UCF May Force The Issue

[hpslugga 4,050]

4 minutes ago, satyanash said:

It's part of devaluing the regular season.

That's in your own head, and it has jack shit to do with reality. 

[Vic Mackey 46,939]

39 minutes ago, satyanash said:

Lol. Have fun when the SEC starts sending four/five teams to the playoff every year. An eight-team playoff completely unbalances the conferences and gives ESPN and the media an inordinate amount of power over the process. 

CFB is not the NFL, so please stop trying to turn it into the NFL.

CFB isn't like the NFL? Ummm are you forgetting every classification under FBS that has an actual playoff? So yes, most of CFB is like the NFL with a real playoff system. Not some arbitrary eye test we get from voters that decide the 4 teams. 2 P5 conferences were not even represented in the playoffs last season. That is fucking ridiculous. You know that pointless month off they have between end of season and the playoffs? Yeah that can be used for playoff games like every other level of college football. You are delusional on this.

[Vic Mackey 46,939]

7 minutes ago, satyanash said:

I hated 2011. My point is that expanding to eight makes it much, much easier for 2011 to happen again. It's part of devaluing the regular season.

You just had 2011 happen again last year under the current shitty system. Lmao. What are you talking about?

College football fans from the FBS level are the only sports fans I have ever seen on earth who say a playoff system devalues the regular season. So you would rather the regular season be judged like a figure skating competition where we get to argue over teams who are all independent of each other? The only sport on earth this happens like this and people actually become brainwashed and think its a good idea. FCS has it correct on their playoff system. Don't see fans of those schools say it's too many games, not feasible, devalues the season or whatever other excuse they bring to the table on why playoffs are bad. And no, what we have now is not a playoff system. It is nothing more than the old BCS system except now they pick 2 more teams.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

Just now, satyanash said:

I hated 2011. My point is that expanding to eight makes it much, much easier for 2011 to happen again. It's part of devaluing the regular season.

Not really.  Just last year you had 2 SEC teams play for the title.  Bama won it after not even making their conference championship game.  Not to mention that every year, there is at least 1 P5 champion who doesn't get the benefit of the doubt when "The (four) teams had never played each other."

And to be clear, Bama has been the eyeball test "best" team every year for nearly the past 10.  They're trotting pro teams out there against amateur squads.  They just fuck up a game every now and then.  And fucking up games is the part of college football you're missing when determining "best."  If your consensus number 1 loses to the 8 seed in the playoffs, guess what?  They aren't the "best" team that year.  Maybe wild cards will win.  One won last year with 4 teams.  2 games went to OT.  You can certainly play those games multiple times and have Georgia or OU come out champion in some of them.  So how is Bama "best?"  Or Georgia even.

What we will know with 8 that we didn't know last year is whether a B1G champ OSU or P12 USC team was better than that wild card.

[JBJ 3,649]

The bigger problem here is in the selection process.  It's hidden in everyone's post even discussing what an 8-team tournament should look like.

Let's just all agree the system is a sham when at-large teams ever make it in at the expense of conference champions.

[Magus Ossis 2,784]

Maybe we should scrap the polls and the playoffs. Sagarin's algorithm will crown the champion by internet press release December 10 of each year. That way we have enough time for the regular season, don't devalue it, and ensure that the objectively "best" team is the champion.

[rickyspub 801]

38 minutes ago, satyanash said:

The issue here is that CFB is traditionally focused on finding the best team in the country each and every year.

 

The 'best team' argument is the shittiest of all the tired excuses trotted out by fans afraid of a playoff. By your argument, we might as well just stop playing the games and just give Bama the title every year until Saban retires. No one plays an identical schedule. You can tout Bama all you want, but I feel certain Bama wouldn't have 5 national championships if they played a schedule similar to those of the other P5 conferences. Give them an extra conference game and take away their FCS bye week and I bet they would have less playoff appearances over the past decade. 

[Magus Ossis 2,784]

2 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The bigger problem here is in the selection process.  It's hidden in everyone's post even discussing what an 8-team tournament should look like.

Let's just all agree the system is a sham when at-large teams ever make it in at the expense of conference champions.

I agree P5 champions should be auto-bids. G5 collectively getting one auto-bid is fair in my mind for an 8 team field. I would like to see all 10 champs included in a field of 16. The G5 champs would likely get seeded as visitors in the first round, much like weaker auto-bids with lower RPIs do in March Madness.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

3 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The bigger problem here is in the selection process.  It's hidden in everyone's post even discussing what an 8-team tournament should look like.

Let's just all agree the system is a sham when at-large teams ever make it in at the expense of conference champions.

So no wild cards then. All P5 has to go to 16 teams.  No independents.  All champs in.  Reform remaining minnows into 2 minnow conferences.  Their champs play each other for a 6th playoff spot.  Top 2 ranked teams get a bye so you can keep poll lovers happy.

[Bert Orange 1,115]

Guess it belongs in this thread. But ESPiN has an article on the undefeated teams and their path to the playoffs. Their dark horse list includes W Va. according to them, the Mountaineers’ toughest remaining game on their schedule is OU. Ummmmmm.  OK. 

[irishtexan 11,447]

3 hours ago, 'stache said:

They let this shit get out of hand for too long without working together for a workable plan.  Eight conferences with ten teams each having geographic ties to one another would have worked.  Each conference plays a nine game round robin, leaving room for 3 out of conference matchups.  Then the 8 round robin champs face off in a playoff.  Perfecto.  But dumbass conferences had to expand because "TV markets" and cable models and rivalries be damned, break em up if you can squeeze a few bucks out of ESPN.  The latest round of realignment ensured the system has become fucked beyond repair.

I like this plan. Also, it might encourage more competitive out-of-conference games among top-ranked teams because at that point rankings wouldn't impact your pathway to the playoffs. If Texas played Clemson and Bama in their non-conference scheduled and lost to both, but went undefeated in conference, they make the playoffs regardless of their out of conference record.

[Spoetzl 181]

I'd be fine with a 6 team playoff.  All P5 conference winners plus the highest ranked G5/Independent.  Lowest 4 seeds play games the week after the conference championship games (which should be considered playoff games).  So 3vs6 and 4vs5 on the home fields of the higher seeded teams.  After that it's the 4 team format that exists now.  

Added to that, every conference should have to have 9 game conference schedules and FBS teams can only schedule one FCS team for OOC (and that should have to be played within the first 3 games).  Heck, just do that and everyone will start to see clearer separation of the top teams.

[Huckleberry 32,710]

If you can go undefeated and not win the championship then it's not a real championship, that's all there is to it.

Either expand the playoff to 16 or break up FBS into two divisions. If it's a playoff then conference champions need to be guaranteed entry.

Edited October 9, 2018 by Huckleberry

[Bert Orange 1,115]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

If you can go undefeated and not win the championship then it's not a real championship, that's all there is to it.

Either expand the playoff to 16 or break up FBS into two divisions. If it's a playoff then conference champions need to be guaranteed entry.

This was always my thinking on a way to have 16 playoff teams and only add one week. Pit the winners of each conference against each other in the college super bowl. 

[C-Man 27,083]

31 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

It’s not a red herring or you don’t understand what I am saying.  What I am saying is that just because a team is top 4 or 8 or 16 doesn’t mean they have a legit shot at winning.  In some years, theoretically speaking, #5 might have realistic shot.  But not usually.  And so “making sure they get in” isn’t what matters. It accomplishes nothing unless they really can win. 

Another way to put it is that it is far more useful and relevant to have the right choices make up a smaller group than to just “fix the problem” by making the group larger.  In most years, having the consensus best 2 teams would accomplish the same thing as having those 2 sprinkled in among 4, 8 or however many.  The pre-playoff problem to me always was that we didn’t always make that happen.  But in years like 2005, for example, no one was really thinking that we didn’t end up with the two best teams playing for the NC or that we needed a playoff with 2-6 additional teams to figure that out. 

Well, if you can come up with a system that can unequivocally ID the two best teams in the country each and every year and match them up in a winner-take-all championship game then I'd be OK scrapping anything beyond that. But that's not reality. That's why you get OU ahead of Texas in 2008.

There are 118(?) teams playing D-1 football and none of them playing anything remotely close to a common schedule (not even conference or divisional mates). On top of that, the leagues have different fucking rules -- some play 9 conference games, others play 8; some have extraneous CCG (looking at you Big 12). The SEC hardly plays outside the conference footprint and they don't travel to play anybody. Conference strength can change on a year-by-year basis. It's a goddamn beauty pageant at that point. You want to rely on the computers again? Silly me, I'd like to see something settled on the field like they do at EVERY SINGLE OTHER LEVEL OF FOOTBALL!

I don't want to water it down and do what college basketball has done. I'm not ready to go to 16 for that matter. But the current system -- better than it was, BTW -- still falls short when you have no real way other than the dreaded "eye test" to determine which four teams will play three games to pick the national champ. This can be better.

[JBJ 3,649]

If you really want to be fair to the minnows: I think 4 team regional conferences (30-36 teams each) with 3 pro-reg divisions is ideal.

Each conferences decides how they chose 1 or 2 teams for the tournament each year.  They get seeded by a committee. 

Bottom 2/Top 2 in each division play relegation games.

The mad dash of bowls for everyone else.

 

I kinda want to set this up and simulate a few seasons.

Edited October 9, 2018 by JBJ

[Huckleberry 32,710]

My actual vote right now would be an 8-team playoff. P5 conference champions and any undefeated G5 champions get automatic bids. If there are more than 3 G5 undefeated champions (almost infinitesimal chance) then the lowest rated ones play off to get in the playoff. Would never happen, though.

Any remaining spots are at-large and decided by the same committee who seeds the teams. First round (quarterfinals) is played at the higher seed's stadium. Semis and finals same as now.

The end.

[Liquor and Poker 3,659]

10 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Well, if you can come up with a system that can unequivocally ID the two best teams in the country each and every year and match them up in a winner-take-all championship game then I'd be OK scrapping anything beyond that. But that's not reality. That's why you get OU ahead of Texas in 2008.

There are 118(?) teams playing D-1 football and none of them playing anything remotely close to a common schedule (not even conference or divisional mates). On top of that, the leagues have different fucking rules -- some play 9 conference games, others play 8; some have extraneous CCG (looking at you Big 12). The SEC hardly plays outside the conference footprint and they don't travel to play anybody. Conference strength can change on a year-by-year basis. It's a goddamn beauty pageant at that point. You want to rely on the computers again? Silly me, I'd like to see something settled on the field like they do at EVERY SINGLE OTHER LEVEL OF FOOTBALL!

I don't want to water it down and do what college basketball has done. I'm not ready to go to 16 for that matter. But the current system -- better than it was, BTW -- still falls short when you have no real way other than the dreaded "eye test" to determine which four teams will play three games to pick the national champ. This can be better.

I don't argue that we can do better, but it seems to me that the really stupid results usually come from a refusal to use the "dreaded 'eye test'" more than from using it.  Politics, silly computer formulas, desire to stick to hard-and-fast rules, etc. cause more problems than just asking "who are the best 2 teams?"  That how Florida got a rematch with Florida State in 1996, how OU passed Texas in 2008, and how LSU got to play an overmatched OU in 2003.

I also just see the "we need 8" as a slippery slope - just like it went from 16 to 32 to 48 to 64 to 68 in basketball.  If someone guaranteed me it would never go past 8 I'd be all for it.

[angelos's frog 83]

TCU came into the Big 12 and won the conference 3 years in with guys we recruited as a MWC team.  And, I really think we could've won the whole thing that season if we had gotten in over tOSU.  I also think our Rose Bowl team would've had a very good chance at winning a playoff back in 2010-11.  So, I'm pretty sympathetic to UCF and the G-5 conferences.  

[BB65 476]

Wholesale re-alignment, 16 eight team conferences. All play a round robin schedule of 7 conference games and four non conference games against the other conferences. No more FCS teams on your schedule. All sixteen conference winners make the playoffs.

[fellside 1,079]

2 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

TCU came into the Big 12 and won the conference 3 years in with guys we recruited as a MWC team.  And, I really think we could've won the whole thing that season if we had gotten in over tOSU.  I also think our Rose Bowl team would've had a very good chance at winning a playoff back in 2010-11.  So, I'm pretty sympathetic to UCF and the G-5 conferences.  

Oh cool. I feel better about 2008 now.

[rickyspub 801]

4 minutes ago, BB65 said:

Wholesale re-alignment, 16 eight team conferences. All play a round robin schedule of 7 conference games and four non conference games against the other conferences. No more FCS teams on your schedule. All sixteen conference winners make the playoffs.

That would be a good solution, but just too unlikely. If we are going pie in the sky I would rather just see the P5 split off. No playing of teams in the lower divisions. All the conference winners make the playoffs with 3 at-large teams. Schedules would be much closer to equal and the overall level of play might improve with good players choosing the lower tier P5 teams rather than a middling, but more local, G5.

[Hozz 1,012]

I hated the BCS.  It was a lame half measure.  The current playoff is better than the BCS but still inadequate.  The very first year convinced me of this.  TCU was absolutely in the conversation with the 4 teams that made it and they were actually 6th in the standings behind Baylor because of a road head to head coin flip type game.

I'd be ok with 16, but I think 8 is the way to go.

First, establish some scheduling minimums for the P5 schools to qualify for an automatic berth.  Something like schools must play 9 conference games and at least 11 FBS games before conference champs get an automatic berth. This ends the SEC scheduling charade or it forces them to contend for limited committee selected at large slots.  ACC only plays 8 conference games as well.  So you might only have 3 automatic bids the first few years if those conferences don't meet the requirements, but eventually they would fall in line.  I think this (having 5/8 being automatic slots) also incentivizes ND to join a P5 conference which I think would be good overall.

Then use the committee to fill the at large slots and to seed the teams.  Make the first round of the playoff home games for top 4 seeds, use the current bowl rotation for the last 3 games.  I am not in favor of a set aside for the best G5 school.  Most years this would screw a more deserving team and the G5 team would get blasted in a tune-up game by the 1 seed.  UCF will finish top 8 this year if they stay undefeated so the G5 problem works itself out if the G5 team is good enough and the playoff field is expanded.

['stache 21,778]

12 minutes ago, BB65 said:

Wholesale re-alignment, 16 eight team conferences. All play a round robin schedule of 7 conference games and four non conference games against the other conferences. No more FCS teams on your schedule. All sixteen conference winners make the playoffs.

Or 8 conferences each with two 8 team divisions and regional/cultural rivalries.  CCG's are defacto first round of a 16 team playoff.  But TV contracts, and "only need one per state," and "Joneses" and "helmet school" and "prestige worldwide!"  You'll never get any semblance of a system to make any fucking sense in today's world of college football alignment.  That's the major source of my frustration.  

[Katfid54 8,593]

2 minutes ago, Hozz said:

they were actually 6th in the standings behind Baylor because of a road head to head coin flip type game.

I love road head.

[BB65 476]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

Or 8 conferences each with two 8 team divisions and regional/cultural rivalries.  CCG's are defacto first round of a 16 team playoff.  But TV contracts, and "only need one per state," and "Joneses" and "helmet school" and "prestige worldwide!"  You'll never get any semblance of a system to make any fucking sense in today's world of college football alignment.  That's the major source of my frustration.  

I like this too

[Zepol87 9,172]

Hell yea!!! Realignment thread 3.0 here we come

['stache 21,778]

It's pretty impossible to talk about a new playoff system without realignment.  In my opinion, realignment has fucked up any chance there was at a system that makes sense.  It's why regional rivalries no longer exist.  It's why Notre Dame has a half-ass conference deal and special treatment in the current system.  It's why the Big XII has 10 teams and a guaranteed rematch for a CCG.  It's all bullshit anyway.

[Huckleberry 32,710]

The Big 12 has a stupid guaranteed rematch because the conference administration has consistently done everything it can to screw itself and for no other reason. They are terrible at PR and logic and that is the real issue.

It's not that difficult to push the fact that a round robin is the best way to determine a champion and that our round robin guarantees that our two best teams play each other and that we already have 9 conference games. Then you tell the selection committee to consider the tiebreaker winner as the conference champion for selection purposes and move on. But no, they shoot themselves in the foot whenever possible.

[El Diablo 4,232]

1 hour ago, Magus Ossis said:

Maybe we should scrap the polls and the playoffs. Sagarin's algorithm will crown the champion by internet press release December 10 of each year. That way we have enough time for the regular season, don't devalue it, and ensure that the objectively "best" team is the champion.

ESPN sold the playoff to the participating schools. BCS was too stupid to realize what they had. The only way the participating schools will change is if their $$ increase.

[El Diablo 4,232]

24 minutes ago, Hozz said:

I hated the BCS.  It was a lame half measure.  The current playoff is better than the BCS but still inadequate.  The very first year convinced me of this.  TCU was absolutely in the conversation with the 4 teams that made it and they were actually 6th in the standings behind Baylor because of a road head to head coin flip type game.

I'd be ok with 16, but I think 8 is the way to go.

First, establish some scheduling minimums for the P5 schools to qualify for an automatic berth.  Something like schools must play 9 conference games and at least 11 FBS games before conference champs get an automatic berth. This ends the SEC scheduling charade or it forces them to contend for limited committee selected at large slots.  ACC only plays 8 conference games as well.  So you might only have 3 automatic bids the first few years if those conferences don't meet the requirements, but eventually they would fall in line.  I think this (having 5/8 being automatic slots) also incentivizes ND to join a P5 conference which I think would be good overall.

Then use the committee to fill the at large slots and to seed the teams.  Make the first round of the playoff home games for top 4 seeds, use the current bowl rotation for the last 3 games.  I am not in favor of a set aside for the best G5 school.  Most years this would screw a more deserving team and the G5 team would get blasted in a tune-up game by the 1 seed.  UCF will finish top 8 this year if they stay undefeated so the G5 problem works itself out if the G5 team is good enough and the playoff field is expanded.

Just for giggles what 8 teams would have made up a playoff field each year since it started if we were using the BCS metrics?

['stache 21,778]

17 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

The Big 12 has a stupid guaranteed rematch because the conference administration has consistently done everything it can to screw itself and for no other reason. They are terrible at PR and logic and that is the real issue.

It's not that difficult to push the fact that a round robin is the best way to determine a champion and that our round robin guarantees that our two best teams play each other and that we already have 9 conference games. Then you tell the selection committee to consider the tiebreaker winner as the conference champion for selection purposes and move on. But no, they shoot themselves in the foot whenever possible.

I agree, but it goes back to the real problem being Big 10 and SEC's dumbass expansion plan because TV markets and networks nobody watches and "one per state" and other stupid ass shit which ended up with our conference being poached and the only remaining conference with 10 teams.  Fuck the whole process.  UT-Aggy, OU-Neby, MU-KU should all still be games played annually (or regularly with OU-NU) with a CCG and no guaranteed rematch.  But Big 10 and SEC needed those TV markets so fucking bad.  Fucking stupid ass shit.

Edited October 9, 2018 by 'stache

[Vic Mackey 46,939]

Hell yea!!! Realignment thread 3.0 here we come

This is more than just realignment dipshit.

[Beau Vine 54,018]

3 hours ago, JBJ said:

My bad.  They play an 11 game season, I thought it was 10.  Maybe it's D-II that plays 10.

Nope.

2 hours ago, hpslugga said:

DII does still play 10 with an option to go 11 if you play an FCS team (very rare that teams play FCS teams, let alone pursue that option, but it does exist a la the old Hawaii Rule from back in the day). 

???  Where in the world are you getting this from?

https://minesathletics.com/schedule.aspx?path=football

Where's the FCS game?

[kopp0e 1,135]

6 hours ago, Shmitty said:

An undefeated UCF for the 2nd year in a row may force the issue with re: expanding the playoffs.  Stumbled upon this post yesterday and think this may become bigger by the week if UCF manages to keep winning, get's left out of the playoffs after going undefeated 2 years in a row, forcing congressional involvement.   This may be what's needed to force an expansion of the playoff or a breakdown of the P5/G5 rigged barrier (read antitrust).   

 

https://www.cougarboard.com/board/message.html?id=20556384

 

Joel Klatt on Seattle radio: the P5 commissioners are panicked about UCF

He says they are worried that if UCF goes undefeated again but gets left out of the CFP then the commissioners will have to “sit in front of congress.” 

Interesting to me—I would never have guessed it could get to that level this soon but Klatt seemed pretty confident that there’s a lot of concern for this among the power conferences.

Good article..!

[BEHorn 1]

5 hours ago, 'stache said:

Another point I should have made is that a broader playoff needs a shorter regular season.  That won't ever happen.

That’s the reason

[victory88 5,663]

An 8 team playoff would be amazing.  Hell make it 12!  As a fan, why would anyone not want to see the top 8, 12, 16 teams match up.  Most people don’t even watch all the shitty bowl games.  And the money to be made off all those big matchups would be insane.  Take away an OOC game and remove the Conferance championship games as they don’t fucking matter.  Alabama didn’t even win their division last year and made the playoffs.  Why make teams play in them if you’re going to give a spot to teams for not even winning their division.  Make it 12-16 teams.  No one will give a shit about the last place team to get in as long as you get the top 8 or so teams selected correctly.

[woohorn 1,131]

It's not that difficult to push the fact that a round robin is the best way to determine a champion and that our round robin guarantees that our two best teams play each other and that we already have 9 conference games. Then you tell the selection committee to consider the tiebreaker winner as the conference champion for selection purposes and move on.

"One True Champion"?

[Zavala 1,384]

6 hours ago, 'stache said:

The answer is to stop having major and mid-major conferences in the same division.  There is simply no way to compare an undefeated team playing a C-USA or AAC schedule with a one or even two loss team in the SEC or Big 12.  An eight team playoff is not feasible.  So separate P-5 and G-5 for championship purposes.  It doesn't make sense that they are together to begin with.

Holy fuck I agree

[Slacks 6,792]

Who is UCF playing and beating? Miami?

I haven't looked. Ef yo Google

[Vertigo 20,273]

5 hours ago, 'stache said:

Another point I should have made is that a broader playoff needs a shorter regular season.  That won't ever happen.

If you ditched 1 OOC game you could make it work. That would ruin the midseason bye week against directional technical college for the SEC.

Edited October 9, 2018 by Vertigo

[hpslugga 4,050]

40 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Nope.

???  Where in the world are you getting this from?

https://minesathletics.com/schedule.aspx?path=football

Where's the FCS game?

I didn't say that you had to play one, I said if you played one you had the option of going up to 11 (at least that was the rule back when I was there as we had an 11-game season due to us playing Sam Houston State early in the year). If it's gone up to 11 regardless, that's news to me. 

[Gil Bang 25,903]

Charlie's gonna give them a loss, so it's a moot issue.

[Steamboat1874 4,037]

This argument always gets crazy.

 

Look.....I am pretty sure there are 11 D1 conferences.

All 11 conference champs qualify but you have to determine your conference champion by the first Saturday in December.

5 at large teams are chosen with a limit of two teams from any one conference.

Second week of December eight games are played at the top 8's home fields.

Third week of December 4 more games are played at the top 4's home fields.

Now you have 4 teams with three weeks to play a championship game with a week off before either the semi or the final.

Simple and will rival the Super Bowl in revenue.

The end.

[Sejjr 3,246]

4 hours ago, satyanash said:

Lol. Have fun when the SEC starts sending four/five teams to the playoff every year. An eight-team playoff completely unbalances the conferences and gives ESPN and the media an inordinate amount of power over the process. 

CFB is not the NFL, so please stop trying to turn it into the NFL.

ESPN (Disney) already has an inordinate amount of power over college football. They also own and operate 14+ bowl games under the ESPN Events umbrella. This whole argument is the same shit we experienced during the BCS era, and before during the Bowl Coalition. Congress has already gotten involved multiple times. There were congressional sessions involving the anti-trust issues in College Football. Senators like Orrin Hatch (Utah) led the charge, back when Utah was getting hosed despite beating teams like Alabama in bowl games and going undefeated. These congressmen like this issue because it gets their names in the press and allows them to pretend to be looking out for their constituents.

The P5 conference leaders (led by Delaney and Slive) did not want a playoff and fought and argued against it until their hand was forced and they created this bullshit 4-team "playoff" that is really the BCS in disguise. An 8-team playoff is not what they want, which means it is absolutely what we need. And why anyone who is a fan of this sport would be against more meaningful football games, I will never understand. The biggest reasons they will fight against expanding the playoff are the idea that expanding the playoff would "damage" the precious bowl games, which are bullshit exhibition games lining the pockets of corporate sponsors, tax-free, as well as the fear that a G5 team might sneak in and win the whole fucking thing. 

[Bert Orange 1,115]

Guaranteeing playoff spots with conference championships makes non-conference games meaningless. And that’s not very fun to think about. 

[hpslugga 4,050]

48 minutes ago, Bert Orange said:

Guaranteeing playoff spots with conference championships makes non-conference games meaningless. And that’s not very fun to think about. 

There’s an easy remedy for that if non-con really means that much to you.

[ztejas 43,287]

2 hours ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Simple and will rival the Super Bowl in revenue.

Man you were doing so good too.

[WBT 20,443]

4 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Then you tell the selection committee to consider the tiebreaker winner as the conference champion for selection purposes and move on. But no, they shoot themselves in the foot whenever possible.

Or you continue to declare co-champions and tell the committee that if they can't decide who the better team is between 2 teams with 8 common opponents that they have no business trying to seed the top 4 out of 130 teams.  But you already mentioned the shitty pr thing.

Edited October 10, 2018 by WBT

[Nivek 16,873]

The Big 12 has a stupid guaranteed rematch because the conference administration has consistently done everything it can to screw itself and for no other reason. They are terrible at PR and logic and that is the real issue.

It's not that difficult to push the fact that a round robin is the best way to determine a champion and that our round robin guarantees that our two best teams play each other and that we already have 9 conference games. Then you tell the selection committee to consider the tiebreaker winner as the conference champion for selection purposes and move on. But no, they shoot themselves in the foot whenever possible.

Big 12 doesn’t give a shit, they got an extra game/revenue guaranteed each year. Personally I don’t like rematches.