BCS playoff

[Westtncat]

On another note, as I predicted in the OP, Notre Dame is now ranked #4 in the AP. JMO they aren't any better than most of the top 15, too much human influence and why I say let them settle it on the field.

[RV]

Not sure everyone knows the polls are just polls and don't amount to or mean much of anything in the grand scheme. It's nice to be ranked high and be validated to the degree it does. The real numbers come out the end of this month from the Selection Committee and that's where the rubber meets the road. If we win the next two, look for the Cats to be top 10 when the first ranking is released.

[KevinHall]

Just a note that these playoff aren't called the BCS any longer. After the NCAA took over complete control of post season college football the BCS went away. By the NCAA record books the official NCAA championships for FBS college football are only four years old.

[Dwight Schrute]

The regular season is the playoffs in CFB. The more you put that in the post season the more you take that away from the regular season.

Bunk.

[Dwight Schrute]

This is actually not true most years. Last year UCF went 13-0 including a bowl game victory over Auburn and had absolutely no shot at a title. You think thats good or even fair for college football? No way.

Agreed. Auburn was penalized for losing in the SEC title game last year while the team they'd beaten the week before waltzed to the CFB Playoffs. Ohio State won the B10 and got left out. This system is better but 8 teams are needed, IMO.

[Dwight Schrute]

I agree with expanding to eight teams. Just like in bb though, no matter how many teams are in it there'll always be someone complaining that they should have been in.

I agree but the difference is that in basketball, the teams that get left out never have a shot at the title.

[Spiritof96]

I could go for that but they could even seed those 6 teams 1 thru 6 and then give 1 and 2 a bye. I would bet even money that even if both SEC teams missed getting the bye and were seeded 3 thru there would be at least 1 SEC team in the championship game.

Quoted from another thread but relevant here. This my prefered playoff expansion but it is still not ideal.

I still think playing a conference championship and then a three-game playoff is too many unless the regular season were to go to back to 11 games. (which isn't happening) What needs to be avoided is someone not playing in their conference championship game and then getting into the playoff ala Ohio State. In my mind that is a tremendous advantage to the non-title game participant.

BTW UCF can go pound sand...

[Dwight Schrute]

Quoted from another thread but relevant here. This my prefered playoff expansion but it is still not ideal.

I still think playing a conference championship and then a three-game playoff is too many unless the regular season were to go to back to 11 games. (which isn't happening) What needs to be avoided is someone not playing in their conference championship game and then getting into the playoff ala Ohio State. In my mind that is a tremendous advantage to the non-title game participant.

BTW UCF can go pound sand...

I dunno, Alabama had this very scenario all last year. I don't think anyone who watched last year would argue that Alabama was the very best team all year long until they lost a rivalry game (against a good team) on the road. Any scenario that kept out Alabama last year would've invalidated the national championship, IMO.

[Spiritof96]

I dunno, Alabama had this very scenario all last year. I don't think anyone who watched last year would argue that Alabama was the very best team all year long until they lost a rivalry game (against a good team) on the road. Any scenario that kept out Alabama last year would've invalidated the national championship, IMO.

I forgot them. Still, in the scenario I favor, Bama shouldn’t get the bye.

[Dwight Schrute]

I forgot them. Still, in the scenario I favor, Bama shouldn’t get the bye.

Probably not. I think a 6 team playoff would be ideal. To be honest by early January I am pretty checked out of football, so I kind of understand the argument that an extra game would make it go on too long.

[catfaninin]

Further proof just how meaningless the polls are. This guy has Bama 3rd.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/bama-hating-soren-petro-is-the-hilarious-ap-pollster-of-the-week/ar-BBOpHrr?li=BBnb7Kz

[Westtncat]

Quoted from another thread but relevant here. This my prefered playoff expansion but it is still not ideal.

I still think playing a conference championship and then a three-game playoff is too many unless the regular season were to go to back to 11 games. (which isn't happening) What needs to be avoided is someone not playing in their conference championship game and then getting into the playoff ala Ohio State. In my mind that is a tremendous advantage to the non-title game participant.

BTW UCF can go pound sand...

I love the thought of skipping a week of dull games and replacing it with a week of playoff games. Most decent teams will play some meaningless bowl somewhere anyway, lets make them count!

[Old School]

This is actually not true most years. Last year UCF went 13-0 including a bowl game victory over Auburn and had absolutely no shot at a title. You think thats good or even fair for college football? No way.

Yes, I think it’s fair. They played a bunch of wimps all year and played well in their one game against a quality opponent. That doesn’t indicate that they’re anywhere near being the best team in college football. And what’s good for college football is giving major bowl bids to major conference teams that earned their way there by playing tough schedules, teams people want to watch, instead of setting aside a quota for some unqualified team to have a place at the table against a schedule that would’ve resulted in an undefeated record for at least a dozen major conference teams.

[Old School]

Also, it seems if you cant play some of the "nothing conferences" then they would never have a shot to prove themselves so that makes me wonder, why should they even be in division 1 football? Tell me you thought UCF would beat Auburn last year? I didnt.

I also wonder why they should even be in division I football (or whatever three letters is used for it now). I don’t think they should be. They could drop to the next level or create a level between the P5 conferences and whatever the next level is currently called, but they don’t belong in the mix with the P5 conferences, IMO, and college football would be a better, more interesting, more balanced product without them, again IMO.

[Old School]

On another note, as I predicted in the OP, Notre Dame is now ranked #4 in the AP. JMO they aren't any better than most of the top 15, too much human influence and why I say let them settle it on the field.

They’re always overrated. You may disagree with this, too, but as far as I’m concerned, the P5 schools should tell Notre Dame, too, to take a hike unless they want to join a conference and play in the same structure as everyone else. If they’re too special to do that, let them drop down a level and play MAC and CUSA teams.