It's why the four super conferences with championship games makes so much sense. Therefore it won't happen.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Are You Happy With A Four Team Playoff ?
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
The other option would be to hold the round of 8 in one stadium over 2-3 days, and then the round of 4 in one stadium as well - sort of like how they do the basketball tourney. You are buying a pass for the weekend and the fan experience, not for a game or a team.
There are currently THREE teams with one loss in the top four. How in the holy Fvck can you suggest they haven't already destroyed the importance of the regular season!?!?!?!?!?
Wouldn't someone have to play Alabama on New Year's regardless? And we don't even know if Alabama will go undefeated. So what we're seeing is a growth in the importance of winning your conference championship while also playing a tough non-conference schedule to boost your resume over other contenders for the Playoff. I see the regular season more emphasized than ever. The days of a Big 8 team being able to play 7 conference games + 4 cupcakes to get to the Orange Bowl undefeated and get crowned national champion if it won are long over. And this is for the best.
My point is there are now at lesat three teams with a loss that are equally in control of their own destiny as one of the undefeated teams. that wouldn't have happened pre-bcs/playoff days, and to suggest that the importance of the regular season hasn't already been diminished is ludicrous
Agree to disagree
Please explain how 3 teams with one loss being in control of their own destiny diminishes the importance of the regular season when your historical setup would be "3 teams with one loss counting on AP members or computers deciding one team has the most style points -- or -- 3 teams with one loss with possibly none of them in line to play the undefeated team due to the automatic bowl tie-ins of their respective conferences".
Your argument makes no sense. You're just being a traditionalist curmudgeon on this. Regular season is as important as ever and probably more important since scheduling is now more important than ever.
But there will not be after today. Either OSU or MICH will have a 2nd loss and there will be as many as a half dozen of those in a beauty pageant for the CFP.
Youren just being disingenuous. I don't believe you really fail to comprehend how giving those one-loss teams the same shot as Alabama of winning the champ diminishes the importance of their respective losses.
You are correct. The rich and powerful have kept the NCAA from instituting an equitable post season system like March Madness for obvious reasons.
And my point being is that if the regular season was important today as 15 years age, there would only be two teams relevant in the Natty conversation
We always had a team with 1 loss having the same opportunity to win the national championship as an undefeated team in years when we only had 1 undefeated team.
Why is this confusing to you?
Are you suggesting that in a year when there's a single undefeated P5 we shouldn't have a playoff and shouldn't count a bowl loss against them? Just crown their ass?
I'm other followig. the NCAA gives autobids to every conference, not just the P5 or the Big6 or whatever.
It sounds like you want the regular season to be played and whoever is ranked #1 at the end is crowned national champ. In this case, Alabama is so far ahead of everybody else that nobody should be given a shot from another conferences to dethrone them?
You're re-writing history. who was this one loss contender in 1990?
I'm not confused. I'm quite positive the four team playoff has already diminished the importance of the regular season. actually quite a surprised more can't see it.
That's is what I want, bit thats not the point being discussed.
The point being discussed is whether the current playoff format has diminished importance of the regular season. whether that diminishment is an acceptable tradeoff for whatever goodness that comes with the playoffs, is a totally separate point.
Actually, there would have been a lot of politicking for all of the one-loss teams in years previous to the CFP.
That would mean the little guys would get more access to recruits. Unacceptable. Also, that's big boys farm program for coaches. No likey. And lastly, and most detestable to the mighty, an opaque at best selection committee hidden behind closed doors in Indianapolis would do the selection. Probably a lot like they do for the lower division playoffs.
Last edited:
Completely disagree - now strength of record becomes incredibly important rather than being the team that manages to walk the tightrope and go undefeated.
Yes!!!!!!!!!
There would've been, keeping college football a topic of national interest well into February!
1990? Buffs had a loss and a tie. Notre Dame had 2 losses. Georgia Tech got left out with 1 tie and a weaker strength of schedule. What point are you trying to make?
No, only to show Nike that he was mistaken. but I think you already knew that
That's there was no one loss team being given equal shot as an undefeated team
OK. So your argument is that you think it's better if there's no chance to sort that out with a clear winner and we have a mythical national champion instead. That's fine if that's your preference. I disagree, but you're entitled to your opinion. But don't come with some bull**** that the old way somehow made the regular season more important. All it made more important was a program's ability to lobby the most media votes.
Hokie... You're crazy. I like you, but you're crazy.
You're arguing that the regular season has not lost importance, but rather that relative importance of different aspects of the regular season have shifted. i.e. losses are not as important as they used to be, but SoS/SoR is more important.
That position has merit.
No, only to show Nike that he was mistaken. but I think you already knew that
You're being an idot. I was talking about this season and what would have hypothetically happened this year in your system. And you knew that.
Bringing up 1990 is just giving a different scenario where your idea equally sucks.
You are wrong. You might prefer the chaos of the old system, but you are wrong about all of your justifications except for your one honest post when you said you liked programs lobbying until February and then arguing/bitching for decades afterward.
I just don't get the logic that, just because Alabama went undefeated, with a very inequitable schedule relative to other teams in the conversation, they should be crowned champs with no other team being able to challenge them.