Strong arming the "Best 4 teams" BCS games?

#1
Daloth

Daloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
6,729
Likes
1,403
#1
I just saw the first bit of PTI, and something Wilbon said made quite a bit of sense. He said the only way an agreement will be done on the BCS final 4 is if one side strong arms the other into submission on the whole "4 conference champs VS 4 best teams" situation.

My thought was, how would that really work? And would it work even?

If Slive came out with all the AD's of each SEC school and head coaches and said, "Either the NCAA and BCS adopt the 4 best teams policy or we will completely withdraw from both institutions and create our own league" would that work? Is there really any other form of "forcing" the league to adopt a policy?

And would you support a move like this?

(I think it's all a bit crazy, but I don't know that I could argue if it happened because with the fear in leagues like the B1G there may be no other way to agree on it than to go over their heads basically. But I think if we got another league or so to agree to it there is no way they could say no.)
 
#3
#3
There has to be some sort of "comprimise wording" like:

"If there is a second team from the same conference that has fewer losses than the remaining conference champions..."


Then an 11-1 non Conference Winner would get in ahead of a 10-2 Conference Champion.

But if it sets up like

1)LSU 11-1
2)Bama 11-1
3)Michigan State 11-1
4)who cares 10-2

Then MSU would get the Championship game over the higher ranked Bama team. if the #3 and #4 teams were both 10-2, then Bama would get in.

EDIT: its pretty freaking simple.
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
Daloth said:
I just saw the first bit of PTI, and something Wilbon said made quite a bit of sense. He said the only way an agreement will be done on the BCS final 4 is if one side strong arms the other into submission on the whole "4 conference champs VS 4 best teams" situation.

My thought was, how would that really work? And would it work even?

If Slive came out with all the AD's of each SEC school and head coaches and said, "Either the NCAA and BCS adopt the 4 best teams policy or we will completely withdraw from both institutions and create our own league" would that work? Is there really any other form of "forcing" the league to adopt a policy?

And would you support a move like this?

(I think it's all a bit crazy, but I don't know that I could argue if it happened because with the fear in leagues like the B1G there may be no other way to agree on it than to go over their heads basically. But I think if we got another league or so to agree to it there is no way they could say no.)
Click to expand...

There's no way they could go "form their own league"

Among several other things, there's no way the presidents of the universities would ever agree to do such a thing
 
#6
#6
They could say they wouldn't play the teams from other leagues. Force them to play cupcake teams and lose money because of it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#8
#8
Daloth said:
I just saw the first bit of PTI, and something Wilbon said made quite a bit of sense. He said the only way an agreement will be done on the BCS final 4 is if one side strong arms the other into submission on the whole "4 conference champs VS 4 best teams" situation.

My thought was, how would that really work? And would it work even?

If Slive came out with all the AD's of each SEC school and head coaches and said, "Either the NCAA and BCS adopt the 4 best teams policy or we will completely withdraw from both institutions and create our own league" would that work? Is there really any other form of "forcing" the league to adopt a policy?

And would you support a move like this?

(I think it's all a bit crazy, but I don't know that I could argue if it happened because with the fear in leagues like the B1G there may be no other way to agree on it than to go over their heads basically. But I think if we got another league or so to agree to it there is no way they could say no.)
Click to expand...

scott.png


Maybe the Michael Scott Paper Company... was a huge mistake. I should leave, I should go, and start my own paper company. That'll show 'em.
 
#9
#9
It's quite simple if there is going to be a four team playoff it has to be the best four teams.
If it is not the playoffs are useless, imo.

They can use the same format they have been using for the BCS and the top 4 are in period.
 
#11
#11
Gramps said:
It's quite simple if there is going to be a four team playoff it has to be the best four teams.
If it is not the playoffs are useless, imo.

They can use the same format they have been using for the BCS and the top 4 are in period.
Click to expand...

So there's no legitimacy to the idea that if you want to be the best team in the country, you should be the best team in your own conference, much less division, first?
 
#12
#12
and then there is Notre Dame....would somebody please force them into a conference!
 
#13
#13
milohimself said:
So there's no legitimacy to the idea that if you want to be the best team in the country, you should be the best team in your own conference, much less division, first?
Click to expand...

Of course that's legitimate. However, the best team in the conference or division is not always the champion.
 
#14
#14
GatorBill said:
There has to be some sort of "comprimise wording" like:

"If there is a second team from the same conference that has fewer losses than the remaining conference champions..."


Then an 11-1 non Conference Winner would get in ahead of a 10-2 Conference Champion.

But if it sets up like

1)LSU 11-1
2)Bama 11-1
3)Michigan State 11-1
4)who cares 10-2

Then MSU would get the Championship game over the higher ranked Bama team. if the #3 and #4 teams were both 10-2, then Bama would get in.

EDIT: its pretty freaking simple.
Click to expand...

Oh look, I quoted myself. Because this still makes the most sense. My apologies for quoting myself, but no apologies for being right, but I am.
 
#15
#15
milohimself said:
So there's no legitimacy to the idea that if you want to be the best team in the country, you should be the best team in your own conference, much less division, first?
Click to expand...

Legitimacy of a conference championship is in direct relation to what it eventually accomplishes. Often, not much.

How many times have you seen the two best teams, in the same conference, not play each other in a CCG?
 
#16
#16
GatorBill said:
Oh look, I quoted myself. Because this still makes the most sense. My apologies for quoting myself, but no apologies for being right, but I am.
Click to expand...

your proposal doesn't make any sense.

Imagine an 11-1 team that lost to florida atlantic getting in over a 10-2 that lost to #1 and #2.

You can't base it off win/loss records, that would be ridiculous. You could have a 13-0 MAC team, but they wouldn't be deserving over a 10-3 SEC champion.

The only way to do a playoff is to make it the Top 4 teams, whether you determine the top 4 by BCS standings or a selection committee, it really doesn't matter.

B1G people are silly.
 
#18
#18
GoBigOrangeVols said:
your proposal doesn't make any sense.

Imagine an 11-1 team that lost to florida atlantic getting in over a 10-2 that lost to #1 and #2.

You can't base it off win/loss records, that would be ridiculous. You could have a 13-0 MAC team, but they wouldn't be deserving over a 10-3 SEC champion.

The only way to do a playoff is to make it the Top 4 teams, whether you determine the top 4 by BCS standings or a selection committee, it really doesn't matter.

B1G people are silly.
Click to expand...

a 10-2 team that lost to #1 and #2 would have had to lose those games in the first few weeks of the season to be ranked anywhere close to the top 4 at the end of the season.

Anyway you look at it, 10-2 is going to RARELY get you in the Top 4.

I just went back 10 years of the BCS rankings.

Last year Oregon was ranked #5 in the last week of the season. They were the first 2 loss team. SO they were OUT.

2007 - 6 of the top 7 were 2 loss teams. Only OSU had 1 loss. So this one wouldnt change my theory either.

2006 - #4 LSU would have been out with 2 losses, and 11-1 Louisville would have been IN.

2005 - 9-2 #4OSU and #5ND would have been OUT and #6 Oregon would have been IN

2003 - #4 michigan had 2 losses, but from there on, all the teams in the top 10 were 2 loss teams.

2011 NCAA College Football Polls and Rankings for Week 15 - ESPN


It's a pretty simple theory, with pretty simple wording to keep it all so that it works fairly smooth. Nothing short of a 64 team playoff is perfect. (and then we would have to up it to 65, and then 66....)
 
#19
#19
GatorBill, what is your problem with letting the Top 4 teams be in the playoffs, whether they are picked by a selection committee, or are just the Top 4 in the BCS standings after conference championship games are played?

How is your proposal of looking at W/L records of conference champions/conference runners-up more simple than just having the Top 4 teams in the playoffs?

Take the top 4 teams, and everything takes care of itself. Personally, I'm fine with keeping the BCS rankings and just using those, I'm not crazy about the politics involved in a selection committee.
 
#20
#20
GatorBill said:
It's a pretty simple theory, with pretty simple wording to keep it all so that it works fairly smooth. Nothing short of a 64 team playoff is perfect. (and then we would have to up it to 65, and then 66....)
Click to expand...


As long as the regular season is over by mid October, you may be on to something.
 
#21
#21
milohimself said:
So there's no legitimacy to the idea that if you want to be the best team in the country, you should be the best team in your own conference, much less division, first?
Click to expand...

The best team in a conference does not equal one of the best teams in the nation.

The top 4 teams using the BCS format is the only way to go.

There is no doubt in 2011 Bama and LSU were the top 2 teams in the nation. There was not another team in the nation in their class.
 
#22
#22
bamawriter said:
Of course that's legitimate. However, the best team in the conference or division is not always the champion.
Click to expand...

Conference champions are determined correctly, on the field without any sort of polling 99% of the time. If there were a conference champions playoff last year and you didn't make it, everyone would have said "tough luck, you should have beaten LSU at home" and they would have been right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
Gramps said:
The best team in a conference does not equal one of the best teams in the nation.

The top 4 teams using the BCS format is the only way to go.

There is no doubt in 2011 Bama and LSU were the top 2 teams in the nation. There was not another team in the nation in their class.
Click to expand...

If a top four only had existed in 2006, both Michigan and Ohio State would have made it out of the Big Ten. So you're saying that would have been legitimate, even though we know they both got their asses handed to them in their bowl games?

Bias is very much my biggest issue with this. All of it is towards the SEC right now, and perhaps rightly so. Using BCS standings (which is comprised of computers and two horribly flawed polls) or a selection committee is a terrible idea for determining four teams.

Again, conference champions are determined on the field 99% of the time, and at least showing preference to conference champs would be far more legitimate than just hand-picking four teams.

And it would cut down greatly on bull**** mulligan championships like Bama's last year.
 
#25
#25
milohimself said:
Conference champions are determined correctly, on the field without any sort of polling 99% of the time.
Click to expand...

I'll grant you most of the time, but it's nowhere close to 99%. If that were the case, then last year would have been a major rarity. But there's been several cases within the last decade where the conference champ wasn't the best team. '08 Oklahoma, '07 LSU, and '01 LSU all spring to mind.


If there were a conference champions playoff last year and you didn't make it, everyone would have said "tough luck, you should have beaten LSU at home" and they would have been right.
Click to expand...

If the conferences unwisely chose to go that route, then sure. But if they'd gone a step further and said "You didn't win your conference, so you aren't the best team in the country," then they would have, quite clearly, been wrong.

To put it simply, a conference champions-only model would determine a national champion. A top 4 model would make sure that the national champion is, in all likelihood, the best team in the country.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top