us One is dead - College football is getting a 4 team playoff

[samjones]

The ONLY teams that could even come close to beating LSU and Alabama were LSU and Alabama - NOT OSU AND NOT IOWA ******* STATE for crissakes.

I think that the official name of the school actually is Iowa ******* State for Crissakes University.

The Cowboys "didn't come close to beating LSU and Alabama" because the Cowboys were never given a chance to *play* LSU or Alabama. If they had been given that opportunity they would have won and they would be NC right now. The same thing is true for Stanford.

LSU and Alabama played for a NC because the false economy of the BCS rankings system uses circular logic - the best teams come from the best conferences who are the best conferences because they have the best teams.

 

[samjones]

The NFL has a twelve team playoff structure for a 32 team league
NCAA is looking to pick a four team playoff for over a hundred Div 1 teams

With only four teams , you need to be sure you make a best effort to pick the top 4 most deserving

Having #1, #3, #5 and #6 does not pass muster

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect, because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

 

[WinterBorn]

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect, because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

Okie State and Stanford?? LSU would have mopped the field with either one. Stanford lost to Oregon 53-30. That is not just a loss, that is being whipped like a redheaded stedpchild. And by Oregon? LSU handed Oregon their worst defeat in how long? LSU hung how many points on Oregon?

Okie State wouldn't have done any better. If you can't beat a team that ends the season 6-7, you weren't going to stop the LSU juggernaut.


The BCS Championship did what it was supposed to do at the end of the 2011 season. It put the #1 and #2 teams in a bowl game together.

What you don't like is that both were from the same conference and it was a rematch. The key point is, there was nothing in the rules about either.

But if you have to keep rewriting the rules until an SEC team doesn't win the NC, I guess you have to keep rewriting the rules.

 

[WinterBorn]

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect, because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

And Wisconsin? You have to drop all the way down to the #10 team to get a 4th conference involved? And you want a 2 loss team over the team that lost only once and that was in OT to the #1 team?

How far are you willing to stretch the bounds of logic to try and stack the deck against the SEC?

Alabama, Oregon, Akansas, Boise St, Kansas State, and South Carolina were all ranked higher than Wisconsin and you thinking skipping them would give you a true Nat'l Champion? lol

 

[WinterBorn]

While we don't know for sure, everything I am reading points to a 4 team playoff with the top ranked teams being selected by a committee. Nothing yet about limits of teams by conference.

 

[hortysir]

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect, because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

Okie State and Stanford?? LSU would have mopped the field with either one. Stanford lost to Oregon 53-30. That is not just a loss, that is being whipped like a redheaded stedpchild. And by Oregon? LSU handed Oregon their worst defeat in how long? LSU hung how many points on Oregon?

Okie State wouldn't have done any better. If you can't beat a team that ends the season 6-7, you weren't going to stop the LSU juggernaut.


The BCS Championship did what it was supposed to do at the end of the 2011 season. It put the #1 and #2 teams in a bowl game together.

What you don't like is that both were from the same conference and it was a rematch. The key point is, there was nothing in the rules about either.

But if you have to keep rewriting the rules until an SEC team doesn't win the NC, I guess you have to keep rewriting the rules.

 

[Zander]

I am against a playoff system. This ain't the pro's.......eat shit.

 

[rightwinger]

I am against a playoff system. This ain't the pro's.......eat shit.

It ain't ???

 

[Zander]

I am against a playoff system. This ain't the pro's.......eat shit.

It ain't ???

 

[rightwinger]

I am against a playoff system. This ain't the pro's.......eat shit.

It ain't ???

Making a billion $$$$$$ a year is not pro?

Oh....I forgot.....the players work for free

 

[WinterBorn]

It ain't ???

Making a billion $$$$$$ a year is not pro?

Oh....I forgot.....the players work for free

Hardly for free. They get treated like royalty, get an education worth $40k or more, and get room & board. You try feeding a lineman.

 

[Zander]

It ain't ???

Making a billion $$$$$$ a year is not pro?

Oh....I forgot.....the players work for free

Not for free. They do it for the chicks.

 

[rightwinger]

Making a billion $$$$$$ a year is not pro?

Oh....I forgot.....the players work for free

Hardly for free. They get treated like royalty, get an education worth $40k or more, and get room & board. You try feeding a lineman.

Ok.....If you believe that

 

[WinterBorn]

Making a billion $$$$$$ a year is not pro?

Oh....I forgot.....the players work for free

Hardly for free. They get treated like royalty, get an education worth $40k or more, and get room & board. You try feeding a lineman.

Ok.....If you believe that

Believe what? That they get a free education? I had classes with some of them.

I've seen those kids eat. I believe that.


Not sure what else I am supposed to believe.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect,

YEAH, THAT'S REAL PERFECT, IT DOESN'T EVEN INCLUDE THE BEST TEAM IN THE NATION, YOU ******* MORON.

because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

OSU lost to IOWA STATE who finished 5-7. Lord almighty you are stupid. LSU would - have pummelled ANYBODY (and they did), except the #1 team in the country, which you didn't even include in your lame ass bracket. In the final BCS standings, LSU had beaten #1 Alabama, #4 Oregon, #5 Arkansas, #18 West Virginia, and #20 Georgia, as well as three teams receiving votes in the Final Coaches - Auburn, Mississippi St., and Florida. If you can name any other team that came close to playing that schedule and beating every team in it once - I'd love to see it.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

Great. So the best team in the country doesn't even get to play in a 4 team bracket just because you can't stand to think of the possibility that the top two teams in the nation really are in the same division. Good solution.

 

[Papageorgio]

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect, because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

Wisconsin? Stanford? No Alabama?

Put the crack pipe away, it makes you look stupid.

 

[WinterBorn]

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

I have no doubt that the "4 best conference champions", year in and year out will be comprised of teams from the ACC, B1G, Big 12, PAC12 and SEC.

Let the conferences send whatever designate they want. One conference will be left out in the cold every year, but that's the way it has to be with a 4 team playoff.

Every SEC team has a pretty good shot at winning the NC under this system. They just have to win the SEC first.

Last year it would have been

1. LSU
2. Okie State
3. Stanford
4. Wisconsin

Which would have been perfect,

YEAH, THAT'S REAL PERFECT, IT DOESN'T EVEN INCLUDE THE BEST TEAM IN THE NATION, YOU ******* MORON.

because Okie State and Stanford would have been given a chance to play to see who would have the privilege of beating LSU for the NC.

OSU lost to IOWA STATE who finished 5-7. Lord almighty you are stupid. LSU would - have pummelled ANYBODY (and they did), except the #1 team in the country, which you didn't even include in your lame ass bracket. In the final BCS standings, LSU had beaten #1 Alabama, #4 Oregon, #5 Arkansas, #18 West Virginia, and #20 Georgia, as well as three teams receiving votes in the Final Coaches - Auburn, Mississippi St., and Florida. If you can name any other team that came close to playing that schedule and beating every team in it once - I'd love to see it.

So Bama would have stayed home. Big deal. They could have used the time to gather around Bryant-Denny and ask themselves how they lost to LSU there.

Great. So the best team in the country doesn't even get to play in a 4 team bracket just because you can't stand to think of the possibility that the top two teams in the nation really are in the same division. Good solution.

This is the kind of stuff that makes me laugh. People who claim to want a playoff, but try and come up with any way they can to limit the best teams from being in that playoff.

 

[WinterBorn]

The ONLY way to have a true National Champion is to determine it on the field.

Get the right people on the selection committee and have a 4 team playoff. Select the BEST 4 teams. Nevermind conference lines or whatever.

Put the 4 best teams in a playoff and let'em play!

 

[Zander]

The ONLY way to have a true National Champion is to determine it on the field.

Get the right people on the selection committee and have a 4 team playoff. Select the BEST 4 teams. Nevermind conference lines or whatever.

Put the 4 best teams in a playoff and let'em play!

Yeah sure. Who are the "right" people on the selection committee? It's far to subjective and 4 teams is too few.

The only real way to have a "true" national championship is by going to a 32 team tournament that takes place over 4 weeks in late November and December- we go from 32 to 2 in 4 weeks. With the Final 2 teams playing on the second Sunday in January. The losers can play in Bowl games between Christmas and New Years day.

 

[Papageorgio]

The ONLY way to have a true National Champion is to determine it on the field.

Get the right people on the selection committee and have a 4 team playoff. Select the BEST 4 teams. Nevermind conference lines or whatever.

Put the 4 best teams in a playoff and let'em play!

Yeah sure. Who are the "right" people on the selection committee? It's far to subjective and 4 teams is too few.

The only real way to have a "true" national championship is by going to a 32 team tournament that takes place over 4 weeks in late November and December- we go from 32 to 2 in 4 weeks. With the Final 2 teams playing on the second Sunday in January. The losers can play in Bowl games between Christmas and New Years day.

Why 32? Why not 64 or 128 or 16?