The Hypothetical 2011 NCAA Playoff Thread

[FirstTimer]

And if there was an eight team playoff they would have been in but they weren't better than Oregon or Auburn.

We don't know that.


Saying TCU might no thave been the best team based on the body of work and the schedule they played is one thing..and a discussion worth having in regards to the current system. it sucks to even need to have it the discussion(which is the main problem) but whatever....BUT..... Saying for a fact they weren't better when they never got a chance to play either of those teams, and saying they "blew it" despite running the table and going undefeated, is just flat out ridiculous in my view.

 

[ZoneBlitz]

Glen you're making a terrible argument because TCU was a damn good team last year, and is solid even this year. The point should be that teams like Arkansas State are not even in TCU/Boise category, they are just plain bad.

 

[Atlas]

And you do realize that the playoff Woy posted and you thanked went all the way to 16 schools and not one was from a non-BCS conference, right?

and you realize that was a joke playoff b/c it was all regular season games, right??

 

[nflman2033]

and you realize that was a joke playoff b/c it was all regular season games, right??

I thought it was hilarious

 

[FirstTimer]

And you do realize that the playoff Woy posted and you thanked went all the way to 16 schools and not one was from a non-BCS conference, right?

And you relaize I've posted in this thread and another here that I'd be fine with Zone's idea, woys idea(I though woy had another one in here) maybe I confused him with Hass), I even thanked the first post which had other playoff scenarios, and even mentioned a few pages ago that while all conference champs is always an idea I will push for that I'd be fine with 4, 6 or 8 of conference champs only.(Post #48)

I'll usually never support a playoff with at larges(right away) but I'd rather have that than what we have now.

I'm not saying "my way or the highway".

I don't believe I ever have in this thread. In fact I've stated the exact opposite. So at this point I have no idea what the issue is or what your point even is in bringing up me being ok with other plans?

 

[FirstTimer]

The only thing TCU did wrong last year was have a soft schedule and not be part of a playoff system.

Wut?

 

[ZoneBlitz]

I understand what FT wants with giving everyone an equal chance, but there is such a wide talent disparity between the top & bottom conferences in D1A football.

A playoff should be a showcase of the best teams in the country, in matches everyone wants to see...and having teams from the MAC & Sunbelt would look terrible & create total mismatches.

Teams from lower conferences wouldnt be left out completely under most playoff proposals, because they still have the opportunity to run the table & get highly ranked as Houston did (before they lost). And TCU would be in a playoff this year under most proposals.

 

[FirstTimer]

I understand what FT wants with giving everyone an equal chance, but there is such a wide talent disparity between the top & bottom conferences in D1A football.

A playoff should be a showcase of the best teams in the country, in matches everyone wants to see...and having teams from the MAC & Sunbelt would look terrible & create total mismatches.

Teams from lower conferences wouldnt be left out completely under most playoff proposals, because they still have the opportunity to run the table & get highly ranked as Houston did (before they lost). And TCU would be in a playoff this year under most proposals.

Look, I get that viewpoint, which is why gun to my head I roll with other playoff scenarios that aren't mine.. They are still WAY better than anything we have now. So I'll live.

"Perfect football world". All conference champs are in and people live with that as well. There's not a "perfect" system right now due to the way the NCAA has fucked lower teams forever in many regards but I just have a problem on a certain level with a National Title tournament that every school doesn't have a realistic shot/opprotunity of winning or getting into.

There is SO much money on the table if they go toa playoff systema nd expand the chance for other teams to get in(TV deals etc) thatI'm amazed the NCAA hasn't jumped on it yet.

 

[FirstTimer]

What I was saying was that even in a year when there are some pretty good smaller programs they still aren't even as good as some runners up in the good conferences..

Ok?

Good?

Great opinion.


:dizzle:

 

[Bear Pand]

and BP, of course giving teams like LA Tech (and the like) the same shot at a national title as everyone else would help them in recruiting... to say otherwise is naive...

Not to the extreme you guys make it sound like. I think it's effect would be close to negligible.

Just look at rcruiting rankings by team in football compared to basketball. Top of the list = heavily dominated by big conference schools in both sports. And I know recruiting rankings don't mean a ton, but the whole idea that there's going to be some big recruiting boom for small schools because of a playoff is nonsense. Doesn't happen in cbb why would it happen in cfb?

You got teams sitting in BCS conferences now that can't even recruit.

 

[FirstTimer]

If you go undefeated you'll be in the top 8.

Ok. But then this loops back around. Ark St and all these teams will quit playing the top tier teams on the road for tune ups if they feel that all they have to do is run the table. Arkansas St's two losses this year were to Illinois and Va tech. If they feel that they go undefeated and can get into the Top 8 they go to the other weak conferences for OOC slates.

You'll have schools try and work around the system if you set the mind set that even if you are lower tier "go undefeated and you're in the Top 8"

It would at least be interesting to see but I don't think you can say for sure "run the table and you'll be in" no problem because teams, especially the lower tier ones will be set up to tweak the system better.

So tell me who is getting screwed in that scenario?

I really don't care about Alabama being "screwed". Again, I'm not in favor of any playoff that allows at larges. So under any scenario I truly back Alabama is "screwed". It's not just isolated to my plan alone.

 

[FirstTimer]

Well if you play FCS schools in the preseason you won't be ranked in the top 8 at the end of the year.

Next weeks lottery numbers?
And who said it can only be the top 8 in general? What about Top 8 ranked conference champs? Then these teams maybe start sneaking in more and more.

And it doesn't have to be FCS teams. Just not BCS conference FBS teams.

 

[PP]

Top 4 teams gets it done for me.

 

[Bear Pand]

Ok. But then this loops back around. Ark St and all these teams will quit playing the top tier teams on the road for tune ups if they feel that all they have to do is run the table. Arkansas St's two losses this year were to Illinois and Va tech. If they feel that they go undefeated and can get into the Top 8 they go to the other weak conferences for OOC slates.

2008 Ball State says hi.

They were 12-0 and #12 in the BCS. Of course they lost the MAC championship which might've been enough to get them into the top 8.

They played Northeastern, Navy, IU and Western Kentucky OOC.

Trying to play a shit schedule and get credit for going undefeated is playing with fire.

 

[FirstTimer]

2008 Ball State says hi.

They were 12-0 and #12 in the BCS. Of course they lost the MAC championship which might've been enough to get them into the top 8.

They played Northeastern, Navy, IU and Western Kentucky OOC.

Trying to play a shit schedule and get credit for going undefeated is playing with fire.

They also started the year off unranked..which involves another issue. The only real way for a mid tier team to get in is to start the year ranked...then win out. Ball St starts that season already inside the Top 25 I think they climb higher to begin with. There's a lot more at work here.

 

[FirstTimer]

Maybe, given the state of CFB today, and the parity not being there (yet) every conference champ levels the field too much....but requiring any mid tier team to basically start teh year ranked(pretty much by chance) and then run the table......still seems WAY to unbalanced for my tastes.

 

[ZoneBlitz]

Ok. But then this loops back around. Ark St and all these teams will quit playing the top tier teams on the road for tune ups if they feel that all they have to do is run the table. Arkansas St's two losses this year were to Illinois and Va tech. If they feel that they go undefeated and can get into the Top 8 they go to the other weak conferences for OOC slates.

I agree with the point you're making here, but this scenario furthers the case that the bottom tier dont belong with the top tier. Arkansas State went undefeated against their non-AQ brethen, but were overmatched in their only 2 games vs AQ opponents.

Maybe, given the state of CFB today, and the parity not being there (yet) every conference champ levels the field too much....but requiring any mid tier team to basically start teh year ranked(pretty much by chance) and then run the table......still seems WAY to unbalanced for my tastes.

I think Houston started the year unranked, and they still reached as high as #6 before losing.

I know 2008 Ball State started the year unranked, and they were 1 win away from cracking the top 10.

Its very possible.

IMO in order for any team from bottom tier to be included in the discussion for a playoff they should run the table and separate themself from their inferior conference competition.

 

[FirstTimer]

I think Houston started the year unranked, and they still reached as high as #6 before losing.

Yeah Houston was reciving votes but was unranked.

Its very possible.

Ball Stat's case is intersting. I doubt a MAC win over Buffalo helps them much maybe they jump to #10 but I doubt they jump 4 spots. And even then we are scraping by here.

Even in 2007 Haiwaii started ranked #23 ran the table and only got up to #10.

The balance just seems "off".

IMO I'd rather have the balance be flat across the board and more objective but in the end as long as there is at least a 6 team playoff I'd be content. 4 Is alright I guess and most likely what we will end up with but even still it would be better than what we have now. If it's only 4 or 6 though IMO it has to be conference champs only. You get toward 8 and 12 and at larges can be thrown in I suppose at that point.

IMO in order for any team from bottom tier to be included in the discussion for a playoff they should run the table and separate themself from their inferior conference competition.

Agree and disagree a bit. If you are for at larges does Boise losing to a good TCU team really show they aren't worthy of being NC's even though they already beat Georgia this season?

I just think treating some teams and saying they have room for error, and saying others need to run the table even to have a shot at all of even getting in to begin with doesn't really jive.

 

[FirstTimer]

To go conference champs only in a 4-6 team playoff would leave a few conferences outside looking in.. which would alienate them from the title even moreso than they are now.

And to Go Top 4 you risk getting as few as two conferences only into the playoff.
Two weeks ago you had 3 SEC teams in the Top 4.

Conference champs only at 4 or 6 you're guraunteeing at least 4 or 6 conferences are involved.

You actually risk more conferences being cut out by going with the rankings alone.

Also you can't take just conference champs when every team in the conference doesn't even play each other IMO.

Wut?

Why not?

 

[FirstTimer]

This year:

Top 4...you get 3 conferences in. SEC, Big 12, Pac 12. Including two teams that didn't even win or even play for their conference title.

Top 4 or 6 conference champs. 4 or 6 conferences are in. All conference champs.