Bcs system vs the Playoffs
- Thread starter Cam82huskers
- Start date
Neither, it was fine the way it was before all this playoff and BCS crap. Give whiny teams a cry room and aroma therapy.
You really think it’s better for the top teams to potentially never play one another or is this just a pining for the good old days when life was simpler?
I don’t see how a situation where Michigan truly feels they were the best team after playing Washington State and Nebraska played Tennessee is superior to either of these.
Ideally playoffs expand to 8 and stop there.
UCF says hello. They're a top team and have no chance to play the top teams for the national championship.
No better today than prior to the BCS. Teams that can't even win their conference are regularly making it into the narrowest playoff field in any major sport. Most likely due to politics.
There are no criteria -- zero -- for making the top 4.
None.
We used to have a system that had no real rhyme or reason for determining the national champion.
It was traded for a BCS system that was all about rhyme and reason, with ratings and rankings considered and weighted.
Which was trashed for a playoff system that once again has no rhyme or reason. The participants are awarded by a committee behind closed doors, and criteria shifts around yearly. Most likely in order to achieve the best TV ratings.
My opinion is that the BCS was close but too narrow. Using that BCS formula to seed the top 8 teams for a 3 week tournament would be sweet, but I don't know that it'll ever happen in college football.
Last edited:
So sort of like what we've had pretty much every other year since that title game but with more drama, meaningless bowl games, and boredom than we had then? Like I said, stop whining. Cry rooms and aroma therapy.
They're a top team, just not a top 4 team. You don't get to make the 4-team playoff when your toughest opponent was #19 Memphis and when you're a Group-5 school & you only play one Power-5 school.
Memphis will most likely finish around #22-#24. South Florida might sneak into the top 25, but their schedule was one of the worst in college football.
Thank you for posting that. That's their own publication and includes the following phrases:
"Ranking football teams is an art, not a science"
"The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the
commissioners, Presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country."
"Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected."
"it is understood that committee members will take into consideration all kinds of data including polls"
".....the committee will consider a wide variety of data and information"
"All votes will be by secret ballot."
So the criteria for selecting the 4 teams is not defined and is whatever they want to use each year.
So you're going to use UCF's situation to explain away that nothing is better at all in the playoff system than it was when conferences had bowl alignments. That's interesting. That's kind of like saying if there is one terrorist event on an airplane that all TSA screening and security is no better than letting anyone on with no screening.
Seems I don't understand your point. Or you're angry because we have different opinions. Where did the whining comment come from? I simply stated that the BCS AND playoff structure are superior (in my opinion) to the conference alignment bowl system in the past. You seem to have taken my opinion personally.
Then you agree that if the committee would have selected UCF over Alabama this year then you should still be complaining right? Because "the criteria for selecting the 4 teams is not defined and is whatever they want to use each year."...
Nope. I'm saying that the current college football playoff is an invitational beauty pageant and that UCF's situation is evidence of that. And I don't even like UCF or care if they ever get a shot at a title.
There was a chance at the end of the BCS era to get a better system than the BCS and all we have managed to do is to go back to secret ballot voting.
Last edited:
Plenty of people will be complaining no matter what when you use "art" to select a very narrow playoff field.
Plenty of people complaining, rightly so, when Ohio State made it in last year.
I'm asking about you.
In order to be consistent your answer should probably be yes and still yes even if Nebraska made the playoffs if nothing with the committee changes. Which is completely fine if you answered yes since then you would be consistent.
Sorry @chicolby, the whining comment wasn't directed at you specifically. I'm just saying people were having exactly the same conversations then as they do now.
How many regular season games do those other divisions play?
How many conference title games do they play?
Many Group of 5 and FCS schools keep their football programs only because of the “buy games” they get to play against Power 5 teams.
The extra home game that a P5 team gets keeps many of their other sports from extinction.
There is just more to it than simply adding 4 or12 teams to the CFP.
My thought on the whole BCS/Playoff situation is that back in the good old days, a team like UCF would have been given fair consideration IN THE FINAL POLL. There was the chance at least of a split poll and the *** whipping UCF gave Auburn would have meant something to voters. Non-power 5 voters would have had a say in who got to claim a trophy. Now it's an oligarchy that completely squeezes out an undefeated team that proved itself in their bowl game against a team that beat BOTH teams in the "championship" game.
Merge old way and BCS.
No computer formula.
1v2 and 3v4 must play in bowl games regardless of affiliation. 1v2 matchup rotates bowls.
End up with two champs so be it, but the only reason it happened in 97 is because of affiliations.
The playoff system sucks and 8 will only make CFB worse.
No computer formula.
1v2 and 3v4 must play in bowl games regardless of affiliation. 1v2 matchup rotates bowls.
End up with two champs so be it, but the only reason it happened in 97 is because of affiliations.
The playoff system sucks and 8 will only make CFB worse.
Playoffs are a step in the right direction but this version of a playoff is a cheap joke..
Who would have been the other 2 this year?
Ohio St 11-2
USC 11-2
Wisconsin 12-1
UCF- 12-0
8 looks better no one gets left out that deserves to be in the playoffs.