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

[Jim Rome is Flaming]

No. If the rules of the playoff were you are in, you reset the records and start playing the games, then it would be MSU vs. Alabama.

But we are talking about "earning" our way into a field. And I don't think that Michigan State has "earned" anything more than Alabama has. So they won their conference? That'd be fantastic if there weren't 2 teams in the SEC ranked higher (and considered better) than your conference champion.

There's exactly the problem. "ranked higher" and "considered better" need to be eliminated. Settle it on the field.

I remember you, in another thread, stating something along the lines of the BCS is the best system to find a champion, because the best team is crowned champion more often than in any other system. I completely agree with your premise here, and it's why I think winning your conference should be a requirement. If you want to be regarded as the best team in the country, finishing 2nd in your conference (even if your conference is much better than another) doesn't cut it.

 

[7Samurai13]

He recruited Brantly if I am not mistaken and stayed a year with him at the helm. He bolted when he saw the handwriting on the wall.

So I guess if Saban leaves this year it will be because he sees no QB option on the roster after McCarron, since he is a senior and leaving this year? Money may be the root cause of this more than McCarron leaving, seeing as Saban has won a title with his last two QB's in their first year as QB.

If Saban leaves for Texas (and that is a huge IF) and Alabama can and will match any offer that Texas makes, why would he leave?

 

[rmilia1]

I find it ironic that in a sport that we all love because every single game means something, we would EVER think that winning your leagues title is irrelevant. People are against a 12-16 team playoff because it waters down the meaning of the regular season but they are AOK with having a a team that didnt win their own league playing for the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP??? LOL. That makes ZERO fucking sense. Sorry, it just doesnt. Either go to 12-16 teams OR the ONLY teams that should be eligible are conference winners. If OK State cant beat OU to win their league the last week of the year they dont deserve to be in a playoff. If Bama cant beat LSU to earn the right to play for their league title then they dont deserve to be in a playoff. If USC loses to UCLA and doesnt play for their league title then they are out. Its really simple. With 4 teams there are plenty of conference champions to choose from that have EARNED their spot. Everyone else can fuck off IMO.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

It is clear that only SEC teams should be allowed into the playoffs.
No other teams have an argument to be included or even thought of as anything but marginally average football teams.

Knowing you I know you are being sarcastic and i truly hope your not being serious.

On any given year i could see a team not a conference champion being selected that is one of the top 4 teams and it doesnt have to be from the SEC. I think the sentiment outside the SEC has gotten so jaded that they can only come up with bullshit answers instead of giving good debate answers, but reality says that the door swings both ways so one day it might be two Big 12 or ACC, or B1G teams in the playoffs and one not be a conference champion. Anyone that says its not possible or scoffs at that remark is clearly delusional.

 

[rmilia1]

Win your conference and you're in?

So the 4 team playoff will consist of
Auburn
Florida State
Stanford
Baylor
Michigan State
Rice
Central Florida
Bowling Green

...see where I'm going here?

So 4 of the fianl top 5 in the BCS standings??? Only team left out would be Bama and they left THEMSELVES out by losing to Auburn. Perfect.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

Knowing you I know you are being sarcastic and i truly hope your not being serious.

On any given year i could see a team not a conference champion being selected that is one of the top 4 teams and it doesnt have to be from the SEC. I think the sentiment outside the SEC has gotten so jaded that they can only come up with bullshit answers instead of giving good debate answers, but reality says that the door swings both ways so one day it might be two Big 12 or ACC, or B1G teams in the playoffs and one not be a conference champion. Anyone that says its not possible or scoffs at that remark is clearly delusional.

Obviously it could happen that way in the future, and certainly it's easier to argue for or against this based on how things are for the various conferences right now. I just don't see why someone can argue that a team who is not the best in their conference could be the best in the country. It's illogical.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

I find it ironic that in a sport that we all love because every single game means something, we would EVER think that winning your leagues title is irrelevant. People are against a 12-16 team playoff because it waters down the meaning of the regular season but they are AOK with having a a team that didnt win their own league playing for the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP??? LOL. That makes ZERO fucking sense. Sorry, it just doesnt. Either go to 12-16 teams OR the ONLY teams that should be eligible are conference winners. If OK State cant beat OU to win their league the last week of the year they dont deserve to be in a playoff. If Bama cant beat LSU to earn the right to play for their league title then they dont deserve to be in a playoff. If USC loses to UCLA and doesnt play for their league title then they are out. Its really simple. With 4 teams there are plenty of conference champions to choose from that have EARNED their spot. Everyone else can fuck off IMO.

I have been in favor of a 12 team playoff since they started talking about it. I still feel that in order to get the best teams in the playoff as a four team you cannot simply limit yourself to Champions only because we simply cannot say that all conferences are created equal and if someone doesnt understand that lets look to some past examples of champions of conferences who were clearly not one of the best teams in the country. We only have to go as far as last year to get a good example of one and that was what this original premise in the OP's post considered as a reason.

4 teams is not a playoff to me and it will get visited again in a few years when more controversy comes up and will be moved possibly to eight or twelve teams.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Obviously it could happen that way in the future, and certainly it's easier to argue for or against this based on how things are for the various conferences right now. I just don't see why someone can argue that a team who is not the best in their conference could be the best in the country. It's illogical.

So let me venture into the realm of two conferences such as the B1G and Big 12 have 2 loss teams as conference champs, and we have a Mac team that is a one loss champion and then we have a one loss non conference champion from the SEC, with an undefeated champion and a one loss non-division winner from the SEC and an ACC undefeated Team. Who would you choose as the best four then, and this scenario is possible as we almost had a two loss Big 12 champion this year and we had a 3 loss B1G champion last year due to probation. See, the possibilities are not as easy to consider when you look at it in the light of Champions only, but to include all the teams it gets a bit clearer.

Would you choose the 2 loss champions over a one loss non conference winner? If so then you clearly leave out what could be a better team. Do you choose the 1 loss MAC winner over the 2 loss champions of the B1G and Big 12? Not so easy is it, this is why I say you have to look at the big picture when its only 4 teams because its a small sample size and you want to make the BEST choice, not the politically correct choice.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

So 4 of the fianl top 5 in the BCS standings??? Only team left out would be Bama and they left THEMSELVES out by losing to Auburn. Perfect.

So you think that a 2 loss Stanford team is better than a one loss Alabama team that lost with no time on the clock on a fluke play, but was hands down the best team in the country prior to that game in all the polls. See, even if I wasnt an Alabama fan, i would have a problem with this one based on Stanford having 2 losses and one of those losses coming at the hands of a 7 loss Utah team. Conference champion does not automatically mean better than another team based on that one win.

 

[rmilia1]

Went back 3 years and IF you had a 4 team playoff with ONLY conference cahmps you'd have had :

2012: 1 Notre Dame vs 4 Stanford
2 Bama vs 3 K State
- Only team left out would have been Florida and as we all saw in their Orange Bowl debacle the Gators were maybe a tad overrated anyway.

2011 : 1 LSU vs 4 Boise State
2 OK State vs 3 Oregon
- 2 top 4 teams left out this year with Bama and Stanford BUT both those teams would have had their chance to win their way in but didnt with Bama losing at home to LSU and Stanford losing to Oregon.

2010: 1 Auburn vs 4 Wisconsin
2 Oregon vs 3 TCU
- Once again only 1 top 4 team left out ( sorry to Stanford again but hey beat Oregon and youll be OK)

To sum up their is a grand total of 4 teams in 3 years that would have been top 4 and gotten bypassed with 3 out of those 4 having every chance to play their way in but losing. Lone exception being 2012 Florida which probably turned out for the best anyway given their performance vs Louisville.

 

[cane_man]

If Saban leaves for Texas (and that is a huge IF) and Alabama can and will match any offer that Texas makes, why would he leave?

I think conf champs should be included in a playoff too. But you need an 8 team playoff to adhere to that, imo.

 

[LawDawg]

So you would leave out the champion of arguably the #2 conference in the country?

Definitely. 2 losses, one to Utah. Not deserving. Good example of what I've been saying.

 

[rmilia1]

So you think that a 2 loss Stanford team is better than a one loss Alabama team that lost with no time on the clock on a fluke play, but was hands down the best team in the country prior to that game in all the polls. See, even if I wasnt an Alabama fan, i would have a problem with this one based on Stanford having 2 losses and one of those losses coming at the hands of a 7 loss Utah team. Conference champion does not automatically mean better than another team based on that one win.

No I think Bama is the 2nd best team in the country this year behind FSU but its irrelevant. You guys had your shot and lost. Stanford had their shot and won. Thats what a playoff is about.

 

[LawDawg]

So 4 of the fianl top 5 in the BCS standings??? Only team left out would be Bama and they left THEMSELVES out by losing to Auburn. Perfect.

Less than perfect ... you are missing one of the 4 best teams. I want the 4 best teams. Period. Let the committee do their work.

 

[LawDawg]

I find it ironic that in a sport that we all love because every single game means something, we would EVER think that winning your leagues title is irrelevant.

It's not irrelevant, it just isn't the only factor. You want it to be the only factor, I want a subjective evaluation. We won't change each others minds.

 

[rmilia1]

If we REALLY want a true playoff and a true test of who the best teams are its simple. A. Abolish preseason rankings, no rankings til at LEAST week 7. B. All leagues play 9 conference games, not fair to have some leagues play 8 while others play 9. C. Playoff has to be at LEAST 12 teams. That way you can get conference champs AND the best at larges in. That makes the regular season important but doesnt penalize you for playing a tougher schedule and D. ALL BCS conference teams must play OOC schedules that consist of at least 2 other BCS conference teams, if you want to schedule 1 cupcake then fine but playing 4 cupcakes and 8 league game and going 11-1 isnt nearly as impressive as playing 2 decent OOC games and a 9 game league slate and going 10-2 IMO.

 

[rmilia1]

Less than perfect ... you are missing one of the 4 best teams. I want the 4 best teams. Period. Let the committee do their work.

They shouldnt have lost then. CFB " where every game counts". Thats the motto for the whole sport. Dont lose that game and they are in. They knew the ramifications before the game started.

 

[charlie42s]

If Saban leaves for Texas (and that is a huge IF) and Alabama can and will match any offer that Texas makes, why would he leave?

... because he might want me to be the first football HC to win NCs at 3 different schools.

Also, when you force your current employer to give you a raise, it tends to get bridges burned.

 

[rmilia1]

It's not irrelevant, it just isn't the only factor. You want it to be the only factor, I want a subjective evaluation. We won't change each others minds.

Thats not what I said, I said if you are only having 4 teams then you can find 4 conference champs that have resumes as good as or close to as good as a team that didnt win their league and IMO the title outweighs the other stuff. This is why the playoff needs to be bigger.

 

[LawDawg]

They shouldnt have lost then. CFB " where every game counts". Thats the motto for the whole sport. Dont lose that game and they are in. They knew the ramifications before the game started.

Doesn't matter ... 2 of the best teams in the same division. I want the 4 best teams. Committee will put Bama in. To say otherwise is that you don't think Bama is top 4, or you are anti-SEC, or you don't want the top 4 teams. Can't have it any other way.