|
Replies: 11
| visibility 3,017
|
1st Rounder [616]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 924
Joined: 11/18/01
|
Is anyone else tired of the who beat who arguments
Nov 22, 2017, 2:20 AM
|
|
that make up the CFP selection process?
You know, there are other ways to do this. Here's an aliterate approach.
* All 5 power conference champions are automatically in the playoffs.
* 1 at large non-power-5 team makes the playoffs. We all need a Cinderella.
* The only job of the committee is to choose the non-power-5 entry and to seed all the teams.
Seeds 1 and 2 get a bye first round.
First round
Seed 3 vs Seed 6
Seed 4 vs Seed 5
Second round
You know the drill.
Championship
Hooray! A champion is reigned using a system people can understand and can't complain about (as much).
Potential Criticism
There will be those that say, while whimpering a little, “But team A was better. They just didn't play well in 1 game and lost the conference title. Is it right they shouldn't be in the playoffs?” It's not unusual in sports for a team to look really good in the regular season and lose in the playoffs. Do we think the team that loses in the playoffs should get a special pass into the second round? Why should we treat the loser of a conference championship differently?
Every game is important. Conference championships would be like the first round of the playoffs. Who gets into the conference championship would also become more critical. This is how it should be.
Benefits
Instead of people guessing about which conference is better and which teams are better, it becomes much more cut and dry. I've loved the run Clemson has been on and the Committee has been great to us. But I'm not a fan of the process. It's silly. It doesn't need to be this complicated.
|
|
|
|
 |
1st Rounder [616]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 924
Joined: 11/18/01
|
Alternate approach
Nov 22, 2017, 2:22 AM
|
|
Not aliterate approach. Ugh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11188]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5532
Joined: 11/22/15
|
Re: Alternate approach
Nov 22, 2017, 2:28 AM
|
|
TL: DR seems appropriate..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16058]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 24595
Joined: 5/14/02
|
Would we lose BIG OOC games like Clemson-AUB?
Nov 22, 2017, 3:06 AM
|
|
Or UT-VT or USC-Texas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [616]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 924
Joined: 11/18/01
|
Re: Would we lose BIG OOC games like Clemson-AUB?
Nov 22, 2017, 11:22 AM
|
|
No. Regular season would stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [861]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 585
Joined: 5/3/07
|
I Get It, But Don't Agree
Nov 22, 2017, 3:36 AM
|
|
You're right, pretty logical. But you've got yet another playoff game. So you go through a 12 game regular season, a conference championship game, then you must play three more games to decide the National Championship. That's just too much. Too much on the players, fans can't travel that much, and introduces even more debate given all the games beyond the regular season. I think the system is fine. Perfection isn't possible so there will always be some discontent. That is not necessarily a problem needing a resolution. There's always "something", the matchup, injuries, a bad call. You can't fix it all so live with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30804]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22859
Joined: 11/1/03
|
What if the 1st and 2nd round were played at the higher seed
Nov 22, 2017, 4:09 AM
|
|
home stadium?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [616]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 924
Joined: 11/18/01
|
Re: I Get It, But Don't Agree
Nov 22, 2017, 11:20 AM
[ in reply to I Get It, But Don't Agree ] |
|
Only 4 teams out of 120 would have another game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12986
Joined: 8/4/14
|
But the whole point now is to create more controversy
Nov 22, 2017, 7:41 AM
|
|
which they think stirs up more interest among fans. Even with the current four team format, the committee's input could be greatly simplified. You have five conference winners. Decide which four make it, and seed them.
If, once in a blue moon, a G5 team seems worthy, throw them into the mix. But if you don't win your conference, you are out. Divvy up the rest among the other bowl games and go home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2922]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4060
Joined: 11/30/98
|
The 2 loss teams have no beef.....
Nov 22, 2017, 8:03 AM
|
|
It's a 4 team playoff for a national championship. Currently there are 3 undefeated and two 1 loss teams.
2 of those teams will play each other.
Now if Bama or Wisconsin loses, then it will get interesting...but until that happens, this year potentially could be easier than last year to declare the four teams.
But if you have 2 losses...no one wants to hear those arguments.
Most of the whining is based on 'what if' scenarios that don't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15909]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7796
Joined: 11/15/09
|
Not me. Its what keeps people talking about college ball.
Nov 22, 2017, 8:03 AM
|
|
What stupid is when people are like, team A has win way better than team B, but team A has a worse loss.
For me its about what you've done, not what you didn't do.
I have no interest in 8 team playoff. Group of 5 shouldn't get a spot and right niw we're talkong about 2 loss teams in a 4 team playoff. No thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [514]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 858
Joined: 2/4/03
|
Re: Not me. Its what keeps people talking about college ball.
Nov 22, 2017, 8:58 AM
|
|
The reason the semifinals are on/around Jan. 1 is to allow the bowls to be part of the process. Two quarterfinal games in mid-December would deny two of the best teams
and their fans the bowl week experience. Also, most colleges have exam week the first half of December.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 11
| visibility 3,017
|
|
|
50
