Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Critique "Caddie's Playoff Rules". If I were king...
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 6
| visibility 726

Critique "Caddie's Playoff Rules". If I were king...


Nov 29, 2018, 10:54 AM

I don't mind the current system, but here's my proposal. 8-team playoff.

1. Eliminate conf championship games, and 1st round played on this week. This means no additional games to be added to the schedule.

2. Keep the playoff committee to rank the teams 1 thru 8. Top 4 seeds will host the 1st round playoff game.

3. Automatic Qualifiers: 5 Conference Champions receive automatic bid with a 10 win minimum. Conference Champions with less than 10 wins may still receive an "at large bid", but just not an automatic bid. If tie-breaker cannot be broken to determine the conference champion, the playoff committee will determine the representative.

**The reason I think there should be a 10 win minimum for the "Automatic Qualifier" is that some years, a conference may not legitimately have a Top 8 team (Pac 12 this year). I think most years, all conferences will be represented, but I don't think it should be a foregone conclusion that we MUST include every conference. HOWEVER, I also think you need the "10 win conference champion" as an automatic qualifier to prevent bias from the committee just ranking the top 8 teams from one conference. You can't have all top 8 teams being from the SEC or the ACC or whatever.

The committee will release the Top 8 rankings the Sunday following rivalry week.

Automatic qualifiers this year would include:
Bama (SEC Champion) 12 wins
Clemson (ACC Champion) 12 wins
Ohio St (Big 10 Champion) 11 wins
Oklahoma (Big 12 Champion)11 wins

*Washington is the Pac 12 champion, but only has 9 wins. They would be considered as an "at large team" this season along with everyone else.
*ND is not an automatic qualifier until they join a conference.
*Non Power 5 schools are not automatic qualifiers.

So, this year you would have:

Bama vs UCF
Clemson vs Michigan
ND vs OSU
UGA vs Oklahoma

The top 4 teams would host. Then, you continue business as usual. Essentially no changes to anything other than replacing the conf champ games with a 1st round playoff game on a college campus.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Critique "Caddie's Playoff Rules". If I were king...


Nov 29, 2018, 11:08 AM

It's hard to name a conference champion with no CCG unless all teams play each other. Who would get the nod last year between 11-1 Clemson and 11-1 Miami? What if two teams finish undefeated in conference and didn't play each other?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Last year Miami would have won the ACC's regular season


Nov 29, 2018, 11:16 AM

title and auto-berth as a common tie-breaker, after lack of head-to-head, would be record among common opponents - and Miami beat Syracuse while we lost that game. We would have been an obvious at-large likely at our #1 spot still that we had before the ACCCG and after.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Critique "Caddie's Playoff Rules". If I were king...


Nov 29, 2018, 11:12 AM

Pretty much an advocate for this primarily to improve regular season schedules with greater variety and travel ops by getting rid of divisions. Plus the CCG's are haphazard and poorly structured and balanced. AND, college football season is too short and precious for re-matches until Natty time.

Two alterations:

1. With home hosts not known until Sunday after Rivalry Week and the difficulty in not only game planning a brand new team on the schedule but in organizing the staff and structure needed to operate 80k+ seat stadiums and crowds, first round should be next weekend / 2nd Saturday in December (essentially 2 week prep). Losers of this round fill the remaining four spots in NY6 games 2.5 - 3 weeks later.

2. All Power 5 regular season champs should receive auto bids without game loss #'s being a factor. If that were to become a factor then you can kiss goodbye many quality Power 5 OOC regular season games as there would be absolutely zero to gain from playing these, win or lose. For instance, regular season Pac-12 Washington would be in at 10-2, but they scheduled Auburn, lost, and have that as a 3rd loss.

Go Football!

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


The current playoff system already has


Nov 29, 2018, 11:13 AM

three losers.
Why add four more?

College football recruiting where the players choose the school where they want to play doesn't allow parity compared to the NFL draft.

College Basketball has much smaller rosters and budgets making more teams even
resulting in bigger tournaments.

Big football schools will always have the better players, barring injury as an equalizer it will always be the top four and then everybody else.

Cinderella football teams don't happen.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I like it, but conference tiebreakers may be difficult


Nov 29, 2018, 11:14 AM

As someone said, case in point, ACC last year. Would Miami have won due to the common opponent, Syracuse?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Yes. Clemson would've still been #1 seed, but


Nov 29, 2018, 1:48 PM

Miami would've gotten the Automatic Qualifier Bid.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 6
| visibility 726
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic