forums

Does the voting committee learn a lesson?

Bird4um

Bird4um

Sophomore
Premium
Joined
Jan 15, 2012
Messages
4,464
Penn State looks good... Should not have been *. Need to win your conference?
 
Advertisement
Needing to win your conferences devalues out of conference games. If you lose two games in college football you're done.
 
Advertisement
Best way to do it is all power 5 champions unless you are a three loss team, one 1 wild card team, unless a power five champion has 3 l's then highest ranked teams take their places
 
Advertisement
I thought even if Mich or OSU were beastly u had to give it to Penn state period even if they sucked. The giant were a wildcarn at 9-7 people complained n said one n done and they won the Superbowl. Win ur conference should be automatic bid period even if u lucked into it
 
Conference championship loss should be an automatic out cause thats a aplayoff game to get into the playoffs
 
FlaSportsFan88 said:
Caneadian said:
Cityboy4life82 said:
Bird4um said:
Penn State looks good... Should not have been *. Need to win your conference?
Click to expand...

We just need an 8 team play off
Click to expand...

Then we need 16,.....32.......64.......
Click to expand...

This. adding 4 teams just changes the controversy from the 5th team to the 9th team
Click to expand...

I don't completely agree, but I understand the point. The discussion before the playoff is who deserves to be in the title game, but then when there is a playoff, deserving teams still got left out. I'm sure most would agree Baylor and TCU deserved a spot that first year. Despite the fact that Ohio st actually won it, they never should have jumped both schools to begin with. The discussion never goes out to 7 or 8. There have been discussions going all the way out to 6, even before the playoff started.

I don't doubt, people would raise the questions of why didn't 9 or 10 get in, but the discussion typically doesn't go past 6, so 7 and 8 are afterthoughts as far as I'm concerned. In reality, they should have left the BCS ranking system in place, and just determine the seeds through that. This committee is a little bogus imo. An alternative could have been replace the coaches poll with a committee poll in BCS calculations.

Lastly, a conference champ should not be held out over someone that not only didn't win the conference, but couldn't even beat them.
 
Last edited:
6 team playoff, 5 P5 teams & an at-large bid, 1 & 2 seeds get a bye... Just like the NFL.

8 team playoff would be awful.
 
Advertisement
Get out of here....lost to Pitt and got beat 49-10 by Michigan. Sure they are playing well, but you can't be in the playoffs over 1 loss teams with those two losses on your resume.
 
LOL! Michigan and/or OSU* were LOCKS, as was a Pac10 team, all along.

The powers that be wanted a Stanford, Michigan, OSU* and Bama playoff, with another SEC team or Oklahoma or ND to plug a gap left by the floundering of said 4.

Washington was a pawn, they were 'sposed to be the whipping boy for Stanford. Then they were the only PAC10 team standing. They ruined the agenda, a bit. They still needed a PAC 10 team.
 
Advertisement
poncho0091 said:
FlaSportsFan88 said:
Caneadian said:
Cityboy4life82 said:
Bird4um said:
Penn State looks good... Should not have been *. Need to win your conference?
Click to expand...

We just need an 8 team play off
Click to expand...

Then we need 16,.....32.......64.......
Click to expand...

This. adding 4 teams just changes the controversy from the 5th team to the 9th team
Click to expand...

I don't completely agree, but I understand the point. The discussion before the playoff is who deserves to be in the title game, but then when there is a playoff, deserving teams still got left out. I'm sure most would agree Baylor and TCU deserved a spot that first year. Despite the fact that Ohio st actually won it, they never should have jumped both schools to begin with. The discussion never goes out to 7 or 8. There have been discussions going all the way out to 6, even before the playoff started.

I don't doubt, people would raise the questions of why didn't 9 or 10 get in, but the discussion typically doesn't go past 6, so 7 and 8 are afterthoughts as far as I'm concerned. In reality, they should have left the BCS ranking system in place, and just determine the seeds through that. This committee is a little bogus imo. An alternative could have been replace the coaches poll with a committee poll in BCS calculations.

Lastly, a conference champ should not be held out over someone that not only didn't win the conference, but couldn't even beat them.
Click to expand...

I think the discussion most certainly would go out to n+1, no matter how many teams you have. If PSU were sucking it, people would say at least they didn't get in just because they won the big 10, that would have been a disaster. Any way you pick and no matter how many you pick, somebody who's out will look real good and make you wonder if they should have been in.
 
SoFlaSmitty said:
Best way to do it is all power 5 champions unless you are a three loss team, one 1 wild card team, unless a power five champion has 3 l's then highest ranked teams take their places
Click to expand...

THIS, and ONLY this! 5 P5 champions, no matter their record, and one at large, based on RECORD VS said P5 champs, head to head record vs other contenders, and thats all. (IE Clemson for the ACC, and Pitt has a claim as they beat PSU, and frauds like OSU* and OU, and UL, and Michigan get NADA!)

Conference champions, ith a wild card based on wins against other P5 champs. Encourages OOC games, takes the SEC and Urban Maya bias away.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top