|
Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
|
Replies: 22
| visibility 1,615
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 8:17 AM
|
|
To all college football fans, "experts," talking heads, etc.,etc. who think an 8-team playoff would be better than what we have are obviously butt-hurt for some reason or don't know enough about college football to have an intelligent conversation.
Conference championships SHOULD NOT AUTOMATICALLY WARRANT CFP INCLUSION!
Popular opinion would say an 8-team playoff includes:
P5 Champs + G5 Champ + 2 At-Large = 8
Would anyone be happy with the playoff had Florida and VT gotten in by virtue of beating Alabama and Clemson? I didn't think so...
Or in 2012 when 6-6 GT won the Coastal because UNC and Miami were ineligible. Should an upset over FSU that year have been deserving of a CFP spot over a 10-win (just an example) NON-CHAMP?
I understand that it works in beautifully basketball, where the body of work is 30+ games and 68 teams get into the field.
This is just another example of our "everyone deserves a trophy" society.
Just another reason Clemson is becoming a benchmark program - our Tigers leave no room for debate regarding their inclusion (EXCEPT to a large group of people in the Midlands, for some reason).
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [21557]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13911
Joined: 9/7/02
|
Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 8:22 AM
|
|
A conference champion doesn't always win it in basketball. I don't want 8 teams. 6 would be ok, with 1 and 2 getting a bye. There needs to be a reward for finishing 1/2. 8+ is way to much and dilutes the product. The arguments alone make college football better than everything else. Don't mess with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 8:35 AM
|
|
Conference tourney champs get auto-bids in every league but the Ivy League (the don't sponsor a conference tourney).
The ACC doesn't officially recognize the regular season champion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12986
Joined: 8/4/14
|
I believe the regular season champ is recognized now, but
Dec 5, 2016, 8:43 AM
|
|
only the tourney champ gets the "automatic" berth. Although I can't imagine a scenario where the regular season champ doesn't also get in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 10:07 AM
[ in reply to Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID ] |
|
How the hell would byes be acceptable? The whole reason we have 4 now is due to the fact that the difference between 2 and 3 is very very minimal most years. Now you are going to give one of those two teams a massive advantage over the other?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13359]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9885
Joined: 1/23/06
|
The problem is the inverse of your point.
Dec 5, 2016, 8:23 AM
|
|
It's not that the winner of the conf champ game gets the nod automatically...
It the thought that if you don't win your division... didn't play in the conf champ game and obviously didn't win your conference... how in the world are you eligible to play for the National Championship when your conference says you weren't the best team in your own division.
Yeah... let's just go to eye test matrix.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
Garbage. If 6-6 GT beat 12-0 Clemson and 11-1 FSU was
Dec 5, 2016, 8:34 AM
|
|
2nd in the Atlantic division that year, with its lone loss to Clemson, GT gets in over both if the two-at large spots were somehow filled?
No way! And you can't defend that you would be okay with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
More of an indictment of Conference Championship games than
Dec 5, 2016, 8:55 AM
|
|
... than of the validity of an 8-team playoff.
The concept of arbitrarily dividing conferences into two divisions and then deeming the winner of the divisions the best teams is flawed to begin with.
So, no ... conference champs should not automatically get a playoff position.
We definitely need 8 teams, but, somehow we need to actually find a way to include THE BEST 8 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13359]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9885
Joined: 1/23/06
|
Settle down.
Dec 5, 2016, 8:55 AM
[ in reply to Garbage. If 6-6 GT beat 12-0 Clemson and 11-1 FSU was ] |
|
1- I don't think you understood my point.... I'm not saying conf champs should get in automatically.
2- In your example, I would take Clemson.
3- what's an at large spot? Aren't they all at large?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
Re: Settle down.
Dec 5, 2016, 9:09 AM
|
|
Apologies, but I don't think you got my original point either.
I stated that an 8-team playoff would consist of (according to popular opinion) the five P5 champs, one G5 champ, and two P5 at-large bids. Many times a P5 champ is not worthy, regardless of the fact that they won their division and conference (in 2012 GT's case, it was because #1 and #2 in their division were ineligible).
What I gathered from your post was virtually an argument for PSU over OSU. I completely understand where you're coming from. The committee needs to provide better guidelines, for sure, but it's year three and the kinks are still being worked out.
One day if Clemson is in the same boat as OSU, the precedent set this year may benefit the Tigers, and we'll all think "that's the way it goes!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13359]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9885
Joined: 1/23/06
|
Don't disagree with that.
Dec 5, 2016, 9:28 AM
|
|
I would just say this to anyone that likes the 8 team thought.
This year is NOT a good explample of why we need 8 teams. It's merely an example of an incestuous conference (B1G 10) they have a cluster-f over there. An 8 team playoff this year would have 3- maybe 4- from the big10. That's silly.
If anyone has their tin-foil hat on- I think it's time to start discussing no conferences for the power5 schools and have an NFL like system where schedules are made by a governing body and playoffs are 8 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4378]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 4849
Joined: 5/22/15
|
Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 8:24 AM
|
|
I completely agree. +1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
In today's liberal-leaning society, I'm surprised
Dec 5, 2016, 8:45 AM
|
|
that we even allow a "National Champion." Doing so really crushes the market for participation trophies.
As to expanding to 8 teams... within a year of doing so, you would start to hear the media calling for 12 teams... or 16 teams... and pretty soon, it would be just like the NCAA Basketball brackets. It's all subjective, but since more games mean more "talking head idiots" and more TV revenue, well, you get my drift...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2877]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3857
Joined: 11/19/11
|
Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 9:10 AM
|
|
4 is perfect
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15730]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17365
Joined: 2/1/99
|
I don't think many believe the conf champ should AUTOMATICALLY get in.
Dec 5, 2016, 9:21 AM
|
|
Specifically with PSU and OSU, it was a conference champ who beat OSU head to head should get in over a team that has one less loss but didn't even play the extra game against a division champ.
Also, I will keep saying this: 6 teams is a horrible idea. Giving the top two teams a bye in a sport as tough as football will make it nearly impossible for teams 3-6 to win. And that's fine if picking 1 and 2 wasn't a beauty contest. But it is. So you're back to everyone complaining that they got shafted by being #3 instead of #2.
Bowls were fine for my money.
4 is sufficient.
If you want a true champion, you extend it to 16 and have every conference champ and 5 at large bids. I'm not advocating it, I'm just saying that's the only way to have a true, pure playoff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
To me, it's rather simple.
Dec 5, 2016, 9:21 AM
|
|
One reason, of the many, that I don't enjoy gymnastics, diving, and figure skating is that they are sports which are judged and the winners are crowned based on opinion.
In football we don't HAVE to do that, and yet we are choosing to select some number of teams based in large part by the eye test. I want no part of giving everyone a trophy, but I would prefer a system where everyone has the ability to earn their way to the title regardless of opinion. This worked somewhat in past years when you had to be #### near perfect to get to the title game, but once the bulk of the playoff field has a loss we begin to grade losses on value and the criteria becomes so very subjective.
I don't see that as necessary, and the natural (and final, to me) expansion to 8 teams provides a path to removing the "subjective only" path to the playoffs. Win your division, win your conference, and you're in. The opinions of anyone anywhere wouldn't be able to remove your on-the-field accomplishments.
I'd also add that it is stupid to me that teams play in a division of football that they simply have no way of winning. Western Michigan didn't lose a game all year. They are as perfect a team as they can be, and yet no matter their performance they cannot win the title. There is nothing more they could've done to get there. What the point in playing in the FBS then? An automatic bid to undefeated non power-5 teams or some structure to make sure they get a shot needs to be in place.
You say that the idea of automatic bids to the conference champions cannot be defended, and I'd disagree wholeheartedly. I think the easy defense is to argue that the conference championship games would be the de facto first round of the playoffs. You have to get to them and win them to win the national title.
I find our current situation odd in that it ammounts to including wild card or at large bids, without providing a concrete path to the title for everyone.
I prefer objective criteria, but thats just me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
But do you see where an issue like the OP would completely discredit this system?
Dec 5, 2016, 9:29 AM
|
|
As I posted before, in 2012, GT was 6-6 and #3 in their division, but #1-2 (Miami/UNC) were ineligible. GT won by default. Had they upset FSU in the ACCCG, you're putting them in the playoffs?
Technically, they won their division and conference, but are nowhere near playoff-worthy, even if the rules are the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Eh, I'd be fine with that rare circumstance
Dec 5, 2016, 9:34 AM
|
|
But I wouldn't throw a potential system out because of a possible outlier situation when a simple rule can be put in place that says the team must actually win (as in on the field record) their division, and if they didn't and yet (through a technicality) went to the conference championship game and won then that conferenc would vacate their bid that year and an extra at-large pick would be used.
Or, perhaps, we can simply say that each conference must determine their representative however they wish. That team represents their conference in the playoff. Each conference can put whatever rules they want in place to guard against situations like you mentioned.
The risk of these situations can be mitigated, and even if they do occur, I'd argue it's much better to let them happen than it would be to run an entire playoff based on subjective criteria.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17754]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16649
Joined: 9/1/12
|
8-team playoff w/o auto-bid is smart
Dec 5, 2016, 9:31 AM
|
|
Screw the conference championships. I still think eight teams using the current method more or less. Conference championship is way down the list as far as having any meaning.
With just four, it still is dictated too much by match ups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40342]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23463
Joined: 7/13/12
|
i guess the only thing that bothers me about it is this:
Dec 5, 2016, 9:31 AM
|
|
there is no room for an underdog/cinderella scenario.
part of what makes march madness fun is that C of C can make a run to the sweet 16 and it adds to the excitement.
the EPL had Leicester City with a miracle championship last year: A number of newspapers described their title win as the greatest sporting upset ever, or the best football fairy-tale of history.
while i don't think i agree that Pitt is a playoff team, they have been somewhat of a giant killer this year (Us, PSU), and given the opportunity to play they could keep that up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30766]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 34465
Joined: 6/22/03
|
I would be perfectly content if vt, fl, calorado, and penn st
Dec 5, 2016, 9:38 AM
|
|
Were in the playoffs.
If that is the rule, than it is clear and understandable .
8 is too many. 6 would get conf. Champs plus the year's prom queen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: Luckily, Clemson need not worry about this, but I think an 8-team playoff is STUPID
Dec 5, 2016, 10:09 AM
|
|
"I disagree with you therefore it is stupid"
quality post.
/s
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
At the end of the day...
Dec 5, 2016, 5:45 PM
|
|
Anything not based on wins and losses is subjective. Yes, there are different levels of subjectivity.
Should Ohio State be left out? Probably not (subjective). Should Penn State be left out, since they beat Ohio State? Probably not... this would have been "objective" had they not lost two games... but is now "subjective" on the basis of whether their win over Ohio State outweighed their two losses.
So, do we start the year with a 128 team bracket? No! Clemson beat Louisville in the 3rd game of the season... had not Louisville imploded in the last 2 games, Clemson and Louisville could have been #2 and #3 and virtually inseparable... but with a bracket system, Louisville would have been "out of it" in Week 3.
Is there an answer? NO! So, then the question becomes, do we need a "National Champion"?
Argh!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 22
| visibility 1,615
|
|
|
|
50
