If 2 teams from the same conference make the playoffs

[rmilia1]

Would you rather see them play each other in the semis OR make sure they dont play each other?? IE say this years playoff is Oregon/Florida State/Stanford and Alabama. Are you a bigger fan of making sure that Oregon and Stanford meet in the semis or would you rather have them not play each other right away?? Does it matter if the game is NOT a rematch as opposed to a rematch?? Or do you think you should simply go by seeding and let the games fall where they may?? I can see both arguments frankly.

 

[DawgsOnTop]

IMO, it should be by rank. Thats the only fair way to do it.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

Well it depends on a few things. If the teams played during the regular season, I'd certainly rather see them not paired up in the semis. But if, for example, Undefeated MSU and 1-loss Wisconsin were to make the playoff after not having played that year because Iowa was in the conference championship and lost, I wouldn't mind it. That said, it should always come down to rank and more often than not a conference champ with a similar record will likely get the nod over a team that didn't win the conference.

 

[WhiteMamba]

I hope only one from each of 4 of the 5 conferences make it.

But in the scenario presented... I would much rather avoid the 2 teams from each conference playing each other in the semis.

Most likely it is a rematch game as they are in the same conference.

If they meet a 2nd time it should be earned in a semifinal victory.

Like when Bama got its rematch with LSU....

Say Bama beat Oky State ( which they would have) then got the rematch with LSU and won the NT.

Nobody could bitch then, as it would have been a clear cut earned spot and rematch in the NC game vs LSU.

 

[rmilia1]

Reason I ask is do you think the committee should make an effort to make sure that teams from the same league DO NOT end up playing for the title ( only because Id have to imagine it would affect TV ratings ) or do you think they should not be worried at all about the money/TV end of things??

 

[jonvi]

I think the ranking is a beauty contest so I would rather the two teams be in differing brackets. If both of these teams advance to the NC...then they earned it.

You may find neither team advances. And if they do, TV ratings should be the last thing we care about. If they earn it, they are in.

 

[rmilia1]

I hope only one from each of 4 of the 5 conferences make it.

But in the scenario presented... I would much rather avoid the 2 teams from each conference playing each other.

Most likely it is a rematch game as they are in the same conference.

If they meet a 2nd time it should be earned in a semifinal victory.

Like when Bama got its rematch with LSU....

Say Bama beat Oky State ( which they would have) then got the rematch with LSU and won the NT.

Nobody could bitch then, as it would have been a clear cut earned spot and rematch in the NC game vs LSU.

Solid point. Im torn on this one as a fan. I want teams to earn their way into a title game but on the flip side Id much rather see teams from different leagues playing for a title than teams from the same league ( regardless of what league it was including my own teams league )

 

[WhiteMamba]

Reason I ask is do you think the committee should make an effort to make sure that teams from the same league DO NOT end up playing for the title ( only because Id have to imagine it would affect TV ratings ) or do you think they should not be worried at all about the money/TV end of things??

No. Because then you are predetermining a hypothetical outcome.

If two teams from same conference make playoff. No matter the records or "poll rankings" should be a factor in seeding them opposite of each other.

At all costs, they should be seeded against an ooc playoff participant.

Not that public polls make one difference in the committee's decision as far as we know.

 

[4down20]

With a committee in charge, I'm sure they will try to make the best matchups possible for viewing pleasure. IE: More likely to produce matchups people want to see, which reduces the chances for them making the rematch.

If Alabama, Oregon and LSU go, they are most likely to put Alabama vs Oregon in a semi IMO.

 

[Lance Armstrong]

I'd want them seeded in the same semi. If they couldn't figure it out in conference play, let them figure it out in the semi's before the title game.

 

[4down20]

I'd want them seeded in the same semi. If they couldn't figure it out in conference play, let them figure it out in the semi's before the title game.

If you scared, just say you scared.

 

[BamaInHoustonRTR]

There are 4 spots and 5 conferences. One major conf is already going to get left out. There is no way in hell they are going to let 2 conf's get left out. This 4 team playoff is bound to move to 8 sooner than later.

 

[rmilia1]

Let me ask a hypothetical again. Say in my scenario you get an Oregon-Bama and Stanford-FSU semis. IF Oregon and Stanford win those games do you think that game would get anywhere near the ratings as a game between 2 different leagues would?? Doesnt that have to play a role in how the committee seeds these teams?? If we are wanting the best matchups then dont they have to consider how a title game with only one league represented may do for ratings?? Or does that just not matter at all in your eyes?

 

[rmilia1]

There are 4 spots and 5 conferences. One major conf is already going to get out. There is no way in hell they are going to let 2 conf get left out. This 4 team playoff is bound to move to 8 sooner than later.

Id wager there are at least 50% of the years in the BCS era where, if a playoff had been in place, that 1 league would have had 2 teams in it.

 

[BamaInHoustonRTR]

Id wager there are at least 50% of the years in the BCS era where, if a playoff had been in place, that 1 league would have had 2 teams in it.

That's because you are assuming they will do it by the rankings. They won't. They will pick the 4 conf championships then make up a reason why 1 conf champion doesn't deserve in. They aren't going to let 2 teams in from 1 conf and screw over 2 major conferences. This isn't computer polls, this is an oligarchy of politicians. Maybe you just don't understand how politics works. Its not going to happen, no way no how...unless the very next year becomes the 8 team playoff.

 

[Inquisitor95]

Should be 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 regardless of conference. That's only fair.


If say Alabama and LSU end up in the NCG again, at least they earned it to some degree.

 

[4down20]

Id wager there are at least 50% of the years in the BCS era where, if a playoff had been in place, that 1 league would have had 2 teams in it.

I don't know about that honestly. If we use the BCS rankings it's more likely, but with a committee I don't think it will happen as often.

Take 2008/2009 for example. Alabama and Florida played in the SECCG and after the game I do believe the loser of that game was still in the top4. But I don't believe the committee is going to take both of them after playing in that game at the end of the season.

It would have to be a really close SECCG with some unresolved issues to get in then.

But in 2011 with Alabama and LSU, they were in the same division so didn't play in the SECCG, so that is when it is most likely to happen. Possible that Alabama and Auburn would have gone last year, but that too is so late in the year it really wouldn't have been guaranteed.

 

[DawgsOnTop]

Let me ask a hypothetical again. Say in my scenario you get an Oregon-Bama and Stanford-FSU semis. IF Oregon and Stanford win those games do you think that game would get anywhere near the ratings as a game between 2 different leagues would?? Doesnt that have to play a role in how the committee seeds these teams?? If we are wanting the best matchups then dont they have to consider how a title game with only one league represented may do for ratings?? Or does that just not matter at all in your eyes?

I think its more important to have the BEST 2 teams in the NT game. No matter the conference.

 

[Codaxx]

Would you rather see them play each other in the semis OR make sure they dont play each other?? IE say this years playoff is Oregon/Florida State/Stanford and Alabama. Are you a bigger fan of making sure that Oregon and Stanford meet in the semis or would you rather have them not play each other right away?? Does it matter if the game is NOT a rematch as opposed to a rematch?? Or do you think you should simply go by seeding and let the games fall where they may?? I can see both arguments frankly.

-
I am looking for match-ups. I would love to see Bama vs Oregon. Spread vs Power. That is the most interesting aspect of the playoffs for me. I want to see teams have to face multiple styles to win a title. Outside of that I dont really care how they match them up.

 

[rmilia1]

That's because you are assuming they will do it by the rankings. They won't. They will pick the 4 conf championships then make up a reason why 1 conf champion doesn't deserve in. They aren't going to let 2 teams in from 1 conf and screw over 2 major conferences. This isn't computer polls, this is an oligarchy of politicians. Maybe you just don't understand how politics works. Its not going to happen, no way no how...unless the very next year becomes the 8 team playoff.

Cant do that every year man, especially in the years where there are only 2 conferences represented in the top 4. Hell just look back. Last year Bama and Auburn ( 2 and 3 ), 2012 Bama and Florida ( 1 and 3 ), 2011 Bama and LSU ( and 2 ), 2010 Oregon and Stanford ( 2 and 4 ), 2009 NONE, 2008 ( Oklahoma and Texas AND Bama and Florida ( 1 and 3 and 2 and 4 ), 2007 NONE, 2006 OSU and Michigan AND Florida and LSU ( 1 and 3 and 2 and 4 ), 2005 PSU and OSU ( 2 and 3), 2004 USC and Cal (1 and 4), 2003 NONE, 2002 Iowa and Ohio State ( 2 and 3 )... Thats about as far back as I can rmember but MOST of those year had at leadt 2 teams from the same league in the top 4 asnd a few had only 2 leagues represented at all. AND very few of those teams were ranked 4th, most were 1/2/3 so itll be hard to justify having 6th ranked Michigan State being selected ahead of 3rd ranked Auburn even if MSU wins the B10 and Auburn doesnt even make its league title game. If you are going to just reward conference winners then just say that. I do not think that what is going to happen though.