Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

TCU would destroy Ohio State.

I guess I'll play b/c I'm bored.....

Why +1 when 8 yields the same time frame? (to play the games)

regardless of the number of teams in the playoffs there will be teams at the cutoff number that feel they are worthy. Here's a look at this year's Top 10 with bowl result:

#1 Alabama lost to #4 Ohio St
#2 Oregon beat #3 FSU
#5 Baylor lost to #8 Michigan St
#6 TCU beat #9 Ole Miss
#7 Miss St lost to #12 Georgia Tech
#10 Arizona lost to #20 Boise St

Saying that...here's what an 8 team playoff would have looked like based on CFP seedings:

Alabama vs Michigan St paired with Ohio St vs Baylor
Oregon vs Miss St paired with FSU vs TCU

Again, not everyone is going to be happy with how a National Champion is decided.. Everyone complained for years about the BCS and the way they chose the National Champion and wanted a playoff.. Well we got the playoff and now everyone is upset with how it's going.. This is the first year of the playoffs, and it's going to evolve as they tweak it.

There's always going to be a team that "doesn't get a fair shot".. Especially when you have a 12 person panel picking the teams going to the playoffs.

There is no scenario that'll please everyone. This is the world we live in. I thought the playoffs would've eliminated some of the bowls, but that didn't happen either.

(01-02-2015 12:39 PM)usm99 Wrote:  regardless of the number of teams in the playoffs there will be teams at the cutoff number that feel they are worthy. Here's a look at this year's Top 10 with bowl result:

#1 Alabama lost to #4 Ohio St
#2 Oregon beat #3 FSU
#5 Baylor lost to #8 Michigan St
#6 TCU beat #9 Ole Miss
#7 Miss St lost to #12 Georgia Tech
#10 Arizona lost to #20 Boise St

Saying that...here's what an 8 team playoff would have looked like based on CFP seedings:

Alabama vs Michigan St paired with Ohio St vs Baylor
Oregon vs Miss St paired with FSU vs TCU

that sounds like fun to me.....except one g5 has to be in it for serious fun value....

imagine #8 taking down #1....then taking down #whatever in the next round.....john lennon got it right with that one......

people would go apeshite and vomit their way to the screen to watch that shite happen....

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

Because then the bowl pairings would influence selection, just as conference title games may have influenced this one. Six in one hand and half a dozen in the other.

I'm pretty confident saying TCU may be better than every team in the nation outside of maybe, maybe Oregon. They are the complete package.

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

We have 10 conferences and one of Independents.

I say you let the 10 Conference Champs (not Co-Champs, it has to be outright, I'm looking at the Big XII and AAC) have a spot.. And have 6 At Large spots.. You could reserve one for the Indy boys, but they refuse to join a conference so let them take their chances on getting an At Large on their record.. Let the ones left out be voted on.

That'll give you 16 teams to start.

It'd look like this:

AAC- Memphis/UCF/Cincy (there'd need to be an outright Champ) For sake of argument give it to Memphis
ACC- Florida State #3
Big XII- TCU#6/Baylor #5 (Again, need an outright Champ) For sake of argument give it to Baylor
B1G- Ohio State #4
C-USA- Marshall
MAC- NIU
MW- Boise State #20
PAC 12- Oregon #2
SEC- Alabama #1
Sunbelt- Georgia Southern

#6- TCU
#7- Miss. State
#8- Michigan State
#9- Ole Miss
#10- Arizona
#11- Kansas State

There's your 16 teams.

When it comes to who plays who, that could be done by rankings, No. 1 plays the lowest rank, No. 2 the second lowest rank, and so on.

You might would see a Bama vs Georgia Southern, Oregon vs NIU/Marshall/Memphis, FSU vs NIU/Marshall/Memphis, Ohio State vs NIU/Marshall/Memphis, TCU vs Boise State, Miss. State vs. Arizona, and Michigan State vs Ole Miss.

I'm not sure if that'd work, I'm doing this on the fly. I'm not sure that'd even be a good bowl line up.

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

I'm still trying to figure out how that is different from 8......bueller, anyone?

Being realistic, when they go to 8, whether that's 12 years from now or sooner, it will likely be the 5 conference champions, with 3 at larges. The best shot the rest of us have of getting in is the TV execs wanting that 'cinderella' feel ala March Madness, and letting the best non-$5 champion into the playoff, with 2 final at larges.

(01-02-2015 01:18 PM)MTowho Wrote:  Being realistic, when they go to 8, whether that's 12 years from now or sooner, it will likely be the 5 conference champions, with 3 at larges. The best shot the rest of us have of getting in is the TV execs wanting that 'cinderella' feel ala March Madness, and letting the best non-$5 champion into the playoff, with 2 final at larges.

that was my previous point in #6.....

don't be shocked when this happens.....

I really don't understand what is taking 'them' so long.....

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

Exactly. I would prefer going back to the old bowl \ conference affiliations and the a plus one.

(01-02-2015 02:37 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

Exactly. I would prefer going back to the old bowl \ conference affiliations and the a plus one.

Honestly, I'm not sure that'd appease anyone. You'll find fans that will claim their team didn't get the fair shake. I mean today we're saying TCU, but how do you give everyone a fair shake? You can't.

Eventually this playoff system will evolve. Especially if this proves to be lucrative to many sponsors, Bowl CEOs, the NCAA, colleges, etc.

I still think the way to go is to ensure all Conferences are represented, not just the P-5. I mean look at the NFL, they don't exclude a division if they're weak, I mean look at the NFC South for heaven's sake.

Do I think TCU got a fair shake? Yes they played in one of the 6 NY's Bowls. After watching them tear Ole Miss a new one, should they'd been in the Semi finals? Probably so.. It'd been more fun to watch them and Oregon perhaps.. But hindsight is always 20/20.

As long as we have a panel of people picking which teams are ranked, there'll be flaws.

(01-02-2015 03:48 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 02:37 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

Exactly. I would prefer going back to the old bowl \ conference affiliations and the a plus one.

Honestly, I'm not sure that'd appease anyone. You'll find fans that will claim their team didn't get the fair shake. I mean today we're saying TCU, but how do you give everyone a fair shake? You can't.

Eventually this playoff system will evolve. Especially if this proves to be lucrative to many sponsors, Bowl CEOs, the NCAA, colleges, etc.

I still think the way to go is to ensure all Conferences are represented, not just the P-5. I mean look at the NFL, they don't exclude a division if they're weak, I mean look at the NFC South for heaven's sake.

Do I think TCU got a fair shake? Yes they played in one of the 6 NY's Bowls. After watching them tear Ole Miss a new one, should they'd been in the Semi finals? Probably so.. It'd been more fun to watch them and Oregon perhaps.. But hindsight is always 20/20.

As long as we have a panel of people picking which teams are ranked, there'll be flaws.

My brother's in-laws are big Bama fans and they actually declined to make a deposit on championship game tickets several weeks ago because according to them tickets started in the $400 range for nose bleed seats. If that's the case I imagine lower level seats are easily going for $1,000 minimum. With those prices I feel like they are overpricing many of your fans. On the flip side, there will be people who won't go to games and save up on the chance of getting one or more championship tickets

The last thing espn wants is two teams from west of the Mississippi in the national championship game. Oregon TCU would be a ratings nightmare because neither is traditional national tv draw, although Oregon is growing more of a national following.

(01-02-2015 02:37 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

Exactly. I would prefer going back to the old bowl \ conference affiliations and the a plus one.

I heard Jim Rhome say this morning that if the BCS were still intact, we'd be getting Alabama vs Florida State for the national championship game this year. Thank GOD we're moving past those days. Your "plus one" idea sucks!

(01-02-2015 03:48 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 02:37 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

Exactly. I would prefer going back to the old bowl \ conference affiliations and the a plus one.

Honestly, I'm not sure that'd appease anyone. You'll find fans that will claim their team didn't get the fair shake. I mean today we're saying TCU, but how do you give everyone a fair shake? You can't.

Eventually this playoff system will evolve. Especially if this proves to be lucrative to many sponsors, Bowl CEOs, the NCAA, colleges, etc.

I still think the way to go is to ensure all Conferences are represented, not just the P-5. I mean look at the NFL, they don't exclude a division if they're weak, I mean look at the NFC South for heaven's sake.

Do I think TCU got a fair shake? Yes they played in one of the 6 NY's Bowls. After watching them tear Ole Miss a new one, should they'd been in the Semi finals? Probably so.. It'd been more fun to watch them and Oregon perhaps.. But hindsight is always 20/20.

As long as we have a panel of people picking which teams are ranked, there'll be flaws.

In an 8-team playoff, if you don't win your conference you have no room to complain. If you don't win your conference, you know up front that you're "at risk". And that's the way it should be.

Right now, with a 4-team playoff, a P5 team can win their conference and still be left out. That ain't right. That's a big difference.

(01-02-2015 02:37 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 01:12 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why couldn't the committee have simply chosen the best two teams after the bowl season in a plus 1 game. Who would be your top two?

I think a lot of people would rather see Oregon and TCU.

I thought this system they introduced was basically a +1.. They let the top 4 teams play and then the two winners play.

I think he means a +1 with a wide-open field instead of one with semifinals, and I think that's a good idea.

Exactly. I would prefer going back to the old bowl \ conference affiliations and the a plus one.

I understand now.....snail pace is in puff mode....

I don't agree with it by any means, but I now understand....