Playoff System

#26
#26
I posted this in another thread but it goes here also....
Why does everyone who supports the BCS say that a playoff system would devalue the regular season?? You have to win to get in....Does it devalue the regular season in Div 1-AA, II, and III? What about other sports? Are you seriously going to stop watching regular season games because there is a playoff? I think not!
 
#27
#27
Bennett4UT said:
I posted this in another thread but it goes here also....
Why does everyone who supports the BCS say that a playoff system would devalue the regular season?? You have to win to get in....Does it devalue the regular season in Div 1-AA, II, and III? What about other sports? Are you seriously going to stop watching regular season games because there is a playoff? I think not!
Click to expand...
No I would not quit watching, but it would devalue the games in the sense that there would not be that do or die mentality in the big games (UT vs. FSU, OSU vs. Mich., OSU vs. Tex., USC vs. Cal, UF vs. Aub.). The way it is now you lose and you have severly hurt your chances of playing for a NC. If there was a playoff then they would know that they will still make the playoffs. Teams would be playing to get into the playoffs as opposed to playing for the right to play for a NC. That is how it would devalue the regular season. The regular season is the playoff.
 
#30
#30
In college football, you truly have to put together the perfect season to win it all. That's what I like about it. With any sort of expansive playoff, you get a myriad of one and two-loss teams who can get hot at the end, and beat a team who's gone undefeated all season. I think that's wrong.

College football is great as is. I love the fact that your season IS the playoff. I'd agree to a +1 game to give teams such as '04 Auburn a chance, but that's about it.
 
#31
#31
milohimself said:
In college football, you truly have to put together the perfect season to win it all. That's what I like about it. With any sort of expansive playoff, you get a myriad of one and two-loss teams who can get hot at the end, and beat a team who's gone undefeated all season. I think that's wrong.
Click to expand...
AMEN!!!!!!!!

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
 
#32
#32
milohimself said:
In college football, you truly have to put together the perfect season to win it all. That's what I like about it. With any sort of expansive playoff, you get a myriad of one and two-loss teams who can get hot at the end, and beat a team who's gone undefeated all season. I think that's wrong.

quote]

So it would be wrong for a 1 loss team that has played a much tougher schedule to beat an undefeated team that had a softer schedule? Beating a team on the field is wrong? I just don't get that.
Click to expand...
 
#33
#33
allvol123 said:
milohimself said:
In college football, you truly have to put together the perfect season to win it all. That's what I like about it. With any sort of expansive playoff, you get a myriad of one and two-loss teams who can get hot at the end, and beat a team who's gone undefeated all season. I think that's wrong.

quote]

So it would be wrong for a 1 loss team that has played a much tougher schedule to beat an undefeated team that had a softer schedule? Beating a team on the field is wrong? I just don't get that.
Click to expand...
I don't think that he ever said that it would be wrong for a one loss team to beat an undefeated team. He said that it is wrong for a one loss team to get a chance to get hot at the end of the year and go home with a NC win they clearly weren't the best team that season, just the best team at that time (UF in B-Ball).
Click to expand...
 
#34
#34
utvol0427 said:
allvol123 said:
I don't think that he ever said that it would be wrong for a one loss team to beat an undefeated team. He said that it is wrong for a one loss team to get a chance to get hot at the end of the year and go home with a NC win they clearly weren't the best team that season, just the best team at that time (UF in B-Ball).
Click to expand...

he said, a one or two loss team could get hot at the end and beat an undefeated team, and he thought that was wrong.

If you are worthy of the title, you should not be concerned about losing to anyone else.
Click to expand...
 
#35
#35
allvol123 said:
If you are worthy of the title, you should not be concerned about losing to anyone else.
Click to expand...
I agree, however, this has nothing to do with the fact that a team could get hot at the end of the season and pull an upset or two and be the National Champs when they aren't deserving.
 
#36
#36
allvol123 said:
milohimself said:
In college football, you truly have to put together the perfect season to win it all. That's what I like about it. With any sort of expansive playoff, you get a myriad of one and two-loss teams who can get hot at the end, and beat a team who's gone undefeated all season. I think that's wrong.
Click to expand...

So it would be wrong for a 1 loss team that has played a much tougher schedule to beat an undefeated team that had a softer schedule? Beating a team on the field is wrong? I just don't get that.
Click to expand...
You misunderstood my post. Often, there are very good one-loss teams. But at the end of the season, the polls sort out who is the best, and there are never more than 3 or maybe 4 teams who are national-title caliber, and have put together a good enough season all year long. Those, IMO are the true national champions.

In sudden-death playoffs, like the NCAA basketball championships or NFL Playoffs, they don't determine who has been the best all season. They determine who is the best towards the end of the season. Teams such as last year's Pittsburgh Steelers or Florida Gators, who were clearly not the best teams in their respective sports, but who got hot and lucky towards the end of the season.

In college football, I'm interested in who can put together the best complete season, not in who can play the last few games the best.
 
#37
#37
utvol0427 said:
I agree, however, this has nothing to do with the fact that a team could get hot at the end of the season and pull an upset or two and be the National Champs when they aren't deserving.
Click to expand...




How is it that a team can play a cupcake schedule and get HOT and beat one good team in a bowl game, win the NC and this is called deserving.
 
#38
#38
allvol123 said:
utvol0427 said:
he said, a one or two loss team could get hot at the end and beat an undefeated team, and he thought that was wrong.

If you are worthy of the title, you should not be concerned about losing to anyone else.
Click to expand...
I meant a one or two loss team deemed unworthy of playing for the national title. For instance, I believe this year, Auburn's bad home loss to a team like Arkansas makes them unworthy of playing for the national title. But all of a sudden, if they get hot at the end and go into a playoff, they could beat a team like Ohio State who has clearly put together a better regular season to this point.

There's a huge difference between the seasons of a one-loss Auburn, and another team with one loss such as ourselves. We suffered a one-point loss on the road to a top 10 team.
Click to expand...
 
#39
#39
allvol123 said:
How is it that a team can play a cupcake schedule and get HOT and beat one good team in a bowl game, win the NC and this is called deserving.
Click to expand...
When they go undefeated and most other teams lose games, I won't argue that they don't deserve a shot at the national title.
 
#40
#40
milohimself said:
You misunderstood my post. Often, there are very good one-loss teams. But at the end of the season, the polls sort out who is the best, and there are never more than 3 or maybe 4 teams who are national-title caliber, and have put together a good enough season all year long. Those, IMO are the true national champions.

In sudden-death playoffs, like the NCAA basketball championships or NFL Playoffs, they don't determine who has been the best all season. They determine who is the best towards the end of the season. Teams such as last year's Pittsburgh Steelers or Florida Gators, who were clearly not the best teams in their respective sports, but who got hot and lucky towards the end of the season.

In college football, I'm interested in who can put together the best complete season, not in who can play the last few games the best.
Click to expand...

In a way, the regular season is part of the equation in what you mention. You have to have a good enough record to get in, you can't just slough off the first part of the season. Sometimes in the current method, the team putting together the best complete season is doing so because they are not playing as tough a schedule as other teams. So is it really the best complete season. A playoff does not inhibit this team from completing their best complete season. If they are the best, they will comeplete their season that way.
 
#41
#41
milohimself said:
When they go undefeated and most other teams lose games, I won't argue that they don't deserve a shot at the national title.
Click to expand...

I agree, I won't argue that they don't deserve a shot either. And they should get that shot over a 2 or 3 game stretch.
 
#42
#42
The playoffs idea might be easier to sell if all the conferences had CGs. Drop a RSG have a 4 team playoff with in each conference. I'd like to see a 1E vs 2W and vice versa.
 
#43
#43
There's a huge difference between the seasons of a one-loss Auburn, and another team with one loss such as ourselves. We suffered a one-point loss on the road to a top 10 team.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you're saying here, but Florida beat Tennessee in Knoxville.
 
#45
#45
no one disputes Ohio State should be no.1, but the question is who deserves to play them? West Virginia, Texas, Florida, etc.

Thats why a playoff answers. Everyone has their opportunity. There is an undisputed no. 1 team. Teams are seeded, the no. 1 teams gets to play the weakest team, there are still advantages to being the no. 1 seed in a playoff.

The NFL has a playoff, no one disputes its unfair. But how many BCS threads have their been?
 
#46
#46
milohimself said:
You misunderstood my post. Often, there are very good one-loss teams. But at the end of the season, the polls sort out who is the best, and there are never more than 3 or maybe 4 teams who are national-title caliber, and have put together a good enough season all year long. Those, IMO are the true national champions.

In sudden-death playoffs, like the NCAA basketball championships or NFL Playoffs, they don't determine who has been the best all season. They determine who is the best towards the end of the season. Teams such as last year's Pittsburgh Steelers or Florida Gators, who were clearly not the best teams in their respective sports, but who got hot and lucky towards the end of the season.

In college football, I'm interested in who can put together the best complete season, not in who can play the last few games the best.
Click to expand...
Florida got lucky? How many close games did they play in the tournament? How did the Steelers get lucky? They went on the road week after week and kicked people's a$$es.
 
#48
#48
hatvol96 said:
Take the top four ranked teams after the bowls. I can't think of a single year where that wouldn't have been sufficient. Most years, simply playing 1 v. 2 after the bowls would suffice.
Click to expand...
that would work for me....
TennesseeJohn said:
Six conference champions. The six conferences decided by a BCS-style conference ranking sytem. That leaves two at-large spots. One decided by the top ranked BCS team that is left. The last decided by a selection comittee similar to the one that seeds the NCAA basketball tournament.

Go back the eleven-gmae regular season. All conferences go to a conference championship game.

If you're not in a conference, you are not eligible for the playoff.

Great system, if I do say so myself.
Click to expand...
only 6 conf. champions? as a staunch SEC guy, even i can say "no fair" to the other D 1 conferences....if you are going to do it by conf. champs, do all of them, and i agree about conf. champions all deciding their champs the same way...that would have to be done before any playoff of that nature would be "fair".
oklavol said:
Use the playoff system being used in Div II and Div III, or shorten it to 16 teams.

College football is the only major sport in any organization where the champion is not decided on the field by a playoff system.
Click to expand...
but on the other side of the coint, college football has, hands down, the most important regular season in all of sports, on any level.
Bennett4UT said:
I posted this in another thread but it goes here also....
Why does everyone who supports the BCS say that a playoff system would devalue the regular season?? You have to win to get in....Does it devalue the regular season in Div 1-AA, II, and III? What about other sports? Are you seriously going to stop watching regular season games because there is a playoff? I think not!
Click to expand...
because it would. and i would still watch.

it's real simple. we already have a playoff, in a sense.

the reason it devalues the regular seaosn is each team that has a legit shot, has games thruout the regular season that can make or break their chance at a NT shot.

take us and Florida this year. Florida beat us, therefore we are behind the 8 ball. We had our shot, and didn't get it done. If there was a playoff, and given our current position in the BCS, we can then reaosn that losing to Florida wasn't that big of a deal cause we're still in good shape to get in to the playoffs....total crap imo. Flip it, and ask yourself how you'd feel if we had beaten Florida? what had it really gained you? they still get in to the playoff, and so do you...so what's the big deal? especially if they win the play off and NT...after we won the SEC, hypothetically.
How important then was that regular season game?

It would devalue the regular season....lose and you still have a chance in the playoffs....bah, humbug i say.
 
#49
#49
hatvol96 said:
Florida got lucky? How many close games did they play in the tournament? How did the Steelers get lucky? They went on the road week after week and kicked people's a$$es.
Click to expand...
Florida faced a gassed George Mason who you knew was gonna run out of steam in the Final 4 and a UCLA team that shot themselves in the foot, leg, thigh, ass, stomach and heart for the title game.

Pittsburgh got to face the Bengals sans-Palmer, beat Indy because Mike Vanderjagt sucks in the clutch, and was handed the Lombardi trophy by the refs.

hatvol96 said:
That logic gets you this:The 1984 National Champion BYU Cougars.
Click to expand...
That was also the old system, and I'm still not sure how BYU was crowned the champs that season. I haven't looked into it. But I'm not gonna give anybody crap if they say an undefeated BCS conference team ought to play for the national title when there is no more than one other undefeated BCS team.

I would personally choose to put select one-loss teams in over WVU this year, but we'll see how it goes.
 
#50
#50
milohimself said:
Florida faced a gassed George Mason who you knew was gonna run out of steam in the Final 4 and a UCLA team that shot themselves in the foot, leg, thigh, ass, stomach and heart for the title game.

Pittsburgh got to face the Bengals sans-Palmer, beat Indy because Mike Vanderjagt sucks in the clutch, and was handed the Lombardi trophy by the refs.


That was also the old system, and I'm still not sure how BYU was crowned the champs that season. I haven't looked into it. But I'm not gonna give anybody crap if they say an undefeated BCS conference team ought to play for the national title when there is no more than one other undefeated BCS team.

I would personally choose to put select one-loss teams in over WVU this year, but we'll see how it goes.
Click to expand...
Someone from Oregon complaining about officiating. That's rich.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top