Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

BCS Committee Approves Playoff System

Yay. Great. Getting ready for the bias to begin where we have two SEC teams, Texass and a 6-6 Notre Dame team in the "Top 4" seeds every year.
 
In my opinion, this is a big loss for the Larry Scott and the Pac12.

1. No auto tie-ins for the Pac12/Big10. Equal access might stop re-alignment dead in its tracks, allowing a diluted college football marketplace to persist. Similar to the situation that led to women's pro tennis being undervalued, as Scott saw it.

2. No guarantee that strength of schedule will be a strong selection criteria. If Larry Scotts goal is consolidation and a Pac/BIG/SEC/Big12 monopoly, then allowing the SEC and Big12 to continue to place 'value' in smaller schools by scheduling to blow them out to pad their MNC resume is destructive to the end goal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dio
rosstr said:
In my opinion, this is a big loss for the Larry Scott and the Pac12.

1. No auto tie-ins for the Pac12/Big10. Equal access might stop re-alignment dead in its tracks, allowing a diluted college football marketplace to persist. Similar to the situation that led to women's pro tennis being undervalued, as Scott saw it.

2. No guarantee that strength of schedule will be a strong selection criteria. If Larry Scotts goal is consolidation and a Pac/BIG/SEC/Big12 monopoly, then allowing the SEC and Big12 to continue to place 'value' in smaller schools by scheduling to blow them out to pad their MNC resume is destructive to the end goal.
Click to expand...

I am 'pro' playoffs - but I think you've hit the nail on the head with this post
 
The SEC needs to schedule 9 games or they need to be penalized for it. If the Pac12 can do it, the SEC should be forced to do it with 14 teams. Unreal. Same goes for the ACC if they aren't already going to do it.
 
Should have had each conference champion be in the playoff and then fill out the rest of the 16 teams with whoever is ranked highest that isn't a conference champion. And a committee of old farts that don't watch all the games is stupid because they are just going to be looking at $$. This is where the old BCS rankings would have been great to decide who gets in.

Great that they are making some sort of progress but committing to this for 12 years is insane!
 
No matter how many times I read this, it still makes me smile ...


The BCS had its heart in the right place, but its brain in the wrong place. (A few painful examples: Nebraska, a 62-36 loser in its final regular-season game, still played in the 2002 BCS Championship Game -- and got crushed by Miami; ...
Click to expand...


:nod:
 
So my biggest concern with a selection committee is that CU and the rest of the PAC12 often kickoff at 10 pm eastern. Since likely a good majority of the committee members will be from the east coast are they going to see any PAC12 teams play regularly? I could definitely see the day when it comes down to taking a pac12 school or a big12/sec school for the 4 seed and the pac 12 gets surpassed ONLY because selection people are more in tune with stuff on the east coast. Maybe I am wrong but just my concern
 
Ralphandler1 said:
So my biggest concern with a selection committee is that CU and the rest of the PAC12 often kickoff at 10 pm eastern. Since likely a good majority of the committee members will be from the east coast are they going to see any PAC12 teams play regularly? I could definitely see the day when it comes down to taking a pac12 school or a big12/sec school for the 4 seed and the pac 12 gets surpassed ONLY because selection people are more in tune with stuff on the east coast. Maybe I am wrong but just my concern
Click to expand...

As long as USC and Oregon continue to be strong programs (when they're not on probation anyway :rolling_eyes:) it will be difficult for the committee to ignore the Pac 12 IMO.
 
The 4-team playoff is fine if they pick the teams based on the winners of the four major bowl games. That, in effect, turns it into an 8-team playoff where every school has a shot at getting in while retaining the integrity of the regular season.
 
sackman said:
The 4-team playoff is fine if they pick the teams based on the winners of the four major bowl games. That, in effect, turns it into an 8-team playoff where every school has a shot at getting in while retaining the integrity of the regular season.
Click to expand...

Really wish they had done that instead of the round of 4 in the bowls. Oh well, maybe in (wait for it) 2027??
 
sackman said:
The 4-team playoff is fine if they pick the teams based on the winners of the four major bowl games. That, in effect, turns it into an 8-team playoff where every school has a shot at getting in while retaining the integrity of the regular season.
Click to expand...

I don't think they do that. I believe that they have teams 1-4 seeded and matched up in the bowls already, and the 1-4, and 2-3 bowl winners player in the NC. They don't wait for the bowls to be played to pick the 1-4 seeds. However, 4 of the 5 major conferences have conference championships which act as basically an 8 team playoff.
 
This seems like the first step and we'll have an 8 team playoff soon enough. I think 8 is a good number because it's 3 weeks and you'll have all major conferences and maybe a MWC undefeated team.

By the time we all hope CU is back at the national power level in 2016, they'll have the kinks worked out.

Anything is better than the BCS!!
 
Jaximus said:
This seems like the first step and we'll have an 8 team playoff soon enough. I think 8 is a good number because it's 3 weeks and you'll have all major conferences and maybe a MWC undefeated team.

By the time we all hope CU is back at the national power level in 2016, they'll have the kinks worked out.

Anything is better than the BCS!!
Click to expand...

Disagree. I think 8 starts the regular season dilution process. There aren't going to be 8 teams year in and year out that are truly NC caliber. 4 is enough.
 
"Gone are the ridiculous polls, the computer standings and the automatic qualifier status extended to favored conferences."
And we keep the bowl system...very nice!
 
buffedup said:
Disagree. I think 8 starts the regular season dilution process. There aren't going to be 8 teams year in and year out that are truly NC caliber. 4 is enough.
Click to expand...

Disagree. With only 4 teams, good teams will be left out with a lot to gripe about. Much harder to gripe if you're not in the top 8. And it doesn't dilute the regular season in any way. It will take a long time to get to 8, though, because they signed an agreement through 2025.
 
zbuff said:
Disagree. With only 4 teams, good teams will be left out with a lot to gripe about. Much harder to gripe if you're not in the top 8. And it doesn't dilute the regular season in any way. It will take a long time to get to 8, though, because they signed an agreement through 2025.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Except I'm right and you are wrong.:smile2:
 
Like I said, this new CFB playoff system isn't perfect, but what is? At least it's a start and they can tweek it for the better every year.
 
Ralphandler1 said:
So my biggest concern with a selection committee is that CU and the rest of the PAC12 often kickoff at 10 pm eastern. Since likely a good majority of the committee members will be from the east coast are they going to see any PAC12 teams play regularly? I could definitely see the day when it comes down to taking a pac12 school or a big12/sec school for the 4 seed and the pac 12 gets surpassed ONLY because selection people are more in tune with stuff on the east coast. Maybe I am wrong but just my concern
Click to expand...

I think that's a valid concern in certain situations, but the solution is about as simple as you can get: Don't play these games so ****ing late.

buffedup said:
Disagree. I think 8 starts the regular season dilution process. There aren't going to be 8 teams year in and year out that are truly NC caliber. 4 is enough.
Click to expand...

Exactly, 4 is the perfect number. If you let 8 teams in then a top 4 team could potentially lose a late-season game to another highly-ranked team and still get in, but with only 4 teams you couldn't afford a slip-up late in the season especially if you're the 3rd or 4th team expected to get in. So the regular season is virtually entirely preserved with a 4-team playoff, whereas with an 8-team playoff the regular season starts losing its value.
 
Exactly, 4 is the perfect number. If you let 8 teams in then a top 4 team could potentially lose a late-season game to another highly-ranked team and still get in, but with only 4 teams you couldn't afford a slip-up late in the season especially if you're the 3rd or 4th team expected to get in. So the regular season is virtually entirely preserved with a 4-team playoff, whereas with an 8-team playoff the regular season starts losing its value.[/QUOTE]

What!!!??? I thought everyone loves "March Madness" for the very fact that a powerhouse, Indiana, North Carolina, can possibly be defeated in the tournament; maybe even early as CU did to Indiana several years ago. Your observation and so many commentators on sports and college football specifically seem to build up information about a dominant team to the effect that the next victory is immutable. Sports really doesn't work that way, at least not all the time.

My perception is that most knowledgeable observers wanted at least an eight team playoff.
 
kalbuff said:
What!!!??? I thought everyone loves "March Madness" for the very fact that a powerhouse, Indiana, North Carolina, can possibly be defeated in the tournament; maybe even early as CU did to Indiana several years ago. Your observation and so many commentators on sports and college football specifically seem to build up information about a dominant team to the effect that the next victory is immutable. Sports really doesn't work that way, at least not all the time.

My perception is that most knowledgeable observers wanted at least an eight team playoff.
Click to expand...

Most of us don't watch a lot of basketball on tv until March. I'd hate to lose something that's special and unique to college football. Week 1 matters.
 
CarolinaBuff said:
Exactly, 4 is the perfect number. If you let 8 teams in then a top 4 team could potentially lose a late-season game to another highly-ranked team and still get in.
Click to expand...

Top 4 teams would sit their starters, conceding a late season loss knowing that they would still get into the Final 8. An 8 team playoff would ruin the regular season.
 
This could be a good thing if they have football minds making the selections... This committee would be hard pressed not to pick the conference champs of the PAC12/BIG10/BIG12/SEC. The only exceptions would come in years where say Boise State was undefeated and kind of like last season if a 6-6 UCLA team found a way to beat Oregon. Otherwise, I can't see a scenario where a 10-2 Notre Dame team should get in over a 12-1 Colorado team who just won the PAC 12 championship game. If they were to allow that sort of thing to happen, then there will be outrage for a better (more expanded) system and I think that is what they are trying to avoid for some reason.
 
rosstr said:
Top 4 teams would sit their starters, conceding a late season loss knowing that they would still get into the Final 8. An 8 team playoff would ruin the regular season.
Click to expand...

No way this would happen. Besides, if you go beyond 4 teams you have to incorporate games at home to the top seeds and you wouldnt want to have to go on the road. Also, unless you are #1 or #2, if you lose a game, you are probably going to slip down and out of the top 10 which would then have you in a toilet bowl instead hosting a playoff game.

No way any coach mails it in under this format! If anything, it makes every game that much more important because now, if you lose a game or two you are out of the championship running. If there were 8 or 16 teams in they playoffs you would have many many more teams alive playing much more interesting games throughout the whole season.
 
I think they're really close to getting this figured out. If they can tweak this to have the four winners of the four major bowl games as the participants in the playoff, it would be hard to argue against.
 
I'm not looking forward to the controvestry from this which will be like this until 2025 when the contract ends.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top