|
Post by doc on Dec 11, 2019 14:32:02 GMT
If you look at potential seedings strictly based on the committees' final rankings, LSU would play Wisconsin in the first round. Why should a team that lost to Ohio State twice, both times by double digits, get the same opportunity as Ohio State?
|
|
|
Post by stumpystew on Dec 11, 2019 14:54:49 GMT
Yes, UVA in over those others. And if UVA had won, they may have been ranked higher than those. (I put a 16 team bracket on another thread which shows who is in and who ain't.) In a 16 team playoff, you will exclude teams that "are better than the MAC champ." But to use your argument, what chance would they have of winning it all. Odds are against them, but they get the chance
And what is the difference between Bama beating SDSU by 35 in the playoff or doing it in the regular season? And who is to say that SDSU can't beat Bama. And there would be a criteria for seeding the teams and who is the at large teams. And there is criteria for the AQ (win your conference). Will it be controversial and lead to arguments? Yes, just like now.
And my argument for expansion has nothing to do with the domination of a few teams, it is the lack of opportunity for ALL teams to win the national championship. Win your conference, you have a chance to win it all. America is the land of opportunity, there should be opportunity in one of America's bigger, and richer, sports.
|
|
hoya
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by hoya on Dec 11, 2019 17:34:03 GMT
The problem is the huge money difference between FBS and FCS football pushes a lot of teams to want to join the higher level. We now have 130 teams in FBS. If you gave automatic bids to every conference champ (and the equal share of revenue associated with such bids), you'd have even more reason for teams to move up to the FBS tier. Give automatic bids, and I don't think we stay at 10 conferences. I think we'd rapidly go to 12 or 13 conferences as more schools make the jump. You're giving ever more financial incentive for schools to try and take that next step.
This would result in a bunch of games that nobody wants to see. Say what you will about teams deserving a fair shot, but FBS was getting along just fine without Coastal Carolina (who I just learned existed as I was looking for a school that had recently moved up). Creating a system that pulls in more and more lower division teams isn't wise. There was a reason that Div 1a and 1aa split back in the 70s. But the growing pot of gold in Div 1a has led to more teams moving up.
As long as it's super easy to move to FBS, nobody is going to agree to an autobid for all conference champions. We'd just end up with more teams and more conferences each wanting their cut. It will not happen, period.
I think it's okay that we just admit that there's a separation within FBS. Some schools are playing to win, and some schools are playing to draw a paycheck. Generally the teams that are legitimately competing are in the P5 conferences. You could completely eliminate the Sun Belt, half of C-USA, half the MAC, and no one would even notice. If I were setting up a playoff, 8 teams would be sufficient. You take the conference champs of each P5 league, plus 3 at large. Take the highest rated Group of 5 school, and then the two highest rated schools that have not already been included, limited to 2 teams from a single conference.
So this year, LSU is in as SEC champ. Ohio State is in as Big 10 champ. Oklahoma, Oregon, and Clemson are in. Memphis is the highest rated G5 school (sorry Notre Dame, you chose to be independent) so they're in. The remaining 2 spots would be Georgia at #5, and Baylor at #7. I think it's hard to argue that any other teams can say they didn't get a fair shake. You'd have LSU vs Memphis, Ohio State vs Baylor, Clemson vs Oregon, and Oklahoma vs Georgia.
Last year, you'd have Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Washington as P5 conference champs. Undefeated UCF gets the nod as highest rated G5 school. Notre Dame and Georgia are the highest rated of the rest. Bama v Washington, Clemson v UCF, Notre Dame v Ohio State, OU v Georgia.
2017 you'd have Clemson v UCF, Oklahoma v USC, Georgia v Wisconsin, Alabama v Ohio State. It seems like everybody has a pretty legit shot to me.
|
|
|
Post by stumpystew on Dec 11, 2019 19:08:13 GMT
Hoya
I have to disagree. All the teams are playing to win. That is why G5 fire coaches and build nice football facilities too. To win. But money is a factor too, but for ALL the teams, not just a few. Splits and exclusion come along so the P5 don't have to share and keep more of the money. They worry about the perceived "fairness" ( and anti-trust rules) to allow a G5 into an New Years 6 game, but even then I think they receive a smaller pay out. If we had an all inclusive, AQ playoff, would more schools want to move up, maybe. But the job of college sports now is money, not education.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 11, 2019 21:26:13 GMT
Yes, UVA in over those others. And if UVA had won, they may have been ranked higher than those. (I put a 16 team bracket on another thread which shows who is in and who ain't.) In a 16 team playoff, you will exclude teams that "are better than the MAC champ." But to use your argument, what chance would they have of winning it all. Odds are against them, but they get the chance And what is the difference between Bama beating SDSU by 35 in the playoff or doing it in the regular season? And who is to say that SDSU can't beat Bama. And there would be a criteria for seeding the teams and who is the at large teams. And there is criteria for the AQ (win your conference). Will it be controversial and lead to arguments? Yes, just like now. And my argument for expansion has nothing to do with the domination of a few teams, it is the lack of opportunity for ALL teams to win the national championship. Win your conference, you have a chance to win it all. America is the land of opportunity, there should be opportunity in one of America's bigger, and richer, sports. Well, I'm not willing to risk the system for just the opportunity. Again, we don't design airplane seats for the occasional 450lb passenger. So people whine about the committee not getting the top 4 right. Do you think people will stop whining if it expands to 8? Heck no, they won't. Why, because, arguably, picking teams 5,6,7 and 8 would be even harder and more subjective. More subjective = more whining. Same for the 6 at-large teams. More whining. Some people think UCF would have beaten Alabama AND Clemson. Some people’s dumb opinions aren’t necessarily something we should plan around. Yes, people will whine with the current system, but it is awfully risky to try to appease them. They’ll whine about something else after you appease them. We've seen a push to bring the AAC into the P5, using somewhat similar logic. Because the ACC sucks SOOO badly this year, the AAC has more ranked teams than ever. So, using "they would beat X" logic and currency bias, they are being screwed by not being in the mix. The better solution to me would be to consider dropping a few teams from some P5 conferences and moving the FEW and better AAC teams in. Even then I’m not sure those few teams would EVER be able to compete to the top 4 and perhaps struggle in the long run with the top 10. Facilities? Budgets? Recruiting? The argument completely breaks down for me because it ultimately boils down to "they deserve a chance" and not a point of merit.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Dec 11, 2019 21:45:51 GMT
I don't think the higher quality AAC teams are going to be absorbed by one of the P5 conferences anytime soon. Who would invite the likes of UCF, Memphis, Cincinnati, Houston, etc to be a part of their conferences. Not that they're bad schools but there are existing schools in the conferences that would highly oppose the additions. Does the ACC or SEC want Memphis? Does the ACC want UCF? Does the Big 12 want Houston? I'm pretty sure Ohio State's not going to welcome UC into the BIG.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 11, 2019 22:16:39 GMT
I don't think the higher quality AAC teams are going to be absorbed by one of the P5 conferences anytime soon. Who would invite the likes of UCF, Memphis, Cincinnati, Houston, etc to be a part of their conferences. Not that they're bad schools but there are existing schools in the conferences that would highly oppose the additions. Does the ACC or SEC want Memphis? Does the ACC want UCF? Does the Big 12 want Houston? I'm pretty sure Ohio State's not going to welcome UC into the BIG. True, and my argument a couple of posts back - could they remain competitive if they have to meet ALL of the conference standards over a longer time frame? Doc, do you think ticket guarantees are what have really killed the bowls off for most teams? It used to be you get extra practice and a warm vacation with a football game. Now a lot of teams end up losing money on bowl games because of the ticket guarantees, travel costs, etc. But it is also cyclical because without the guarantees the bowls won’t have payouts beyond the bigger bowls. If we got rid of those guarantees I suspect we’d drop down to 20 bowls. Maybe even less?
|
|