Author
Topic: 5+1+2
(Read 16687 times)

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #28 on:** December 02, 2018, 09:53:30 PM »

Also now, at 4 teams, we already have both as double-digit favorites. Imagine what the 1 vs 8 line would be. It'd be a joke.

Anonymous Coward · « **Reply #29 on:** December 03, 2018, 12:52:38 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on December 02, 2018, 09:53:30 PM

Also now, at 4 teams, we already have both as double-digit favorites. Imagine what the 1 vs 8 line would be. It'd be a joke.

Because #1 and #2 get Byes, a 6-team Playoff doesn't exacerbate those spreads. This year Alabama and Clemson would be favored (~)equally in their semifinals whether the playoff had 4 or 6.

TyphonInc · « **Reply #30 on:** December 03, 2018, 02:38:05 AM »

With the Big Ten Champion getting left out of the playoffs 3 years running now, I think I would prefer to have a 5+1 model, with the caveat along the lines of, if the lowest ranked conference champion is ranked lower than the highest ranked non-P5 team they get replaced by them.

At least until P5 and G5 are completely separate, then having an some arbitrary cut off line, maybe like "if the lowest ranked champion is ranked lower than 12th" they get replaced by an "At Large"

Oh and Notre Dame join a conference or GTFO. With ND and the ACC flirting with membership add a caveat of Who ever is ranked the highest the ACC Champ or Notre Dame gets the auto bid.

I want Conference Championships to matter for something, but also understand that not all champions are created equal, I noticed in the last rankings that UCF was one spot ahead of Washington, I'm curious if under my model they would have remained there?

My playoff Bracket this year would have been:
1) Alabama
2) Clemson
3v6) ND (At Large) vs. UCF (replacing Washington)
4v5) OU vs. OSU

Just my two cents.

TyphonInc · « **Reply #31 on:** December 03, 2018, 02:54:30 AM »

Quote from: ELA on December 02, 2018, 07:44:59 PM

They pointed out during the MAC Championship game that NIU scheduled like a team that wanted to go to the playoff. I think it was Iowa, BYU, Florida State and Boston College. That's what UCF has to do. Four P5 teams.

I'm in the camp of separating the two groupings. And I agree that if a G5 wants to play schedule four P5 teams. A counter point though is schedules are done so far in advance, would UCF at the end of last year (getting left out of playoff) have a realistic shot of saying "we think we have a championship caliber team, let's redo our OCC schedule to make it consideration worthy."?

TyphonInc · « **Reply #32 on:** December 03, 2018, 03:12:48 AM »

Quote from: Anonymous Coward on December 03, 2018, 12:52:38 AM

Because #1 and #2 get Byes, a 6-team Playoff doesn't exacerbate those spreads. This year Alabama and Clemson would be favored (~)equally in their semifinals whether the playoff had 4 or 6.

Just make sure you and OFM are talking about the same thing.
He said 1v8 (Alabama vs. UCF) which would have a huge spread.
Compared to 1v4/5 (Alabama vs. OU/Georgia or OSU depending how the pie gets made.) all would have a closer spread; Georgia ~9, OU ~11.5, and OSU ~13.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #33 on:** December 03, 2018, 07:26:14 AM »

I don't think we're anywhere near having an expanded playoff, so I'm not going to spend much thought about what it might be.

A lot of things might seem to be better until put into action, of course. I think we're a decade away from anything different, at least.

Had UGA held on with Bama, I think both get in the four team system, and THAT would have caused consternation obviously with Bama at #4 again, and very possibly winning it again.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #34 on:** December 03, 2018, 07:43:43 AM »

All of this 'conference champs only' business is just too late to the party. Back when everyone had 10 schools and played everyone else, it makes sense. But you can have a big-boy team go 11-1 and not make their CCG. You're tossing them out, on the assumption 2 of the top 4 or 6 teams in the country can't come from the same conference. That's bogus. Nowadays, when nobody plays everyone else, when it's luck of the draw of who you play across divisions, a non-conference champ has a legitimate gripe.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #35 on:** December 03, 2018, 07:48:25 AM »

The conference champs thing only pertains if the teams are otherwise "close". If they aren't, it doesn't matter.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #36 on:** December 03, 2018, 07:55:54 AM »

Quote from: LittlePig on December 02, 2018, 03:01:38 PM

I have to admit, this seems better than what we got.
There would probably need to be a rule that 2 teams from the same conference need to be in opposite brackets. So in Georgia's case, they would drop to #6 seed even though they were ranked #5 in the rankings.

When they expand (and they will), I think this should be strongly considered. Brackets would be:

1, 4, 5, 8
2, 3, 6, 7

Thus you would only have to move a team one line. The big problem would be if both at-large teams were from the same conference because then you would have three teams from one conference.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #37 on:** December 03, 2018, 07:59:08 AM »

Quote from: FearlessF on December 02, 2018, 03:12:31 PM

UCF can schedule better competition like Notre Dame

UCF's non-con schedule this season?
South Carolina St.
@ North Carolina (nice try, game was cancelled)
FAU
Pitt (Pitt in Orlando, 45-14, good win) need 4 of these, not one or two.

This has been my answer to those advocating for UCF for a while. It is ridiculous that they scheduled an FCS team. They played a rinky-dink conference schedule AND an FCS team? You have no right to complain when you make that schedule. They have ZERO wins over ranked teams and their best win was over a Cincinnati team that is near the bottom of "Others receiving votes" in the AP Poll. Sorry, but if you want to be seriously considered for a CFP spot you are going to have to have some decent wins.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #38 on:** December 03, 2018, 08:02:16 AM »

Quote from: bwarbiany on December 02, 2018, 03:35:36 PM

But so what? We allow one-bid leagues into the NCAAT.

The difference, IMHO, is who we are excluding to let them in.
It is pretty obvious that the last few auto-bids in the NCAAT are taking places that would otherwise go to vastly superior teams from leagues like ours. However, the excluded teams are ~.500 teams. Excluding them isn't THAT big of a deal to me.
In football we have a MUCH smaller pool so the excluded teams from leagues like ours would be 12-1, 11-1, and 10-2 type teams.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #39 on:** December 03, 2018, 08:04:42 AM »

Quote from: MichiFan87 on December 02, 2018, 06:22:15 PM

I've said this before, but I could care less about having an undisputed national champion, but if it has to happen, I'd rather go just have the traditional bowl match-ups and then have the top 2 ranked teams play each other after that. For instance, this year the 6 top bowls would look more like this:

Rose - Ohio State v Washington
Sugar - Alabama v Oklahoma
Orange - Clemson v Georgia
Fiesta - LSU v UCF
Cotton - Notre Dame v Texas
Peach - Michigan v Florida

I assuming the favorites (listed first in each match-up), then Alabama still plays Clemson in the national championship game, though I suspect at least one would lose their bowl game, in which case Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Ohio State would all potentially have a shot if they won their bowl game.

FWIW: I think that Ohio State's chances in this scenario would be nill. The Buckeyes would obviously need one of the top-2 to lose but the problem is that if Oklahoma beat Alabama the Sooners would obviously get in over the Buckeyes and if Clemson lost to Georgia the Dawgs would probably get in ahead of the Buckeyes. Even if the Buckeyes managed to stay ahead of the Dawgs, undefeated Notre Dame would only have to beat Texas to be the obvious #2 anyway.

MrNubbz · « **Reply #40 on:** December 03, 2018, 08:15:03 AM »

Quote from: bwarbiany on December 02, 2018, 01:39:14 PM

I'm ok with the idea of 5+1,

Before they started this play off format that's what many including myself were hoping for.And once in place tough no more expansion or it would be "Participation Trophy" Territory

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #41 on:** December 03, 2018, 08:16:37 AM »

I think that 5+1+2 will be the next playoff. I'm also a fan of a team that would have gotten in every year if this had been established starting in 2014 instead of the current 4-team CFP:

2014: tOSU got in but in a 5+1+2 it wouldn't have even been a question.
2015: tOSU was #7 but they were the second highest ranked non-Champion (behind #5 Iowa) so they would have been in.
2016: tOSU got in but in a 5+1+2 it wouldn't have even been a question, they'd have been the highest ranked non-Champion.
2017: tOSU was #5 but they were B1G Champs so they would have been an auto-bid in a 5+1+2.
2018: tOSU was #6 but they were B1G Champs so they would have been an auto-bid in a 5+1+2.

That said, I still prefer the current system. In a 5+1+2 the OOC games and at least one non-divisional game each year would effectively be mulligans. They would matter, but only for seeding and for the possibility of one of the at-large spots.

Ohio State missed this year because they had one bad Saturday. It isn't even that. Ohio State missed because they had one bad Saturday at the wrong time. If Ohio State had had their "bad day" against Rutgers the Buckeyes would have beaten the Scarlet Knights anyway and they would be EASILY in at 13-0. Instead, the Buckeyes had their bad day against a decent team that happened to have a good day at the same time and that is that. As a Buckeye fan, it sucks. OTOH, if one game wasn't enough to knock the Buckeyes out of the CFP then the games wouldn't matter as much.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: 5+1+2

OrangeAfroMan

Re: 5+1+2

Anonymous Coward

Re: 5+1+2

TyphonInc

Re: 5+1+2

TyphonInc

Re: 5+1+2

TyphonInc

Re: 5+1+2

Cincydawg

Re: 5+1+2

OrangeAfroMan

Re: 5+1+2

Cincydawg

Re: 5+1+2

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2

MrNubbz

Re: 5+1+2

medinabuckeye1

Re: 5+1+2