Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

On the face of it that makes 100% sense, but there is also a major drawback. This is going to eliminate championship quality teams in the big 10 and SEC and elevate teams like ND and the other P4 conferences. Why should the SEC have a playoff, while ND sits back with a bowl of popcorn and watches? Perhaps the simplest answer is that there should be no automatic bids for conferences champions. Given the unbalanced schedules we cannot even guarantee the 2 best teams will play for the conference championship (this year the committee says 50% of the P4 will match the 2 best teams in the conference). This is not like 20-30 years ago when everyone played each other. We have diluted conference championships. 

What it boils down to me is I really wish we wouldn't keep overthinking this, posts like @El Hornarino's are just doing the thing where we keep treating FBS college football postseason as if it's some kind of special snowflake that needs a unique format. I'll keep saying it, but for the umpteenth time it just needs to be a normal playoff format like every other sport.

It would be great, no teams that are considered championship caliber would ever be left out, and everyone would get to prove it on the field. Automatic bids are fine as long as they don't push out deserving teams or teams that are obviously strong enough to compete.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

What it boils down to me is I really wish we wouldn't keep overthinking this, posts like @El Hornarino's are just doing the thing where we keep treating FBS college football postseason as if it's some kind of special snowflake that needs a unique format. I'll keep saying it, but for the umpteenth time it just needs to be a normal playoff format like every other sport.

It would be great, no teams that are considered championship caliber would ever be left out, and everyone would get to prove it on the field. Automatic bids are fine as long as they don't push out deserving teams or teams that are obviously strong enough to compete.

College football is a bit different than other sports. Most sports have conferences where every team play each other and, in many cases, it is a home and home. In that world the conference championship is decided on the field. There is a lot more luck and nuance in CFB

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Codaxx said:

College football is a bit different than other sports. Most sports have conferences where every team play each other and, in many cases, it is a home and home. In that world the conference championship is decided on the field. There is a lot more luck and nuance in CFB

That doesn't really matter nor does it mean we need a condensed, weird playoff format headed by a committee like we have now. 24 team playoff, 8 byes, top 20 or whatever automatically get in and you have some play-ins for the rest. It's not that complicated and doesn't need to be.

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

That doesn't really matter nor does it mean we need a condensed, weird playoff format headed by a committee like we have now. 24 team playoff, 8 byes, top 20 or whatever automatically get in and you have some play-ins for the rest. It's not that complicated and doesn't need to be.

I wasnt complicating anything. I just said get rid of any guaranteed spots. That seems pretty simple to me, just end the athletic DEI nonsense

Edited by Codaxx
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

8 teams. All at large. Cancel CCG unless there are divisions and for those make championship weekend tournament style matchups for 1-2 3-4 5-6 etc for a competitive conference game to end the season. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, El Hornarino said:

P4 championships in the second round, after the first At Large round.  Could plausibly seed the conferences for quality and swap them around the bracket depending on the year.  But generally G5 champs and random independent freeloaders can compete for At Large spots along with whatever power teams are not in conference championship games.

toobigplayoff.png

I don't see ND in here ;)

Posted
29 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

On the face of it that makes 100% sense, but there is also a major drawback. This is going to eliminate championship quality teams in the big 10 and SEC and elevate teams like ND and the other P4 conferences. Why should the SEC have a playoff, while ND sits back with a bowl of popcorn and watches? Perhaps the simplest answer is that there should be no automatic bids for conferences champions. Given the unbalanced schedules we cannot even guarantee the 2 best teams will play for the conference championship (this year the committee says 50% of the P4 will match the 2 best teams in the conference). This is not like 20-30 years ago when everyone played each other. We have diluted conference championships. 

I don't care if Notre Dame is excluded while they are an independent.  They can be crowned AP champ if they want.

As far as conference tournaments, there is little difference between SEC and B1G teams eliminating themselves against conference foes or against other random teams.  Single elimination post season is never going to guarantee the "strongest" team is the last one standing anyway.

Actually the fun thing is that the probability the best team wins the tournament drops as the number of played games increases anyway, so expanding the field and number of rounds isn't really about finding the "best" team.  It's just about filling tv time with fun games.

Posted
18 minutes ago, immamac said:

8 teams. All at large. Cancel CCG unless there are divisions and for those make championship weekend tournament style matchups for 1-2 3-4 5-6 etc for a competitive conference game to end the season. 

This.  Shrinking the playoff might actually breathe some life back into bowl games as well.

And let computers choose the top 8.  Drop the human element or have the criteria strictly spelled out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I saw a reel come across my feed yesterday where some guy applied point value for wins and losses and came up with a season total.

I can’t find the link but his formula was something like this:

+50 pts - non top25 win 
+100 - top25 win
+25 - top10 win
+10 - top5 win

-100 - non top25 loss
-50 - top25 loss
-35 - top10 loss
-25 - top5 loss

Top25 rankings were based on current end of season rankings, not time of game rankings

Add up team totals and seed a playoff accordingly

Posted

I don't mind if they shrink the playoff, or let an algorithm decide.

But which system(s) does one use?  It isn't like they all spit out the same top 8.  And even if you aggregate a few, you don't want to pollute it with one or more junk rankings.

How much should MOV matter?

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

I saw a reel come across my feed yesterday where some guy applied point value for wins and losses and came up with a season total.

I can’t find the link but his formula was something like this:

+50 pts - non top25 win 
+100 - top25 win
+25 - top10 win
+10 - top5 win

-100 - non top25 loss
-50 - top25 loss
-35 - top10 loss
-25 - top5 loss

Top25 rankings were based on current end of season rankings, not time of game rankings

Add up team totals and seed a playoff accordingly

Apologies for quoting myself but here’s Tech’s season total:

50 Ark PB 
50 Kent St
50 Oregon St
100 Utah (15)
100 Houston (21)
50 Kansas 
-100 Az St
50 Ok St
50 K St
100 BYU (11) (should be 10)
50 UCF
50 WV
______

600

Edited by BluTechsan
Posted
1 hour ago, El Hornarino said:

P4 championships in the second round, after the first At Large round.  Could plausibly seed the conferences for quality and swap them around the bracket depending on the year.  But generally G5 champs and random independent freeloaders can compete for At Large spots along with whatever power teams are not in conference championship games.

toobigplayoff.png

this looks beautiful... and it only takes 5 rounds...  but the CCG losers are out and the b1g and sec won't go for that

Posted
2 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

this looks beautiful... and it only takes 5 rounds...  but the CCG losers are out and the b1g and sec won't go for that

Yeah, CCG loser need a way back into the bracket vs the at-large teams

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...