Did the committee get it right?

[aTotal360]

I'll hang up and listen...

 

[fishwater99]

You could argue TCU over FSU now, but hard to jump 12-0 team.

They did the best they could this year with only 4 spots.
I think we will see the expansion to 8 teams soon, and then there would be no questions..

 

[Dawg1976]

Agree. They do need to get to 8 soon because TCU needed to be in playoffs. They could have won it.

 

[aTotal360]

Stay at 4. Don't expand it because TCU was an anomaly. #6, #7, and #8 (us at the time) don't deserve to be in the playoff. IMO, an 8 team playoff will gives a couple teams too many mulligans.

 

[Sutterkane]

nope

 

[00Dawg]

Baylor deserved a shot, and it appears Michigan State did as well. Go to 8.

 

[CookieMonster.sixpack]

Michigan State got a shot

Baylor deserved a shot, and it appears Michigan State did as well. Go to 8.

They played OSU and Oregon. They lost both.

Keep it at 4.

 

[Predestined]

Should NCAA go to 8? At first I thought yes

it would be easy - 5 conference champs and three at large, have the committee seed them and go at it. Would change the argument from the last one out got screwed (who really cares about 9-12?) to "we got screwed in the seedings!". The answer to that complaint is easy - go play it on the field or shut up.



Now, not so sure. Four seemed to work well, especially within the bowl structure. I have no doubt the colleges could work around the extra game with no problem to the student, but I am concerned with over saturation. Four seemed right to me.

I know it works for DII and III, but there is no oversaturation there - hell, very few people care. Not sure if it would be as simple at D1 level.

 

[ronpolk]

Stay at 4. Don't expand it because TCU was an anomaly. #6, #7, and #8 (us at the time) don't deserve to be in the playoff. IMO, an 8 team playoff will gives a couple teams too many mulligans.

It's gotta be expanded. Maybe not to 8 but an expansion is needed. I would be fine with 8 but I think 6 could work. With 6 teams, you let the power 5 conference champions in and 1 at large. Let the committee pick the at large and seed the teams. Give 1 and 2 seed a bye for the 1st round.

 

[Hammer Down]

Absolutely not, in my opinion. Florida State, Alabama and Oregon were unquestioned in everyone's eyes. The only debate was Ohio State, TCU and Baylor. Among those 3, TCU had the best resume but Ohio State had the media. While Ohio State seems to have proven it was the best team, the season/resume has to define the initial 'best' teams, then they play it off. Best or hottest team does not always win.

The playoff should be 8 games, then you are pretty much guaranteed to get the 'best' teams, by any metric (paper, resume, hottest, etc.). But this year, for the 4 teamer, the committee got it wrong. Bad start for this era. I liked the BCS better.

 

[121Josey]

Nope. The ends don't justify the means

The metrics all pointed to TCU.

I don't think that OSU would have won a playoff game with Barrett at qb. Too much tape on him. The change at QB changed OSU's tendencies.

If you don't have a #1 draft pick QB you have to have 2 to keep people off your game.

 

[Sutterkane]

I truly believe if Ohio State and TCU played that the bucks would get smashed.

 

[BulldogBlitz]

no. osu winning the title was one of the worst results for college football. the apologists will be milking this for the next ten years to keep a lesser osu team up in the mix.

 

[LTblows]

Nope. OSU should have been left out. If we're talking "best teams" with taking the whole season into account, then OSU should have been relegated to the Orange Bowl. They lost to Virginia Tech by two touchdowns at home. Virginia Tech ain't great y'all. TCU should feel robbed. Conference championships shouldn't be weighted heavily, because conferences are not created equal, by any stretch.