Deep Creek]

No, I have said that the 4 game playoff is the best method devised so far. I suffered years of bowl games that did not determine a champion before the bowl tie ins made exceptions for NCGs. I have seen the BCS try to adjust the formula to prevent what happened last year from happening again. This is the best system yet. But the playoffs are still decided in the press box/on ESPN and not by the players. The best team by majority opinion means nothing. Look at your own history, particularly the 1992 Championship. Either make conferences mean something or get rid of them.

This would work. No one could use the "but we were conference champions" argument...cuz they ain't any.

 

[4down20]

I don't think anyone disagrees with these two items. The disagreement begins when specific criteria starts being applied in defining what "actual merit" and "equal opportunity" really mean.

Well we can completely discredit the notion that conference champions = actual merit by all the times better teams don't win the conference due to oddly enough - ignorant labels and AQ's like those same people want to use. When the method is demonstrability bad, how can that be ignored?

If people want to see more conference champions, then the changes need to come from the conferences. Get rid of divisions, stupid "AQ" to the conference championship based on those "division champions" and put the 2 best teams in the championship game as defined by the playoff rankings. LSU vs Alabama in 2011 is taken care of, Ohio St vs Penn St last year is decided, etc.

Even then there will be times a conference doesn't deserve to make it and another conference will get in 2 - and it should be that way, and it's not always going to be the SEC/Alabama doing it - although it will be rare that it happens at all, as we just need other teams to do badly like Ohio St/USC did this year.

So if anything with college football needs to be fixed right now, it's not the playoffs - it's the conferences. The Big12 is the only one doing it right.

 

[4down20]

This would work. No one could use the "but we were conference champions" argument...cuz they ain't any.

I'd love it, but scheduling difficulty will prevent it from ever happening, and the quality of teams and contracts/money for teams would decline for many programs leaving them worse off creating an even bigger gap for the have's and have nots.

It'll never happen, but it would be awesome.

 

[Deep Creek]

So if anything with college football needs to be fixed right now, it's not the playoffs - it's the conferences.

 

[Deep Creek]

I'd love it, but scheduling difficulty will prevent it from ever happening, and the quality of teams and contracts/money for teams would decline for many programs leaving them worse off creating an even bigger gap for the have's and have nots.

It'll never happen, but it would be awesome.

Who cares? Let teams like mine pound sand if the alumni, etal won't anti up. Survival of the fitest, natural selection, etc.

 

[4down20]

Who cares? Let teams like mine pound sand if the alumni, etal won't anti up. Survival of the fitest, natural selection, etc.

Don't really want the quality of the sport to go down. I'm all for the things you talk about, but the freedom to form alliances(conferences) and group up for personal gain is among them in practice.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

My idea is still the best and most efficient and transparent.

- 8 teams. Give all the playoff teams a two week bye after conference championship weekend. First two rounds get played on campus sites, final round gets played on one of the six BCS Bowl sites. Every year, you rotate.

- No committees or polls. Use an RPI system to rate each team, and make the formula available to the public. The top 6 highest rated conference champions in the top 12 gets an automatic spot in the playoff. Any remaining spots goes to the highest rated at-large schools.

The problem with the current selection committee is two-fold: No criteria for determining the "best teams" and the committee itself is wildly uneven. 10/13 members are associated with the power conferences. Only 3 members are connected to the G5. Not only that, but the Pac-12, SEC, and ACC have 3 members each. The Big-12 and Big-10 only have one represented.

I wouldn't mind 6 teams either: Basically, take the 4 highest rated conference champions in the top 10, and any remaining spots goes to the highest rated teams.

6 teams would be more bowl friendly. All the playoff games would take place on bowl sites, and the top 4 seeds pick their destination.

 

[Shanemansj13]

I don’t think a conference champion should automatically get you in and we have seen the last two years they haven’t which is fine but in a 6 game playoff it is an even worse idea. What if a team has 4-5 losses and get in? Is that fair? If they do switch to a 6 game playoff it should be the same criteria as it is currently.

 

[WNY_FOOTBALL_DUDE]

I don’t think a conference champion should automatically get you in and we have seen the last two years they haven’t which is fine but in a 6 game playoff it is an even worse idea. What if a team has 4-5 losses and get in? Is that fair? If they do switch to a 6 game playoff it should be the same criteria as it is currently.

I agree with this sentiment. Autobids are a bad idea. You would have teams like 2005 Florida State, 2012 Wisconsin, and 2010 Connecticut making it in, at the expense of an at-large with a better SOS and less far less losses. Just look at the 2012 season. Putting in Wisconsin (lets ignore Louisville winning the Big E), would mean that Oregon at 11-1 would get left out.

A better idea would be to "cap" for conference champions. Conference champions gets in, if they are ranked in the top 12 for 8 team and top 10 for 6. That would make better sense. You would limit the field to the 10-13 win, 0-2 loss crowd for over 95% of the time. A team with 3 losses or 9 wins could still get in, but their SOS would have been off the charts.