Exactly why some did not want a playoff in college football

[hogsanity]

We are looking at the very real possibility of having not 1 but 2 teams that did not win their conference be in the final 4. Not only did they not win their conference they will be from the same conference that they did not win. Tell me, how can 2 teams that did not win their league be considered 2 of the top 4 teams in college football? Actually, if Bama loses to Fla they will still be in so the playoff could have 3 of the 4 teams that did not even win their conference.

This is why they wanted to go from a hybrid system with the bcs to a straight committee to pick the teams though, because they want to pick teams for ratings, not because they are the best 4 teams. This is also why teams like Arkansas are only ever going to be in the top 4 if they go 13-0, because if the committee has any way at all to do it they are going to make sure it is either a blue blood like Mich & Ohio St or a real cinderella like Western Mich ( no they are not getting ) or some such team.

[hoghiker]

I use to love college basketball but have really almost quit watching college hoops. Its a sewer. The Kentucky model tells you all you need to know. It's C league pro hoops. Football still maintains some veneer of being a college sport. 4 teams, then 8 teams, maybe 16 teams and the entire season matters not. Playoffs or we suck. Cheat, win, then glory bound with the big hardware. Yippie. I'll go float the Buffalo instead.

[hogfanny]

Thank you Sanity. Makes me wonder if we would be a lock at 13-0.

[DeltaBoy]

They generally taked Conferance Champions and should remain to do so.  Who cares where your ranked if you can't win your conferance.

[Lake City Hog]

Washington and Clemson control their own fates, win and in.
Penn State still has a GOOD chance to surpass Michigan if they can beat Wisconsin in the championship game. That would give them 1 more win, a top quality win and make them conference champion.
Again, handle Pitt and they are almost assured of being in.

[onebadrubi]

Thank you Sanity. Makes me wonder if we would be a lock at 13-0.

Umm YES!  If our only loss was bama right now we'd be in as well, so would any other sec W team

[hogsanity]

Thank you Sanity. Makes me wonder if we would be a lock at 13-0.

Yes, the sec champ at 13-0 is a lock.

They generally taked Conferance Champions and should remain to do so.  Who cares where your ranked if you can't win your conferance.

They have usually taken conf champs because they have not been faced with not needing to. The conf champs have been Bama, Ohio St, Clemson, Oregon, Fla St, Ou & Mich St and all were either undefeated or had 1 loss.

This year The Big10 champ will have 2 losses, the pac12 champ could have 2 losses, the acc champ could have 3 if VT beats Clemson, and the big12 champ will have 2 losses.

[hogsanity]

Washington and Clemson control their own fates, win and in.
Penn State still has a GOOD chance to surpass Michigan if they can beat Wisconsin in the championship game. That would give them 1 more win, a top quality win and make them conference champion.
Again, handle Pitt and they are almost assured of being in.

Oddly enough, 8-4 pitt, which just gave up 61 to Syracuse ( but still won ) could have victories over 2 of the playoff teams if Clemson and Pn St make it.

[EastexHawg]

I still don't get the indignation.  What is the point here, that Alabama should be the national champ by acclamation?  Why does it bother people so much for a champion to have to win the title on the field?  In a lot of cases, these "undeserving" teams have lost to teams Alabama hasn't played.  So...how can we be certain Alabama would be undefeated if they had played those same opponents?

Maybe I am wrong, but I get the feeling the reason for concern is the fear that the SEC team that is favored to win (most years) might lose and fans of the conference won't be able to pound their chests about how many national championships it has won.

Let them play the games and prove they are the best.

[PonderinHog]

They generally taked Conferance Champions and should remain to do so.  Who cares where your ranked if you can't win your conferance.

There's a better chance of you winning a spelling bee.

[longpig]

We are looking at the very real possibility of having not 1 but 2 teams that did not win their conference be in the final 4. Not only did they not win their conference they will be from the same conference that they did not win. Tell me, how can 2 teams that did not win their league be considered 2 of the top 4 teams in college football? Actually, if Bama loses to Fla they will still be in so the playoff could have 3 of the 4 teams that did not even win their conference.

This is why they wanted to go from a hybrid system with the bcs to a straight committee to pick the teams though, because they want to pick teams for ratings, not because they are the best 4 teams. This is also why teams like Arkansas are only ever going to be in the top 4 if they go 13-0, because if the committee has any way at all to do it they are going to make sure it is either a blue blood like Mich & Ohio St or a real cinderella like Western Mich ( no they are not getting ) or some such team.

srsly cuz? 

[mizzouman]

One issue is that your have 5 power conferences for 4 spots.  That's the first clue that this won't work.  Imagine having 5 conference champs with undefeated records.  Who gets left out? 

[go hogues]

They generally taked Conferance Champions and should remain to do so.  Who cares where your ranked if you can't win your conferance.

You work in education, no? Sheesh.

[jjdlc]

We'll see what the committee does.  I wont be surprised if the winner of the Big Ten championship game gets in over Ohio St.  The committee has said that they put an emphasis on conference championships over simple W/L record so we'll see.  Alabama on the other hand, IF, and thats a huge IF they were to lose to FL, they really drop them out?  They aren't going to put a 3 loss FL team in, so who would they go with?  The only way I could see that happening would be if I'm correct and they take the Big Ten champ, leaving Ohio St. as a 1 loss team along with Alabama, otherwise you would be looking at a situation of putting a 2 loss team above a 1 loss Alabama.  I know a lot of talking heads are crowing about the SEC being down this year, and that may be, we'll find out just how down come bowl season.

[Atlhogfan1]

Never wanted a playoff.  Didn't care for the BCS. Don't want to see the playoff expanded.  When it gets expanded, we will have teams like W Mich and an OU team blown out by Houston and Oh St.  I don't care about conference championships in terms of the NC.  This playoff is of course about money.  Better be careful not to damage the best regular season in sports by expanding. 

[jjdlc]

One issue is that your have 5 power conferences for 4 spots.  That's the first clue that this won't work.  Imagine having 5 conference champs with undefeated records.  Who gets left out?

Thats the main reason I believe an 8 team playoff would be best.

[longpig]

One issue is that your have 5 power conferences for 4 spots.  That's the first clue that this won't work.  Imagine having 5 conference champs with undefeated records.  Who gets left out?

Realise this is virtually impossible, don't imagine it could happen. 

[jgphillips3]

Thats the main reason I believe an 8 team playoff would be best.

Yep.  I want 8 teams with 5 conference champs and 3 at large.  It gives us our best hope of making it someday.  More than 8 is just way too many.  Under that system, winning a P5 championship means something...an automatic seat at the table.

[longpig]

Thats the main reason I believe an 8 team playoff would be best.

Then it takes the season from 14 to 15 games for the champion.  Attrition plays a bigger factor giving teams with better recruiting/depth a decisive advantage.  Or NCAA could allow 10 to 15 more players, which would increase the costs of running a program significantly.  Either way the top recruiters gain even more advantage than they already have.  We wanted 4 when it was 2, now that we have 4 we  want 8. 

[lstewart]

In some cases aren't the teams in question actually conference co-champions, but lost some form of tie-breaker on getting into their championship game? Isn't Ohio State actually co-champion with Penn State with one conference loss? I realize they are not playing in the Big 10 championship game, but to me being a co-champion may be a little different than actually finishing behind someone else in your conference with an extra loss on your record. There probably is not a solution other than some day being more like basketball, taking the power 5 conference champions (by whatever method each conference chooses them, and then having some type of at large selections. Maybe you have a rule like the old BCS bowl game rule that no more than 2 teams from a conference can be represented, assuming you had 8 total teams. You can always think of examples where someone will get left out.

[hogsanity]

I still don't get the indignation.  What is the point here, that Alabama should be the national champ by acclamation?  Why does it bother people so much for a champion to have to win the title on the field?  In a lot of cases, these "undeserving" teams have lost to teams Alabama hasn't played.  So...how can we be certain Alabama would be undefeated if they had played those same opponents?

Maybe I am wrong, but I get the feeling the reason for concern is the fear that the SEC team that is favored to win (most years) might lose and fans of the conference won't be able to pound their chests about how many national championships it has won.

Let them play the games and prove they are the best.

All I wanted was there to be a defined way to get in, and one of those should be winning your conference. The committee in it's 1st year punished the big12 for not having a conf champ because they had no conf champ game. Yet this year they appear very likely to put in 1, maybe 2 big10 teams that did not win their conf.

On a personal level, I do not want to watch teams that could not even win there league just because they are Ohio St and/or Michigan. Do you think if the Ohio St was in the big10 cham game would there be any talk of putting in a 1 loss but not conf champ pac12 team over them, or even another 1 loss big10 team over them? Of course not. This is nothing but the committee probably putting in Ohio st and/or Mich just because of who they are. 

[Tick Hog]

 I'm pretty sure you're right but I agree with the point being made here. OSU isn't going to win their Con and they still get in. Heck they don't even have to have the risk of playing another game. If that were us, I'm almost for certain we'd be on the outside looking in.

[Grizzlyfan]

I'm pretty sure you're right but I agree with the point being made here. OSU isn't going to win their Con and they still get in. Heck they don't even have to have the risk of playing another game. If that were us, I'm almost for certain we'd be on the outside looking in.

Most "experts" say Ohio State is a lock.  Not just that they can get it in.  It's a problem, for sure.

[longpig]

All I wanted was there to be a defined way to get in, and one of those should be winning your conference. The committee in it's 1st year punished the big12 for not having a conf champ because they had no conf champ game. Yet this year they appear very likely to put in 1, maybe 2 big10 teams that did not win their conf.

On a personal level, I do not want to watch teams that could not even win there league just because they are Ohio St and/or Michigan. Do you think if the Ohio St was in the big10 cham game would there be any talk of putting in a 1 loss but not conf champ pac12 team over them, or even another 1 loss big10 team over them? Of course not. This is nothing but the committee probably putting in Ohio st and/or Mich just because of who they are.

Ohio St. and/or Michigan have a lot of high quality wins, more than Penn. St. and Wisconsin.  Big 10 is loaded this year and only 2 teams can be in the championship game, just so happens it isn't the two best teams in the conference.  Look at each of their wins and losses.

[Jackrabbit Hog]

Thats the main reason I believe an 8 team playoff would be best.

Exactly.  No reason why an 8 team playoff wouldn't be better.  Take the 5 conference champs from the Power 5 leagues and then 3 wildcards.  Heck, you can even say one of the wildcards has to come from the "League of 5" conferences just to keep all of them from yapping about it.  Bottom line is that there are MANY years when the 5th team in the ranking has a legitimate argument that it is a true national championship contender (yet is left out in a 4 team playoff), while there's never a year when the 9th ranked team can legitimately make that argument (the first one left out of an 8 team playoff). 

[hogsanity]

Most "experts" say Ohio State is a lock.  Not just that they can get it in.  It's a problem, for sure.

Bama and Ohio St are both locks, even if Bama loses to FLA. That means that at least 2 of the p5 champs are not making it. Assume Bama and Clemson win Sat & that Ohio St is a lock, that means 1 spot left for the big10/pac12/big12. Have to assume in that scenario that Wash gets in if they win the pac12cg, which means that the big10 champ does not get in while a team from that league that did not even play in their title game makes it, and that just is not right.

[Jackrabbit Hog]

Let's assume that chalk holds true this weekend.  If it were an 8 team playoff, you'd have:

Alabama
Clemson
Washington
Wisconsin
Oklahoma

Add to those 5 conference champs the following wild cards: 

Ohio State
Michigan
Western Michigan (yeah; a sacrificial lamb as Alabama's first round opponent). 

Tell me, who has been left out that has a real legitimate argument to be in??

[bvillepig]

I was fine with the bowl games and letting the polls decide.  Made for a fun debate at the end and the regular season and bowl games meant something. 

Eight is to many. There is no way anyone would ever get it right with 8 teams in a playoff.

We have 2 teams in the top 25 with no losses.   One will get left out.
3 teams with 1.
9 teams with 2.
7 teams with 3.
There is not enough difference between the two or three loss teams in a normal season.  it's all about schedules anyway.

[hogsanity]

Let's assume that chalk holds true this weekend.  If it were an 8 team playoff, you'd have:

Alabama
Clemson
Washington
Wisconsin
Oklahoma

Add to those 5 conference champs the following wild cards: 

Ohio State
Michigan
Western Michigan (yeah; a sacrificial lamb as Alabama's first round opponent). 

Tell me, who has been left out that has a real legitimate argument to be in??

But you've changed the criteria. In your scenario the p5 champs all get in automatically. That is the issue now, the conf champs get no such guarantee.

[Torqued pork]

As a fan I would rather have four legit teams. Putting a team in from a soft conference based on a conference title is inviting mismatches.
The flipside is possibly having a scenario where one team has to beat a conference opponent twice. There will never be a way that makes everyone happy.

[Fatty McGee]

Let's assume that chalk holds true this weekend.  If it were an 8 team playoff, you'd have:

Alabama
Clemson
Washington
Wisconsin
Oklahoma

Add to those 5 conference champs the following wild cards: 

Ohio State
Michigan
Western Michigan (yeah; a sacrificial lamb as Alabama's first round opponent). 

Tell me, who has been left out that has a real legitimate argument to be in??

What's the point though?  Why does an 8 team playoff tell us any more than a 4 team playoff?  You're just further devaluing the regular season.

[Fatty McGee]

But you've changed the criteria. In your scenario the p5 champs all get in automatically. That is the issue now, the conf champs get no such guarantee.

A playoff was always a bad idea done only to further pursue the one thing that is ruining college football - money.

[Jackrabbit Hog]

But you've changed the criteria. In your scenario the p5 champs all get in automatically. That is the issue now, the conf champs get no such guarantee.

I probably wasn't clear.  I think an 8 team playoff is far superior to what we have now, and one of the reasons why is that a criteria should be (and almost assuredly would be) that the five P5 champs are automatically in.

No, they're not automatically in as the playoffs are currently set up, and that is a problem.

[HF#1]

Go to 8 teams. 5 auto-bids and 3 at large. Top 2 get byes, higher seeds host games until the semifinals.

[bob slydell]

They generally taked Conferance Champions and should remain to do so.  Who cares where your ranked if you can't win your conferance.

This is only the 3rd year that the committee will be picking the top 4. I don't think you can say that they generally do anything at this point.

[Fatty McGee]

Go to 8 teams. 5 auto-bids and 3 at large. Top 2 get byes, higher seeds host games until the semifinals.

Keep expanding in pursuit of cash and moving further away from the educational mission and you're going to kill the golden goose.

[hogsanity]

As a fan I would rather have four legit teams. Putting a team in from a soft conference based on a conference title is inviting mismatches.
The flipside is possibly having a scenario where one team has to beat a conference opponent twice. There will never be a way that makes everyone happy.

And this was why I was not in favor of a playoff. Now we have people trying to define who the "legit" teams are. I think Washington is a legit team, but many people only saw their game with USC, which USC won. I think they are every bit as good as Ohio St. Ohio St has not been impressive since they beat OU. The struggled to put Wisc away, lost to Pn St, struggled greatly with NW and a really bad Mich St team, and didn't as much beat Mich and Mich beat Mich. But that is just my opinion. 

[hogsanity]

This is only the 3rd year that the committee will be picking the top 4. I don't think you can say that they generally do anything at this point.

But they have talked alot about how conf champs do get more weight.

[longpig]

Exactly.  No reason why an 8 team playoff wouldn't be better.  Take the 5 conference champs from the Power 5 leagues and then 3 wildcards.  Heck, you can even say one of the wildcards has to come from the "League of 5" conferences just to keep all of them from yapping about it.  Bottom line is that there are MANY years when the 5th team in the ranking has a legitimate argument that it is a true national championship contender (yet is left out in a 4 team playoff), while there's never a year when the 9th ranked team can legitimately make that argument (the first one left out of an 8 team playoff).

How's a team supposed to set the edge in the playoffs when it's fresh out of edge setters?

[bob slydell]

Let's assume that chalk holds true this weekend.  If it were an 8 team playoff, you'd have:

Alabama
Clemson
Washington
Wisconsin
Oklahoma

Add to those 5 conference champs the following wild cards: 

Ohio State
Michigan
Western Michigan (yeah; a sacrificial lamb as Alabama's first round opponent). 

Tell me, who has been left out that has a real legitimate argument to be in??

What if it doesn't and you end up with several 3 or 4 loss teams in the playoff? I'd much rather have the committee pick the 4 or 8 best teams and not even broach the subject of auto bids. Does anyone really want to see a team that was middling all season but played in such a weak division that they got into a title game and got lucky and won it? I personally don't think that should be the case.

[bob slydell]

But they have talked alot about how conf champs do get more weight.

If they continue to talk about it say 10 years from now, I'll consider that "generally" showing that tendency.

[Fatty McGee]

What if it doesn't and you end up with several 3 or 4 loss teams in the playoff? I'd much rather have the committee pick the 4 or 8 best teams and not even broach the subject of auto bids. Does anyone really want to see a team that was middling all season but played in such a weak division that they got into a title game and got lucky and won it? I personally don't think that should be the case.

OU fans want to see that.

[bob slydell]

OU fans want to see that.

Then I'll add that to the list of reasons to dislike OU fans.

[S.A.D.C]

Never wanted a playoff.  Didn't care for the BCS. Don't want to see the playoff expanded.  When it gets expanded, we will have teams like W Mich and an OU team blown out by Houston and Oh St.  I don't care about conference championships in terms of the NC.  This playoff is of course about money.  Better be careful not to damage the best regular season in sports by expanding.

GET OFF MY LAWN!  I love the "the playoff is about money" complaint.  What were/are the bowls about?  Hell, what is the entire season about?  I love that it is about money because that gives them incentive to create the best/most entertaining system possible.

Giving the conference champions automatic bids would suck if they keep conference championship games.  Take the SEC this year:  does anyone think Florida should get a bid over Alabama if hell freezes over and they win the SEC championship game?

First: eliminate the conference championship games.  Play a round robin conference schedule.  Crown the conference champion based on regular season. 
Make the playoff a 6 team playoff with the P5 champions plus one at large team. 

[longpig]

But they have talked alot about how conf champs do get more weight.

Get more weight, don't automatically get the nod.  Wisconsin has lost to both Michigan and Ohio State.  Penn. State  beat Ohio State but was blown out by 4 loss Pitt who was beat decisively by unranked Miami.   Michigan is most likely out starting tonight and Washington is in, blowing your blue blood conspiracy.

[The_Iceman]

If Penn State, Washington, and Clemson all win, they should be in the Final 4 win Bama. That would give you the Big 10 Champ, SEC Champ, ACC Champ, and the PAC12 Champ. The way it should be.

[The_Iceman]

Get more weight, don't automatically get the nod.  Wisconsin has lost to both Michigan and Ohio State.  Penn. State  beat Ohio State but was blown out by 4 loss Pitt who was beat decisively by unranked Miami.

Penn State lost to Pitt 42-39. They were blown out by Michigan.

[The_Iceman]

They do however need to eliminate conference tie ins to the other big new years day bowls. Just get the best matchups.

Michigan vs. Oklahoma

Ohio state vs. USC

Wisconsin vs. Colorado or OK State.

[hogsanity]

Get more weight, don't automatically get the nod.  Wisconsin has lost to both Michigan and Ohio State.  Penn. State  beat Ohio State but was blown out by 4 loss Pitt who was beat decisively by unranked Miami.   

Pitt may be more schitzo than the Hogs. Beat Pn St and Clemson, but lose 4 games.

I just never saw having a committee any better than using the bcs rankings. Could have just gone with the top 4 using that formula.

[hogsanity]

They do however need to eliminate conference tie ins to the other big new years day bowls. Just get the best matchups.

Michigan vs. Oklahoma

Ohio state vs. USC

Wisconsin vs. Colorado or OK State.

Do agree with that.