BamaDude
Well-Known Member
And most importantly 1984 BYU would have been taken behind the woodshed by whatever worthy opponent was selected.
There really weren't any good teams in 1984. That's why BYU won that year.
And most importantly 1984 BYU would have been taken behind the woodshed by whatever worthy opponent was selected.
There really weren't any good teams in 1984. That's why BYU won that year.
Because I hate people voting on who makes it in. If people are making guesses at the top 8, or top 6, there will always be controversy. The biggest way to remove controversy is removing the guessing work. Conference champs, in. And either 1 or 3 at-large bids.
In my system, G5 would have their own playoff.I mostly agree, but there's still controversy with that. It shouldn't be the case that a team can go undefeated and have no chance at sniffing the playoffs. In that system, UCF wouldn't have made it in last year. It should be 8 teams (6 is just stupid for a playoff system). The P5 champs. The highest ranked G5 team. And then 2 at large bids.
Very rarely does a G5 actually deserve a shot. There is no need to give an autobid to a G5 every year.I mostly agree, but there's still controversy with that. It shouldn't be the case that a team can go undefeated and have no chance at sniffing the playoffs. In that system, UCF wouldn't have made it in last year. It should be 8 teams (6 is just stupid for a playoff system). The P5 champs. The highest ranked G5 team. And then 2 at large bids.
Very rarely does a G5 actually deserve a shot. There is no need to give an autobid to a G5 every year.
I'm not one that thinks that way. In fact, I'm in your camp. I think it is much better having it settled on the field post regular season than just in the regular season as was the case prior to the BCS.I simply cannot see how having more meaningful games would ruin college football.
Now getting past eight we start watering it down quite a bit. But even then it's better than what we had in the 90's
Sweet Nebraska and Michigan split a title? Super duper
So teams that are ranked in the high teens deserve shots because they played garbage in the regular season? How many of those teams were ranked in the top 8?You're just factually wrong. If we're talking about the 8 most deserving teams each year:
This year, UCF deserved a shot.
Last year, UCF deserved a shot.
2016 - Western Michigan was undefeated and deserved a shot
2015 - Houston was 12-1, probably deserved a shot (and handled #9 FSU in their bowl game)
2014 - 10-2 Boise State probably didn't deserve a shot
2013 - 12-1 UCF deserved a shot (they beat #6 Baylor by 10 in the fiesta Bowl)
2012 - 11-2 Utah State probably didn't deserve a shot
2011- 12-1 Boise State (dominated UGA to start the season) deserved a shot
2010- 12-1 Boise State (beat a great Virginia Tech and lost by a missed field-goal to a ranked rival) deserved a shot
2009- 14-0 Boise State deserved a shot (beat Pac 12 champs), as did 13-1 TCU (who only lost a close one to Boise)
2008- 13-0 Utah most definitely deserved a shot, 12-0 Boise also had an argument
2007- 12-0 Hawaii deserved a shot (got beat down by UGA in the Sugar Bowl, but UGA was the best team in the country that season).
2006- 13-0 Boise State deserved a shot
So, in the past 13 seasons, we had a deserving team in the G5 11 times. We had an undefeated team 7 times. And in two of the others, the one loss team dominated a top P5 team in their bowl game. Yes, the G5 deserve an autobid every year.
So teams that are ranked in the high teens deserve shots because they played garbage in the regular season? How many of those teams were ranked in the top 8?
Very rarely does a G5 actually deserve a shot. There is no need to give an autobid to a G5 every year.
I really couldn't give less of a fuck about the rankings. All that means is that the rankings are wrong. I want to almost completely remove the human elements from the rankings. Last year, 12-0 UCF had 5 two loss teams ahead of them and one three loss team. They were only ranked one ahead of 9-4 Stanford (who hardly played a grueling schedule) in week 15. The year before, 13-0 Western Michigan was ranked behind six three loss teams and a 4 loss team. That is absolutely ridiculous. So your entire premise is flawed.
And more would be ranked in the top 8 if the rankings would give them credit like they do P5 teams. UCF was very damn good last year and handled Auburn, who won the SEC west. They finished the season #6 with four first place votes. They returned their QB, their entire offensive line, 3 of their top 4 receivers, and most of their defense. So they should have been ranked well, maybe 10 at the outermost? Try 21. There was no rhyme or reason for that. That's happened a lot, where blueblood programs are preferred in the preseason.
If a team goes undefeated, they deserve a place in the playoffs. My idea gets all 5 conference champions in, the undefeated G5 team, and still leaves room for 2 at-large bids for the really good teams that just lose a game along the way.
This year, the 8 teams would be: Bama, Clemson, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, UCF, Washington
Last year, the 8 teams would be: Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State, Wisconsin, USC, UCF
2016, the 8 teams would be: Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Washington, Penn State, Michigan, Oklahoma, Western Michigan
I think those would all be good games, and all of those teams have an argument. They'd make a lot of money as well. I think a lot of people would be curious to see an undefeated UCF or Western Michigan go up against Clemson or Bama in the first round. Everyone loves a cinderella story. G5 belongs. Deal with it.
So basically if you are a half way decent mid major you should schedule nothing but garbage so that you can ensure an undefeated non conference schedule and then just have to worry about your conference schedule since who you beat means nothing.I really couldn't give less of a fuck about the rankings. All that means is that the rankings are wrong. I want to almost completely remove the human elements from the rankings. Last year, 12-0 UCF had 5 two loss teams ahead of them and one three loss team. They were only ranked one ahead of 9-4 Stanford (who hardly played a grueling schedule) in week 15. The year before, 13-0 Western Michigan was ranked behind six three loss teams and a 4 loss team. That is absolutely ridiculous. So your entire premise is flawed.
And more would be ranked in the top 8 if the rankings would give them credit like they do P5 teams. UCF was very damn good last year and handled Auburn, who won the SEC west. They finished the season #6 with four first place votes. They returned their QB, their entire offensive line, 3 of their top 4 receivers, and most of their defense. So they should have been ranked well, maybe 10 at the outermost? Try 21. There was no rhyme or reason for that. That's happened a lot, where blueblood programs are preferred in the preseason.
If a team goes undefeated, they deserve a place in the playoffs. My idea gets all 5 conference champions in, the undefeated G5 team, and still leaves room for 2 at-large bids for the really good teams that just lose a game along the way.
This year, the 8 teams would be: Bama, Clemson, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, UCF, Washington
Last year, the 8 teams would be: Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State, Wisconsin, USC, UCF
2016, the 8 teams would be: Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Washington, Penn State, Michigan, Oklahoma, Western Michigan
I think those would all be good games, and all of those teams have an argument. They'd make a lot of money as well. I think a lot of people would be curious to see an undefeated UCF or Western Michigan go up against Clemson or Bama in the first round. Everyone loves a cinderella story. G5 belongs. Deal with it.
Not an original thought here. Several of us have said this for some time now.
When robot was going on with a 6 team auto bid format I showed that using the committee's top 6 since the playoffs formed would have given 22 of the same 24 as that format and doesn't come with any of the same negatives.
Im happy at 4, but if change has to come use the committee to expand.
Because I hate people voting on who makes it in. If people are making guesses at the top 8, or top 6, there will always be controversy. The biggest way to remove controversy is removing the guessing work. Conference champs, in. And either 1 or 3 at-large bids.
So basically if you are a half way decent mid major you should schedule nothing but garbage so that you can ensure an undefeated non conference schedule and then just have to worry about your conference schedule since who you beat means nothing.
Yes but if who you play doesn’t matter who cares. It’s all about being undefeated. Line up 3 FCS teams and on shit G5 and take your shots in conference.How do you figure that if all G5 teams are competing against each other for one G5 spot?