skip navigation
Search Active Topics

2 Pages<12
Changes to BCS
Options
Previous Topic Next Topic
bhsblackhawks
#26 Posted : Monday, May 07, 2012 6:53:14 PM(UTC)
All Conference
Posts: 1,657
High Fives: 181
High Fived: 258
Joined: 10/31/2009(UTC)
WR_88 wrote:
There was only one playoff format that I even remotely liked, but I can't remember where I read it.

The Top 4 would have to be conference champions. If not all 4 are conference champions, they will look at the Top 6 or 8 teams.
If there are not 4 conference champions in that, they will take the Conference runner ups.
Instead of soiling the BCS Bowl traditions, like the Rose Bowl, they would have the semi final games at two different locations, with the title game at another.

EX: semi #1 @ San Diego, Semi #2 @ Charlotte, Championship Game @ St. Louis.

That would leave the Rose to take the Pac-12 And BigTen champs if they are not in the Top 4, and if one or both are in the Top 4 they take the Conference runner-ups.
The Orange would get the ACC Champ or ACC Runner-up.
Sugar would get the SEC champ, runner-up, or Highest remaining ranked team.
Fiesta gets the Big12 champ or 2nd place team.
The Big East team either qualifies for the Tournament, or rotates between the Sugar, Orange, and Fiesta.
The other BCS atlarge spots are are decided the same way they are now.

That sounds like such a clusterf$@#. And I dislike it almost as much as the BCS now, but it is a step up.

Do you have a problem with the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, or NCAA anything else playoffs? If you do, please state what it is and why. If not, then please explain how/why your problem with a college football playoff doesn't apply to those sports but does apply to college football. I'm still trying to figure out how you are rationalizing these things in your head.
Back to top
mickjagger
#27 Posted : Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:25:08 PM(UTC)

WSNxtra: Member of WSN Xtra
All American
Posts: 7,779
High Fives: 1819
High Fived: 701
Joined: 1/25/2009(UTC)
Looks like the BCS has arrived at a 4-team playoff plan that would be implemented after the 2014 season. The idea is now headed to the President's Oversight Committee:

http://espn.go.com/colle...college-football-playoff
Back to top
 |  Edit by user
redwingfever
#28 Posted : Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:31:26 PM(UTC)
All State
Posts: 2,577
High Fives: 37
High Fived: 24
Joined: 6/12/2005(UTC)
Mick Jagger wrote:
Looks like the BCS has arrived at a 4-team playoff plan that would be implemented after the 2014 season. The idea is now headed to the President's Oversight Committee:

http://espn.go.com/colle...college-football-playoff


Small step in the right direction. Is four the right number? Many will disagree, but it is better than the current setup.

Like it says, there are still many things to be ironed out, such as how to determine the teams, where the game will be played, etc. And it still needs the President's Committee approval.

Couple of small things I saw just skimming through the story, the Pac-12 commissioner talking once again about the "academic calendar" is BS. While that wasn't his main argument, just something that irks me that he brought it up.

Second, that Notre Dame is included. If it is, then all independents need to be. Enough with this special treatment of a school that has been irrelevant for Y-E-A-R-S. Force it into a conference if it wants a shot at the national title.

My ideal setup remains at eight teams, but for right now, I'll take what I can get.
67th member of the WSN 2,000 Post Club
Back to top
aloveforfootball12
#29 Posted : Wednesday, June 20, 2012 10:27:49 PM(UTC)
WSNxtra: Member of WSN Xtra
All Conference
Posts: 2,440
High Fives: 52
High Fived: 132
Joined: 8/19/2011(UTC)
RedwingFever wrote:
Mick Jagger wrote:
Looks like the BCS has arrived at a 4-team playoff plan that would be implemented after the 2014 season. The idea is now headed to the President's Oversight Committee:

http://espn.go.com/colle...college-football-playoff


Small step in the right direction. Is four the right number? Many will disagree, but it is better than the current setup.

Like it says, there are still many things to be ironed out, such as how to determine the teams, where the game will be played, etc. And it still needs the President's Committee approval.

Couple of small things I saw just skimming through the story, the Pac-12 commissioner talking once again about the "academic calendar" is BS. While that wasn't his main argument, just something that irks me that he brought it up.

Second, that Notre Dame is included. If it is, then all independents need to be. Enough with this special treatment of a school that has been irrelevant for Y-E-A-R-S. Force it into a conference if it wants a shot at the national title.

My ideal setup remains at eight teams, but for right now, I'll take what I can get.


Four is better than eight. Every single year we can hype up more than eight teams thinking they really have a shot. Just look at the Badger's last year. Recently BB said they were one injury away from playing for a national title while totally forgetting it wasn't that players assignment that ended up leading to an L. Last year the Badgers were being talked about as a darkhorse for the national title game when they defeated Nebraska while having the best QB to ever wear a Badger uniform, a running back that ended up being a Heisman finalist, a WR that sounds like could make an NFL roster, and a first round draft pick on the OL. That is one hell of a talented offensive group on a college football team. The end result for the season was two close losses in the regular season and a defense that got slashed left and right all day long against Oregon in the Rose Bowl. Not way should Wisconsin have been a playoff last year. Last year with Stanford, Oklahoma St., Alabama and LSU would have been the right playoff format. I don't care if team 5 gets upset.
I love football. My twitter account: https://twitter.com/wifootballfan
Back to top
bhsblackhawks
#30 Posted : Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:47:05 PM(UTC)
All Conference
Posts: 1,657
High Fives: 181
High Fived: 258
Joined: 10/31/2009(UTC)
aloveforfootball12 wrote:
RedwingFever wrote:
Mick Jagger wrote:
Looks like the BCS has arrived at a 4-team playoff plan that would be implemented after the 2014 season. The idea is now headed to the President's Oversight Committee:

http://espn.go.com/colle...college-football-playoff


Small step in the right direction. Is four the right number? Many will disagree, but it is better than the current setup.

Like it says, there are still many things to be ironed out, such as how to determine the teams, where the game will be played, etc. And it still needs the President's Committee approval.

Couple of small things I saw just skimming through the story, the Pac-12 commissioner talking once again about the "academic calendar" is BS. While that wasn't his main argument, just something that irks me that he brought it up.

Second, that Notre Dame is included. If it is, then all independents need to be. Enough with this special treatment of a school that has been irrelevant for Y-E-A-R-S. Force it into a conference if it wants a shot at the national title.

My ideal setup remains at eight teams, but for right now, I'll take what I can get.


Four is better than eight. Every single year we can hype up more than eight teams thinking they really have a shot. Just look at the Badger's last year. Recently BB said they were one injury away from playing for a national title while totally forgetting it wasn't that players assignment that ended up leading to an L. Last year the Badgers were being talked about as a darkhorse for the national title game when they defeated Nebraska while having the best QB to ever wear a Badger uniform, a running back that ended up being a Heisman finalist, a WR that sounds like could make an NFL roster, and a first round draft pick on the OL. That is one hell of a talented offensive group on a college football team. The end result for the season was two close losses in the regular season and a defense that got slashed left and right all day long against Oregon in the Rose Bowl. Not way should Wisconsin have been a playoff last year. Last year with Stanford, Oklahoma St., Alabama and LSU would have been the right playoff format. I don't care if team 5 gets upset.

I bolded the stuff that people should actually bother reading. The rest is just the typical ripping on UW.
Back to top
2 users high fived
spike64 on 6/21/2012(UTC), alandoamazing on 6/21/2012(UTC)
coachw12
#31 Posted : Thursday, June 21, 2012 3:10:52 PM(UTC)
All Conference
Posts: 1,946
High Fives: 23
High Fived: 109
Joined: 10/11/2010(UTC)
The new playoff is going to go like this.

SEC #1 vs SEC #4
SEC #2 vs SEC #3

Winner of 1 vs 4 plays winner of 2 vs 3
Back to top
1 user high fived
yzerman1 on 6/22/2012(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 1.9.4 | YAF © 2003-2010, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.802 seconds.