Why being a conference champion should not give automatic bids to a playoff

[LawDawg]

I don't even have a conference. I don't care about conference arguments.

The system doesn't allow them to earn it on the field because they can't play enough games against one another

Why even play the games then? Let's just sim the season on XBox and crown a champion from there?

Whatever on the conference for you ... I am pretty confident this breaks down on conference lines. I guess you are the neutral exception.

Uh, so we can enjoy football. But, unlike pro sports where there are 30 teams, give or take, there are 126 college teams. You will never play enough games for them to "earn it on the field." That is why I favor the subjective method.

 

[sakau2007]

We'll Wisconsin won the conference championship game in a blowout and nearly beat a really good Stanford team in a bowl. Should they have made a 4 team playoff? No, but that's a pretty extreme scenario. More often than not the conference championship game winner is plenty worthy, and if the expectation is set that you have to win your conference to make the playoff it's as fair as can be.

Or taking the 4 best teams is as fair as it can be.

 

[Codaxx]

The system doesn't allow them to earn it on the field because they can't play enough games against one another. Let's say the SEC is awesome, and the B1G sucks balls. Just a hypothetical, of course. But, the college football god agrees with me that all the teams in the SEC are better than all the teams in the B1G. The B1G representative isn't earning it on the field as they are playing demonstrably (in this hypo) lesser teams. That is why I think there has to be a subjective element to the selection.

It probably has to also do with the fact that the subjective component cuts my conference's way right now, and against yours. If the shoe was on the other foot, we might both be taking the other position, although I'd like to think I wouldn't.

lets flip that coin. Most agree that the best conference in football is the PAC and the SEC this yr. Imagine if the Pac rolls through its bowl schedule and the SEC falls on its face. Now everyone believe that the PAC is the best. In a 4 team playoff there would have been a good chance the best team from the best conference would not have participated and 2 teams from #2 would have been in.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Based on opinion.

That's what we want to eliminate.

Let them earn their way on the field. Not some opinion poll.

But in the end even the SoS is based in part on polls(opinions) and is flawed. So whats the answer for deciding the top teams then?

In 2011 Okie light had three games where they were in a dog fight to the end. Bama had one game like that, the rest they won easily, so do we know for sure that Okie light was better based on its possibly flawed SoS and the fact it needed some degree of luck to win in a couple of games. Bama didnt need luck to win a single game that year and had it had some luck in the one game it needed it, we never would have even had the discussion about Alabama being in the title game and LSU's SoS was heads above Okie lights that year.

So, do we really have a definitive answer even using SoS?

 

[LawDawg]

lets flip that coin. Most agree that the best conference in football is the PAC and the SEC this yr. Imagine if the Pac rolls through its bowl schedule and the SEC falls on its face. Now everyone believe that the PAC is the best. In a 4 team playoff there would have been a good chance the best team from the best conference would not have participated and 2 teams from #2 would have been in.

That will be the committee's job. They won't be perfect. But, it is better than taking conference champs, IMHO.

 

[7Samurai13]

So going 9-2(before he left) was not competing? He left before he had time to get that program on its feet. Lets not pretend like the previous four coaches had not done a thing either, Saban was getting recruits to come and was beginning to make an impact when he left. Sadly the next coach was about as inept as the previous four coaches you had before Saban. Its not like anyone really has ever done much with MSU except Dantonio(who is a Saban disciple by the way). And the last tiem both coaches squared off, one had the lesser team win wise and blew the other out by 42 points. Kinda bad to lose to the man who was not able to hack in the B1G huh?

He had one good season. He was a bad coach every other season before then and would have been fired from Alabama if he had posted a .500 record there for 4 seasons.

MSU does not pull the talent that Alabama does. Are all of you Alabama homers not understanding that Michigan State is at best the fourth choice for most of the kids in the Midwest? Ohio State, Michigan and Notre Dame are always going to be higher draws. Who is a bigger draw in the area than Alabama? I have said many times that Michigan State will not sustain what they are doing right now because eventually talent will win out. Again, I am going off the premise that Urban "couldn't hack it" in the SEC and ran to the Big because of it despite putting up TWO NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!! I was not actually suggesting Saban couldn't hack it in the Big Ten.

Sakau says that the only reason that Urban Meyer went to the Big10 was because it is easy then I as a joke said Saban running from Michigan to LSU. You southern boys have some pretty thin skin. Maybe you should try growing a pair.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

This is my point. Because there are so few OOC matchups, it's impossible to really know who is the best. What happens when the SEC "beats each other up" and all the teams end up with multiple losses, yet two B1G teams go undefeated to the CCG where one of them loses in a close game? Or two in the same division go undefeated except for one of the two losing to the other earlier in the year and ending up with only 1 loss? Would you be okay with those two B1G teams getting into the playoff and the 2 or more loss SEC champ getting left out?

Can i say sure and not be blasted? If so then...Sure?

 

[Codaxx]

Or taking the 4 best teams is as fair as it can be.

-
I like taking the best 4. I just not such an egomaniac to believe I can watch 50 games and pick the top 4 teams out of 130 candidates with widely varying schedules.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

But in the end even the SoS is based in part on polls(opinions) and is flawed. So whats the answer for deciding the top teams then?

In 2011 Okie light had three games where they were in a dog fight to the end. Bama had one game like that, the rest they won easily, so do we know for sure that Okie light was better based on its possibly flawed SoS and the fact it needed some degree of luck to win in a couple of games. Bama didnt need luck to win a single game that year and had it had some luck in the one game it needed it, we never would have even had the discussion about Alabama being in the title game and LSU's SoS was heads above Okie lights that year.

So, do we really have a definitive answer even using SoS?

This is the point most of the non-SECers are trying to make. SoS is flawed and should not be used to determine the final 4. Win your conference, you're in. Pretty cut and dried.

 

[Codaxx]

That will be the committee's job. They won't be perfect. But, it is better than taking conference champs, IMHO.

-
i am OK with that in an expanded playoff. 4 is just too limited

 

[LawDawg]

-
i am OK with that in an expanded playoff. 4 is just too limited

There are other problems with 8, but it would take care of the CC argument. 5 CCs, 3 at large bids.

 

[7Samurai13]

same with bret bielema too, right? goes from winning the big 10 in 2012 to going winless in the sec in 2013.

but again, money had nothing to do with his move.

Outside of Wisconsin homers, who ever suggested Bielema was a good coach? Everyone in the Big10 knew that the team was winning in spite of his idiocy not because of it. Just an SEC team was stupid enough to throw cash at a poor coach.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

Can i say sure and not be blasted? If so then...Sure?

No that's fine if that's your opinion. Personally I think that a 10-3 SEC champ would be more deserving than a 11-1 B1G runner up. If conference champions decided the final 4, we would probably be able to see some better OOC matchups as well, because losing in the OOC would be not as big of a deal.

 

[bamabear82]

He had one good season. He was a bad coach every other season before then and would have been fired from Alabama if he had posted a .500 record there for 4 seasons.

MSU does not pull the talent that Alabama does. Are all of you Alabama homers not understanding that Michigan State is at best the fourth choice for most of the kids in the Midwest? Ohio State, Michigan and Notre Dame are always going to be higher draws. Who is a bigger draw in the area than Alabama? I have said many times that Michigan State will not sustain what they are doing right now because eventually talent will win out. Again, I am going off the premise that Urban "couldn't hack it" in the SEC and ran to the Big because of it despite putting up TWO NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!! I was not actually suggesting Saban couldn't hack it in the Big Ten.

Sakau says that the only reason that Urban Meyer went to the Big10 was because it is easy then I as a joke said Saban running from Michigan to LSU. You southern boys have some pretty thin skin. Maybe you should try growing a pair.

Imagine all the teabagging I could do with two pair!

 

[sakau2007]

Nick Saban found the SEC a lot easier than the Big10 which is why he ran from the Big10.

there's a lot of reasons why saban left michigan state for the SEC and why he is having more success in the SEC than he did in the Big 10, and none of them have anything to do with the Big 10 being a tougher conference than the SEC.

 

[RobToxin]

But in the end even the SoS is based in part on polls(opinions) and is flawed. So whats the answer for deciding the top teams then?

In 2011 Okie light had three games where they were in a dog fight to the end. Bama had one game like that, the rest they won easily, so do we know for sure that Okie light was better based on its possibly flawed SoS and the fact it needed some degree of luck to win in a couple of games. Bama didnt need luck to win a single game that year and had it had some luck in the one game it needed it, we never would have even had the discussion about Alabama being in the title game and LSU's SoS was heads above Okie lights that year.

So, do we really have a definitive answer even using SoS?

Easy.

You win your conference.

You have no claim to a national title when you don't even have a conference title. That's the way it goes.

I'll use this season as a hypothetical situation and pick on Bama again.

Let's suppose we had playoff this year and took four conference champions. Let's suppose, again, that Auburn won the playoff.

Can you honestly say that Alabama has a legit gripe for being left out?

Sorry. But no. Not when Auburn played and beat Alabama.

I realize I am in the minority here but to me what happened on the field with the scoreboard counts more than someone's opinion.

 

[7Samurai13]

Imagine all the teabagging I could do with two pair!

LSU male fans better watch out where they pass out even more.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

There are other problems with 8, but it would take care of the CC argument. 5 CCs, 3 at large bids.

Yep. More playoff teams makes this argument moot. I think 8 would be a great number, personally.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

He had one good season. He was a bad coach every other season before then and would have been fired from Alabama if he had posted a .500 record there for 4 seasons.

MSU does not pull the talent that Alabama does. Are all of you Alabama homers not understanding that Michigan State is at best the fourth choice for most of the kids in the Midwest? Ohio State, Michigan and Notre Dame are always going to be higher draws. Who is a bigger draw in the area than Alabama? I have said many times that Michigan State will not sustain what they are doing right now because eventually talent will win out. Again, I am going off the premise that Urban "couldn't hack it" in the SEC and ran to the Big because of it despite putting up TWO NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!! I was not actually suggesting Saban couldn't hack it in the Big Ten.

Sakau says that the only reason that Urban Meyer went to the Big10 was because it is easy then I as a joke said Saban running from Michigan to LSU. You southern boys have some pretty thin skin. Maybe you should try growing a pair.

I dont read Sakau's posts so I had no idea what your post was about except what i read. I like talking to you, we never get into riled up conversations, just debates, so dont take my words as trying to be offensive to you.

Had Saban stayed I believe, based on his track record of success and recruiting, he could have done what Dantonio is currently doing.

As far as Urban, I am not a big fan of his, so my thoughts are that he ran from the SEC because he saw that Saban was doing what he could not, get number 1 recruiting classes that would equate to top teams. Urban was not going to be the top dog anymore once Saban got established and he knew that, especially after Saban beat one of Urbans best teams in the SECCG and made his QB cry on the sidelines like a little girl. So forgive me if i dont get into the Urban to the B1G conversation, my opinion might be a similar one considering he went to one of the two schools that recruits will flock to with a decent coach at the helm.

 

[RobToxin]

There are other problems with 8, but it would take care of the CC argument. 5 CCs, 3 at large bids.

That I could support.

As long as conference champions get first dibs.