|
Post by bluehen on Jan 26, 2016 13:33:03 GMT
The final four should never be 'voted' on. The final four should be the survivors of the national quarterfinal games.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jan 26, 2016 13:36:39 GMT
Bevo: "I've given you cogent arguments against a 16 team tourney. There are many, very sound reasons." Pray tell, please enlighten us. 5 conferences don't need a 16 team playoff to determine the winner. 10 conferences do !
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jan 26, 2016 14:03:41 GMT
Bevo: "I've given you cogent arguments against a 16 team tourney. There are many, very sound reasons." Pray tell, please enlighten us.
Your own favorite expert, Phil Steele, said it best... in an article YOU posted long ago.
philsteele.com/Blogs/2013/JUL13/DBJuly24.html
College football, at the P5 level, has a 100+ year history of success. It's wildly popular and loaded with tradition. As a fan of one of the top programs in that system, I want to preserve the tradition, not destroy it. That's why I hate all this conference re-org bullshit. Going to a 16 team field would destroy the feel of the game as it is today. It would also give a bunch of small conference teams a very unfair advantage: ie, the ability to get elevated into a 4 week playoff without having to earn recognition by playing an equivalent schedule. This is the same problem I've always had with unbalanced large conferences... Teams could go undefeated without having to play the top teams in their own conferences. CCG's have helped to alleviate this problem... Top teams now have to play at least ONE other good team. But, the CCG system hasn't eliminated the inherent unfairness of the unbalanced schedule.
I'll give you a perfect, non-biased example. The 1996 Texas team. First year of the Big 12. The North Division of the Big 12 had three top teams: Nebraska, Colorado, and K State. The Southern Division was pitiful. Texas managed to win the South with 7-4 overall record, and 6-2 Divisional record. Without playing as difficult a schedule, we 'won' the right to play Nebraska in a 1 game playoff. Texas managed to squeak out a lucky, ballsy win. Yea team! But, Nebraska was a far better team. In the bowls, Texas got embarrassed by Penn State, while Nebraska soundly beat Va Tech. The unfairness of the game was never forgotten by Osborne. Moving to a 16 team playoff field with an auto-bid for all the G5 teams would multiply this unfairness by a factor of 10. No thanks. I can certainly appreciate why a Marshall fan would want it. It shouldn't be too hard to understand why a Texas fan would not.
Large format playoffs are probably a good idea for the FCS teams.... This format has the potential to elevate public interest for teams that would otherwise have NONE. No one cares if they have to give up a few regular season games in order to facilitate a large field playoff. It might even be a good idea for the G5 teams..... or, they might want to form their own 4 team playoff format? But, I don't want to completely overhaul the feel of the game. I want to fret over our FIRST loss... and, agonize over a second.
|
|
|
Post by redwood on Jan 28, 2016 12:26:06 GMT
In most years you can pick one play that would change the season for most top teams. Michigan State had that lucky play at the end or they would not have made the playoff. I don't see anything wrong with four. My goodness, the season seemed never to end as it was if you were a Clemson or Bama fan.
|
|
|
Post by redwood on Jan 28, 2016 12:32:15 GMT
This whole G5 fear is the same argument Boise State uses in their 2 game schedule. We saw what happened when two of the best G5 teams joined the Big 12. It didn't go so hot the first couple of years when they had to play a full P5 schedule instead of two games. Heck, when you play two games a year you can get up sky high for them. I would love to see Houston, Memphis and Temple play a full Big 10 or SEC schedule.
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Jan 28, 2016 18:42:34 GMT
This whole G5 fear is the same argument Boise State uses in their 2 game schedule. We saw what happened when two of the best G5 teams joined the Big 12. It didn't go so hot the first couple of years when they had to play a full P5 schedule instead of two games. Heck, when you play two games a year you can get up sky high for them. I would love to see Houston, Memphis and Temple play a full Big 10 or SEC schedule. If they played a full schedule in those leagues they would be members of those leagues and they would be able to recruit a higher level of talent to compete and you would have no remote clue how they would do. in that circumstance. Can't you see the relationship between the talent level available to recruit and the conferences allowed to play in ?
|
|