Before commenting ask yourself if these matchups get the right teams in or out and post YES or No. They come from the system I will describe below after a Y/N vote is given. Please give your opinion on whether any teams deserve/do not deserve to be in.
This is an attempt to find a way to bracket any "deserving team" as the number of these fluctuate year to year.

2010: 3 unbeaten schools meet criteria
AUB vs winner or Oregon/TCU

2009: 5 unbeaten teams meet criteria
Bama vs TCU/BSU winner
Texas vs Cincy
Winners head to head

2008: 9 teams meet criteria (Undefeated Boise and Utah, 7 one-loss teams)
OU vs BSU/PSU winner
Bama vs USC
Florida vs TxTech
Texas vs Utah

2007: 10 teams meet criteria (Undefeated Hawaii, 1 loss KU and Ohio St, 7 two-loss schools)
Ohio State vs KU/WVU winner
OU vs UGA
VT vs Mizzou
LSU vs USC/Hawaii winner

2006: 6 teams meet criteria (4 1-loss schools and undefeated Ohio State and Boise)
Ohio State undefeated gets winner of 1 loss Wisconsin and 1 loss Louisville
Florida (1 loss) gets winner of 1 loss Michigan and 0 loss boise who has lowest BCS rank.

2005: 2 undefeated teams meet criteria
USC vs Texas

2004: 5 undefeated teams meet criteria
USC gets winner of Boise/Utah
OU vs Auburn

2003: 3 1 loss schools meet criteria
LSU gets winner of OU/USC

2002: 2 undefeateds meet criteria
Miami vs Ohio State

2001: 4 qualify
Miami vs Maryland (1 loss)
Oregon vs Nebraska

2000: 6 qualify (undefeated OU and 5 1 loss teams)
OU gets winner of Washington/VT
FSU gets winner of Miami/Oregon State

1999: 3 undefeateds qualify.
Florida State gets winner of VT/Marshall

1998: 8 qualify (Undefeated Tenneseee and Tulane, Six 1-loss teams)
Tenn vs Tulane
UCLA vs Ohio St
Florida State vs Wisconsin
KSU vs Arizona

1997- 2 undefeateds qualify
Nebraska-Michigan



These were created with 3-4 simple rules:
A- Find the 2 teams with a top 50 computer avg SOS that have the best record. That way you have 2 teams who have earned the right to be there.
B- Any team with equal or fewer # of losses to the 2nd best record of the teams in rule A are in. They have a legitimate arguement as well.
C- Bracket all teams that meet this criteria unless they both have a loss and a worse than 80 SOS. If you can't go undefeated with cupcakes you are not the champion.
D- Seeding based on BCS rank. Lowest seeds have to play more games if bracket is unbalanced.

Hard to give a straight yes or no vote. I like it a lot better than most proposals and think I know where you're going, but I would want to specify only conference champs and limit the 1 loss teams a lot more. I think at points when you have it limited to 2-3 teams is when it works best (although I think 5 teams last year was fine). 2009 and 2010 are perfect given the regular season results. I really don't care for 2008 which renders Florida vs. Bama moot or 2006 with the 3 Big Ten teams though. So I guess I say no, but it's closer than 95% of playoff proposals. Count that vote however you wish.

Edit: I do really like the uncertainty that remains with losing even one here. You might be OK, but you might not, you still are really rooting for the top couple to lose. That's not something most proposals deal with.

(12-08-2010 01:18 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Hard to give a straight yes or no vote. I like it a lot better than most proposals and think I know where you're going, but I would want to specify only conference champs and limit the 1 loss teams a lot more. I think at points when you have it limited to 2-3 teams is when it works best (although I think 5 teams last year was fine). 2009 and 2010 are perfect given the regular season results. I really don't care for 2008 which renders Florida vs. Bama moot or 2006 with the 3 Big Ten teams though. So I guess I say no, but it's closer than 95% of playoff proposals. Count that vote however you wish.

Conference champs- Not an autobid, if you haven't got the body of work just go enjoy a quality bowl. This is for teams with a legit arguement. This year's UConn, FIU, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, and Boise State/Nevada don't have the same kind of arguement the top 3 have.

2008- UF and Bama have equal resumes, 1 blemish and a strong record. Can't deny either. Also if you say winner eliminates loser the B12 trio of UT-TT-OU is a nightmare to handle.

Here's the only playoff format that is worth a darn...

1) Auburn
16) FIU

8) Arkansas
9) Michigan St.

5) Wisconsin
12) Va. Tech

4) Stanford
13) UConn

3) TCU
14) UCF

6) Ohio St.
11) Nevada

7) Oklahoma
10) Boise St.

2) Oregon
15) Miami (OH)

The only sure wins would be for the number 1 and 2 seeds this year. This format would crown a true champion out of many worthy teams.

(12-08-2010 11:20 PM)army56mike Wrote:  Here's the only playoff format that is worth a darn...

1) Auburn
16) FIU

8) Arkansas
9) Michigan St.

5) Wisconsin
12) Va. Tech

4) Stanford
13) UConn

3) TCU
14) UCF

6) Ohio St.
11) Nevada

7) Oklahoma
10) Boise St.

2) Oregon
15) Miami (OH)

The only sure wins would be for the number 1 and 2 seeds this year. This format would crown a true champion out of many worthy teams.

1- You still did not say whether the matchups pit the deserving teams.

2- So 2 loss LSU is out in favor of UCF? 2 loss Ok State is out in favor of Miami (Ohio)? Sorry, there has to be a stricter cutoff than merely being a conf champ and all teams involved IMO need a legit argument that they should be national champ. IMO this means Oregon, Auburn, and TCU this year.

Just because the hoops teams do it a certain way with the conference champs does not make something ideal.