Tuesday's decision possibly could squeeze the Big East out of the postseason, as its champion is no longer guaranteed a spot in one of the six major bowls. The "automatic qualifiers" label also will disappear in the new system and those programs will have no guaranteed access to the new structure. Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby called it an "open marketplace for all schools."
Also not involved in the automatic postseason picture is the Mountain West Conference, which did not receive a waiver to automatically qualify for the next two years....""
. i am scared that once they see the spike in revenue from going to a four team playoff, they will look to the opportunity that an 8 team or 16 team playoff would bring. there is no denying that it would bring more money and all the good reasons in the world will not stop it. 
BTW.... there schedule this season is arguably the toughest in the country.
problem is, when breaking down the games i would probably slip up and start talking about why this team will or will not cover the spread.
So what happens when there is a controversy between the 4th and 5th best teams in the country? It'll be like #1 and #2 all over again. You know it's going happen.
Instead of four teams, why not expand it to conference champions? Makes a whole lot more sense and it'll eliminate whatever controversy that might arise from it.
Great thread and opinions.
Great thread Boom. I agree w/ your three points: regular season, 4 teams and bowls. When I think back to the old days (pre-BCS), when the bowls determined the national champion, I ask the question: was there ever a year where after the bowls truly the best team in the country was not among the top 4 as ranked after the bowls? I’ve been following CFB for close to 40 years and in honesty I can say no, never. Same w/ the BCS – we can all argue about selection into the BCS NC game – but can any of us say that the best team in the country was not among the top 4 as ranked after the bowls and BCS title game? I think not – in each and every year, the best team was among the top 4, regardless of who was crowned BCS champion. So, top 4 is good. Bowls are good. The only issue is selection of the top 4.
For myself, I favor something that takes into consideration the issues of when you lose and how. I think it is axiomatic that a 3 point loss on the road to a conference/division rival in September is a universe of difference from a 4 TD blowout loss in late November. Thus, no way in hell should Oklahoma have played LSU in the 2003 title game, no matter what, BCS rules at the time notwithstanding. (And no, I don’t hate the Sooners; have a lot of respect for the history and accomplishment of that program.)
The
truth is, every year at the end of any CFB season there are going to be a slew
of very good one-loss teams who played good competition throughout the year.
Some years you will have *one* undefeated team
at end of year worthy of consideration (sorry, going undefeated in the Sun Belt
doesn’t get you there). This is why I like the human, subjective element in the
final decision; whether by committee, or poll either without bias or large
enough where biases cancel themselves out (i.e., such as the AP), or even the
BCS process, where combination of polls/computers.
The real question is: does the final 4 truly contain among them the best team in the country AT THE END OF THE SEASON. It is the intellectual basis upon which ALL playoffs are predicated. Nobody cares, for example during March Madness, if Team A defeated Team B in January: if Team B beats them in the tourney they advance & can win the national championship because they determined it on the court in the playoff. Nobody argues this. Nobody says, ‘well Team A beat them in January, therefore they should be crowned co-champion.’ It’s absurd. How you play and who you beat at the end of the year trumps all else: who cares if you lost two months before – except in CFB it’s often treated the same, and it’s a mistake. Same with any other sport: NFL; NBA; MLB; NHL; all sports that have legitimate playoffs - when you lose matters.
With that said: four teams; keep the bowls; allow a subjective element to reward who’s playing best at the end of season regardless of whether they have identical records w/ some consideration of SOS so the undefeated Sun Belt team doesn’t make its way into the championship (computers do this best); that’s the way to do this thing right.
GW
I for one like the computer rankings as a big factor. I do agree that who is playing well in the end should matter some.....but not all. Why? The beauty of college football is the entire work one has put in. As I stated in my original post.... I think we can not lose the " pureness " of the regular season. The fact that every game matters means ALOT to me. Im telling you right now, if we ever lose that aspect of college football..... we could lose the true value of the sport.
Its not weak. Its exactly what the game needed. Outside of the top 4 whining is a fucking joke.....
You are 100% wrong.
Its not weak. Its exactly what the game needed. Outside of the top 4 whining is a fucking joke.....
You are 100% wrong.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
