header pic

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.


« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 17   Go Down
Author

Topic: 5+1+2

 (Read 16716 times)

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #154 on: December 05, 2018, 09:54:31 AM »
Quote from: TyphonInc on December 05, 2018, 08:41:54 AM
I'm all for this caveat (ranked in the top 12) if it's what it takes for the playoff to include regional champs. I also through out the idea that if the highest ranked G5 team was ahead the lowest P5 Champion, the G5 team would take the that spot in the playoff. (At least until G5 splits off.)
first, i've not been real clear, i'm not inherently for or against expanding the playoff. i haven't really said that yet and looking back through the thread looks like i'm a big proponent of expanding, which i'm not. not totally against it either, though.
having said that, i'm fine with g5 champs in top 10-12 being in as well. go ahead and throw in nd/independents in top 10 caveat too.  if you're a 0-1 loss conf champ, i don't have issue with your spot being guaranteed. i don't even care to limit g5 to just 1 if there's more than 1 with an argument (like tcu and boise from ~2009-10).
i just don't want to see a totally undeserving teams (from both eye test and results based) get in just because they lucked up and won a fluke game that happened to be a conf title.
Quote
Yes please.
I'd argue as long as NCAA is an "amateur" sport, the kids/schools should be able to select the the dance partner they want. But yes, let's get schedules as symmetrical as possible. (I'd prefer 9 con, and no FCS. But if everyone does 8 con, and FCS so be it.)
And when are collective whimsical minds wonder back to conference expansion, trying to keep things balanced, is one of the reasons I don't want Texas and Oklahoma in the SEC.
i'm with you on that, though i doubt the sec ad's see it that way.
Logged

Entropy

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1432
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #155 on: December 05, 2018, 09:55:09 AM »
After reading the last couple pages.... I still think winning your conference has to matter.   It makes the regular season important.   If an 8-5 Pitt team wins it... so be it.  Make them the 8th seed.   If they upset an undefeated team in the championship game, then most likely they both would be in...   so be it.

I also agree that the NCAA should mandate the format on FCS games and conference games.   Level the field as much as possible.  
Logged

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #156 on: December 05, 2018, 09:59:05 AM »
Quote from: Entropy on December 05, 2018, 09:55:09 AM
After reading the last couple pages.... I still think winning your conference has to matter.   It makes the regular season important.   If an 8-5 Pitt team wins it... so be it.  Make them the 8th seed.   If they upset an undefeated team in the championship game, then most likely they both would be in...   so be it.
should it matter? absolutely. should it matter to the point it totally diminishes the rest of the regular season? absolutely not.
IF you win your conf AND IF you had a great reg season (0-1 loss) then by all means, guarantee a spot (would have to expand to make this feasible). but if either of those are lacking, your spot should NOT be guaranteed.
Logged

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12190
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #157 on: December 05, 2018, 02:19:50 PM »
Quote from: MrNubbz on December 05, 2018, 08:58:02 AM
I get what you're saying but in the lust to have to have an undisputed champion this is what the proletariat is getting.Remember when the 9-7 Giants but beat the Patriots to win the SB 21-17?It's gonna happen
The Giants were not the best team that year. You know what we call them, to this day?
"Super Bowl Champions"
Was it such a travesty?
Logged

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37537
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #158 on: December 05, 2018, 02:25:49 PM »
yes, but since it was the NFL no one cared enough

this is college football - it's important!!!
Logged
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12190
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #159 on: December 05, 2018, 02:28:17 PM »
Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on December 05, 2018, 08:59:16 AM
The larger the number of teams allowed in the playoff, the less important regular season games become.  It is a direct correlation.  Some of these ideas are akin to making the college football regular season about as important as the college basketball regular season.


NO THANK YOU
If you make it conference champions, then winning your conference championship is the number one goal you have. A lot of us have lamented the fact that conference championships are devalued in the CFP world, as we've now seen 11-1 non-CCG participants chosen for the playoff OVER 12-1 conference champions. 
I'll admit it makes OOC games less important. But it makes what you do in conference much more important. 
Right now if you're the SEC, you get a mulligan. You don't even need to go to your CCG to get into a 4-team playoff, despite only playing 8 conference games and scheduling FCS. If you follow what the committee said they value [SOS] and play 9 conference games and no FCS, you don't get a mulligan. 
In my mind, 5+1+2 makes the regular season better. You have more incentive to schedule tough OOC, even if it means you might lose a game. You have more incentive to play nine conference games, as it helps ensure that the conference champion will be a better team with larger sample size than 8 conference games. You don't schedule FCS just because you want an easy win, because the easy OOC win doesn't make as big of a difference.
Logged

rolltidefan

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #160 on: December 05, 2018, 02:38:35 PM »
Quote from: bwarbiany on December 05, 2018, 02:28:17 PM
If you make it conference champions, then winning your conference championship is the number one goal you have. A lot of us have lamented the fact that conference championships are devalued in the CFP world, as we've now seen 11-1 non-CCG participants chosen for the playoff OVER 12-1 conference champions.
I'll admit it makes OOC games less important. But it makes what you do in conference much more important.
Right now if you're the SEC, you get a mulligan. You don't even need to go to your CCG to get into a 4-team playoff, despite only playing 8 conference games and scheduling FCS. If you follow what the committee said they value [SOS] and play 9 conference games and no FCS, you don't get a mulligan.
In my mind, 5+1+2 makes the regular season better. You have more incentive to schedule tough OOC, even if it means you might lose a game. You have more incentive to play nine conference games, as it helps ensure that the conference champion will be a better team with larger sample size than 8 conference games. You don't schedule FCS just because you want an easy win, because the easy OOC win doesn't make as big of a difference.

this is not true. 2016 psu had 2 losses (when osu got in over them) and in 2017 osu had 2 losses (when bama got in over them).
an 11-1 non-champ has only gotten in over 2 loss champs. and both of those had losses to bad teams and a 30+ point loss.
unless you're counting nd, but they're 12-0 not 11-1.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71555
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #161 on: December 05, 2018, 02:49:40 PM »
Consider the "ultimate playoff", one involving 130 teams, single elimination and seeded (magically).  Everyone has a shot.  Of course, nearly always 1 will beat 130 and 2 beats 129 and so forth until you reach around 30 where you get "upsets"  And then a second round and a third etc.

There are extremely low odds that 130 wins the whole thing, but decent odds that a team ranked (magically) 10-30 wins the whole thing, and the odds are decidedly against #1 (who we omnisciently KNOW if the best team).  

That would be entertaining, which is what I like to see, but not really very useful in determining a "true" national champion.

Logged

NorthernOhioBuckeye

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1101
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #162 on: December 05, 2018, 02:51:17 PM »
Quote from: rolltidefan on December 05, 2018, 09:44:24 AM
who had the better regular season, 11-2 non-champ uga, or (hypothetical) 8-5 acc champ pitt? or 12-1 non-champ clemson and pitt?
Hard to say because they played a different set of teams. Without playing similar schedules, it's still subjective to who you think had the hardest road. From what I've read, nobody thinks that UCF is better than Florida because Florida was only 9-3 where UCF was 12-0.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71555
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #163 on: December 05, 2018, 02:53:16 PM »
UCF is ranked higher than Florida, so I surmise folks think they are better.  I think they would likely beat Florida with their usual QB.
Logged

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37537
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #164 on: December 05, 2018, 02:54:18 PM »
good question for Afro

he doesn't seem to think highly of either team
Logged
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71555
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #165 on: December 05, 2018, 02:59:35 PM »
I watched UCF play a couple of times.  They are deadly on offense, very uptempo, hard to organize your defense against that and you can't leverage depth on D.
Logged

Kris60

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2514
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #166 on: December 05, 2018, 03:00:06 PM »
I could live with expanding the playoffs to 8. Nothing beyond that.  And the auto bids for champions wouid have to come with rankings parameter.  No 8-5 Pitt teams allowed.  If you aren’t in the top 12 you don’t get an auto bid.

We might not be able to guarantee we are getting the best teams in there but we can at least guarantee we put in teams who were consistent winners.  I don’t want the playoffs to be too inclusive.  I am much more intrigued by great team may get left out than what pretty good team might get in.
Logged

Anonymous Coward

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 3187
  • Liked:
Re: 5+1+2
« Reply #167 on: December 05, 2018, 03:05:21 PM »
Quote from: rolltidefan on December 05, 2018, 09:44:24 AM
who had the better regular season, 11-2 non-champ uga, or (hypothetical) 8-5 acc champ pitt? or 12-1 non-champ clemson and pitt?
But if non-champ Georgia gets in, then simultaneously both the SEC and ACC regular seasons are tainted. The pressure of winning every game in the SEC is diminished and so is the value of playing in and winning the ACC. Neither of those are complete degradations, but they both steal something important. 
Meanwhile: Georgia had its chance. When it mattered most (twice), Georgia lost. If you want to exclude Pitt, I am all for a solid, predetermined structure to do that**, but I absolutely oppose subbing a non-champ in for the excluded champ.
**("no 3+ or 4+ loss teams" or "no teams ranked lower than 12th" -- though I do prefer exclusionary terms that are not dependent on something as subjective as polls or committees)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 17   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
Custom Mahogany Shadow Box

Smokey Record TShirt