BCS wants 4 teams but how to get them?
- Thread starter Endless Purple
- Start date
Limey Frog
Full Member
It is nearly a mathematical impossibility for the #16 team to be one of the four highest ranked conference champions. The situation I described could happen quite easily. Alabama and LSU would likely have done exactly that this year had they been in different divisions.
Big Frog II
Active Member
The highest rated.
Kaiser
New Member
How often is the 4th best conference champ 9-3 & ranked 16th? Has that ever been the case?
Endless Purple
Full Member
My ideal choice of teams would be top 4 ranked conference champions, but.. They have to be within the top 8 in the rankings to qualify. If there are not 4 that qualify then open it up to at large spots of the next highest ranked non conference champions. (Only too long to put as a choice in the poll)
Kaiser
New Member
Close. It'll be whatever setup makes the most money while consolidating power in the hands of a select few. IIRC a 4 team playoff should account for an additional $600M in revenue while a 16 team playoff would account for an additional $1.5B in revenue. I can think of only one reason our conferences have fought so long and hard against that $600M & are now leaving behind another $900M...
Army Frog Fan
Active Member
Last year it was #10 Wisc.
Kaiser
New Member
I agree with a minimum qualification standard when you have such a tiny playoff. There should've been a minimum ranking standard added to the BCS a long time ago.
My idea playoff would be 16 teams. Autobids for all conference champs & at larges for all the rest to the highest ranked non conference champs.
So 11 auto 5 at large
Maybe force the poorer conferences to merge & get it down to 9 auto 7 at large.
Distribute revenue based on the March madness model.
Kaiser
New Member
So never is what you're saying. That's what I thought.
Delmonico
Semi-Omnipotent Being
Delmonico
Semi-Omnipotent Being
Wisconsin was 11-2 entering the bowl season. Their 3rd loss was in the Rose Bowl.
Limey Frog
Full Member
There is at least small grounds for optimism [never more than small in CFB] that the money factor will cause good sense to prevail. The Alabama-LSU rematch was a disaster in terms of ratings. The best way to maximize ratings nationally for a playoff is with a good regional spread, not two SEC teams and none from the Big Ten or Pac-12 [which if you only take the top 4 ranked teams could happen not infrequently]. Not limiting the field to conference champions will also diminish the value of conference title games, which surely none of the big leagues wants.
Delmonico
Semi-Omnipotent Being
If a Top 4 set-up had been in place last year, you would have had 2 conference champs (LSU, Oklahoma State), a 3rd team that didn't make it to its conference's title game (Alabama) and an additional non-champ coming from a conference where the conference champ DIDN'T finish in the Top 4 (#4 Stanford which finished ahead of of #5 and Pac 12 champ Oregon). if a Top 4 conference champs process were used, then the #1, #3, #5 and #10 teams would have been in the semifinals.
No system is going to be fool proof. The question becomes which system involves the least amount of fools.....
No system is going to be fool proof. The question becomes which system involves the least amount of fools.....
Kaiser
New Member
I have zero faith in our athletic directors & commissioners when it comes to the postseason. I predict something idiotically complicated & convoluted such as the Rose Bowl hosts on the third tuesday prior to the summer equinox if the moon is in its waxing phase according to the julian not gregorian calendar; unless the 3rd place SEC team is available, subject to veto by the council of rabbis of course. Hopefully I'm just being pessimistic and am proven wrong.
Stiff Arm Frog
Active Member
It needs to be the top 4 conference champions. Otherwise we could end up with a scenario where 2 SEC teams (or Big10 teams, for that matter) are once again playing for a National Championship.
I'd be fine with that, if it were an 8 or 16 team playoff. With only 4 though, you need to open it up to as many conferences as possible. Make it conference champions only.
I'd be fine with that, if it were an 8 or 16 team playoff. With only 4 though, you need to open it up to as many conferences as possible. Make it conference champions only.
Opintel
Moderators
That, my friend, is exactly what a real playoff diminishes.
Let's keep it simple - the top four ranked Conference Champions play. You still have the "rank" thing, which has traditionally been the "BC" problem rearing it's bulldookie head...you'll never completely escape it. What we want is the four best, fairly selected, teams in the tournament. Conference affiliation is not a consideration (I'll use the fabulous B10 champ vs the lowly MWC winner for example; how'd that turn out?) being your conference winner, and having the proper ranking (ugh) is the key.
Why could I say the S word, in bullXXXX? I changed it when I saw it posted...is it a Mod thing? Sorry, rules are rules... :blush:
toadallytexan
ToadallyTexan
Make it the four, top-rated CONFERNCE champs...with semis played at home. Then your confernce championship games mean one helluva lot more than they do now, and should draw much better TV ratings than before. As this means more ESPN money for all these broadcasts, it might stand a chance. As this also means Big-10 teams have a better chance at the NC game, Big JIm Delaney (a.k.a. , The Prince of Darkness) ought to endorse it, so it would have even a better chance. SEC would fuss, but they should always be ranked higher than their frozen northen conterparts anyway, so...is this REALLY a problem?
You want to open up the playoff to 8 teams, then go ahead ... top rated teams can sub in for conference champs up and down the line, as many posters here have said. If it's only four teams, then you keep the BCS-type, style points to a minimum. The two other problems then (with eight teams and keeping the home-team advantage) are: 1.) doubling the travel costs to root your ultimate national champ home, and 2.) adding another week to the season, which in this collision sport may place too high a premium in staying injury free.
So, al-in-all, I can embrace the positives that the more restrictive four-team-formula brings with it, but ONLY if you also minimize the style points and beauty contest element in picking the final four. That, my friends, clearly argues for the conference-champs-only criteria.
You want to open up the playoff to 8 teams, then go ahead ... top rated teams can sub in for conference champs up and down the line, as many posters here have said. If it's only four teams, then you keep the BCS-type, style points to a minimum. The two other problems then (with eight teams and keeping the home-team advantage) are: 1.) doubling the travel costs to root your ultimate national champ home, and 2.) adding another week to the season, which in this collision sport may place too high a premium in staying injury free.
So, al-in-all, I can embrace the positives that the more restrictive four-team-formula brings with it, but ONLY if you also minimize the style points and beauty contest element in picking the final four. That, my friends, clearly argues for the conference-champs-only criteria.
RaiderHater
New Member
The top 4 teams should be the 3 highest ranked conference champs plus the next highest ranked team (could also be a conference champ).
As much as everyone hates the SEC NC rematch, their was no doubt that Bama was on of the top 4 teams going into bowl season. Another problem could've been if UGA beat LSU last year. LSU an Bama could be #1 and #2 but niether in the top 4?
Last year would've been:
LSU v. Oregon
Bama v. OSU
2010:
Auburn v. Stanford
TCU v. Oregon
Also agree that a "comitee" would defeat the whole purpose of a 4 team playoff, would rather have the current system than a "comitee".
As much as everyone hates the SEC NC rematch, their was no doubt that Bama was on of the top 4 teams going into bowl season. Another problem could've been if UGA beat LSU last year. LSU an Bama could be #1 and #2 but niether in the top 4?
Last year would've been:
LSU v. Oregon
Bama v. OSU
2010:
Auburn v. Stanford
TCU v. Oregon
Also agree that a "comitee" would defeat the whole purpose of a 4 team playoff, would rather have the current system than a "comitee".
Dogfrog
Active Member
Committees are tolerable for basketball because of the longer season, more data points, lots of inter conference games, and most importantly, it's a 68 team field. Even if they screw up, you know the best team in the country is in the field.
In football, with only 11-12 games, and only picking 4 finalists, a committee approach is a disaster waiting to happen.
In football, with only 11-12 games, and only picking 4 finalists, a committee approach is a disaster waiting to happen.
