Author
Topic: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large
(Read 48248 times)

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #406 on:** July 13, 2021, 03:49:15 PM »

I'm trying to come up with a workable compromise between @ELA 's "all league champions get in" concept and @OrangeAfroMan 's "it should be the best _ teams period" concept.

Honestly, I see the arguments for and against both:

I like that ELA's version rewards league champions but I don't like that it rewards too many "tallest midgets" that are demonstrably inferior to a whole bunch of VERY good P5 non-Champions.

Conceptually I agree wholeheartedly with OAM that it should be the best teams but I have two big objections to going to the top-12 teams:

That provides WAY too many mulligans for teams that start out highly ranked, and
In the real world we don't actually *KNOW* the relative strength of the leagues. Back in 2006, for example, most everybody thought that tOSU and Michigan were the best two teams in the country and beyond that, that tOSU got lucky that USC lost late to UCLA so that the Buckeyes would "only" have to play Florida in the BCSNCG instead of the superior Trojans. That was why I objected to the Bama/LSU match-up in 2011. I agreed with the consensus that Bama was *PROBABLY* better than Oklahoma State but I still maintain that we didn't actually *KNOW* that Bama was better than OkSU so I think the BCSNCG should have been LSU vs OkSU.

I wonder what if they changed it to the top-8 league champions and four at-large teams. I'm ignoring 2020 because it was a goofy year so here are the League Champions from 2014-2019:
2019:

#1 LSU 13-0 SEC -
#2 tOSU 13-0 B1G -
#3 Clemson 13-0 ACC -
#4 Oklahoma 12-1 B12 - L 48-41 @ KSU
#6 Oregon 11-2 PAC - L 27-21 to #12 Auburn, L 31-28 @ ASU
#17 Memphis 12-1 AAC - L 30-28 @ Temple
#19 BoiseSt 12-1 MWC - L 28-25 @ BYU
#20 ApSt 12-1 SBT - L 24-21 to GaSO
nr FAU 10-3 CUSA - L 45-21 @ #2 tOSU, L 48-14 to UCF, L 36-31 to Marshall
nr MiamiOH 8-5 MAC - L 38-14 @ #16 Iowa, L 35-13 @ #21 Cincy, L 76-5 @ #2 tOSU, L 38-16 @ WMU, L 41-27 @ BallSt

The top-8 are at least ranked. FAU and MiamiOH both played #2 tOSU and lost badly so that pretty much proves that point. Obviously one game could be an aberration but it doesn't look like it since they also lost multiple other games.

2018:

#1 Bama 13-0 SEC -
#2 Clemson 13-0 ACC -
#4 Oklahoma 12-1 B12 - L 48-45 to Texas subsequently avenged in B12CG 39-27
#6 tOSU 12-1 B1G - L 49-21 to PU
#8 UCF 12-0
#9 Washington 10-3 PAC - L 21-16 to Auburn, L OT @ Oregon, L 12-10 @ Cal
#21 FresnoSt 11-2 MWC - L 21-14 @ Minnesota, L 24-17 @ BoiseSt subsequently avenged in WACCG OT
nr ApSt 10-2 SBT - L @ #12 PSU OT, L 31-14 @ GaSo
nr UAB 10-3 CUSA - L 47-24 @ CCU, L 41-20 @aTm, L 27-3 @ MTSU subsequently avenged in CUSACG 27-25
nr UNI 8-5 MAC - L 33-7 @ Iowa, L 17-6 vs Utah, L 37-19 @ FSU, L 13-7 to MiamiOH, L 28-21 @ WMU

The top-7 were ranked and #8 pushed a pretty good PSU team to OT but the last two are truly tallest midgets.

2017:

#1 Clemson 12-1 ACC - L 27-24 @ Cuse
#2 Oklahoma 12-1 B12 - L 38-31 to ISU
#3 Georgia 12-1 SEC -
#5 tOSU 11-2 B1G - L 31-16 to #2 OU, L 55-24 @ Iowa
#8 USC 11-2 PAC -
#12 UCF 12-0 AAC -
#25 BoiseSt 10-3 MWC - L OT @ #18 WSU, L 42-23 to UVA, L 28-17 @ FresnoSt subsequently avenged in MWCCG 17-14
nr Troy 10-2 SBT - L 24-13 @ BoiseSt, L 19-8 to S Bama
nr Toledo 11-2 MAC - L 52-30 @ MiamiFL, L 38-10 @ OhioU
nr FAU 10-3 CUSA - L 42-19 to Navy, L 31-14 to #6 UW, L 34-31 @ Buffalo

The top-7 were ranked but the bottom three are tallest midgets.

2016:

#1 Bama 13-0 SEC -
#2 Clemson 12-1 ACC - L 43-42 to #23 Pitt
#4 Washington 12-1 PAC - L 26-13 to #9 USC
#5 Penn State 11-2 B1G - L 42-39 @ #23 Pitt, L 49-10 @ #6 Michigan
#7 Oklahoma 10-2 B12 - L 33-23 to Houston, L 45-24 to #3 tOSU
#15 WMU 13-0 MAC -
#24 Temple 10-3 AAC - L 28-13 to Army, L 34-27 @ PSU, L 34-27 @ Memphis
nr WKY 10-3 CUSA - L 38-10 @ #1 Bama, L OT to Vandy, L 55-52 @ LaTech subsequently avenged in CUSACG 58-44
nr SDSU 10-3 MWC - L 42-24 @ S Bama, L 63-31 to CSU, L 34-33 @ Wyoming subsequently avenged in MWCCG 27-24
nr ApST 9-3 SBT - L OT @ #21 Tennessee, L 45-10 to MiamiFl, L 28-24 @ Troy

The top-7 were ranked but the bottom three are tallest midgets.

2015:

#1 Clemson 13-0 ACC -
#2 Bama 12-1 SEC -
#3 MSU 12-1 B1G - L 39-38 @ Nebraska
#4 Oklahoma 11-1 B12 - L 24-17 to Texas
#6 Stanford 11-2 PAC - L 16-6 @ Northwestern, L 38-36 to #15 Oregon
#18 Houston 12-1 AAC - L 20-17 @ UCONN
nr WKY 11-2 CUSA - L 38-35 @ Indiana, L 48-20 @ #20 LSU
nr BGSU 10-3 MAC - L 59-30 to #23 Tennessee, L 44-41 to Memphis, L 44-28 to Toledo
nr SDSU 10-3 MWC - L 35-7 @ Cal, L OT to S Bama, L 37-21 @ PSU
nr ArkSt 9-3 SBT - L 55-6 @ #25 USC, L 27-20 to Mizzou, L 37-7 @ Toledo

Only the top-6 were ranked and the rest are BAD, obviously tallest midgets.

2014:

#1 Bama 12-1 SEC - L 23-17 @ #9 Ole Miss
#2 Oregon 12-1 PAC - L 31-24 to #10 Zona subsequently avenged in PACCG 51-13
#3 FSU 13-0 ACC -
#4 tOSU 12-1 B1G - L 35-21 to VaTech
#5 Baylor 11-1 B12 - L 41-27 @ WVU
#20 BoiseSt 11-2 MWC - L 35-13 to #9 Ole Miss, L 28-14 @ AirForce
nr Marshall 12-1 CUSA - L OT to WKY
nr UNI 11-2 MAC - L 52-14 @ Arkansas, L 34-17 to CMU
nr Memphis 9-3 AAC - L 42-35 @ #14 UCLA, L 24-3 @ #9 Ole Miss, L 28-24 to Houston
nr GaSo 9-3 SBT - L 24-23 @ NCST, L 42-38 @ GaTech, L 52-19 @ Navy

Only the top-6 were ranked. Marshall might have been decent, the rest were BAD, tallest midgets.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #407 on:** July 13, 2021, 03:53:17 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 13, 2021, 03:49:15 PM

I'm trying to come up with a workable compromise between @ELA 's "all league champions get in" concept and @OrangeAfroMan 's "it should be the best _ teams period" concept.

Honestly, I see the arguments for and against both:

I like that ELA's version rewards league champions but I don't like that it rewards too many "tallest midgets" that are demonstrably inferior to a whole bunch of VERY good P5 non-Champions.

Conceptually I agree wholeheartedly with OAM that it should be the best teams but I have two big objections to going to the top-12 teams:

That provides WAY too many mulligans for teams that start out highly ranked, and
In the real world we don't actually *KNOW* the relative strength of the leagues. Back in 2006, for example, most everybody thought that tOSU and Michigan were the best two teams in the country and beyond that, that tOSU got lucky that USC lost late to UCLA so that the Buckeyes would "only" have to play Florida in the BCSNCG instead of the superior Trojans. That was why I objected to the Bama/LSU match-up in 2011. I agreed with the consensus that Bama was *PROBABLY* better than Oklahoma State but I still maintain that we didn't actually *KNOW* that Bama was better than OkSU so I think the BCSNCG should have been LSU vs OkSU.

I wonder what if they changed it to the top-8 league champions and four at-large teams. I'm ignoring 2020 because it was a goofy year so here are the League Champions from 2014-2019:
2019:

#1 LSU 13-0 SEC -
#2 tOSU 13-0 B1G -
#3 Clemson 13-0 ACC -
#4 Oklahoma 12-1 B12 - L 48-41 @ KSU
#6 Oregon 11-2 PAC - L 27-21 to #12 Auburn, L 31-28 @ ASU
#17 Memphis 12-1 AAC - L 30-28 @ Temple
#19 BoiseSt 12-1 MWC - L 28-25 @ BYU
#20 ApSt 12-1 SBT - L 24-21 to GaSO
nr FAU 10-3 CUSA - L 45-21 @ #2 tOSU, L 48-14 to UCF, L 36-31 to Marshall
nr MiamiOH 8-5 MAC - L 38-14 @ #16 Iowa, L 35-13 @ #21 Cincy, L 76-5 @ #2 tOSU, L 38-16 @ WMU, L 41-27 @ BallSt

The top-8 are at least ranked. FAU and MiamiOH both played #2 tOSU and lost badly so that pretty much proves that point. Obviously one game could be an aberration but it doesn't look like it since they also lost multiple other games.

2018:
#1 Bama 13-0 SEC -
#2 Clemson 13-0 ACC -
#4 Oklahoma 12-1 B12 - L 48-45 to Texas subsequently avenged in B12CG 39-27
#6 tOSU 12-1 B1G - L 49-21 to PU
#8 UCF 12-0
#9 Washington 10-3 PAC - L 21-16 to Auburn, L OT @ Oregon, L 12-10 @ Cal
#21 FresnoSt 11-2 MWC - L 21-14 @ Minnesota, L 24-17 @ BoiseSt subsequently avenged in WACCG OT
nr ApSt 10-2 SBT - L @ #12 PSU OT, L 31-14 @ GaSo
nr UAB 10-3 CUSA - L 47-24 @ CCU, L 41-20 @aTm, L 27-3 @ MTSU subsequently avenged in CUSACG 27-25
nr UNI 8-5 MAC - L 33-7 @ Iowa, L 17-6 vs Utah, L 37-19 @ FSU, L 13-7 to MiamiOH, L 28-21 @ WMU

The top-7 were ranked and #8 pushed a pretty good PSU team to OT but the last two are truly tallest midgets.

2017:
#1 Clemson 12-1 ACC - L 27-24 @ Cuse
#2 Oklahoma 12-1 B12 - L 38-31 to ISU
#3 Georgia 12-1 SEC -
#5 tOSU 11-2 B1G - L 31-16 to #2 OU, L 55-24 @ Iowa
#8 USC 11-2 PAC -
#12 UCF 12-0 AAC -
#25 BoiseSt 10-3 MWC - L OT @ #18 WSU, L 42-23 to UVA, L 28-17 @ FresnoSt subsequently avenged in MWCCG 17-14
nr Troy 10-2 SBT - L 24-13 @ BoiseSt, L 19-8 to S Bama
nr Toledo 11-2 MAC - L 52-30 @ MiamiFL, L 38-10 @ OhioU
nr FAU 10-3 CUSA - L 42-19 to Navy, L 31-14 to #6 UW, L 34-31 @ Buffalo

The top-7 were ranked but the bottom three are tallest midgets.

2016:
#1 Bama 13-0 SEC -
#2 Clemson 12-1 ACC - L 43-42 to #23 Pitt
#4 Washington 12-1 PAC - L 26-13 to #9 USC
#5 Penn State 11-2 B1G - L 42-39 @ #23 Pitt, L 49-10 @ #6 Michigan
#7 Oklahoma 10-2 B12 - L 33-23 to Houston, L 45-24 to #3 tOSU
#15 WMU 13-0 MAC -
#24 Temple 10-3 AAC - L 28-13 to Army, L 34-27 @ PSU, L 34-27 @ Memphis
nr WKY 10-3 CUSA - L 38-10 @ #1 Bama, L OT to Vandy, L 55-52 @ LaTech subsequently avenged in CUSACG 58-44
nr SDSU 10-3 MWC - L 42-24 @ S Bama, L 63-31 to CSU, L 34-33 @ Wyoming subsequently avenged in MWCCG 27-24
nr ApST 9-3 SBT - L OT @ #21 Tennessee, L 45-10 to MiamiFl, L 28-24 @ Troy

The top-7 were ranked but the bottom three are tallest midgets.

2015:
#1 Clemson 13-0 ACC -
#2 Bama 12-1 SEC -
#3 MSU 12-1 B1G - L 39-38 @ Nebraska
#4 Oklahoma 11-1 B12 - L 24-17 to Texas
#6 Stanford 11-2 PAC - L 16-6 @ Northwestern, L 38-36 to #15 Oregon
#18 Houston 12-1 AAC - L 20-17 @ UCONN
nr WKY 11-2 CUSA - L 38-35 @ Indiana, L 48-20 @ #20 LSU
nr BGSU 10-3 MAC - L 59-30 to #23 Tennessee, L 44-41 to Memphis, L 44-28 to Toledo
nr SDSU 10-3 MWC - L 35-7 @ Cal, L OT to S Bama, L 37-21 @ PSU
nr ArkSt 9-3 SBT - L 55-6 @ #25 USC, L 27-20 to Mizzou, L 37-7 @ Toledo

Only the top-6 were ranked and the rest are BAD, obviously tallest midgets.

2014:
#1 Bama 12-1 SEC - L 23-17 @ #9 Ole Miss
#2 Oregon 12-1 PAC - L 31-24 to #10 Zona subsequently avenged in PACCG 51-13
#3 FSU 13-0 ACC -
#4 tOSU 12-1 B1G - L 35-21 to VaTech
#5 Baylor 11-1 B12 - L 41-27 @ WVU
#20 BoiseSt 11-2 MWC - L 35-13 to #9 Ole Miss, L 28-14 @ AirForce
nr Marshall 12-1 CUSA - L OT to WKY
nr UNI 11-2 MAC - L 52-14 @ Arkansas, L 34-17 to CMU
nr Memphis 9-3 AAC - L 42-35 @ #14 UCLA, L 24-3 @ #9 Ole Miss, L 28-24 to Houston
nr GaSo 9-3 SBT - L 24-23 @ NCST, L 42-38 @ GaTech, L 52-19 @ Navy

Only the top-6 were ranked. Marshall might have been decent, the rest were BAD, tallest midgets.

Split the difference. Six conference champs. Four at-large.

Two-game play-in, unlikely to get in four teams from one league unless the at-large pool just sucks.

I know some folks don’t like play-ins, but I think it builds some balance.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #408 on:** July 13, 2021, 03:57:21 PM »

I like your version better than the current 12-team format being proposed, @medinabuckeye1

But I still hate the 12-team format.

I still hate the idea of teams 5-8 getting a home game while 1-4 get a bye. That seams like an advantage for the school ($$$) and fans (home game) that teams 1-4 are missing out on.

I still hate the byes at all. Pick 8 or 16, not 12. Same issue when people were talking about expansion to 6. It's just a bad number, if you have byes. This isn't NFL wild-card weekend. This is a tournament. Play the same number of games as everyone else.

8+4 is IMHO better than 6+6 as it relates to limiting the at-large field size such that it means something, but that still allows 2 more tallest midgets that don't have a shot, so you're trading off teams that at the very least might have a good run and win it all for teams that ASSUREDLY will not.

6+2 is the way to go. Top 6 ranked conference champs and 2 at-large. Done.

Brutus Buckeye · « **Reply #409 on:** July 13, 2021, 03:59:59 PM »

Pretty sure the current system already does combine the two schools of thought rather seamlessly.

Literally half the schools will be selected one way, while the other half are selected the other way.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #410 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:00:05 PM »

Quote from: bayareabadger on July 13, 2021, 03:53:17 PM

Split the difference. Six conference champs. Four at-large.

Two-game play-in, unlikely to get in four teams from one league unless the at-large pool just sucks.

I know some folks don’t like play-ins, but I think it builds some balance.

Okay, if you have to have byes, I like 6+4 more than either 6+6 or 8+4. It limits the tallest midgets AND the mulligans.

And there's an oddly more acceptable idea to having 40% of the field playing to become 25% of the field, than there is for the 12-team byes where 66% of the field is playing to become part of 50% of the field... I'm not sure why. But I hate it less.

847badgerfan · « **Reply #411 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:03:35 PM »

How about a criterion that states that even a P5 conference champion, with 3 or more losses, cannot get in?

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #412 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:18:05 PM »

Quote from: 847badgerfan on July 13, 2021, 04:03:35 PM

How about a criterion that states that even a P5 conference champion, with 3 or more losses, cannot get in?

That's kind of the same as being ranked below the top P5 champ, isn't it?

bayareabadger · « **Reply #413 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:20:14 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on July 13, 2021, 04:00:05 PM

Okay, if you have to have byes, I like 6+4 more than either 6+6 or 8+4. It limits the tallest midgets AND the mulligans.

And there's an oddly more acceptable idea to having 40% of the field playing to become 25% of the field, than there is for the 12-team byes where 66% of the field is playing to become part of 50% of the field... I'm not sure why. But I hate it less.

Byes put more of an emphasis being the top, while a play-in puts more emphasis on not being at the bottom. Only a few teams have that possible advantage of not being rusty, and they are the ones facing the longest odds.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #414 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:28:37 PM »

Quote from: 847badgerfan on July 13, 2021, 04:03:35 PM

How about a criterion that states that even a P5 conference champion, with 3 or more losses, cannot get in?

I mean, setting aside the question of encouraging softer schedules, who fills in?

If you outlaw three-loss teams, do you just keep adding G5 teams to fill up? Or are we saying, no 3-loss P5 over a 2-loss P5?

utee94 · « **Reply #415 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:29:19 PM »

Far too few games in a college football season to allow byes of any kind in the playoff. I'll never be on-board with such a plan.

847badgerfan · « **Reply #416 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:32:25 PM »

Quote from: bayareabadger on July 13, 2021, 04:28:37 PM

I mean, setting aside the question of encouraging softer schedules, who fills in?

If you outlaw three-loss teams, do you just keep adding G5 teams to fill up? Or are we saying, no 3-loss P5 over a 2-loss P5?

What I'm saying is that a conference champion with 3 losses is out in favor of a higher ranked P5 team.

So, if USC wins the PAC at 8-4 and PSU is sitting at 10-2, PSU is in if they are ranked higher than USC.

Brutus Buckeye · « **Reply #417 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:35:32 PM »

I don't think that there will be many three loss P5 conference champions getting in over a second G5 Conference champion with a bloated record. Maybe Bama.

Does anyone else find it odd that the quarterfinal round is at neutral sites? I get the final four and the NCG... but the elite eight? Wtf?

bayareabadger · « **Reply #418 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:36:01 PM »

Quote from: utee94 on July 13, 2021, 04:29:19 PM

Far too few games in a college football season to allow byes of any kind in the playoff. I'll never be on-board with such a plan.

So 16 is better than 12 or 10?

bayareabadger · « **Reply #419 on:** July 13, 2021, 04:36:21 PM »

Quote from: Brutus Buckeye on July 13, 2021, 04:35:32 PM

I don't think that there will be many three loss P5 conference champions getting in over a second G5 Conference champion with a bloated record. Maybe Bama.

Does anyone else find it odd that the quarterfinal round is at neutral sites? I get the final four and the NCG... but the elite eight? Wtf?

Bowl handouts

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: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

medinabuckeye1

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

bayareabadger

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

betarhoalphadelta

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

Brutus Buckeye

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

betarhoalphadelta

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

847badgerfan

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

OrangeAfroMan

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

bayareabadger

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

bayareabadger

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

utee94

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

847badgerfan

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

Brutus Buckeye

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

bayareabadger

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large

bayareabadger

Re: SI Says 12 Team Playoff Likely w/ 6 At-Large